Patent Application
20140331431
Mop-like assemblies of the type used for applying floor finishes (e.g., floor wax, polyurethane, or other floor finishing or floor sealing materials, etc.) to a surface such as the surface of a floor are well known, and are hereinafter generally referred to interchangeably as floor finish application tools or assemblies. Some conventional floor finish application tools generally include a floor finish application head and a handle pivotally attached to the head. In many cases, a valve assembly is mounted on the handle adjacent the head and in fluid communication with the floor finish to control the flow of floor finish from a reservoir to the floor. The valve is normally closed to stop the flow of floor finish through the valve, but can be manually opened to allow the floor finish to flow through the valve to be deposited on the floor at a position close to the head. The floor finish is spread over the surface by the head, or more specifically, by an applicator pad coupled to the head. These conventional assemblies typically do not accurately control the amount of floor finish applied to a floor at a reasonable cost to be considered disposable.
The present invention relates to a floor finish application pad and/or method of applying floor finishes to a floor.
Some embodiments also feature a unique floor finish applicator pad that is useful for applying floor finishing compositions onto a substrate surface, such as a floor.
In some embodiments, the floor finish application pad comprises a material having a tri-dimensionally extending network of intercommunicated voids.
Some embodiments of the present invention relate to a method of applying a protective floor finish to a floor, wherein the method comprises providing a floor finish application tool, actuating a valve assembly from a closed position to an open position, dispensing floor finish onto the floor in response to actuating the valve assembly to the open position, and spreading the dispensed floor finish across the floor with the pad.
In some embodiments of the present invention, a floor finish applicator pad is provided, and comprises a body comprising a sheet of air filter material having a first side and a second side opposite the first side and more fluid absorbent than the first side; a leading edge; and a trailing edge having a thickness different from that of the leading edge.
Some embodiments of the present invention provide a floor finish applicator pad, comprising: a leading edge; a trailing edge; and an air filter sheet having a first side; a second side opposite the first side and more fluid absorbent than the first side; and a fold at least partially defining one of the leading and trailing edges of the applicator pad and having at least a double layer of the air filter sheet, the fold further defining a first portion of the applicator pad in which the second side of the air filter sheet is oriented to engage a floor surface; wherein a second portion of the applicator pad is at least partially defined by the air filter sheet, the first side of the air filter sheet at the second portion oriented to engage the floor surface.
In some embodiments of the present invention, a floor finish applicator pad is provided, and comprises: a body having: leading and trailing edges joined by lateral sides; and a ground-engaging surface; the body comprising filter material having a density greater than about 0.01 g/cm3 and less than about 0.08 g/cm3, and a thickness greater than about 0.3 cm and less than about 2.5 cm.
Further aspects of the present invention, together with the organization and operation thereof, will become apparent from the following detailed description of the invention when taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings.
Before any embodiments of the invention are explained in detail, it is to be understood that the invention is not limited in its application to the details of construction and the arrangement of components set forth in the following description or illustrated in the following drawings. The invention is capable of other embodiments and of being practiced or of being carried out in various ways. Also, it is to be understood that the phraseology and terminology used herein is for the purpose of description and should not be regarded as limited. The use of “including,” “comprising,” or “having” and variations thereof herein is meant to encompass the items listed thereafter and equivalents thereof as well as additional items. The terms “mounted,” “connected,” and “coupled” are used broadly and encompass both direct and indirect mounting, connecting and coupling. Further, “connected” and “coupled” are not restricted to physical or mechanical connections or couplings, and can include electrical connections or couplings, whether direct or indirect. Finally, as described in subsequent paragraphs, the specific mechanical configurations illustrated in the drawings are intended to exemplify embodiments of the invention. Accordingly, other alternative mechanical configurations are possible, and fall within the spirit and scope of the present invention.
Referring now to
The illustrated floor finish application tool 10 comprises a floor finish application head 12, an elongated handle 14 having a first (or distal) end 15 pivotally attached to the head 12, and a portion adjacent an opposite second (or proximal) end 16 that is adapted to be manually engaged by an operator to move the head 12 along a floor or other surface.
