NBSIR 7b 914

Graffiti Removers: Evaluation and

Preliminary Selection Criteria

M. Godette

M. Post and

P. G. Campbell

Institute for Applied Technology

National Bureau of Standards

Washington, D. C. 20234

December 1975

Final

Prepared for Division of Energy. Building Technology and Standards

Office of Policy Development and Research

Department of Housing and Urban Development

jton, D. C. 20410

100

.1156

75-914

1975

NATIONAL BUKttAl Of STANDARDS

USBABY

not (Lee - K*f.

Q-Ctoo

NBSIR 75-914

GRAFFITI REMOVERS: EVALUATION AND

PRELIMINARY SELECTION CRITERIA

M. Godette

M. Post and

P. G. Campbell

Institute for Applied Technology

National Bureau of Standards

Washington, D. C. 20234

December 1975

Final

Prepared for Division of Energy, Building Technology and Standards

Office of Policy Development and Research

Department of Housing and Urban Development

Washington, D. C. 20410

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, Rogers C.B. Morton, Secretary

James A. Baker, III, Under Secretary

Dr. Betsy Ancker-Johnson, Assistant Secretary for Science and Technology

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS, Ernest Ambler. Acting Director

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

1. INTRODUCTION I

2. LABORATORY EVALUATION OF COMMERCIALLY AVAILABLE GRAFFITI REMOVERS 3

2.1 Preliminary Screening 3 2.2 Removal Effectiveness - Specific J 2.3 Removal Effectiveness - General Purpose 4 2.4 Removal Test of Felt-Tip Pen, Crayon and Lipstick Markings 4 2.5 Remover-Substrate Compatibility 5 2.6 Migration 5 2.7 Evaporation Rate 6 2.8 Flash Point 6 2.9 Nonvolatile Content 6

3. DISCUSSION 7

4. RECOMMENDED SELECTION CRITERIA FOR GRAFFITI REMOVERS 7

4.1 Removal Effectiveness - Specific 7 4.2 Removal Effectiveness - General Purpose 8 4.3 Remover-Substrate Compatibility 8 4.4 Evaporation 9 4.5 Flash Point 9

5. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 10

6 . REFERENCES 35

iii
LISTING OF TABLES

Table Mo. , Page

1 Properties of Graffiti Removers 11

2 Generic Types of Aerosol Paint Used to Test Removal Effectiveness 25

3 Dimensions and Physical Properties of Brick 27

4 Time Required for Complete Removal of Major Generic Types of Spray Paints

from Matte Tile by the 24 Most Effective Removers 28

5 Ranking of Removers According to Average Color Retention of 36 SprayPainted Brick 29

6 Five Removers Which Will Remove 36 Spray Paints from Brick and Their

Compatibility with Common Substrates 30

7 Effectiveness of Removers in Removing Spray Paints from Bricks 31

8 Ranking of Removers According to Effectiveness of Removal of Felt-Tip

Pen, Crayon and Lipstick Markings from Brick 32

9 Effect of Removers on the Color Retention of Unmarked Building Materials.. 33

iv
LIST OF FIGURES —Figure No. Page

1 Distance of Migration of Removers When Applied to Limestone and

Sandstone for 1 Hour 24

v
ABSTRACT

A program was undertaken to determine the performance of graffiti removers so that

performance criteria for selection of these types of materials could be recommended. The

results of laboratory tests of removal efficiency, range of effectiveness, remover-substrate

compatibility, migration (spreading), and flash point are presented. From the results

i tained, tentative criteria for selection of graffiti removers are recommended.

The marking materials (graffiti) used were spray paints of major generic types, crayon

and felt-tip pen markers. The substrates used were clay brick, ceramic tile, limestone,

sandstone, aluminum and wood. Ninety-nine commercial materials which are marketed for use

as graffiti removers were used in the study.

This report is on the removal of marking materials from brick. The results showed

that all markings can be removed with a high degree of effectiveness. No single remover was effective on all markings, but a set of five selected removers used in sequence, was effective against all.

The compatibility of the most effective removers with various building materials was also studied. Care must be taken to select a remover which will neither discolor the

substrate being cleaned nor adjacent areas.

Key Words: Graffiti; graffiti removers; removal; materials; paint; spray paints; effectiveness

remover-substrate compatibility; substrate.

vl.
1. INTRODUCTION

The vandalous use of spray paints and other marking materials to deface the surfaces

of buildings has increased tremendously in the last decade. These markings, commonly known

as "graffiti", are unsightly and expensive to remove. Nationally, the graffiti problem is estimated to cost 600 million dollars annually [1]*.

Proper maintenance of building surfaces requires the availability of suitable removers which will remove the markings without damaging the substrates and presenting undue hazards

to the users of such cleaning materials. Substantial savings could be made by the Department

of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) if effective removers were identified and criteria

for their selection and use were developed. Therefore, HUD initiated a program to identify

and evaluate effective commercial cleaning materials for the removal of markings from

various substrates (building surfaces)

.

This study of graffiti removers was conducted in four phases. Phase I included a literature survey of methods for the removal of markings from building materials; the

identification of materials used in public housing, and the identification of graffitiresistant materials. Phase II was an evaluation of the effectiveness of commercial products

proposed for use as graffiti removers. Phase III complemented Phase II in that proposed

graffiti-resistant coatings were evaluated for performance, including durability. Phase IV was the development of interim criteria for the performance of graffiti removers and graffitiresistant coatings. This report presents the results of the activities of Phase II and IV and covers methods of test, and interim performance criteria. The initial task, Phase I, resulted in a letter report to the sponsor (HUD) . Information from Phase III is contained

in a report presently under editorial review [2].

The objectives of the work described in this report were:

1. To identify commercially available removers suitable for the removal of

spray paint, crayon and felt-tip pen markings from commonly exposed building

materials.

2. To select tests for evaluating removal efficiency and physical properties of

graffiti removers.

3. To evaluate commercially available graffiti removers and recommend interim

performance criteria for their selection.

A good remover is characterized by its ability to act quickly and to be easily removed

with the marking material without damaging the substrate. Many removers are effective on smooth non-porous substrates, but few are effective on porous and absorptive materials.

From a review of the literature, through contact with industry and public housing

engineers, and through visits to commercial sources, 99 potential graffiti removers were

identified and samples obtained. The products included liquids, emulsions, pastes, gels

and powders. Information on the properties of the removers and the manufacturer's recommended

precautions in their use are given in table 1. Among the removers were products claimed to be suitable for application to steel, concrete, sandstone, limestone, brick and wood.

A rapid qualitative screening test was employed to eliminate, from further study,

those graffiti removers that showed insufficient effectiveness, unsatisfactory flow properties,

or extraordinary hazards. Then, the most promising removers or procedures were more quantitatively evaluated for removal effectiveness.

The marking (graffiti) materials and devices selected for the study were aerosol

paints, crayons, lipstick and felt-tip pen markers. The selection of marking materials to be used in the program was based on those general types frequently used by the graffiti

artist, and their availability in local stores. The resin type, color and sample number of each spray paint are listed in table 2. In addition to the spray paints, the following

materials were used:

*Figures in brackets indicate references in this report.

1
Felt-Tip Penti - The pens were blue, red, black, red, black, pink and manufactured*

by Carter Ink, Skllcraft, Zip Mark and Flair Mft. Co. Two pens made in Japan,

could not be identified by either trade name or manufacturer.

Crayons - The crayons were orange, green, green and purple and manufactured by

the Crayola Company.

Lipstick - The lipsticks were pink, gold frost and burnt sugar and manufactured

by Avon, Max Factor and Elizabeth Arden Company, respectively.

In addition to the brick whose properties are listed in table 3, the following building

materials, similar to those found in public housing, were used as experimental substrates.

Future reference to these materials implies the type and grade listed below:

1. Aluminum (Architectural) - 6061-T6

2. Briar Hill Sandstone - ASTM Specification C-616

3. Matte Tile - U.S. Dept. of Commerce Spec. USAS A1371-1967

4. Indiana Limestone - ASTM Specification C-568

5. Wood (white pine) - prime grade, kiln dried exterior siding

As a basis for establishing limits of performance for graffiti removers, it is necessary

to be able to evaluate the degree to which the uniform appearance of the substrate can be

restored following defacement by graffiti. To do this, a Hunter Color-Difference Meter [3] was used to measure changes in appearance. This instrument determines small color differences,

observable in daylight illumination, between opaque surfaces such as paint specimens. The

apparatus consists of means for locating the surface of the specimen, a light source furnishing a beam incident on the specimen, and a receptor located to receive the rays reflected

by the specimen. The receptor is a photosensitive device responding to visible radiation.

This instrument is designed to provide color difference measurements in approximate agreement with average visual judgments of color difference [4].

Measurements were made on each specimen before application of the graffiti and after

the cleaning process. The change produced by the incomplete removal of the applied graffiti

and the effect of the removal process is expressed as "color change."

The color change, AE, in NBS units [4] was computed from these measurements and expressed in terms of color retention, C.R. which was defined as [5]:

* Identification of commercial products is included only to adequately specify the test con- ditions. Identification does not imply recommendation or endorsement by the National

Bureau of Standards.

**The color difference parameters, Rd (the 45°, 0° luminous daylight reflectance), a (redgreen) and b (yellow-blue) were measured with a color difference meter. The color change

in NBS units were calculated by the following formula:

C.R. = 100 - AE**.

Color change

2
An NBS unit 1h equivalent to the Ali, ah determined in method 6 1 2

'i of Federal Test Method Standard 141 [41 and 100 would repreuent complete return to original appearance

after helng stained and cleaned.

