Formulation of White Board Marker Ink Using Locally Sourced Raw Materials



Abstract Views
15071

Downloads
17279

Citations

Share

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##

Submitted Jan 28, 2019
Published Mar 19, 2019
10.24018/ejeng.2019.4.3.1108

Abstract viewed = 15071 times

Table of Contents

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

This research work was conducted to demonstrate the mechanism of white board marker ink production using locally sourced raw materials such as charcoal and used lube oil. In the production of the ink, the charcoal served as a pigment, used lube oil served as the primary binder or resin, ethanol served as solvent and gum Arabic served as an additive. The charcoal was obtained from processing of Mango, Oil bean (Ugba) and rubber trees, which were further crushed to their finest particles respectively and the used lube oil was obtained from mechanical engineering servicing unit of automobile engines. The crushed charcoal samples were characterized to determine the physio-chemical properties of some mineral elements such as Ca, Cu, P, K, C, S, N. however the mineral component that controlled the production of this ink was the Carbon content. The different ink samples were formulated in terms of odour, colour, hazardous reaction, pH, density and viscosity and compared with that of international standards. Results obtained showed a good match, indicating the reliability and the quality of the produced white board marker ink. The pH results for Ugba ink = 5.43, Rubber ink = 6.79, and Mango = 7.41. Empirical models were used to predict concentration with that of experimental values, a plot of concentration against time in terms of production yield revealed that the order of magnitude was rubber>Ugba>Mango whereas in terms of penetration and writing ability Ugba>rubber>mango. Furthermore, the research demonstrates the significance of the characteristics of the charcoal and the used lube oil in the quality of the end product. Finally, the research revealed that ink produced from the oil bean (ugba) charcoal and lube oil was best in terms of write-ability and quality in the production of white board marker ink.

Keywords: charcoal; production; marker ink; used lube oil

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. Yuuko Suzuki (2003) Introduction to Japanese calligraphy: search press. Revised and published January 28th 2017 by schiffer publishing. Hard cover 80 pages.
     Google Scholar
  2. Bokonon-Ganta, A.H., de Groote, H., and Neuenschwander, P., 2002, “Socio Econmic Impact of Biological Control of Mango Mealybug in Benin,” Agr.Ecosyst. Envtron., 93, 367-378.
     Google Scholar
  3. Nansaior, A., Patanothai, A., Rambo, A. T. & Simarks, S. (2013). The sustainability of Biomass Energy Acquisition by Households in Urbanizing Communities in Northeast Thailand,” Biomass. Bioenergy., 52, 113 – 121.
     Google Scholar
  4. Enujiugha, V. N. & Akanbi, C. T. (2005). Compositional changes in African oil bean (Pentaclethra macrophylla Benth) seeds during thermal processing. Pak. J. Nutr., 4: 27-31.
     Google Scholar
  5. Ikediobi, C. O. (1981). Amino and fatty acid composition of Pentaclethra macrophylla and Treculia africana seeds. J. Am. Oil Chem. Soc., 58: 30-31.
     Google Scholar
  6. Akintayo, E. T. & Bayer, E. (2002). Characterization and some possible uses of Plukenetia conophora and Adenopus breviflorus seeds and seed oils. Bioresour. Technol., 85: 95-97.
     Google Scholar
  7. Mooibroek, H, & Cornish, K. (2000). Alternative sources of natural rubber. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 53(4):355–65.
     Google Scholar
  8. Van, B. J. B. & Poirier, Y. (2007). Establishment of new crops for the production of natural rubber. Trends Biotechnol 25(11):522–9.
     Google Scholar
  9. Lieberei, R. (2007). South American leaf blight of the rubber tree (Hevea spp.): new steps in plant domestication using physiological features and molecular markers. Ann Bot.;100(6):1125–42.
     Google Scholar
  10. Woods, M. & Woods, M. (2000). Ancient Communication: Form Grunts to Graffiti. pp 51-52. Minneapolis: Runestone Press; an imprint of Lerner Publishing Group.
     Google Scholar
  11. Gottsegen, M. D. (2006). The Painter's Handbook: A Complete Reference Page 30, New York: Watson-Guptill Publications. ISBN 0-8230-3496-8.
     Google Scholar
  12. Bosworth, C. E. (2004). A Mediaeval Islamic Prototype of the Fountain Pen? Journal of Semitic Christian Science Monitor ‘Think ink’ September 21.
     Google Scholar
  13. Shreve, R. N. (1967). Chemical Process Industries, Third Edition, McGraw-Hill, NY, 1967.
     Google Scholar
  14. Scott, A. C. & Damblon, F. (2010). Charcoal Taphonomy ans Significancein Geology, Botany and Archeology. Palaeogeogr. Palaeocl., 291, 1-10.
     Google Scholar
  15. Novak, M. & Wilensky, U. (2007). Net logo/connected chemistry/solid combustion model..
     Google Scholar
  16. Ramos, G., & Perez-Marquez, D. (2014). Design of Semi- Static Concentrator fpr Charcoal Production. Ernerg. Proc., 57, 2167-2175.
     Google Scholar