Accelerat ing t he world's research.

MACIJ16000117.pdf
Eliot Iscariot

Nwosibe PO*, Nwafulugo FU and Iliyasu N

Cite this paper Downloaded from Academia.edu 

Get the citation in MLA, APA, or Chicago styles

Related papers Download a PDF Pack of t he best relat ed papers 

Development and Charact erizat ion of Het erogeneous Kaolin/Ash Based Cat alyst Syst em
Jibrin Muhammad Yelwa

A review of modified surfaces for high speed inkjet coat ing

John Ket t le, Pat rick Gane

Performance Crit eria for an Ast m XRF St andard Test Met hod for Hydraulic Cement s : Int er-Laborat or…
Paul St ut zman
 Medicinal & Analytical Chemistry International Journal

Erasable Ink Production for White Board Marker Using Locally

Sourced Dye

Nwosibe PO*, Nwafulugo FU and Iliyasu N

Research Article
Department of Chemical Engineering, Kaduna Polytechnic, Nigeria Volume 2 Issue 2
Received Date: July 07, 2018
*Corresponding author: Nwosibe PO, Department of Chemical Engineering, Kaduna Published Date: July 23, 2018
Polytechnic, Kaduna, Nigeria, Phone: +2348037710269; Email: [email protected]

Abstract
This research was aimed at producing erasable ink from locally sourced dye that can compete favourably with available
commercial brands. The ink was produced by mixing gum Arabic, ethanol, dye, deionised water and phenolphthalein
thoroughly and heating the mixture to 60oC. The ink was then cooled and strained using a filter cloth. Three different ink
formulations A, B and C were produced and subjected to physiochemical analysis to ensure that it conformed to standard.
The results obtained were pH (6.6, 2.2, and 4.3), viscosity (0.001329 Ns/m2, 0.003013 Ns/m2and 0.009237 Ns/m2) and
drying time (6.76 seconds, 9.04 seconds and 15.46 seconds) respectively for samples A, B and C. Samples A and B had the
best properties regarding drying time, viscosity, eligibility and erasability. The XRF analysis for the samples proved that
the concentrations of the various elements present in the ink is comparable with that of the standard ink available in the
market.

Keywords: Ink; Whiteboard; Pigment; Chalk; Schools; Polymer; Dye; Soot; Marker; Erasability; Market

Introduction permanent marker ink. The major difference between the

two is that permanent ink uses an acrylic polymer which
Ink can also be defined as a colloidal system of fine helps the colourant stick to surfaces while dry erase ink
pigment particles dispersed in a solvent [1]. White board uses an oily silicon polymer that makes the ink slippery
markers use erasable ink (also known as dry erase ink) to and prevents the colourant from coming in direct contact
write on the non-porous and glossy whiteboards. with the surface [3]. So many institutions are making the
Erasable ink can be cleaned or erased after drying switch from chalkboards to whiteboards, therefore the
without leaving visible colour residue (also known as demand for dry erase markers have increased. However,
streaking) or ghosting so that the surface can be written most of the brands used presently are imported from
on again. White board markers have certain advantages other countries, mainly China. Akande & Nwosibe [4]
over chalk. Thus they are unaffected by water, they can be clearly stated that producing the ink locally but using
used on a board by applying less pressure, they erase synthetic materials that are imported is expensive, hence
more easily than chalk, they are cleaner to use than chalk a need has arisen to replace the materials used in
due to the absence of chalk dust, white board markers are production with locally sourced ones and thus reduce the
healthier to the user than chalk because chalk dust can be overall cost of production. Also, some imported
hazardous when inhaled [2]. Dry erase ink is similar to whiteboard markers contain xylene and toluene which