The illustrated floor finish application tool 10 also has a valve assembly 18 with a valve (not shown) for controlling dispense of fluid from the tool 10. In some embodiments, the valve assembly 18 is positioned adjacent the first end 15 of the handle 14, and is operable to regulate the flow of floor finish from a reservoir 26 to the floor. The valve assembly 18 has an open position in which the valve assembly 18 permits floor finish to flow to the floor, and a closed position in which the valve assembly 18 does not permit floor finish to flow to the floor (or more specifically, through a conduit positioned in the valve assembly 18). In some embodiments, the valve assembly 18 can have multiple predefined open positions corresponding to multiple flow rates. Although the valve assembly 18 can be configured in a number of different manners, in the illustrated embodiment the valve assembly 18 has a pinch valve configuration.
As illustrated in
Some floor finish application tools, such as the one illustrated in
The reservoir 26 can take a number of different forms. For example, the reservoir 26 can comprise a bag, a substantially rigid vessel or container, and the like. The reservoir 26 can also have an opening closed by a screw cap, plug, or other suitable closure mechanism through which opening the container can be dispensed, and in some embodiments refilled. In some embodiments, the reservoir 26 can be provided with a non-removable closure mechanism to prevent the floor finish delivery system from being reused, which may prevent related clogging issues of reuse.
As mentioned above with regard to the illustrated embodiment of
As discussed above, the second end 15 of the handle 14 is coupled to the head 12. Specifically, the second end 15 of the illustrated handle 14 is pivotally coupled to the head 12 via a joint, such as a ball joint, universal joint, hinge, and the like. The head 12 can include fastening structure for fastening a floor finish application pad 44 to the head 12. This fastening structure can include substantially any fastening structure known in the art, such as mechanical fasteners like hook and loop fasteners or fastening material, elastic grabbing members, pinching members, pockets received by the head, and the like.
The floor finish application pad 44 can have a number of different shapes based at least in part upon the shape of the head 12, the manner of connection of the pad 44 and head 12, and the type of floor finish to be spread by the pad 44. In some embodiments, the pad 44 is substantially flat as shown in the embodiment of
In some embodiments, the applicator pad 144 is positioned such that the first surface 148 engages a floor or other surface (hereinafter referred to simply as a “floor surface” or “floor” for ease of description). In other embodiments, the applicator pad 144 is positioned such that the stepped second surface 152 engages the floor. In some embodiments, it may be desirable to engage the floor with a flat surface, based upon a number of factors, including the viscosity of floor finish to be moved by the applicator pad 144, the absorbency of the applicator pad 144, and the like. However, when a non-flat surface (e.g., stepped second surface 152) engages the floor, various unique properties, such as reduced drag or friction, can result. For example, while not subscribing to any specific theory or suggesting that the applicator pad 144 must be in any particular orientation with respect to a floor, the inventors have found that engaging a floor with a smaller surface area, such as with a non-flat surface (e.g., with the front surface 162 shown in
The illustrated applicator pad 144 further includes a substantially planar front surface 162 extending between first and second side surfaces 164, 166, respectively. First and second corners 168, 170 are positioned between the front surface 162 and the respective first and second side surfaces 164, 166. The first and second corners 168, 170 can form a right angle between the front surface 162 and the first and second side surfaces 164, 166, thereby permitting an operator to move fluid into corners or other restricted spaces.
The illustrated applicator pad 144 additionally includes a rear surface 172. Third and fourth corners 174, 176 can be positioned between the rear surface 172 and the respective first and second side surfaces 164, 166 of the applicator pad 144. The third and fourth corners 174, 176 can be curved (e.g., see
In some embodiments, the applicator pad 144 can have a width of between about 40 cm and about 60 cm between first and second side surfaces, 164, 166. In some embodiments, the length of the applicator pad 144 is between about 11 cm and about 12 cm between the front surface 162 and the rear surface 172. Also, in some embodiments, the first portion 154 of the applicator pad 144 extends less than half (e.g., about one third) of the length between the front surface 162 and the rear surface 172. In other embodiments, the first portion 154 extends greater than half (e.g., about two thirds) of the length between the front surface 162 and the rear surface 172.
