What was wrong with SAW 08020626?21 Aug 01:56
SAW 08020626 ("S 9076") was an application test judged Not OK — "Gloss and Re-solubility inferior." It tested S 9076 in two ink systems (Violet 23, Violet 27) on a Nitrocellulose Polyurethane ink base, compared against the BYK 9076 / Finalux 108 standard for that day.

Violet 23 (the driving failure):
  • Gloss @ 60°: S 9076 63.6 vs reference 67.1 → gloss inferior
  • Re-solubility rating: 1 vs reference 3 → re-solubility inferior
  • Also: colour strength 96-97 vs 100.00; transparency slightly opaque vs reference; viscosity 33 s vs 29 s
  • Passing: grinding < 5 µm, adhesion tape test pass, no separation/settling

Violet 27: re-solubility 3 vs 3 (equal), gloss 8.5 vs 8.8 (near-parity), colour strength 100.00 vs 100.00 — largely comparable.

Caveats:
  • The record is a STUB — an unlinked sample, not a fully confirmed experiment.
  • conclusion/outcome are cited to S 9076 #64 not ok.docx, but the numeric table values (incl. a Carbon Black N 330 row) sit in the merged record whose second doc is S 9076 #SAW 08020626 not ok.docx.
  • The merged record holds two conflicting value sets for Violet 23 — the free-text result string (e.g., gloss 55.6 vs 66.4, re-sol 2 vs 4, colour 98-99, viscosity 23 vs 21 s) vs the table (63.6 vs 67.1, re-sol 1 vs 3, colour 96-97, viscosity 33 vs 29 s). Both point the same direction (gloss and re-solubility inferior); the exact figures differ. Report both, pick neither.
confidence: medium
replying to this older question starts a new chat that includes it · Enter to send · Shift+Enter for a new line