As will be seen from the results presented in Section 2, it is possible to distinguish

between removers of different effectiveness. This is a necessary requirement for the

recommendation of practical criteria for the selection of graffiti removers.

2. LABORATORY EVALUATION OF COMMERCIALLY

AVAILABLE GRAFFITI REMOVERS

This section presents the rationale for the evaluation of graffiti removers and gives

the results of the selected tests. Determinations of removal efficiency and measurements

of physical properties of removers are used in assessing their quality.

The following tests were chosen to measure those physical properties which are directly

related to the performance of graffiti removers. These are the tests which were used to obtain the data presented below and which are referenced in the interim performance criteria

of Section 4.

2.1 Preliminary Screening

A qualitative screening test was used in the initial evaluation. In this test, spray

paints of various types (table 2) were applied to matte tile. Some of the generic types

have more than one representative due to the variations in their ease of removal from tile.

Such factors as vehicle type, quantity of vehicle, quantity of pigment and pigment type

affect the removal process. The purposes of the test were:

1. To assess the effectiveness and general characteristics of each remover.

2. To eliminate from further study those removers that were ineffective on many

markings.

Each of the 36 paints (table 2) was sprayed onto matte tiles, baked at 49 ± 2°C for 16 hours, and stored at 23 ± 2°C and 50 ± 5% rh for 24 hours. Duplicate sets of 36 tiles,

each with a different paint, were prepared. Each remover was then applied to the sets in

accordance with the respective supplier's directions. When wrinkling, crazing, lifting, or swelling occurred, the tiles were rinsed with water from a garden hose at a rate of five

gallons per minute for a period not longer than 30 seconds to attempt to remove the paint

film. Time of removal and percent area affected were recorded.

Those removers providing for the complete removal of the markings within 60 seconds

after application of the remover on the marked surface are listed in table 4. These removers were selected for further evaluation. The results showed:

1. The time needed to dislodge the paint could be determined by observation of

signs such as wrinkling, cracking, lifting or swelling.

2. The time varied widely between removers.

3. In general, those removers containing bodying or thickening agents (e.g.,

ceresin or paraffin wax) tended to be more effective.

2.2 Removal Effectiveness - Specific

To be most useful, a graffiti remover must remove a wide range of marking materials.

As a measure of usefulness, a test was carried out with each of the 24 removers to determine

how many different paints it could remove. Paints were applied to brick, removed and the

difference between the original and final appearance (color retention) of each brick determined. The number of paints removed with an efficiency (color retention value) of 90 or greater was recorded.

3
The purpose of this test was to determine the number of upray paints which could be

removed wLth a high degree of effectiveness by each remover.

The 36 paints (table 2) were sprayed onto brick, baked at 49 + 2

3 C for 16 hours and

stored at 23 + 2°C and 50 + 5% rh for 24 hours. Each remover was applied to a set of 36 painted bricks in accordance with the supplier's directions except that the dwell time

prior to washing was extended to 30 minutes. The brick was then washed with 5 gal/min of high pressure (1600-1900 psi) , water to attempt to remove the paint film. Photoelectric

measurements of changes in appearance were made by a color difference meter both before

application of the paint and after the removal process.

The criterion for removal was that the brick should have a color retention value of at least 90. Table 5 indicates that only three products removed 18 or more of the paints; the most effective product (No. 85) removed 23, the least effective removed only 3. Table 6 identifies the specific paints removed effectively by each remover. The number of specimens

retaining a color retention value (C.R.) of 90 or more was recorded.

2.3 Removal Effectiveness - General Purpose

Removal effectiveness, for the purpose of this report, was defined as the extent (average color retention value) to which duplicate sets of 36 painted bricks were restored

to their original appearance.

The purpose of this test was to determine the extent to which a remover coulef restore

a substrate, marred by a variety of paints, to its original appearance. Preparation of

specimens and the cleaning process were as described in Section 2.2. Photoelectric measurements of changes in appearance both before application of the paint and after the removal

process afforded a ranking of the removers according to the extent that duplicate sets of painted bricks were restored to their original appearance.

Table 5 lists the 24 removers in order of effectiveness as determined by the average

color retention for brick painted with each of the 36 paints. The number of spray paints

removed from brick with an effectiveness (color retention) of at least 90 is also shown for

each remover. Removers numbers 85, 88, 82, 90 and 83 were the five most effective removers. However, since several paints were not removed by any of the above removers, they would not

be the best five to cover removal of all 36 paints.

Table 7 lists five removers that could be used in sequence for the effective removal

of a wide variety of spray paints from brick and other substrates. The compatibility of

the removers with various substrates is also indicated. (This will be discussed further in

Section 2.5)

2.4 Removal Test of Felt-Tip Pen, Crayon and Lipstick Markings

Since felt-tip pen markings are probably the most difficult of all markings to remove, the removers were next tested for their ability to remove felt-tip pen, crayon and lipstick

markings

The purpose of this test was to identify those removers suitable for the removal of

felt-tip pen, crayon and lipstick markings from brick.

The color of the face of brick to be defaced (duplicates for each remover) was determined by a color difference meter [3]. The bricks were then marked with parallel lines, two inches long, using 4 felt-tip pens, 3 lipsticks and 4 crayons. Color and manufacturer

are listed in Section 1. The marked samples were then baked at 49 ± 2°C for 16 hours,

removed and conditioned at 23 ± 2°C and 50 ± 5% rh for 24 hours.

3 The removal process consisted of applying 50 cm of each remover (table 8) over the

marked area. Application was in accordance with the supplier's directions, except that the

dwell time prior to washing was extended to 30 minutes to obtain maximum removal effectiveness. Then, the markings were washed from the coated brick with 5 gal/min of high pressure

(1600-1900 psi) water to remove the paint film. After drying, photometric measurements of

4
the appearance were made by a color difference meter [3] and used with the results of

measurements made before application of the markings to determine the color retention.

It is shown (table 8) , that the average color retention value for each set of bricks

is approximately 78. This low value reflects the difficulty experienced in removing felttip pen markings from porous substrates. Generally, those removers found effective for the

removal of paint or felt-tip pen markings were also effective for the removal of crayon,

chalk and lipstick as well.

2.5 Remover-Substrate Compatibility

An ideal remover should be able to remove marking materials but should not otherwise

affect the appearance of the substrate. To determine the suitability of the removers for use on brick, limestone, aluminum and wood, the change in appearance (color retention) was determined after applying each remover to those materials for one hour, rinsing with water

and drying for 24 hours.

The purpose of this test was to determine the effect of each remover on substrates

(building surfaces) encountered in public housing developments.

Duplicate 100 x 100 x 6.25 mm specimens were cut from brick, limestone, white pine

siding and architectural aluminum. Each specimen was cleaned with 5 percent by weight

trisodium phosphate solution and a cellulose sponge, rinsed thoroughly with running water,

and dried at 23 ± 2°C and 50 ± 5% rh for 24 hours.

Next, the color of the front side of each specimen was determined by a color difference

meter. The measured side was then covered with 25 cm3 of remover by brush. After exposure

for 1 hour at 23 ± 2°C, the specimens were removed and cleaned as before. After storage at

23 ± 2°C and 50 ± 5% rh for 24 hours, the color change was determined as outlined in Method

6123 of Fed. Test Method Std. 141a [4],

Effects of removers on the color retention of aluminum, brick, limestone and wood are indicated in table 9. The wood was most easily altered in appearance, with the limestone

being second in order. Surprisingly, even the appearance of the brick was susceptible to change by certain removers.

Tentative performance criteria, for selection of graffiti removers for use on specific

substrates, based on the effects of 24 removers on brick, aluminum, limestone and wood, are indicated in Section 4.3. Removers numbers 83 and 27 met the tentative minimum criteria

acceptable for application to all four substrates.

2.6 Migration

Removers frequently migrate into or through porous materials to which they are applied.

The extent of migration for removers applied to limestone and sandstone was determined by

measuring the distance traveled from the point of contact in one hour under specific conditions. These substrates, limestone and sandstone, represent those building materials most susceptible to the migration of solvents.

Ability of a remover to migrate into a substrate may aid the removal of marking materials

embedded in it or it may contribute to unnecessary defacement by carrying waxes, or solvents

to areas which were previously free of markings.

The purpose of this test was to determine the distance traveled from the point of contact with the stone.

Duplicate 25 x 25 x 75 mm specimens of Indiana limestone and Briar Hill sandstone were

allowed to stand vertically in a dish (55 mm in diameter) filled to the 6.25 mm level with

each remover at 23 ± 2°C and 50 ± 5% rh. After one hour, the specimens were removed and

the depth of migration (visible on the sides of the specimens) beyond the 6.25 mm level was measured by ruler to the nearest mm.

5
Only fourteen removers (figure 1) showed little or no migration into Briar Hill sandstone; however, on Indiana limestone, their migration averaged 10 mm. Removers that migrated

12.5 mm into limestone usually showed even greater migration into sandstone.

2.7 Evaporation Rate

Removers that contain large quantities of volatile solvents may be unacceptable for reasons of air pollution, toxicity and fire hazards. Also evaporative loss of solvents may

reduce the effectiveness for the removal of markings. The rate of evaporation of removers

was determined by exposing a fixed volume and surface area to the atmosphere at 23 ± 2°C

and 50 ± 5% rh, and recording the loss during the first minute.

The purpose of this test was to determine the relative rates of evaporation of solvents

from removers at a normal temperature of application.

Portions (duplicates) of the thoroughly mixed sample (not more than 0.03 gms) were transferred to flat-bottomed pans (60 mm in diameter) . The pans and contents were weighed

to the nearest one-tenth of a mg and exposed to an atmosphere of 23 ± 2°C and 50 ± 5% rh. After 1 minute, the pans were weighed again and the average weight loss per minute was determined.

