I have two issues with the report. 1) A natural exposure was never run, and 2) there was no discussion or even mention of what the exposed paint looked like!
Long-time readers of this blog will know that I am always leery of any claims of huge acceleration factors (huge being anything in double digits or more), so a 100x increase over an already accelerated exposure (the metal halide lamp irradiance between 300 and 400 nm was 75 mW/cm2 = 750 W/m2 which already 10x the normal exposure levels) is particularly challenging to swallow without further support - a control tested to actual outdoor exposure.
But how about including a snapshot or two of what the final exposed paint looked like? I'd love to know if what was left even looked like paint or was it more like the Flanders fields in 1918?

[*] The exposure time was broken into 8 hour cycles with 4 hours of irradiation followed by 4 hours of moisture condensation and no irradiation.
4 comments:
Hello there,
This is a question for the webmaster/admin here at rheothing.blogspot.com.
May I use some of the information from your post above if I provide a backlink back to your website?
Thanks,
John
Do you people have a facebook fan page? I looked for one on twitter but could not discover one, I would really like to become a fan!
Thanks for an idea, you sparked at thought from a angle I hadn’t given thoguht to yet. Now lets see if I can do something with it.
Hi there, I found your blog via Google while searching for a related topic, your site came up, it looks good.
Post a Comment