Catalogs >
AMETEK MOCON >
Comparing ASTM F1115 vs F2467

Comparing ASTM F1115 vs F2467
6Pages

Catalog excerpts

WHITE PAPER A COMPARISON OF THE ASTM F1115 AND F2476 TEST METHODS FOR CO₂TR MEASUREMENT AMETEK MOCON April 2024 Content: Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Zahm-Nagel Method Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 MOCON Comparison Study: IR Method vs Zahm-Nagel . . . . . . . . . . 4 Permeation Test Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Open the catalog to page 1

TWO MAJOR METHODS FOR CO₂TR ANALYSIS WHITE PAPER As carbonation is critical to the flavor profile of carbonated beverages, carbon dioxide gas transmission rate (CO₂TR) is the most important determinant of shelf life for a carbonated soft drink package. Abstract When assessing carbon dioxide (CO2) barrier properties in the food and beverage industry, there are two major test methods: ASTM F1115 “Standard Test Method for Determining the Carbon Dioxide Loss of Beverage Containers,” and ASTM F2476 “Standard Test Method for the Determination of Carbon Dioxide Gas Transmission Rate (CO2TR)...

Open the catalog to page 2

ZAHM-NAGEL METHOD PROCEDURES WHITE PAPER could be long or short in time. For any bottles or packages with poor barriers or seals, the pressure drops quickly, and the test could be short. Alternatively, for bottles with good barriers and seals, the testing could be very long, from 2 months (smaller bottles) to 4-5 months (larger bottles). The industry needs a method to evaluate CO2 barriers in a reasonably short time. This whitepaper introduces ASTM F2476 — the IR CO2TR Method, represented by the MOCON® PERMATRAN-C® 4/30. This method quantifies CO2 loss with an Infrared (IR) sensor, unlike...

Open the catalog to page 3

MOCON COMPARISON STUDY WHITE PAPER • Closure permeation tests were done on a set of the special MOCON closures. Glass bottles were used to ensure that the permeation came only from the special closures. First the bottles were carefully flushed with CO2. The closures were then added, and the bottle was pressurized to 60 PSIG. The bottles were then put into the capture volumes and tested. Closures took about 5 days to come to equilibrium. Results are as follows. Closure A = 0.3926 cc/pkg•day, closure B = 0.3745 cc/pkg•day. Results when normalized for PSIA of CO2 are as follows: With the...

Open the catalog to page 4

PERMEATION TEST RESULTS WHITE PAPER Bottle Permeation Test (Empty Bottle Without Closure, CO2 Going In) Bottle Permeation Test (Full Bottle, CO2 Going Out) The same above special closure was used to attach a pressure gauge and a shutoff valve that can be connected to a tank gas line. The bottles were filled with water and pressurized with CO2 to 60 PSIG (75 PSIA, or five atmospheres of CO2 in the bottle). The bottles were then conditioned for a minimum of 6 days and then placed into the capture volume for testing. The results are as follows: bottle 1 = 8.2027 cc/(pkg•day), bottle 2 = 8.1879...

Open the catalog to page 5

WHITE PAPER Conclusions The above data demonstrates that using the MOCON IR Sensor CO2 permeation instrument, the CO2TR test results were comparable with that from the Zahm-Nagel Test Method. Several considerations, best practices, and suggested further reading are listed below. • The Zahm-Nagel Method is historically a good tool for brand owners to monitor the real-time shelf life of the carbonated liquid products. • Zahm-Nagel tests are often time consuming. The longer the test takes, the longer the shelf life, which is good news for the brand owner. However, the longer testing time may...

Open the catalog to page 6