In some embodiments, the applicator pad 144 includes one or more layers of air filter material, the properties of which are described in greater detail below. The material can be found in sheet form having thicknesses that are also described below, and can be stacked, folded, and/or interfolded in different manners to achieve different unique properties of the applicator pad 144. Some features of sheet materials that can have a significant impact upon the characteristics of the applicator pad 144 include the smoothness and absorbency of the sheet material used to construct the applicator pad 144. These features can be different on opposite sides of the sheet materials. For example, some sheet materials according to the present invention are relatively smooth on one side and relatively rough on an opposite side (i.e., generating different frictional resistances when dragged across another surface). As another example, these and other sheet materials can have one side that is more fluid permeable and/or fluid absorbent than another, and in some cases can have one side that is fluid impermeable or substantially fluid impermeable, and an opposite side that is fluid permeable. As will now be described, the construction of applicator pads according to some embodiments of the present invention is based at least in part upon the use of sheet materials (e.g., air filter sheet materials) having different properties on opposite sides of the sheet materials.
Additional non-flat applicator pad embodiments according to the present invention are illustrated in
With reference to the embodiment of
Although the opposite edges of the first and second lengths of material 278, 280 shown in
The applicator pad 244 illustrated in
The applicator pad 444 illustrated in
Although the opposite ends 490, 492 of the length of material 478 shown in
The applicator pad 544 illustrated in
The applicator pad 644 illustrated in
The applicator pad 744 illustrated in
Although the opposite ends 790, 792 of the length of material 778 shown in
Applicator pads 44, 144, 244, 344, 444, 544, 644 and 744 according to various embodiments of the present invention can be constructed of a number of different materials having the performance and material characteristics described below. By way of example, such applicator pads 44, 144, 244, 344, 444, 544, 644 and 744 can be constructed of fibrous material, webs, foams, and other sponge-like materials, plastic elements, and the like. Exemplary floor finish finishing materials include, but are not limited to, polyester fibers, rayon, cotton, wool, polyolefins, polyamides such as nylons, and combinations thereof.
Applicator pads 44, 144, 244, 344, 444, 544, 644 and 744 according to various embodiments of the present invention may be fabricated using a number of well-known technique suitable for producing materials with the material characteristics described below.
In the development of applicator pads according to various embodiments of the present invention, multiple cleaning pads, cloths, and filters were tested for even floor finish distribution and for leveling out uneven surfaces. Three materials showed unexpected results when used to distribute floor finish over a surface. The first two materials are air filter materials available under the product designation HF40 HS1S (hereinafter, “HF40”) and HF32D available by Ahlstrom Corporation, Helsinki, Finland, while the third material is the air filter material available from Nox-Bellcow, Zhongshan, China (hereinafter “Nox”). It was unexpected and surprising that air filter material would perform as good as or better than conventional scrub pads and applicator pads. In order to determine material properties that could improve floor finishing performance, various tests were run to determine material properties for these three air filter materials, and many scrub pads and applicator pads that are readily available in the marketplace. For example, these materials were compared to various conventional pads relative to density, friction, compression resistance, porosity, spreading, absorbency, and the like.
During tests, it was observed that the air filter materials (i.e., HF40, HF32D and Nox) had surprisingly dramatic reduction in drag without compromising the quality of coatings achieved. As such, various tests were conducted to test these observations. Specifically, the coefficient of friction was calculated on the same surface for a variety of conventional materials and compared to the air filter material. Three different tests were conducted. One test determined the dry coefficient of friction (static and dynamic) relative to the common surface. The second determined the wet coefficient of friction (static and dynamic) relative to the common surface. The third was a measure of the coefficient of static friction utilizing the James Machine.
