Lab Testing
CCT Laboratories
- Independent laboratory
- Located in Dublin, Ohio
- Previously retained by Federal Trade Commission
- Employs 14 doctorate-level scientists and 35 engineers
Test Conducted:
2002–03 for the Canadian government’s Competition Bureau
Type of Test:
Salt Spray over the scribed area only. Test was done to show the efficiency of the Final Coat Electronic Corrosion Module over a surface in the absence of an electrolyte (moisture) film and its ability to reduce the rate of corrosion. Test Panel Size: 4 feet x 3 feet
Test Results:
“The corrosion rate is reduced by 99.7% by the Module on the Test Panel compared with the Control Panel. Even if the difference in the corrosion potential is reduced to -0.100V, the ratio (CR) test/ (CR) control = 0.0204 and hence the corrosion ratio is reduced by 98%. To put these numbers in perspective, imagine that a system (automobile) fails by corrosion without the Module in a time of 1 year. If the Module is attached, the failure time would be 343 years if the potential is displaced by 150 mV in the negative direction, and 49 years if the potential was displaced by only 100mV. Such results are particularly significant when one considers that the average life of a vehicle is in the order of 10 years. Accordingly, these calculations demonstrate that the reduction in corrosion rate is substantial and that the Module is an effective corrosion control device”.
Note: The corrosion potentials measured at the scribes on both panels were approximately the same until exposure times exceeded 60 hours. The potentials then diverged, with that for the test panel eventually becoming more negative than that for the control panel by about 150mV, indicating that an induction time exists for the Corrosion Module to exert
UCL Laboratories
- Independent laboratory located in Toronto
- In business of testing for over 80 years
- Conducted in accordance with ASTM Standard D1654
Salt Spray Test:
Performed to ASTM D1654-92 Standards (Test Method for Evaluation of Painted or Coated Underwriters’ Laboratories of Canada)
Test Conducted:
2001
Type of Test:
Salt Spray Test performed to ASTM D1654-92 Standards (Test Method for Evaluation of Painted or Coated Specimens Subject to Corrosive Environments) Test Panel Size: Four panels each measuring 4 feet x 4 feet were grounded together giving a test surface area equal to 128 square feet. All panels were scribed.
Single Panel Test:
Two painted galvanized automotive sheet metal panels measuring 4 feet x 4 feet Panels prepared in accordance with DCX specifications Scribed to expose bare metal One panel connected to Module Placed in heated salt spray chamber for 1000 hours (40 days)
Conclusion on Single Panel Test:
Unprotected panel “showed corrosion and rust damage” Panel connected to Module “showed no corrosion or rust”
Multiple Panel Test:
Four panels each measuring 4 feet x 4 feet Panels connected by conductive wire Each panel scribed to bare metal One panel connected to Module
Conclusion on Multiple Panel Test:
“all panels showed no corrosion or rust” Compared with unprotected panel that “showed corrosion and rust damage”
Smithers’ Scientific Services Inc.
- Independent Laboratory located in Akron, Ohio
- Testing conducted in 1997 on BodyGard module (rebranded Final Coat in 2004)
Type of Test:
Humidity Test
Test Panel Size:
2 sections (7 feet x 15 inches) connected by grounding strap
Test Results:
“substantially reduced the corrosion rate”.
Test Methodology:
Test conformed with ASTM Standard D1654 Four separate automotive sheet metal panels, each measuring 7 feet x 15 inches Each panel scribed to bare metal One panel connected, other three not connected 35 days (800 hours) of exposure in corrosion chamber.
Conclusion:
“test panels…showed a marked degree of severe corrosion and rusting” “Scribes protected by BodyGard system (rebranded Final Coat) were nearly corrosion free” “The BodyGard system appeared to afford substantially more corrosion reduction than that of the factory panels tested” Test repeated two more times with consistent results.
Since 1978, we’ve been dedicated to providing help for people with Alzheimer’s disease and other dementias and their caregivers. That help comes in many ways.
Ohio State Electro Science Laboratory
- Question arose in Canadian Competition Bureau hearing as to whether the induced current is uniformly distributed across the vehicle surface.
- This issue was studied by Ohio State University’s Electrosciences Laboratory on an instrumented vehicle.
- Current was found to be uniformly distributed across entire surface of vehicle.
Test Conducted:
2004 for the Canadian government’s Competition Bureau
Type of Test:
Test was done to show the measurement of “surface current” generated by the Final Coat Electronic Corrosion Module on a typical.
Test Panel Size:
1994 Buick Century Automobile.
Test Results:
“…we have reliably and demonstrably sensed surface current all over the surface of this test automobile”. Fifty-eight (58) points were measured on the vehicle, from the back to the front, from the top to the bottom.
Elite Electronic Engineering Inc.
- Independent laboratory located near Chicago, Illinois
Type Conducted:
2007
Type of Test:
RF Emissions Measurement. To determine if the module meets the conducted and radiated emissions requirements of the FCC “Code of Federal Regulations.”
Test Results:
The module “did fully meet the conducted radio interference requirements of Section 15.107 and the radiated interference requirements of Section 15.109 of the FCC “Code of Federal Regulations” Title 47, Part 15, Subpart B for Class B equipment.”
Type Conducted:
2007
Type of Test:
Electromagnetic Compatibility. To determine if the module compromises or interferes with automotive electrical systems.
Test Results:
The module was compliant with requirements in all tests performed. “Compliant = Meets the broadband and narrowband emissions requirements specified in the Commission Directive 2004/104/EC test specification.”