Erasable Ink Production for White Board Marker Using Locally Sourced Dye Med & Analy Chem Int J
2
Medicinal & Analytical Chemistry International Journal
can be potentially harmful to the health of users. And so Dye based inks have lower viscosity than pigment
most existing inks are pigment based, that is pigments are based ink since dyes are dissolved while pigments are
used as the colourant. The pigments are finely distributed suspended or dispersed in the resin solution. Pigment
in the ink and are maintained in the suspended state based inks are more expensive than dye based inks and
using a dispersing agent [5]. A major disadvantage is that they are less consistent in colour. They also have less
the pigments often precipitate in the ink reservoir. As a colour range than dye based ink. Dye based inks are
result, the pigment content of the ink is reduced and the generally stronger than pigment based inks and can
images written with this ink becomes faint over a produce much more colour of a given density per unit
relatively short period of time. mass. Another advantage of pigment based inks is that the
dye molecules can interact with other ink ingredients,
In the late 19th century, logwood ink was made from thereby allowing greater benefit when compared to
extracts of the logwood (Haematoxyloncampecheartzim) pigmented inks which need optical brighteners and
tree mixed with crystallized sodium carbonate and colour enhancing agents to increase the intensity and
potassium chromate and potassium chromate [6]. The appearance. The type of pigment used also affects certain
wood was cut into pieces and then steeped in boiled ink qualities like the saturation, lightness and hue.
water to extract the dye [7]. They used fine particles of Pigments are insoluble in the solvent and have no affinity
carbon (lampblack) as the colourant and gums, saps or for the substrate [13]. Pigments have been used
glues as the vehicles or bonding agents Gottensgen and predominantly for coloring. Pigments can be organic or
Mark, 2006. Lampblack is the soot collected from oil inorganic. They are insoluble because they consist of
lamps; however, the lampblack used was created by molecules larger than that of dye. Inorganic pigments
partially burning tar with a little vegetable oil. The such as titanium oxide, carbon black, ultramarine blue,
pigment (i.e. lampblack) was suspended in gum or other cobalt blue, chromium oxide, iron oxide red, and graphite
glue to ensure that it adhered to the writing surface. The are used. The most common pigment used is carbon black
erasable or dry erase ink was invented in 1975 by Jerry because it gives opacity, colour permanence and vibrancy.
Woolf of Techform laboratories; however dry erase
markers and boards became popular in the mid-1990 [8]. Methodology
The erasable ink is used to write on enamel-covered
white boards or non-porous surfaces in general [9]. A few lumps of gum Arabic were dissolved in a small
amount of deionised water to form a viscous liquid. 4.5 g
Dry erase ink should flow easily so that the marker of dye was measured using a weighing balance and
does not become clogged. The ink must flow readily from poured into a beaker containing 20 ml of deionised water
the marker, so that the finest lines and character can be to form a solution.
formed. It must not be thick or form hard crust when it
dries. Dye based ink has lower viscosity than pigment 40 ml of ethanol was measured using a measuring
based ink because dyes are dissolved while pigments are cylinder and added to the solution in a mixer. The solution
dispersed in the resin solution [10]. The drying time was stirred to achieve a homogeneous solution. 5 ml of
affects the erasability of the ink. According to Cueppers & humidified gum Arabic and 2 ml of phenolphthalein was
Christoph [11] they stated that the faster the ink dries the added to the mixture and stirred.
more easily erasable it is. This is because if the drying
time is rapid, the ink tends to be attached to the surface The resulting mixture was heated to 60oC using a
and not absorbed by it making it easy to be erased. The heating mantle for three minutes while stirring to aid
ideal drying time for erasable ink is between three and proper reaction mixture and achieve homogeneity. The
five seconds. ink solution was cooled and strained using a filter cloth to
remove un-dissolved dye particles. 0.30 g of magnesium
A dye is a coloured, ionising and aromatic substance sulphate was measured using a weighing balance and
that has an affinity to the substrate to which it is applied. added to 30 ml of the ink to serve as a drying agent.
Dyes are coloured because they absorb some wavelengths
of light more than others due to the presence of The resulting ink then was subjected to
chromophore. Dyes can either be oil based or water physiochemical analysis and quality assessment tests to
based. Dye consists of small molecules which blends with ensure that it conformed to standard.
the water based solution [12].

Nwosibe PO, et al. Erasable Ink Production for White Board Marker Using Locally Copyright© Nwosibe PO, et al.
Sourced Dye. Med & Analy Chem Int J 2018, 2(2): 000117.
3
Medicinal & Analytical Chemistry International Journal
Viscosity at room temperature and the drying time was measured
and recorded using a stopwatch.
The ink should flow easily and not clog the marker tip.
Ideally, ink should have maximum colour strength at The ink should be easily erased without leaving ghosts
minimum velocity. The time of flow was measured using a or coloured residue behind. The ink should be erased
flow cup and a stopwatch. A volume of water was allowed without using any cleaning agent like methylated spirit or
to flow freely from a flow cup and the time was noted. ethanol. The ink was used to write on a whiteboard,
Equal volume of the ink was also allowed to flow freely allowed to dry and then erased to determine its
and the time was noted. The viscosity was then calculated erasability.
using the following relationship between time of flow and
viscosity. X-ray fluorescence analysis shows the metals and
oxides which are active in the ink mixture. The identity of
the element is determined using the energy (wavelength)
Time of flow of water (t) Viscosity of water (µ) of the x-ray light (photon) emitted by a particular
= element.
Time of flow of ink (t) Viscosity of ink (µ)
(McCabe et al, 1986) [14] Results and Discussion
Discussion of Results
Drying Time Table 1 presents the result of the physical analysis
carried out on the ink samples. Standard ink 1 and 2
After application to the writing surface, the solvent
refers to ink samples from imported brands currently
should vapourize quickly leaving the colourant and the
available in the market which stand as the standard ink,
binder so that the ink is attached to the surface and not
while samples A, B and C are the ink samples produced
absorbed by it. The ink was used to write on a whiteboard
from different formulations.