For both the first and second friction test noted above, six inch diameter samples of material were separately dragged over a coated tile surface (black VCT from Armstrong with 4 coats of Carefree® floor finish, available from JohnsonDiversey, Inc.) under a set vertical force (Z-force) using a Precision Force Instrument. One cycle of testing included moving the pad from one side of a tile to an opposite side of the tile, and then moving the pad in an opposite direction across the tile. Each pad was dragged over the tile for two cycles (total of 4 passes) with a pause included between cycles. Pad position, running time and both horizontal (X) and vertical force (Z) were recorded at the rate of 100 data points per second during the run. The first peak forces (or static forces) in the horizontal (X) were detected in the beginning of each pass when the pad started to move across the tile, while a lower force (or dynamic force) in the horizontal (X) direction was detected while the pad was moving across the tile. The average (through out whole pass) and first peak (static) coefficients of friction were calculated respectively by dividing the average X-force (whole pass) by average Z-force (whole pass) and by dividing the first peak X-force (static) by the Z-force at that point. The average coefficient should be very slightly higher and could be viewed as a dynamic coefficient. For the dry test, the materials were not moistened. For the wet test, the materials were moistened with 25 mL of water to partially simulate use conditions. This data is included Table I—wet and Table I—dry below.
The sample with the lowest static coefficient of friction values was the filter material (HF40). From the results in Table I-wet, the HF40 filter material demonstrated a static coefficient of friction of about 0.39 and a dynamic coefficient of friction of about 0.24 when wet, which are substantially less than the other materials tested. HF32D filter material demonstrated a static coefficient of friction of about 0.45 and a dynamic coefficient of friction of about 0.26 when wet, which are substantially less than the other materials tested. From the results in Table I-dry, the HF40 filter material demonstrated a static coefficient of friction of about 0.38 and a dynamic coefficient of friction about 0.28 when dry, which are substantially less than the other materials tested.
The inventors have discovered that in some pad embodiments according to the present invention, the static coefficient of friction tested according to the above-described test method is less than about 0.75. In some embodiments, the static coefficient of friction is less than about 0.55. In still other embodiments, this static coefficient of friction is less than about 0.45.
As indicated above, the materials were also tested using the James Machine Test (ASTM D-2047). This test is generally used to measure the coefficient of static friction of a polish-coated flooring surface relative to a standard “shoe” as a safety measure. Specifically, this test normally uses a piece of leather attached to a metal plate as a “shoe,” and places the “shoe” on top of the floor surface under a set vertical force. The floor material is then moved laterally until the shoe slips under the force. The point at which the shoe slips relative to the floor is the measure of the coefficient of static friction.
The James Machine Test was also adapted to determine the coefficient of static friction for each of these materials relative to an unmodified (i.e., no additional coatings applied) 12 inch by 12 inch Armstrong new black vinyl composite tile. In this modified test, a three inch by three inch sample of material was attached to the “shoe”. The new tile was lightly wiped with non-link tissue between tests to remove any particles from the tile. The average static coefficients of friction for the pad materials are included below in Table II.
The inventors have discovered that mop drags experienced in applying floor finishes have the same trend as the results from the modified James machine test described above. However, it was noticed that with the Nox-Bellcow material, the side of the material with the smoother surface presents an amount of friction that is most likely due to the biting of that surface into the tile under extreme high pressure (˜8.9 lb per square inch)—a result that is many times higher than the head pressure on the pad (˜0.02 to 0.2 lb per square inch) during the application. The inventors have discovered that in some pad embodiments according to the present invention, the static coefficient of friction tested according to the modified James Machine Test method should be less than about 0.32. In more preferred embodiments, the static coefficient of friction is less than about 0.28. In yet more preferred embodiments, this static coefficient of friction is less than about 0.26.
As indicated above, density was also measure for a variety of materials to determine whether density helped provide the performance characteristics noted with the air filter materials. Many of the possible floor finish pads were tested under various circumstances to determine some material properties of the pads yielding desired floor finish application results. The height of sample stacks were measured according to ASTM D6571 with sample stacks sandwiched between two plates. The weight of the sample stacks were also measured, and these parameters were used to calculate the volume and the density of the samples. This data was collected, and is listed below in Table III. One will note that all samples were tested with multiple layers of the same material stacked to reduce the effects of sample variation.