Data in table 1 includes evaporation rates for the 99 removers. Generally, effective removers retained their solvents; less effective removers lost solvents rapidly. Remover

numbers 76, 80, 67 and 11 lost more than one percent of the weight applied during one minute of exposure. Twenty of the 24 most effective removers lost less than one percent

during the same period.

Rapid evaporation of solvents may cause hazards for the user if the vapors are toxic

or flammable (see Section 2.8).

2.8 Flash Point

The vapors from low boiling solvents in many paint removers may present fire hazards.

To simulate actual conditions, removers were exposed to elevated temperatures in the presence

of an open flame.

The purpose of this test [8] was to determine the flash point — the lowest temperature

at which the remover gives off vapors in sufficient quantity to be ignited by an open

f lame

The basic test method shall be as specified in ASTM Designation: D130-59T. The sample

is placed in the cup of a Tag Open Tester [8] and heated at a constant rate. A small test flame is passed at a uniform rate across the cup at intervals of 0.5°C rise in temperature.

The flash point is taken as the lowest temperature at which application of the test flame causes the vapor at the surface of the liquid to flash.

Data in table 1 indicate that the removers have a wide range of flash points. Most of

the top ranked removers in table 1 (numbers 85, 88, 82, 83, 69 and 11) flashed at a temperature greater than 37.8°C and would not be classed as flammable.

2.9 Nonvolatile Content

To be most useful, a graffiti remover must contain sufficient solvents to penetrate

the markings and soften, dissolve or lift them from the substrate. The purpose of this

test was to determine the amount of available solvent in each remover.

Basically the procedure is as described in Method 4041 of Federal Test Method Standard

141a. A portion of the thoroughly mixed sample (not more than 0.3 gms) was transferred to

a flat bottom pan (60 mm in diameter) . The pan and contents were weighed to the nearest one-tenth of a mg and placed in a gravity convection oven at 105°C for 30 minutes. After

cooling in a desiccator, the dish was weighed again to the nearest one-tenth mg. The

percent nonvolatile was calculated from the weight of the residue in the dish and the

weight of the sample taken.

6
The removers (table 1) showed a wide range of nonvolatile contents. The samples

ranged from a low of 0.3% to a high of 48.7% for non-powder type removers.

3. DISCUSSION

The results of the laboratory tests reported in Section 2 show that with selections of removers, it is possible to remove each of 36 spray paints from brick to the extent that

there is at least a color retention value of 90 as compared to the original unpainted

brick. Further, the smallest set of removers capable of removing any one of the 36 paints

from brick to give a color retention value of 90 contains five removers. The most effective

set of five removers for spray paints on brick was identified and consisted of removers

numbers 85, 88, 82, 38 and 67.

The study of the effects of removers on the various substrates showed that care must

be exercised in selecting the removers to ensure that they do not discolor the substrate to an unacceptable degree. Other considerations in selection of removers should be avoidance

of hazardous materials, whether toxic or flammable, wherever this can be done without serious

loss of removal effectiveness. Lastly, it is important to note that removal effectiveness

or convenience of use may be impaired if the rate of evaporation is high, or if the remover

tends to migrate too far in the substrate.

The selection of removers for use with unidentified markings on a given substrate cannot be made in a definitive manner. However, the tables given in Section 2 show removers which can be used on brick with reasonable confidence. Similar tables can be drawn up for

markings on other substrates.

Taking into account the factors mentioned above, and based on the data reported in

Section 2, tentative selection criteria for graffiti removers to be used for markings on specified substrates have been drawn up. These tentative criteria are presented in Section 4.

4. RECOMMENDED SELECTION CRITERIA FOR GRAFFITI REMOVERS

The recommended selection criteria for graffiti removers which are given below are based on the results reported in Section 2. The quantitative values given in each criterion

reflect our present best judgment. However, it must be recognized that further experience

may suggest that the values should be changed or that a different set of criteria is needed.

4.1 Removal Effectiveness - Specific

Requirement

A set of removers should be available which, between them, will be highly effective in

removing all common marking materials. In addition, to simplify remover selection, removers which are highly effective for specific materials should also be effective on as many other common marking materials as possible.

Criterion

When a remover is tested as outlined below, a minimum color retention value of 90 shall

be obtained for at least 14 of the 36 spray painted bricks.

Test

The 36 paints (table 2) are sprayed onto brick, baked at 49 ± 2°C for 16 hours and

stored at 23 ± 2°C and 50 ± 5% rh for 24 hours. Each remover is applied to a set of 36 painted bricks in accordance with the supplier's directions except that the dwell time

prior to washing is extended to 30 minutes. The brick is then washed with 5 gal/min of

high pressure (1600-1900 psi) water to remove the paint film. Photoelectric measurements of

changes in appearance are made by a color difference meter both before application of the

paint and after the removal process.

7
This criterion was designed to enable users to select removers for the removal of specific markings with a high degree of effectiveness while retaining the convenience of a remover which will remove several types. Results were dependent upon test samples (spray

paints) used and probably would have been slightly different if other materials had been

used

4.2 Removal Effectiveness - General Purpose

Req uirement

Where convenience of selection of a remover for an unknown marking is more important

than having the highest effectiveness of removal, removers should be available which are at least moderately effective in removing a wide range of materials.

Criterion

When tested as outlined below, the average color retention for duplicate sets of 36 different paints (table 2) shall be not less than 75.

Test

The 36 paints (table 2) are sprayed onto brick, baked at 49 ± 2°C for 16 hours and

stored at 23 ± 2°C and 50 ± 5% rh for 24 hours. Each remover is applied to a set of 36 painted bricks in accordance with the supplier's directions except that the dwell time

prior to washing is extended to 30 minutes. The brick is then washed with 5 gal/min of high

pressure (1600-1900 psi) water to remove the paint film. Photoelectric measurements of changes in appearance are made by a color difference meter both before application of the

paint and after the removal process.

Commentary

The effectiveness of a general purpose remover must be judged on its ability to remove

a wide variety of markings. This criterion is based on an average effectiveness in removing

36 different commercially available spray paints. Results would probably be different if a different selection of marking materials had been used.

4.3 Remover-Substrate Compatibility

Requirement

Removers should remove markings without impairing the integrity and appearance of the

substrate

Criterion

When the remover is tested as outlined below, the substrate's color retention shall

comply with the following requirements:

Aluminum Brick Limestone Wood

(6061-T6) (Table 2) (Indiana) (White pine)

Color retention (min) 97.0 96.0 95.0 90.0

Test

Duplicate 100 x 100 x 6.25 mm specimens are cut from brick, limestone, white pine siding and architectural aluminum. Each specimen is cleaned with 5 percent by weight trisodium

phosphate solution and a cellulose sponge, rinsed thoroughly with running water, and dried

at 23 ± 2°C and 50 ± 5% rh for 24 hours.

8
Next, the color of the front side of each specimen is determined by a color difference

meter. The measured side is then covered with 25 ctn^ of remover by brush. After exposure for

1 hour at 23 ± 2°C, the specimens are removed and cleaned as before. After storage at

23 + 2°C and 50 ± 5% rh for 24 hours, the color change is determined as outlined in Method

6123 of Fed. Test Method Std. 141a [4].

Commentary

Removers which are effective in the removal of common marking materials frequently

alter the appearance of the substrate. These criteria were established to minimize damage

or discoloration which might be caused to common architectural materials by graffiti removers.

The limits were determined by testing 24 removers. Bases for selecting the above criteria

included the number of removers meeting the criteria, the observed change in appearance and

the average color change as determined by a color difference meter.

4.4 Evaporation

Requirement

The remover should be capable of remaining in contact with the marred substrate for

sufficient time to effect removal.

Criterion

The evaporation loss during the first minute of exposure shall be less than one percent

of the weight of remover applied.

Test

Portions (duplicates) of the thoroughly mixed sample ( not more than 0.3 gins) are transferred to flat-bottomed pans (60 mm in diameter) . The pans and contents are weighed

to the nearest one-tenth of a mg and exposed to an atmosphere of 23 + 2°C and 50 ± 5% rb

.

After 1 minute, the pans are weighed again and the average weight loss per minute is

determined

.

Commentary

The user's work task is facilitated by the use of removers which remain in contact with

the defaced area for sufficient time to effect removal of the markings. This property

results in a need for fewer applications and a shorter removal time. This criterion was selected to identify those removers most likely to remain on the affected area for long

periods of time. The degree of toxicity and air pollution effect were not' considered.

A low rate of evaporation prolongs the time in which the solvent is able to saturate

the affected area and provide effective removal. Twenty of the 24 effective removers had an evaporation rate less than one percent by weight of the exposed remover.

4.5 Flash Point

Requirement

The user should not be exposed to undue hazard because of the flammable nature of the removers

.

Criterion

Removers shall be classified as follows:

Extremely Flammable Flammable

Flash Point -6°C -6 to 26.7°C

9
Test

The basic test method shall be as specified In ASTM Designation: D130-59T. The sample

is placed in the cup of a Tag Open Tester [8] and heated at a constant rate. A small test flame is passed at a uniform rate across the cup at intervals of 0.5°C rise in temperature.

The flash point is taken as the lowest temperature at which application of the test flame causes the vapor at the surface of the liquid to flash.

Commentary

The vapors from low-flashing removers may present undue fire hazards to the user. This

criterion was selected to identify those removers which could be used safely during the

removal process. Typical precautions in using low-flashing removers include the exclusion

of open flames and providing adequate ventilation during use. Removers show a wide range

of flash points; however, most effective removers flashed at a temperature greater than

37.8°C and would not be classed as flammable. These classifications are in accord with the

Federal Hazardous Substances Labeling Act [6].

5. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The results reported in Section 2 show that a wide range of markings can be removed

from brick. Results also show that some of the removers used on brick, can also be used on other substrates currently used in public housing.

From the experiments on the use of a wide range of graffiti and paint removers in the

removal of 36 spray paints, felt-tip pen, crayon and lipstick markings, it was concluded

that:

1. A quantitative rating of the effectiveness of graffiti removal and restoration

of color of substrate can be based on measurements with a color difference

meter.

2. While no one remover was effective against all markings on brick, several removers effectively attacked a wide variety of markings.

3. A selection of removers is usually required to ensure removal of markings of unknown types.

4. Since many removers stain one or more of the substrates on which they might

be used, care must be taken in their selection.

On the basis of the work described, the tentative performance criteria presented in

Section 4 provide a rational basis for the selection of effective removers for spray paint,

felt-tip pen, crayon and lipstick markings on specific substrates.

Five removers which can be used to remove a variety of unknown spray paints from brick

effectively are Nos. 85, 88, 62, 38 and 67. Of these five removers Nos . 38 and 67 can be

used for aluminum, Nos. 88, 38 and 67 for wood and No. 38 for limestone without affecting

the color of the substrate.

LO
BO 1 c

u 0 M d> c

O E

jq <u o >

(fl 00 Q

C nj 0 p o -—

*-» B iJ * X)

iH to o B c ru

QJ c 1 l-i Id

J2 En 3fll td (11 i—

[fl x (1) (J * L-l E CO

IU r

CO >N 4j (0 X nj (0 x> CO id CO

Dli 3 H ^, x

"O 0) "U W 4-1 (TJ 0 o

Q) t-1 0

e

y C *-i X! 3 C •H o o >> o rl 00 n o CO a 3 u id 3 •o c (0 C 4J H R) CM X C u 3 01 OS > M H cn (0 u X H 0 0

0) o » x U iH B td i-H •H 3 B td c •H O u jd u 4-1 o o o ^

fa 0 O 3 X o 4-1 id H <a a u 01 u u u U •H > o

iH <D ij D U CO 14-1 u 0 tn Jj ui a id o o o (0 13 0 3 rH W o 0) > o l-l E

td a a I4H CO (fl CO s» 4-1 CO CO c c 4J •H C 4-i o c td a CO o a. o CO CO i* l-l 0 (3 > l-l c CO •a O i-t 03

o> S f"N X id u a) !- CO o l-l 3 3 X M o H o o o (fl c > ^ CO

CxS s CO O > <u id > 0) 33 a o XI bJ O o 4-1 T3 Q Q u 3 to < (fl X

td i-l o

f-i o b al-i <Da

o

M

O X

C cd O 4-1 c: o\

4J o

o a X

co o

U-l c t-l

14-1 M M W ^ X

o

CO o

3 rH •a

i-ioi td

co CC at

c c o

•h a

td (fl >

tu O

CO u

V4 3

3 T3

4J O

<d

CO>1-be! 2

c c

id

CO X

id ^l-l 4J a c

oi cuBO

!-. O CO

11
a o -o 0 £5 H 0 y 60 u t

0 (0 C i -a > >, 4-1 H •H 01

01a

re V) X

01 • = fl < rHa

on X

at in i5

Ifl 3 u. 4J 0 u. In 0

rj 4J Ut H •H H

a 0 0 'H • -H m 0 01 T3 •H 0 V) rH o UH [fl O Cl 3 V) 4-1 o oi O u 01 01 3 o c Ifl •H rsl «l 0) (fl CN >, CM it 3 91 (0 (Nl u 3

4J 01 C 01 H > 4J >, rH rH 01 0 S t-i 0 ^ (fl 3 X 0) o 01 -H xi rH 0 a

Ifl Ifl a p 01 '4- ID 4-1 01 X 0) it (fl 01 (fl rj

U-J U J 0 01 > 0 4-1 fl > 4J > u <fl a I4H 01 o > •a

0) 4-1 0 0 c O 01 0 H 0 Ifl 3

Si

•rt H 01 3 o 4J C

0] u o XI 00 0 > X 3 X rH id 3 o X) X 60 o (fl rH

Oi (fl 01 111 c o 4J to (fl •H to III (fl 0 VI (fl a (fl 3 t>0

01 M rH •H 3 a> 4-1 H (41 rl 01 •H 4-1 01 Uh C

XI -J c 01 0) X XI 0 4J 01 (-1 01 C •H X

E

(J a VI 0) X a ^ a •H

11 1- X X> Ij u 01 ifl U Ifl 4J 3 (fl rJ o 01 E N

13 3 0} 3 01 o rcj Ij 0- 3 0 4J o > rH •H (A 10 do o u 0) B u CO 0) u 01 (fl oi cr 4J P 4J 3 3 3

a

4-1 3 01 01

01 u 3 0. u v> M 01 01 01 (11 0 (fl u o V) u XI V) |M

Ifl 01 X x a id XI o H

E U M 0 •H X 01 3 (4-1 u 01 01 u 01 !fl 4-1 (J 0 X (fl X U 4J Ifl c

0 3 0 r* 0 T3 m 0 *o 0 >N s ill 01 o O -a (fl u 0 TJ u c c rH a H 0 X a •H fl fl) X 4J •a X a 4J c H 01 H H

113 u rH o "0 •H 4J 0 M c rH u n 0 a >> 4J 0 S 0 0 H 0 > a Ji *H 0 > o Q. 01 0 0 •H rH M 0 > 01 ifl <n > Q c 3 Q < ig tn 3 a < a X u o 3 (4-1 O Q u X 4J <

3

3

4J O

O X

(fl 4-1 \Q C o> o

5-s >a

e c .31

4J

(fl 4J U (fl 0 rH

o.

(fl V! > V) W 0

rH

P 4-1 a c

(fl 01 M 4J a. c(fl 01

c c

-1 (fl OJ X

12
c c O iH h e

CO 4J w cn oa

CO CO >u o

%

Q

-I !i3 —i cn

cO

in "a

to

SO -H a w

co co u

J£ > -rH

s

-H J

in

CO&

CM :t

witl

ition.

if

ul

]

:ontac Lrritc

han -o cu

11 in

be

00 3 C co O u

i-H

May 0 >v £ i

<u -o >

a) H > u oo <

3 g . cr i-H u moo •o u o.

«o

T3 T3 -i

1)

3 > W rH . .M.

- cu 3 C M CO •H O i U T)

CO C/5 C

CO

I SI • U 00U

•H C X

3 -H 00

-H •H CO U U rH

cli aj a) o o c

C O

!> <

0) U CM M • CM

V) 0 "O 1 4/ a M a £, 0 0 0 o H Do Av ap c m

CU ' > •t M

a H 01 •H A3 0) CU CM rH CU

4J 0 •H 0

l2

-C % M H 00 CO 4J llH a 3 4J M cn •H 0 0 i-t O 3 li >

3 O iJ 1 rH B CO c 0) <u 3 0 4J 01 o CU o • o CO u c g

31 s> 3 >>^ Oi

CJ "O rH 00-H U

c o

O > M

rH < O

•h a

3 *H

cr m

J3 CU •H 00 c c M CO

0) X

u U

cn •H M

T3 O

i-H o o

X. CU M CU 3 co 00

CU o 11) c

rS co cu

co 3 cn X cn 3

u cu M H H TJ

CU rH

•H 00 c c

M CO

CU J3 o u

cn

13
a n C3 'D C T) 1 -C M X) 41 o 41 <U u o •H J= 4-4 A M 41 r*» fr dr M

t3 u IJ

"13 ti O

>

at H

3

00

•H rH3

0

a. 0 4J10

41 tn '—

r-H rH o CO H cr to 41 rH Or to a X

41 0 X 41 rH M 4J 0 41 P

l> o H 4J 41 -C tc >- x: o XI H XI o 3 41 U 4-1 •H a- d (J u 4) to 4-1 r>< n CO t*. 3 0 3

o •H 4-1 fi a fH X. 4J X X) CO 5

>. l»- o 41 ,c 41 rH 41 c S 41 rH > 4-1 4J

i-i o 4J 0 U •H > CO 4_t 0 0 41 3 CO o

3 -O -c "3 41 3 4J 0 03 o 4-t H O x; CO 41 u,

(0 JZ bQ 4) r; XI 3 4) 4) u-l XI 9 d 4-1 o -J u (J 3 M flj o 4-J 41 a u to co rH •H 41 a 41 o d) nJ <0 0 X> M rJ :*> tfl 4-1 4) o !^ -H CO 3 o X fO

QJ co U-t CX rH 3 C 4-1 CO 4J 3 X) o 3

CLi "" V-i ** 0 >> X) a C7* H CO 3 CO ty CO rH c

r c x sz 0 4) 4-4 co 0) rH 0 H X 41 XI

x) U-l O 4J u P a O 0 x U-l o U-4 > rH U HI <u o c > H •H 41 O to Cl a. •H 41 O o 41 XI 3 QJ •H 3 3 CO •rH (0 XI (0 OJ 4-1 >> 4J CO > u CJ c u CO x: 4-1 01 > 41 u rH ta <! co X

QJ 'J 3 3 a T3 4-> 4J 41 to 4J o£ ^ 41 41 41 CO ,—

CU

tfl o O •H (U a a o CJ rH •H 4J C U-4 >j s .C 4-1 n 4-1 i+H »-i >s 0 ro CO '/) •H 3 0 o o •H 41 CO U-l l- CO G CO 0 3 a D. W co u U-4 41 4-1 C 1-1 C X! U 13 U-l o CO C 41 o C <u at M •H c c (J CO c 41 0 00 -H 4-1 O E a 41 v-> <u 0) <D c a- o 0 o 3 M 41 co 0 u c M 1- CO to U O D

tn Pu o u CO DO > 3 -o a. H O u Uh o X > R) a 4J

41 u

cr) u X

4J 4J

CO •H cn X 3 Im3

CO 4J o O X

C rt 0 4-1 X' c cr.

l-l 0

o u

0) U

Uh c •H

U-l M

w X

uoo

o

4)3

T-J 4-1 H «

c c O -H

•h B

4J

tO U

l-l CO O rH a

tO U) > to bJ O

41 rH

XI 41 H 00 E § 8-S

0) •H M

XI O

CX u

41 XI o.

c c

u to

41 X

X

14
u 01 3 X

CO CO O rJ

91 en

tx, -

•oC u

01e co SI

4-1 4-» Ul O O 01

CO CO u • 4J 4J CO CO C C u-i 0) O O H CO O O 3 CO

co 00

i-i •

01 C B 3

>j -H CO T3

J3 Ji H O

•H X X

O 4J 4J > -r4 *H < 3 3

O. 01

11 10 u

0) «H CO

s>4 3

<: O 3

a.

