Best Practice For Water Resistance Testing

September 26, 2014

I'd like to test some of my inks for water resistance. However, I've noticed that people test differently, and when I test, I get different results on different papers.

Can we discuss an appropriately rigorous determination of resistance? I'd like to standardize my approach.

For example:

What paper should be used? Are there any papers known to shed inks better than others?

How much water? For how long? Dropped, swabbed, scrubbed, soaked, run over the paper, or licked?

Do you blot off the water? Wipe it? Let it evaporate?

How should ink be laid down? Grids? Words? Solid lines?

Is there any benefit to adding things to the testing water (like soap), or to testing other substances (ethanol/bleach)?

Length of time? Temperature? Size of swatch?

September 26, 2014

SBRE Brown uses the "eye dropper of death" and the "(bleep) brush" to test waterproofness during ink reviews. The brush applies water to regular writing, while the eye dropper is used for large writing done with a Pilot Parallel. After a time he usually blots so he can get on with the rest of the ink review. You can find his reviews on Youtube under the FP Geeks' Inkcyclopedia. I'm can't be of any more help, I don't do any ink testing. Best of luck.

September 26, 2014

I am actually going to do some tests on this and write up my findings in the near future, but I've been wondering the same thing. I definitely think that the length of time you leave the ink on the paper has a huge effect on water resistance, since longer times give the ink more time to seep deep into the paper fibers. For this reason the way a lot of reviewers do their water tests (immediately after it dries) is a bit misleading, at least to me.

Same with paper type - a more absorbent paper will probably provide better water resistance than a slick one where all the ink stays close to the surface.

As for how to put the ink down? I don't think it matters too much. All you want to see is if you can tell what was there before. I prefer words for soak tests, grids for drip tests, but I think that's only because that's how I've seen other people do it.

Personally I don't see the point of testing other solvents. I know that some people do this because it could matter with check washing or something, but I can't believe that you wouldn't be able to otherwise tell if a check/important document has been dunked in bleach. I only test water because that's my main enemy on a daily basis.

September 26, 2014

I like the idea of some standardization of testing and standardized results, so we could give a score of 4 out of 5 and everyone would have some idea what that meant. But the testing itself needs to recreate real-world conditions, doesn't it? When I'm using an ink with unknown water-resistance and I'm concerned, I'm usually concerned about whether my writing can take a direct hit from a tipped-over glass of water or a cup of coffee. If one of those things happened, I would quickly remove the writing from harm's way, put it someplace out of direct sunlight, and let it dry on its own. So when I test, I put the written-on paper in a shallow dish, pour a glass of water on it, allow it to sit for about 20 seconds while I pretend to look for a towel to clean up the spill, I pull the paper out and lay it out to dry.

Edited September 26, 2014 by Bookman

September 27, 2014

After you have done all this rigorous testing, how do you propose to keep up with manufacturers' unannounced changes in formulation?

I have two bottles of black Quink. Paper chromatography shows one to be plain black dye; the other exhibits plain bands of blue, violet, orange, yellow, and red. The two formulations have different water resistance.

You could do a lot of work here and wind up just pounding Diogenes' tub.

September 27, 2014

I write a few words on a strip of paper and soak it in a saucer overnight. I'm not anancastic about it. If the text is still easily readable the next day, it's OK with me. I accept color change and some fading (which is usual with the low concentration IG inks).

Different people have different definitons of water resistance depending on their personal needs. I only need my writing to be readable after soaking in case somebody spills coffee on the text or our basement archive gets flooded in a skybreak. Others may want/need absolute color fidelity.

Edited September 27, 2014 by Oldane

September 27, 2014

Sometimes, I do a water swab, other times, I use a wet paint brush. My favorites are when I take an insulin syringe and squirt out dots and swirls. When the water has hours to soak in, it does lots of damage. I've tested lots of different ways and no one way is best. Inks react differently to different liquids and yes, to different papers. Some inks bond to the cellulose in the paper, thus paper with higher cellulose is probably more likely to keep the ink. Inks also react differently depending on how long they have been dry. I don't know that you will get one standardized test...at least not for other people. Why not start out with a series of experiments... Try one ink and one paper... write on multiple sheets. Try all the different water methods. What did you observe. Then try it with a different type of paper... keep going until you have a working hypothesis.

That's my advice.

September 27, 2014

Just be sure to explain whatever method YOU are using when posting results. You want it to be replicable.