As noted in the test data, the preferred filter materials had a material density of about 0.036 to about 0.046. It is believed that the material density has some effect on drag, porosity, and absorbency. As such, through experimentation, the inventors discovered that a range of acceptable density values for the applicator pad according to various embodiments of the present invention of between about 0.01 g/cm3 and about 0.08 g/cm3 is desirable. A second narrower range of acceptable density values is between about 0.025 g/cm3 and about 0.06 g/cm3. A more preferable range of density values is between about 0.035 g/cm3 and about 0.05 g/cm3.
Overall pad height can be another important material property for the applicator pads according to the present invention. As discussed below, a preferred range of heights or thicknesses can (1) provide better results over an uneven floor and (2) inhibit the finish from flowing over the top of the tool head 12 during use. The inventors have discovered that an applicator pad height according to some embodiments of the present invention of between about 0.3 cm and about 2.5 cm is desirable. In more preferred embodiments, the height is between about 0.6 cm and about 2.0 cm. The most preferred embodiments have a height of between about 0.9 cm and about 1.5 cm. All three filter materials HF 40, HF32D, and Nox materials described herein and tested were relatively thin. Multiple layers of these materials were used in testing to achieve the desired effect.
The inventors have also discovered that compression resistance is another material property that can be indicative of performance of the applicator pads. For example, it has been noted that the higher the compression resistance of a material, the floor finish applied tends to be more consistent and uniform in coat weight. One possible test to determine the compression resistance of a material is the ASTM D6571 test. This test includes multiple stages of adding and removing a mass from the pad to determine the compression of the subject material, and the relaxation of the material after the mass is removed. The following Table IV shows a summary of pad material sizes and mass values used during testing of the HF40 and other materials described above:
During the ASTM D6571 test described above, the initial pad height was measured, the pad height was measured again immediately after a mass was positioned on the pad, and then a third time after ten minutes elapsed with the mass on the pad. The mass was then removed, and the height was immediately measured, and was measured again after ten minutes without the mass on the pad. These steps (A to F indicated below) were measured followed the ASTM D6571 procedure, while the later steps (G′ to J′) were repeated for different time periods, which are modified from a true ASTM D6571 test (and noted on Table V with a prime symbol (′)). For example, G′ was measured after the mass was placed a third time over the pad for two hours, instead of twenty-four hours as specified in the test, and J′ was taken after thirty minutes elapsed instead of one hour elapsed. The data collected from the test are included below in Table V:
Three variables were calculated from these results: L, M and L−2 hr. L is compression resistance, and is equal to one-hundred multiplied by the height of the sample stack (a stack of multiple layers) after the mass has been positioned on the sample stack for ten minutes, divided by the initial no-mass height. M is the elastic loss, and is equal to one hundred multiplied by the difference between the initial no-mass height and the relaxed height after ten minutes, all divided by the initial no-mass height. L−2 hr is compression resistance of the sample stack for the second time the mass is applied and after two hours have elapsed. Specifically, L−2 hr is equal to one hundred multiplied by the height after the mass has been applied for two hours divided by the recovered height after the mass has been removed for ten minutes. To summarize, the formulae are L=100*C/A, M=100*(A−E)/A, and L−2 hr=100*G′/E, as taken from Table V. A summary of the data, including calculated values L, M and L−2 hr, is included in Table VI below:
The data in Table VI indicate that the HF40 pad has a Compression Resistance of between about 75 and about 77, depending upon the length of time exposed to compression. Although these filter materials do not have the highest compression resistance test, the measured values are acceptable.
When an operator is finished polishing or finishing a floor, the operator typically lifts the tool 10 off the floor. It is desirable to have minimal fluid drip from the pad after being lifted off the floor. A property that illustrates the propensity of a material to drip or retain fluid (e.g., in the pad) is Liquid Absorptive Capacity (LAC). A test of LAC (Standard Test Method: WSP10.1(05) issued jointly by INDA and EDANA) includes submerging the material in fluid for one minute, and then removing the material and allowing the material to drip for two minutes. The mass of the dry sample (Mk) is measured before the test, and the mass of the wet sample is measured (Mn) after the test. The LAC parameter compares the mass of the dry sample (Mk) to the mass of the wet sample (Mn). The equation for the LAC in a percentage is LAC%=(Mn−Mk)*100%/Mk. With regard to the present invention, the test was repeated five times per sample material, and the LAC% was calculated. LACs for the various samples are included below in Table VII.