CO> a

rH CO rH 01 4-> H

CO O u -V U U V rH t-J OJ *H 4J UH 0) CJ CJ O

c

01 CO > rH » a -a

U rH CO O CO >. 3 O 4-1 e x cr o -h

0> 4J 01 tJ P. 01 TJ C I-i O 0 flj *H "H

o co rS

O » U

in co co a 3 u-i

l-i 0» U-I CO O i-4 co 3 o 3 x x

J= T3 3 O r-l

k4 u-i ZC

ru CO 01 o (11 U

3 3 o o H DO o 1/1 CO H 4J e Tl 6

r-l 01 •a U co •H c 0)

<-t >. c D. e r-| N CO x

CO 01 01 to r< •H 01 u

3 01 01 u 01 CO (0 x LO «! c c •o U T3 X!

*j M •rl 01 01 U-l C 4-1 >H •H T3 u CO > 3 CO •H *H 3 C 01 CO 4-t o a X 3

CO c 01 rH o

rH 4J J3 10 o 4-t u 4-1 4J 3 CJ Ifl CO o CO CO uh <J u

UH to 01 3 01 CO B 4-1 C 4-J o. CO a. 4-1 4J

t- C CO CO CO 01 01 01 0 C

HJ o u 01 01 a U-l 01 1-1 o

IE o XI x u. CO •H Dm CJ

X 4J

CO C CJ

CO iH i rH O

• 4J fO

Cu co cn B C

X 3 I- 3 3

CO 4-1 o

O X

C CO O 4J vC C ON

4J O

CJ CJ J*

X 01 •H 00 c c

01 rHX 01 •H 00 £ co 01 X

CJ CJ a

c c

O *H

•rl B

4J

COM CO O rH a

CO CO >

[I] O

01 u

l-i 3

3 -a

4J o

co z CL, •H D. 3 *rl CT H a•H9

15
a a (0 c

0 •H UH i HI oj

to 0 a i to. QJ C 1 u

UH 0) 11 0 re (A 1 >, CU T3

Ih Ih a oo u 3 eo 3 JB re 1) x: 1 kc 1 rH 0 3 c 0) CJ u rH U-i tn 4J *H O c •H

in 4J 4J to Jul •H o CJ •H •h o c r) w to 0J c J3 a tn to QJ CO • >. 4J r( 3 u x: •rl 3 t/5 3 QJ 0) CJ o 1j >> u TJ rH O X >> a so 4H in -o tn a

•H H TJ QJ OJ tj tO 01 rH J3 0 S>> a 11 c •H D U 0) 0J 0 >H—

QJ a a c OJ U tO 4J H O > ft 3 CJ u (A 4J 0

3 X) B •B to u IB s M C •H 10 re to QJ tn *H OJ TJ « tfl 0) jj xa •H u 0 4J B O u u u 4J i-» t|H tn •H C J3 U .J u 'H (A rH OJ Ll H CO *J to o c |H re rH rH J3 re U

0) iH 3 -o u 3 Ji! OJ rH re u to U 0 3 oo 0) CO •H re M U) Q) a 01 a a -o m in iH 3 U iH 0 u tn u tn u 4H iH 0J a. 3 u 4J re on c •r-i rt O 4J cr j3 c 6 u re c CO tn re ii M 4H re CJ c 0 H u j= a 0J 0 -o 4J •H 0 U-. 3 u

QJ at Ih to -D 0 *H 01 Q. u it TJ TJ o O H 0 M D- H X) J3 a ri QJ u 0 <—

U *H C > CJ -H o o J3 O u M § O

3 to 0 QJ o 3 (0 >, 3 O o !_ > u 3 O 0 B

a o 1

0 e u <0 u u H D x: > 0 • <

^ O re u 0 4H 1 4-) <3 Q

CD a) tn IB ll 3 cj re to •H tn OJ <j CJ 0) la O

I4H H r>>

• tj 3 tj u o 10 «j 4J 3 3 • t- 0) 3 r< MH -0 0 3 TJ Ih to •H O •H O a 0 a-j 0) 4J tH CT 3 0 QJ rH a -a CO a 0) ^1 a

a a (3 •O QJ O u o a o cj c r* 01 0J O a rH re 0 E 3 re re u

ll tt) Ih > > to o o re re o U tj tn t» re re rH ii c 0 re 0 3 H 0J c£ 5 td «J < < > z a <J u •H CO > o c a 'tH z X rH re uh

J3 -U

in c c_ re *h 0 rH O

te. 0-

01 'H til X> 3 P

3 3 W 4H O

0 JC c to O u v£> C Ov u O O 0 M

0J

<4h a t( <H H h

rjj jo

oo

nj tn

uQ

c c o

•H S u

re u

|Hoa

to tn >

- w p

8-S

|H00 toc

X. -H

OJ rH

-a 0J tH 60 C C

M (0

QJ J3 o tj tn

•H J3

O.

iH Mh O O

V

Ih tn a 11Ih u o u p.

OJ J3 OJ •H 00 B B

r< re

QJ J3

CJ O

01

OJ rH

J3 U

•H 00 B B

Ih CO U JZ

CJ CJ

tn

II rH

J3 0J *H 00 B B

^ to

OJ J3 O O

tn

3

• 0) o

oi z

J6
c c X1 a H •H T3 c o XI CO be if

>,

ao M

be if C/3 >,

CO

no ,_i •HO CO ,—

i

c |4 rH c CD rH r-| > 0) >> to o ca ^» rH c o to 01 < (0 0 >H Do 3 o *H D- CO ft) 3 01 0) tu 44 CO ill Uh u U) .C (0 a) o d S oi CC3 s Q> 4J c >» 10 H rH xi E BO r—

1

M 10 rH •H cu •H u

4J OJ i> d cd •H 44 01 HJ •H 3 u-t c H

n rH _c 4J <0 J3 4J m ,o r* •H 01 o

nj B 0) 43 C 3 j_l CQ tj o u u at -c: s

^! 4J a) rH CO

a) 0 c > o c > n) 3 nl id O

to 1

01 & id B 0) i

(U CL a 4J 01 id CO (d 4J 0) o 1 CO 4J 0 g Tj (tj u u

3 [> <H 44 u B l-l 3 > H U j_a o o tj td a

X) a) id 14 id CW H •4-1 V-i cy rH 0

1-4 o B u 3 u-i a u ex u M H X) CJ 01 01 -a 3 ;»> a •H o- >, >, T3 •H cr >» *o c o c 01 4J 4-1 c u .H (j 01 4) Cfj 0 rH V-> 0) OJ (13 c (U >-» o id 4J XI CO CO

OJ O 01 0 » 01 T3 01 01 o 3 a to GO o rH Si id 01 •H •H

a] s o r*. <d a 0 0 cl (0 a c rH rH

'M 01 tH rH 01 o 01 rH H CD o o -a u •rl cd • 0 u n rH j= a u nj rH 43 a rH C r-l o J-l oi c 0) 01 o u <d •o 4-1 Oy •a 44 4-1 Cfl T3 4J 0J o •H o E a C a. -h c c

<u X (0 3 c •H 41 c X flj 3 C •H 0) C M A! > fd 01 01 ^! o 0

ai w 01 CO 3 « W Cfl n] 3 to 04 CO < X > > U CO z

£ 4-1 CO C CJ

id H o tH O

t. a.

u 43

4J

CO H in 01 43 » M rH 3 3 XI 01 in U O •H O JS c

c id s o 4J 01 J3 c o O

4J 0 CO 0 CJ ^ •H l0) CJ XI o

UJ a iH rH

<4-l H

1

M O o w XI Z CJ

B e

oH S

O rH a

cd co

01 o

l-l 3

3 XI U O

cd m Z (v.

cu XI 01 •H 00 C B

u id

01 4= o o

CO

o

o

H 00 c c

r- Id

01 X!

01 43 01 •H 00 C B

V-i Cd oi j:

CJ O

CO

43 01 •H 00 C C

17
B V c 1 V) O 0) 1 0 •H c CO c 01 u o> 3 rC Jn! o 3 0 01 01 c >,

tu -O MH -J H 4-1 XI 0) •H 0 CO u u 01 'H 01 u •H 4-* •H •H 1 11 4J a 0 u a

>l rd 3 O 3 O a) at 0) ra a. -o 4J 3 >> D rC

in iO </l CD a > M c x: rH • OJ "2 CO 4J ra a. u

a 3d CO B 01 < rO 0 4J •H a 01 0 CO 0 •H o OJ H o 0) rH 4-4 •H bcj > 4J U a 3

'H H B c s XJ 0 .c C fa o 01 0) u u OJ <u XI (A O a c aj M u OJ 01 0 a a 0 4-1 3 XI r-l c 3 0 0 a •rl > o 0) B 4J CJ