September 28, 2014

Hi,

Best practice? Hmmm…

In reply to your questions:

What paper should be used?
- I suggest using a paper that is both suitable for FP use, and available to most Members. My choice for wet tests is 24lb / 90gsm laser copy/print paper. That is a pretty good 'utility' writing paper, and is quite common in many office environments, though 20lb / 80gsm may be more widely used of late.

Are there any papers known to shed inks better than others?
- I haven't noticed a huge difference amongst writing papers, but after reviewing the results of other Members, I was disinclined to run my own set of extensive sampling, due in part that water resistance is not a top priority for me. Rather, if I want water resistance, I will choose such an ink, not rely on a specific ink+paper to enhance things.

How much water? For how long? Dropped, swabbed, scrubbed, soaked, run over the paper, or licked?
- When I do my Ink Reviews there are two methods: the Splatter Test, and the Soapy Soap Test. For the ST, I just use an eye dropper to drip water upon a small grid, then let it evaporate undisturbed. The SST involves water taken from a sink full of water that I've prepared for hand washing china, silverware & drinking vessels, then giving the ink+paper a static soak for about seven hours.

- Some animal companions explored my inky writing with their noses, tongues & mouths, but results were inconclusive, due in part to the wee beasts quickly realising ink+paper is not food, a treat nor a toy. (I await observations of Members who use scented inks.)

Do you blot off the water? Wipe it? Let it evaporate?
- I let it evaporate. I considered immediately blotting-up the water, as might happen in the wild, but I set that aside as being part of disaster recovery, so letting the ink evaporate likely depicts one worst case scenario result.

How should ink be laid down? Grids? Words? Solid lines?
- I am satisfied with any form or shape, so long as it is done with a 'normal' pen.

Is there any benefit to adding things to the testing water (like soap), or to testing other substances (ethanol/bleach)?
- The SST uses washing up liquid plus a whisper of [sanitising] household chlorine bleach.

- I thought of using other domestic liquids, but that became rather a jumble, so left it to other Members to explore real world risks in their environment.

- Also, the ICS&T Forum includes many [high stress] samples exploring the properties of Noodler's family of cellulose-reactive bulletproof inks.

Length of time?
- As above.

Temperature?
- Ambient: 18 - 45℃.

Size of swatch?
- Large enough to give a fair depiction the results. I use 4.5x5cm for each test.

It is a priority for me to have tests that are relevant to what might happen in the wild, and are simple and repeatable, so that results for different inks can be compared on the level. Such methods also enable other Members to repeat the tests with their pen+ink+paper combos which can reveal deviation from my results - in a few instances it gave reason to believe that an ink was reformulated: the ink appeared much the same colour, but water resistance was very different.

I exclude stress testing, such as running water over the paper, nefarious acts by villains, and the real world risk of running something through a clothes washing machine or a dry cleaning cycle. I let anecdotal evidence of such mishaps speak for themselves.

The aspect of ink migration / offset is not addressed by the methods I use: What would happen to adjacent written-upon sheets in a bound journal or file?

- I tried folding a written-upon sheet then placing it in a soup plate full of water, with another such plate filled with water on top to give a uniform pressure, but the results were not consistent, so I considered my method and/or interpretation of results flawed in some way, so left it at that, once again letting other Members contribute their real world results of such mishaps. (OCD has limits, or so I'm told.)

I reckon that water resistance tests should also address disaster recovery methods: Should the page be blotted? Or rinsed to remove ink that came adrift? Or just left to air dry? What about using heat to dry the pages? And so on.

Also, with the fairly wide availability of digital cameras, I suggest that the damaged sheets be photographed as soon as possible, and most certainly prior to any manner of disaster recovery.

Bye,
S1

__ __

Evaluating Wet Test Results - the 4S Scale:

0 Nothing left but wrinkled paper.
Recycle.

1 Some inky artifacts remain as evidence of activity, but no words legible.
Recycle.

2 Over half is legible.
May provide basis for 'best guess' restoration. (Think Dead Sea scrolls.)

3 All legible, but either very faint and/or has heavy staining from re-deposit of soluble dye.
Needs recovery/restoration for anything beyond personal use.

4 All legible, can be easily read and/or have light staining from re-deposit of soluble dye.
Use as-is for work papers & internal use.
Adjustments to a scanner may drop-out the stain.

5 Cannot really tell that it was wet, except for the wrinkled paper.
Line quality may be ever so slightly degraded: woolly/feathering.
Use as-is.
May need to be photocopied/scanned to replace wrinkled paper.

Edited September 28, 2014 by Sandy1