According to the results in Table VII, the HF40 sample had an average LAC% of 1362%, and the Nox sample had an average LAC% of 1185%. As illustrated, the air filter material had a LAC% higher than any of the other samples tested. The inventors have discovered that in some embodiments of the present invention, a high Liquid Absorptive Capacity may be desirable to promote better spreading of floor finishing material and/or inhibit dripping of floor polish. The inventors have discovered that applicator pad materials having a LAC of at least about 500% are desirable. However, the inventors have also discovered that such applicator pad materials having an LAC of at least about 900% are more desirable. Finally, the inventors have also discovered that such applicator pad materials having a LAC of at least about 1100% are most desirable (e.g., air filter materials such as the HF40 and Nox filter material).
Another material property indicative of performance may be porosity. Theoretically, a less porous material should provide better application results. However, porosity must be sufficiently balanced with drag and LAC.
It is assumed the opacity can be relatively indicative of porosity. Opacity is the amount of light blocked by, or not allowed to pass through the material. Opacity can indicate the porosity of the material by measuring the void space in the material. The higher the opacity (i.e., amount of background blocked) of the material, the lower the porosity of the material. Thus, higher opacity values of an applicator pad material can correlate to lower material porosity. Lower levels of porosity of material usually gives better performance in consistent and uniform layer of floor finish to a floor. Accordingly, higher opacity values of an applicator pad material can be desired.
A modified WSP 60.4 “Standard Test method for Nonwoven Opacity” was used in testing applicator pad materials relevant to the present invention. To determine the opacity of several samples, the test measured the reflectance factor (lightness measurement, L) of a black area of a Leneta card (a chart with a combination of black and white areas large enough for wide aperture reflectance instrument measurement), and the reflectance factor (lightness measurement, Ls) of a single sheet of material to be tested placed on the same black area. Five samples of each material were tested, the L values for each sample were averaged, and then compared to the L value of the black sheet. The change in lightness measurement (Ls−L), the difference between the lightness measurement of the black sheet (L) and the lightness measurement of the samples (Ls), was measured and is included in Table VIII below. The thickness of each sample was also measured (see Table III), since opacity generally changes based upon the thickness (T) of the sample. Finally, the opacity was calculated using the equation (Ls−L)/T, and is included in Table VIII below. Note that for this test it is assumed the each material reflects light substantially equally.
The HF40 material described above had a change in opacity of about 120 L/cm and the Nox sample had a change of about 131 L/cm. The inventors have discovered that in some embodiments, opacity values no less than about 55 L per cm are desirable. In other embodiments, the inventors have discovered that desirable opacity values in applicator pad materials are no less than about 100 L per cm (e.g., polyester air filter materials such as the HF40 and Nox materials described above).
One interesting aspect observed by the inventors is that the high porosity material gave much better performance in applying an extra thick coat than applying a thin or regular thickness coating. The higher the porosity of the material, the thicker the coat of floor finish applied onto the floor. Accordingly, lower opacity values of pad material, such as HF32D, can be desired if an extra thick coat is desired in the application.
Another material property that can affect floor finish is spreading character. If spreading character is high, the applicator pad can more evenly distribute fluid over the floor surface. Samples of applicator pad materials relevant to embodiments of the present invention were tested with a modified version of the ASTM D 6702 Standard Test Method for Determining the Dynamic Wiping Efficiency of Nonwoven Fabrics Not Used in Cleanrooms. These samples were cut to have an area of 96 mm by 74 mm, and were attached to a weight block weighing 994 g to form a sample block. The sample block was placed on top of a white Vinyl Composite Tile (VCT) having two coats of finish already applied thereto. The longer edge of the sample block was aligned with the tile edge. A small percentage of dye was added to the floor finish to illustrate the spreading characteristics of the pad on the sample block. A fixed amount of floor finish with dye was placed in front of the sample block with a pipette. The sample block was then moved steadily toward an opposite side of the tile for about 3 to 4 seconds, and traveled a distance of about 225 mm. Two different concentrations of dye in floor finish were used (i.e. 0.02% and 0.05% dye in the floor finish). In a first test, 0.5 mL of finish was used, whereas 1 mL of finish was used in a second test, and 1.5 mL of finish was used in a third test.