(0 rt rO •rl 01 H 9] •rl «! -3 0 01 0 °) ra O -j iH 4-1 01 Ol B 4J o> XI 01 4J rH rQ Q 4J c 4J

OJ .Q 0 <0 u CtJ « a. c u 4-1 •H rJ B

to n d rH 3 rH rH OJ ra o ttj 3 0) • U 0 ra 0

IX 01 •rl u <4H H u CO 3 > 3

U-4 01 CO a a o

W rH 01 0 CJ 4-1 4-1 (A 4J c 4J 0 01 01 -a 0) Uh 3 Q § a •rl VJ p M u c 0) <J rH M >. 01 "O

OJ I-I TO 01 B 0 01 0 g 0 T) nj CO C4H 0 Ol fa M cm H

X) 3 T3 0 i—> > a. o cd 4J o c O 0 0 0

0 U c X) ai 01 XI ra a 01 >, u J3 O 0) u o >

OJ a CO M 01 01 rH rJ 01 U > -o rC 0 k rH 4J ro > oi CN a) <

fa 0 3 Vj 4J •H 4-1 01) 01 4-1 CJ o 01 3 •H rH •H rH CJ a 0 0 •9 MH CO a 4-1 •H 4J a 3 00 4J c

J 3 o rH -3 1

3 0 o (Q 3 01 01 01 o 01 0) 01 o C to <5 H 01 cr cr -H 0J H u a 4J > OJ e > 01

<u •H >_> CO 1-1 01 CD aj o M a Ol O 4-1 4J O CJ o c 0 9J %

cc 0 ed H TJ rH X) M a 01 01 0 X n ra XI o 0 -O U H

fa tin 01 C4H nj fa It] a H u s 3 c fa) m 4J ra z a CO a

11 c u

CO *H o

rH O

fa Ol

01 -H 01 J3 3 3 3

en u o

CJ JS C co O 4J vO C 0\

4J O

CJ O X

01 UH C IH

Mh m

c c oh a

CO 01

fa) o

01 CJ U 3

3 -O

4J o

CO S3 fa

E g

01 X

COa i-i 0) a a.

o

01 rH

XI 1) •H QO C C

r-l CO

0) J3 O CJ

0)

oj a ra SO 41 3

C 01 cr O ^ 01

r-l X) O • CO

i-i a

CL -H 01 x -a

T3 0) -H

rl > O 01 o

> J3 r- < 4J fa

ai rH

XI 01 •H 00 q a

u eg

oi J CJ CJ

0)

18
3 O

o x> h-j u

U o i oi a

v to c 5

i! 2 o z 3 CO -H

co cj *j • O co oi Q. >> rH U-i

M O

CO C

tJ 0)

CO

rl X U 4J . « H 10 A 9 li 3 3 w u O

_ ° * C co QuoC o\

4J O

CJ CJ

01

X-l C 1-1 CM M W W w X

01

r-l X 01 •H 00 c c

u (0

01 J3 O O

01 fH

.O 01 •H M

a c

l-l to

0) X

o o

aH In TJ O

rH O O z o

01 rH

X) 01 •H 60 E §

01 x

cj o

(0 *H w

•a o

rH o o z o

01

I-l X 01 H 00 E §

01 X

o o

0) •H l_ •a o 5 0 Z O

X 01 •H 60 c c

01 rHXi 41 H 60 £

C«

01 x

o cj (0 H h

•o 0

fH 0 0 z 0

C

0) H -1 CD XI 0) u H 60 CO £

C

ra >^

01 x CO

CJ a rl

cn 60

•H

-o o ^ rH 0 O CO z CJ O

o

o

01 rH 3

•o

•H CO to

01 6C as

c c

O -H

•H S u

CO 4J

rlO rH a

CO CO >w o

o

o

01 CJ U 3

3 T3

4-> O

CO w z a.

4J 4J C c

01 01 rl 60 60 0) u rl a

a 01 CO u -u 0)

ai 01 rH

•o •a CJ o •o •a

•H H rH 3 3 3

tr cr C •H •H TH

rJ rJ

19
0 ,—

oi Is rH O .O 3 B 0) •H l-l OI CT 01

4-1 U u J-. U 01 >

3 a •H «,4-< M O T3 u

n) <o 4J B 01 10 01 o c. o rH •H T3 H -o > CO u *H

0) 3 H to TD M 01 u 0 i XI 0) *j 3 11 0] a. to > H cr 00 U O < -C oi O 0) 3 3 01 3

-j 0! n 4-1 ai oi oj 14-1 •0 0 —

01 M u A-J •H o .a oi E

01 to H •H 3 o 0 01 s <o n) 3 0) 0 3

C jJ 0 i-i U-l t« to r; B J3 rJ O rH o 3 4J u ^ o JZ 0 a. jj « 3 u O 3 H •H

'S u

iw -a 'D 01 •a • u 01 4J T3 to 0 3 E

•H a 4-1 •h d 0 u in •H AJ u a 0 0) d o a -h a .t) rH 01 0 c

01 2to > a 0 'H (0 J«l H r4 (A > 0

Hi M < o o 4J oj to > a 4J 3 u

3

3

4J O o JS

10B

O

(J

B B

0 - d •h a u

tO w

l-l 01 O iH

a.

tO 0) >w o

rH

6-S w

II rH C 3

'

00

oU 01

oi rH

J3 01 •H 60 a b

Vj to

oi jz u u

0) H U

TJ o

St

too

O B

•H 01

4-i a

to o

rH

•H T3

*J B

B 10 v to a o

01 > 0> 4J

01 01 u JZ

to

00B

' o o

r-4O 00

I- c a -h

01 U TJ 4J o o) > u < J2

0 a

•H

•o

01 01 00B J= O 4J

Id to O fl o

rH 0* > O O

U-l o. < o u

3

cr

•HJ

0)3

rH

a.

01

01 3 01 c *o 0 H H •H

to 01 to

4-1 01 4J

01 r- 01

^

01 1

rH B° rH

rH 10 rH

QJ D X 0

T3 l-l •H 0) 3 a

cr a

01 01 3

O 4-1 O B

10 4J T3 t/1

01 O O I-.

3 0) > C

CN rH O 1/1

cr oo

01 C >*4 tj O O

4j a -h •h ,e 3 73 4J •H 10

01 O 01

0! > I-, =l < £>

u u <J

oi to

'H rH 3 O

o

-3- (S

20
4J (U 3

<d <d

T3 a)

01 M

TJ 3 C u

01 tj a it 55

o • 0 o> u >

D. -H

01 (A w O

• I cd C u » «

01 C ^ m a m -h 0 B «

B. C TJ * iH 0J 01 U 5 > HI

id cr c

01 01 01 o

J= 4J rH MHO B C 5 t- 0 -h <r o. H Ih TJ TJ

cd S -h

>. a o

<o ei j= >

3 v < Cd » -H

01 3 • a b a

0> cd 01 o

01 H <H M >*-i 3 4J

TJ C

01 *H

cu> j: C u> o

0 4J M -H a 3

TJ <-> t4 CJ o a

> u < a

o

• o M

O TJ a oi <a u

> cd

00C M H 0

O *M 4-1 iJ H O O i-t

a u

oi n

> oi

Cd TJ r-4 3 II O

o> e

TJ o

v u

tj c

01 o

00 cj c

O TJ

-4 *H o o

M > a <

oi o

«i > 3 <

c c

<d i-l M to CO O SI a u

Cd H

> 3

O CM U u

•H O U -H

4J Cfl 3

Cd 60 u

—I C C iJ H f4 O U u c u <g C u 4J

M 00 CJ U O TJ 3TJ iH -H

0) O O

CP 60 M >

oi a a. <

TJ O

Cd ^ TJ o c c W Cd "H

oi o

co > 3 <

£ 4J

CO C U

Cd *H o rH O

C/5

CO i-l CO J3 3 3 3 U O

CJ JZ C Cd O u <o C CH

4-1 O

CJ CJ M

01 <W C -H CM I-l W ^ J2

U

0Oo 01 <-< 3

TJ 4J iH cd

CO

a e

O -H

•H S u

aH

O rH a

Cd CO u o

oi cj M 3

3 TJ

4J O

cd u z a3 01 cr > H O

c e

m cd

0) A

TJ O r-l

TJ

i-l U

3 01 Cf >

•H O

rH B

01

co u

3

O 4-1 cj C

CO iH

•H Cd > a

0) rHJ3 01 •H 60 c c M Cd

0) J=

CJ o

CO

01

i-H £> 01 •H 00 C C

M fl) 01 J= u o

eg •H M

01 I—

I

J3 01 •H 00 c c

M Cd

oi x:

cj cj co

3 0) cr >

•H O

21
a 1 C 0 1 c 01 0> u

I4H pu

CO se M

CO dr

li

T) o on

01

01

»-j ii

01 x> H •H 01 3 01 4J JS c C 01 4J 01 01 0 <j 0 .