The horizontal spreading pattern of each tested applicator pad material was measured (i.e. the width of the floor finish along the tile) to indirectly measure the spreading capacity of the tested material. The width of the floor finish that was spread on the tile was measured at the start of spreading the finish, in the middle of spreading the finish, and at the end of spreading the finish. The width of floor finish on the pad was also measured at various points, and the largest width was recorded. The spreading was calculated by dividing the largest width on the pad by the starting width on the tile. The end width on the tile was divided by the starting width on the tile to show how effectively the finish spread on the tile by each material. The results of this test are shown below in Table IX.
The data illustrate that the HF40 air filter material spreads floor finish more effectively than the Glit 98 white pad. One way to illustrate this is to compare the spreading end/start on tile value for each test, which divides the end width by the start width on the tile. The average value for the HF40 pad was 1.78, whereas the average value of the Glit pad was 1.15, as calculated from the values in Table IX. The values for the HF40 pad are higher than the values for the Glit pad, such that the floor finish is spread farther and in an improved manner by the HF40 pad.
Another way to illustrate spreading capability is to calculate the angle of finish spread between the starting point and the end point. The average widths were used for each starting point, mid-point, and end point for a given concentration of dye. The widths were divided by the length traveled, and the inverse tangent for the ratio was calculated. The angles were first calculated between the starting points and the mid-points, and are included in Table X below in the row entitled “First Half” The angles were also calculated between the starting points and the end points, and are included in Table X below in the row entitled “Whole Run.”
As the data in Table X illustrates, the spreading capability or angle of spread of the HF40 is superior to the Glit pad. Therefore, under the testing conditions, the HF40 pad more quickly and evenly spread floor finish than the Glit pad, as shown in Tables IX and X. The inventors have discovered that a material having an average spread angle of greater than about 10° is advantageous and desirable in some embodiments of the inventive pad. In other embodiments, an average spread angle of greater than about 2° is advantageous and desirable in some embodiments of the inventive pad.
Another material property that can affect floor finish is the leveling character of the applicator pad material. If the leveling character is high, the applicator pad can leave a relatively smooth coating on a floor. Theoretically, less abrasive and smoother material surfaces should provide better leveling performance. However, such surface characters should be sufficiently balanced with drag.
Unfortunately, the weight loss measurement from standard abrasive tests (such as the Schiefer value with 3M/ST test method as described in U.S. Pat. No. 4,078,340, and weight loss measured with ASTM D1242 for Resistance of Plastic Materials to Abrasion) would be very small for suitable pad materials of low to non-abrasive characteristics. Therefore, the inventors utilized a modified method from ASTM D6279 for Rub Abrasion Mar Resistance of High Gloss Coatings. In particular, this method was adapted to measure the decrease of gloss reading caused by dragging pad materials over coated tiles. In testing each material, a 4.5 inch diameter sample of material was moved while spinning at 50 rpm over coated tiles (Black Armstrong tiles with 6 coats of Signature® floor finish available from JohnsonDiversey, Inc., aged at room temperature for 3 weeks) under a set vertical force of 5 pounds (Z-force) using a Precision Force Instrument. To avoid effects of uneven drag (higher drag) at the beginning of pad movement, each pad was placed outside of the testing tile, moved over the entire length of tile to outside the opposite side of the testing area, and then moved in an opposite direction across the tiled testing area back to the starting position. In these tests, each pad was spun at 50 rpm during this whole testing cycle. Two pieces of each pad material were tested, and the gloss readings before and after the test were measured, and summarized in Table XI below.
Among the three materials tested, the 3M 5100 red pad is the most abrasive, with a Schiefre Value of 0.1 gram (source: 3M product sheet). Based upon tests performed, the inventors have discovered that suitable pad materials should be less abrasive than the 3M red pad. As data in Table XI illustrates, the preferred pad material generates less than 10 points of gloss lost, or change in gloss readings. In more preferred embodiments, the gloss lost is less than about 5. In still more preferred embodiments, this gloss loss is less than about 2.
Applicator pads according to the various embodiments of the present invention have particular combinations of properties found by the inventors to provide superior performance results over conventional applicator pads for floor tools. Such properties include those described above for which testing was performed by the inventors. The inventors have discovered that certain combinations of properties (i.e., material and performance characteristics as described above) result in significant improvements compared to conventional floor finish tool applicator pads. One such combination is the wet coefficient of friction (whether dynamic-average, or static-first peak) and the LAC and/or opacity, particularly in the ranges referred to above. Another such combination is the pad material density and the LAC and/or thickness, particularly in the ranges referred to above. Yet another such combination is the pad material compression resistance and the pad material thickness and/or opacity, particularly in the ranges referred to above. Although polyester and other polymeric non-woven materials, such as air filter materials (e.g., HF40 or Nox air filter materials) have such desirable performance characteristic combinations, it will be appreciated that other materials having the above-described material and performance characteristics are possible, and fall within the spirit and scope of the present invention.
In some embodiments, the pad 44 can include fibers that can be monofilaments, yarns, tows, or bound filamentous materials. The materials that may be used as a floor finish distributing material are not limited to filament fibers, and can also includes webs, such as three dimensional fiberous webs, foams, flocked foam, and other sponge-like materials, needle punched material, open celled material, and the like. In some highly preferred embodiments, the floor finish distributing material is an open non-woven three-dimensional web formed of interlaced randomly extending flexible fibers, wherein the interstices between adjacent fibers are open, thereby creating a tri-dimensionally extending network of intercommunicated voids.
Examples of floor finish distributing materials for the applicator pad 44 include, but are not limited to, polypropylene and/or polyester fibers. Additional floor finish distributing materials include nonwoven materials such as, for example, the low density open non-woven fiberous materials described in U.S. Pat. No. 2,958,593, U.S. Pat. No. 4,355,067, and U.S. Pat. No. 4,893,439, and woven materials such as scrims and screens. Furthermore, other open structured materials including brushes having the above properties can be used. Substances suitable as floor finish distributing materials include, but are not limited to, polypropylene, polyethylene, polyesters, polyurethanes including modified polyurethanes, polyamides such as nylons, and mixtures and combinations thereof.
In operation, floor finish is delivered to the floor in bulk, and is distributed via the applicator pad. To spread floor finish on the floor, the applicator pad contacts the bulk floor finish deposited on the floor and spreads the bulk floor finish substantially evenly over the floor regardless of the pressure applied by the operator to the floor via the applicator pad. Substantially even spreading is accomplished by the material qualities of the applicator pad.
The embodiments described above and illustrated in the figures are presented by way of example only and are not intended as a limitation upon the concepts and principles of the present invention. As such, it will be appreciated by one having ordinary skill in the art that various changes in the elements and their configuration and arrangement are possible without departing from the spirit and scope of the present invention. For example, many material properties were identified as providing ideal floor finish characteristics for the applicator pad 44. The present invention does not require a single pad to incorporate all of these properties. Rather, a pad having one or more of the properties (as described above) may be desired for a particular purpose.
Various alternatives to the certain features and elements of the present invention are described with reference to specific embodiments of the present invention. With the exception of features, elements, and manners of operation that are mutually exclusive of or are inconsistent with each embodiment described above, it should be noted that the alternative features, elements, and manners of operation described with reference to one particular embodiment are applicable to the other embodiments.
Various features of the invention are set forth in the following claims.
This application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/864,547, filed Oct. 26, 2010, which is a national phase application filing of International Patent Application No. PCT/US2009/031858, filed Jan. 23, 2009, which claims the benefit of and priority to U.S. Provisional Application No. 61/023,626, filed on Jan. 25, 2008, the entire contents of each of which are incorporated herein by reference.
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 61023626 | Jan 2008 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Parent | 12864547 | Oct 2010 | US |
| Child | 14338202 | US |