01 > 01 TO ^ J3 >,

•H oi < 01 cj 01 '4-4 Hi 3 01 •H CO 0 o

3 J2 CO J3. 01 JZ a

B) to U •a IJ C u 4J

CJ j 0) o 01 •H U •ri 0

'1/ M 3 > 3 01 3 01 CO 01 0 0 a 4J 3 01 0- H 01 4-) U-( 4J 0 1-1 M rH i-i 4J 0 CO o c

T3 01 CO CO 01 CO CO CO 0 (IH

OJ u jj I

3 4-1 01 4-4 (0 o

T3 3 OJ £ CT 0 •a c •H iH a 4J IJ-I 4J 01 0 a 0 0 4-4 a. u •H T3 CJ 10 o 0- (0 3

fa be •H 3 to -o

j= •a

rn 0

o 3 [-0 4J JS H ,c •rt c 01 a

0 C III U 4J 0 01 0 »H 4J 0) 01 0) CO •H > CO > c 01 Pi 1 C 4J 3 < 3 < 01 •H

u j3 u 4-1 in •rt in 01 01 01 3 li H 01 r-4. 3 3 JO 01 jj 01 c c JJ

c/5 4-1 0 •H DC i-l 60 'H •H •H 0 -C £ C C C to CO C CO CO F4 nj 4J 4J E

0 4-1 01 J= 01 J3. 01 01 01 c o CJ o CJ CJ 4J 0 01 01 3 3 01 o u M •H iJ •H u o 0 •H u u o 0 a 0 rH rH -o

14- c H iH H rH r-4 H U 0 0 o 0 01 0) 0 w Z CJ z CJ >- z

as a

fO 4J u oi o *-i a

CO 01 > 01

tij o

i-H S^5

01>o

B • 01 o

Pi z

3 01 0 > a o

01 s

O 4J «H

•i-i 01 KO 01 u 013

0) CO J3 O

jr il 'J 4J 4J B 3 o •H a u ro 4J J= 3 r40

ro U-4

ro 01 4J 01 > a

4j •H c 01 < 0 3 3 60 u

'71 C jJl •H ro 0

Q- Ct hi 01

01

on X

3 |

y. CO 4J jr. k4 •H 4J 4J 01 01 u o u 3 4J 60 U 01 c 1-4. •H 4J « C ro o

-o 0 CJ 3 X 01 i~i CO

0) u •H H rH c C4J 60 U 4J a 4J 0 u

c T3 0 CJ C 14 o 3 o H CO 01 0 01 0) H 0 01 4J r-t > 01 0 > 01 c JJ 60 c o in M < >> 0 60 H 01 c •H 01 ro 01 cj d 4-1 H 01 to -C 10 ro TMo u •a -C 3 3 4J OI CJ H 0 c •rl 4J o- CO £ X! •H 0 a •H o o •i 01 0) 4J IX > J<! > rH 0 -a IJ •H M o < > 0) < CJ u CO 3 O

•H

COa >j01 •a a h a

3 *H cr ij •H 4J

i-J 01

CO 01 4J 60 01 c

CO XI

>J c O CO

22
s i c

o 01 o OO o I u 1 XI c H X) XI 1 u-i M cO -C u 01 c fl U J= 4J cd u x: •H I-l cd J3 XI 4-1 •iH rH to w rH u u

CO a. 4J •H (( 3 •H 01 iH XI o iH c 01 H O 01 4J CL. 3 Cl o 3 > IH u a 01 01 to 01 •H <—

1

< XI U 01 u u >

0) u 01 to > u 01 -C «> U] -o u l-i to (0

n) !fl 4) c 01 c 01 o u CJ X) T3 u J x: 0 o 4J a 0) C

01 1-1 (0 o CO v o M 3 CO u 0) s 01 u 01 3 OJ (J O o

n. 0 e n a x> VI cr 00 rH c

In u tO i—

i

01 c 01 01 C V- 01 i-l H H

0> UH !-) H u fO 5s Xi 0 0 01 CO to J!

0) M M-l 4-1 4) to I-I >. 4J 3 t-0 XI a !*> c u 01 o no 01 <0 01 c u CO a 01 0 M XI r* V4 C U-i 01 cj 01 > o c 4-1 O. i-l l-l HH i—

1

mm fa do X)

01 a

to

tO 1-13

x:

xi u

0 be

iH fu o 3 o. i-l aO > c iH CO c a)

CJ C 01 XI ed C •H 01 O 01 1-1 01 G

01 01 c 3 O A! to > H 01 to OS 5 m cr .H o 3 < XI oi c x:

<0 iH I iH O

U. Bu

0) u

COtr X

4-1 VI •H 01 01 01 01 01 01 01 X 3 u rH r-l r-l rH rH rH 3 3 XI 01 X 01 XI 01 XI 01 c XI 01 XI 01 c

c/5. AJ 0 •H 60 •H oo H •H 00 H •H OO •H 00 •H o JS c c e a c c c c CO c c c c CO C tO & CO u CO I-l CO I- CO <J CO V* CO 4J 0 4J *J3 0) XI 01 x; cu X! 41 XI co 01 x: 01 X u

c ON CJ CJ o o CJ O O o CJ CJ y CJ

4-1 o a CO ca 01 3 01 a »

CJ o Jd 1-1 l-i i-i M •H l-i 1-1 u 0 •H I-l •H c

01 o XI 0 XI o X) 0 XI 0 rH XI 0 XI o

<4H e —1 rH 1—

1

rH iH H rH rH

UH M M 0 0 o 0 0 0 o 0 01 o o o 0 cu Ed X z o z CJ z CJ z u >< z u z CJ r~

iH CO

co

oi ac « pT

iH ik Hho

§5

fl e

CO 4-1

I-l 01 O rH a

CO 01 > co w o

rH

oi o

u 3

3 XI u o

0) O 01 u

rH U O U

« ri a o x

3 in x to u

01 l-l 01 U O

5 U

H C

•H U r*

3

41 CO XI O

01 fj 00a xi o *H

rH O o >

-< <

9 a

cr a iH iH rH IJ

4-1 CD VI 3

O 4J o e

XI r4 H 11 9 a

cr a

•H iH rH r4

4-1 CO CO 3

0 4J

cj a

01 iH

•h cd > a

XI u u iH XJ u

•H 41 m iH cu 4-1 4H 3 & I t4H 3 a c C

o- a CO CO cr a iH •H H iH 41 I-l •H iH CO CO rH

tr cl OO rHtr cu

l-i 0.

r4

V) V) 01 u CO CO CO 0) 01 0) 3 XI 3 01 3 9 a. 3 a

0 4-1 iH o > O 4J 0 a O a

O a 3 o O a CJ •H CJ H

0) •H cr co 8 CO rt CO Ui CO r4 H CO iH •H 01 CO iH 4-1 •H U

> a rJ > 1-1 > a > co > CO

23
a) a

CO -H CO •° 3 - 3 3

in « O

o .e C to o -u vo u o

(J <4J C -H

r-H XI HI •H 60 C C W (0

CD £

CJ O

(A •H M

CO 0) > 10 W O

CU O U 3

3 T3 u O

CO Ij Z ft.

CO 11 3 Cl o a
Tdlili' ')

. (U'lierlt' Typen ul Anromil I'nlnl to HninuVf1 1' KM pel Ivpnnun

Resin Type Color Sample No

.

(a) Alkyd

Vinyl Toluene Soya Alkyd Resin

Vinyl Toluene Soya Alkyd, Ester Gum

Mixture of Plasticized Coconut-Oil

Alkyd Resin, Ester Gum and

Cellulose Esters

Plasticized Coconut-Oil Alkyd

Resin, Ester Gum

Linseed Alkyd, Styrene Copolymer

Acrylic Castor-Tall Oil Alkyd

Fish Oil and Soya Alkyd

Soya Isophthalic Alkyd

Vinyl Toluene Linseed-Soya Alkyd

and Sulfonamide Amidaldehyde

Soya, Alkyd, Tall Oil Alkyd, Ester Gum and Phenolic Resin

(b) Acrylic-Alkyd

Acrylic-Vinyl Toluene Safflower

Alkyd

(c) Alkyd-Epoxy

Epoxy Ester Soya Alkyd

(d) Alkyd-Cellulose

Cellulose Nitrate, Castor Oil

Alkyd and Maleic Resin

Cellulose Nitrate and Oil

Modified Alkyd

Cellulose Nitrate and CoconutOil Modified Alkyd

(e) Acrylic

Silicone Acrylic Ester Resin

Acrylic Ester Resin and

Sulfonamide Amidaldehyde Resin

Acrylic Resin

Orange, Blue

Red

Brown

Green

Red, Red

Red

Ivory

Red, Black, Red

Orange

Red

Blue

Black

White

Black, Red

Gray, Green

Red

Orange, Gold

Gold, Gold

1, 2

3

5

6, 7

8

9

10, 11, 12

13

14

15

16

17

18, 19

20, 21

22

23, 24

25, 26

25
l-e sln Type

Table 2. (continued)

Color Sample No

i Acrylic-Cellulose

Nitrocellulose and Acrylic Resin

(g) Epoxy

Epoxy Ester Resin

Dehydrated Castor Oil and

Modified Epoxy Resin

(h) Linseed Oil

Linseed Styrene Resin

Linseed Styrene, Coumarone Resin

(i) Coumarone- Indene Resin

Coumarone-Indene Resin and

Soya Oil Dicyclopentadiene

Gray 27

Gold 28

White, Black 29, 30 Red, Turquoise 31, 32

Blue, Red 33, 34

Green 35

Aluminum 36

26
aBrick was Lusted in accordance with ASTM C 67-66 [6J, except thai, results were express

in SI units. Each value in the table represents the average of the results for five

specimens

.

27
r-l <U in >* S

3te

U

H <

01

05 -a

H

M

iH< 4> O

P. 41 w a

H *H

=B= -D

H

>. M

n 4i

a

=S= 41 -H U

oio

iH3 i-l

T3

H 3

<y10cHUM

<u u«

toM0

•Hu

o.

-g0

01

u

n 0)(0 0 M

0)>0 u e 0 tu MH M u 14-1 O

0>

0) -0 <J -a- C

41

U TJ

<d

H

01

41 41 H

•H

4J o C0 41a

-a

H

0)

H

II

CD CO i

ijH c H

•HB

0-

H

28
Table 5. Ranking of Removers According to Average Color

Retention* of 36 Spray-Painted Brick

Average Color Retention Number of Paints R of 36 Bricks to Give C.R. >90

85 88 23

88 87 19

82 86 18 90 86 14 83 85 14 69 83 13 11 83 12 92 82 13

38 81 14

89 80 13

27 75 11

24 74 10

91 74 9 67 72 8 43 71 9 37 69 9

7 ^ 66 9 42 66 11 48 58 6 68 58 6 99 58 12 80 49 6 79 48 4 76 46 3 *Color Retention = 100 - AE, where AE is color change in NBS units.

29
I a; q2 i losiosasosososososososios I OS I OS OC!

I OS OS I loSOSQSOSoSOSOSOSOSOSOSI I OS I I I I I

s

3 CN Z CNI

oc; OS ps OS os a os dc oc oc oc oc; oc

I i oc, i oc oc i oc; OS i

i i I i I I I I i I i I I

I i oc oc oc os I I I I I I I

OS I I I OS I OS I I

OS OS I OC I I I I OS OS

I I OS 1 I I I OS I

OS OS OS lOSOSOSOSOSOSOSOS I OSQSIOSOSI I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I QSOSOSOSOSOSIOSOSOSOSI I

OS

OS OS OS I OS I OS OS OS

OS I I

I I I I I OS

I I OS I i as i i i

i as i i

I I I I I I I I I

OS OS I OS OS I OS I

I I I I I

OS I I OS OS I OS OS I

i os i i i i i i i i os i i i i i i i i i i iosioSiiosiiosiiiosiiiiiiiiii

OSIOSIIIIIIIIIOSlllOSIIIIIII

I OS I I I I I I I I I I I I I OS osoSososiosasocosioSososiasosiorsosososi i i

OS I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

OS OS OS OS OS OS I iososiososioSosososiososososi

I I I I I I I I I I I I I OS osososososiososososiosososi i iososqsososios

OS I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ososososososososososososasosiosasi i i os I i i

i i I i i I i I i I I i I i i i I i i i i i

I OS I I I I I I I OS I I I I I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I OS I I I I OS I I I ososasosasososososasososososasosososososasasos i OSIOSOSIIOSIIIIIIIIIIOSIIIIII

i i os os os os os os

os i os i i i i i i

I I I I OS I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I OS I I I ososiasososasiosi i i i i iosiosi iosi i i *

•K

I I os i i i i i i i i i i os i i i i i i i i i i

OS I I I I I I I I I OS I I I I I I I I I I I I I

OS pi OS I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I t OS I I osoSoSoSoSiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii

30

O

o> o c

a- 0

A •H

4J C c

0 <u -H u

u 0) c OS

CD

4-1 u

IV 0

OS 0 u u

o

Go CJc

<v •H

—1 CJ u H

>

•HU w

CJ

<u H

CO>

04 0

£

X) <u

HJ OS >o u

o

O

OS Oj

II II as * K *
Table 7. Five Removers Which Will Remove 36 Spray Paints from Brick

and Their Compatibility with Common Substrates*

Remover

pH of Remover Aluminum

(6061-T6)

Wood

(White Pine)

Limestone

(Indiana)

Brick

(Table 2)

85 11 I I I c

88 1 I C I c

82 2 I I I C

38 7 C C c C

67 9 C c I C

C - Compatible

I - Incompatible

*Determined by measuring the color retention of the substrate after exposure to the removers for 1 hour at 23 ± 2°C and 50 ± 5% rh (see Section 2.4).

31
Table 8. Ranking of Removers According to Effectiveness of Removal of Felt-Tip

Pen, Crayon and Lipstick Markings from Brick

Remover No.

88

83

11

63

288694

872443

8582

27

899190

38

67

7999

3748

4542

69

75

688092

Average Color Retention of

Duplicate Specimens

85

85

8484

8483

82

82

828080

7978

78

76

7574

74

73

73

73

717170

70

70

70

70

70

32
OWinHI-><fNN<t»iCvOOCOMMOOO-*lAHHCOOO

OOiOt^OOvOin^inOc^u^iOrHint^r^rOCOiHvOrOcO^J-Ln

pi

a) •H

1-1 x)

TJc

to T3

CD 4=

CO

CO

e

<u u

ou

o

m

c

CO

CN

3O

J3 veH-tuiioirno-jN^-jcovooflONONminoin^

•^oovosvOcooocococor-r^cococONcONrN^rvincoco

CTvCT*CTN00C^O>O>CT\C^C^C^O^CTNCy^O^O^CT*Cy\ CT\ CTN 0> 0>

14-1 CD o >o

as 6

a. cu pa

>o

s

<y

^DvDr-^\Ooot-(cNir^oOr-H<tr^r^r~v£>Or--cjNCO^DvDcnr-~v£>

nN(jioriiriNNO\coinN-jNOcoHtvmooin

^<rr~oooooooocNa%oor^<^cNicTNCT,>vocT\^ovo<i-<r

00 cr\ 01 00

•a

COo

id

toa)

4-1

ct) uu

CO

C/l

cfl

33
Figure 1. Distance of Migration of Removers When

Applied to Limestone and Sandstone for

1 Hour

1h
6 . REFERENCES

1. Gossett, Ken, "Graffiti: The National Problem," Professional Sanitation Managements,

P. 20, Environment Management Association, Clearwater, Fla. 33151, September 1973.

2. Godette, M. , Post, M., Campbell, P.G., "Graffiti-Resistant Coatings: Methods of Test

and Preliminary Selection Criteria," NBS Report, in press.

3. Hunter, R.S., "Photoelectric Tristimulus Colorimetry with Three Filters," NBS Circular

429 (1942).

4. Color Difference of Opaque Materials — Instrumental Measurement," Method 6123, Federal

Test Method Standard 141a. Obtained from Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government

Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402.

5. Moore, D.G. and Porter, A., "Effect of Exposure Site on Weather Resistance of Porcelain

Enamels Exposed for Three Years," Nat. Bur. Stand. (U.S.) Monograph 44, April 1962.

6. "Sampling and Testing Brick," C67-66, ASTM Book of Standards, Pt. 12, 1968. (American

Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, Pa. 19103).

7. "Federal Hazardous Substances Labeling Act," Public Law 86-61 Definitions and Regulations,

Subchapter D, Part 191, Section 191.1, July 12, 1960.

8. "Standard Method of Test for Flash Point of Liquids by Tag Open-Cup Apparatus," D1310,

ASTM Book of Standards, Pt. 17, 1972. (American Society for Testing and Materials,

Philadelphia, Pa. 19103).

USCOMM-NBS-DC

35
II ri I ir- (• 1 Ml I OMM 1. 1'iim.K BIBLIOGRAPHIC DAI A SHFFT NBS I R

2. Gov 'i A. , . No.

A. Ill AND si Hi I I I I.I Graffiti Removers: Evaluation and Preliminary Selection

Criteria

7. A ' HUMUS)

M. Godette, M. Post and P. G. Campbell

3. I'. i

1 1 i * ni *- A, .

5. Publi. iiiion Date December 1975

6. Performing Organization f ode

8. Performing Organ. Report N. NBSIR 75-914

9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRKSS

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20234

10. Project/Task/Work Unit No

11. Contract/Grant Ni

12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Complete Address (Street, City, State, ZIP)

Division of Energy, Building Technology and Standards

Office of Policy Development and Research

Department of Housing and Urban Development

Washington, D.C. 20410

13. Type of Report & Period Covered Final

14. Sponsoring Agency Code

15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

16. ABSTRACT (A 200-word or less factual summary of most significant information. If document includes a significant

bibliography or literature survey, mention it here.) A program was undertaken to determine the performance of graffiti removers so that performance criteria for selection of these types of materials could be recommended. The

results of laboratory tests of removal efficiency, range of effectiveness, remover- substrate compatibility, migration (spreading), and flash point are presented. From the

results obtained, tentative criteria for selection of graffiti removers are recommended.

The marking materials (graffiti) used were spray paints of major generic types, crayon

and felt-tip pen markers. The substrates used were clay brick, ceramic tile, limestone,

sandstone, aluminum and wood. Ninety-nine commercial materials which are marketed for' use as graffiti removers were used in the study.

This report is on the removal of marking materials from brick. The results showed that

all markings can be removed with a high degree of effectiveness. No single remover was effective on all markings, but a set of five selected removers used in sequence, was effective against all.

The compatibility of the most effective removers with various building materials was also

studied. Care must be taken to select a remover which will neither discolor the substrata

being cleaned nor adjacent areas.

17. KEY WORDS (six to twelve entries; alphabetical order; capitalize only the first letter of the first key word unless a proper name; separated by semicolons) Graffiti; graffiti removers; removal; materials; paint; spray

paints; effectiveness; remover-substrate compatibility; substrate.

18. AVAILABILITY ^Unlimited

[X^ For Official Distribution. Do Not Release to NTIS

[ ~

' Order From Sup. of Doc, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402, SD Cat. No. CI 3

J Order From National Technical Information Service (NTIS)

Springfield, Virginia 22151

19. SECURITY CLASS

(THIS REPORT)

UNCLASSIFIED

20. SECURITY C LASS

(THIS PAGE)

UNCLASSIFIED

21. NO. OF PAGF.S 41

22. Price

USCOMM-DC 29042-P74
•