Physical Test Standard Ink 1 Standard Ink 2 Sample A Sample B Sample C

Erasability Easily erased Easily erased Easily erased Easily erased
Not easily erased
Drying Time(Seconds) 2.21 2.21 6.76 9.04 15.46
Viscosity(N.S/M2) 0.001147 0.00095 0.001329 0.003013 0.00924
Colour Blue Black Red Black Green
Less distinct and
Eligibility Distinct and clear Distinct and clear Distinct and clear Distinct and clear
clear
pH 5.5 5.5 6.6 2.2 4.3
Table 1: Physical Tests for the Various Ink Samples.

The viscosities of standard ink 1 and 2 are 0.001147 the ink erases quickly. The drying time of samples A, B
N.s/m2 and 0.000950 N.s/m2 respectively and that of and C are 6.76 seconds, 9.04 seconds and 15.46 seconds
samples A, B and C are 0.001329 N.s/m2, 0.003013 respectively. The drying time of the ink is a function of the
N.s/m2 and 0.009237 N.s/m2 respectively as shown in viscosity. The drying time of samples A and B are closer to
Table 1. This infers that the viscosity of the ink affects the standard than sample C; this is because they have lower
drying time, therefore, the more viscous the ink, the viscosities. Low drying time is necessary for easy
longer the drying time. Thus viscosities of samples A and erasability so that the ink components will stick to the
B are closer to standard than sample C. The difference in surface instead of being absorbed. The erasability of
viscosity is due to variations in the quantity of gum Arabic standard ink is high; the ink samples A and B are easily
used in the ink formulation. erased while sample C is not easily erased. This is because
of the relatively low viscosities and drying time. The third
As indicated in Table 1, the drying time of the standard sample C does not erase easily because the drying time is
ink is 2.21 seconds; this is due to the low viscosity of the long; the quicker the drying time, the easier the
ink. As a result of this quick drying time and low viscosity, erasability.

Nwosibe PO, et al. Erasable Ink Production for White Board Marker Using Locally Copyright© Nwosibe PO, et al.
Sourced Dye. Med & Analy Chem Int J 2018, 2(2): 000117.
4
Medicinal & Analytical Chemistry International Journal
The colors of the ink samples are red, black and green 6 for standard ink 1, 2 and Samples A, B and C
for samples A, B, and C respectively. The colour of the ink respectively. The standard ink contains SiO2, TiO2, SO3, Cl,
sample is a derivative of the dye used. The eligibility or P2O5 and Al2O3 as the active ingredients and while K2O,
distinct nature of the markings is a function of the MgO, Cr2O3, Mn2O3, Fe2O3 and SrO are contained in minute
chemical components of the ink. This will be discussed concentrations. However, Na2O, CaO and ZnO are absent.
fully under the chemical analysis as will be seen in Table The pH of the ink was seen to be 5.5 from the physical
2. The eligibility of standard ink is high as the markings tests in Table 1; this is accounted for by the high
are distinct and clear. Samples A and B have high percentage of SO3 which is an acidic oxide and chlorine as
eligibility and the markings are distinct and clear, while depicted in Tables 2 & 3. The active ingredients in sample
the markings by sample C are less distinct and clear. This A as shown in Table 4 are SiO2, SO3,Cl, P2O5, Al2O3, K2O and
is due to the viscous nature of sample C which results in CaO. MgO, TiO2 Cr2O3, Mn2O3, Fe2O3, ZnO and SrO. These
longer drying time of the ink sample. are contained in small quantities while Na 2O is absent.
The presence of SO3 and chlorine are responsible for the
Serial Concentration pH values of the ink. The percentage of SO3 is relatively
Element
Number (Weight %) small which accounts for the slightly acidic value of 6.6.
1 Sodium oxide, Na2O 0 The percentage of SO3 in sample B shown in Table 5 is
2 Magnesium Oxide, MgO 0.102 14.057% the highest hence it accounts for the low pH
value of 2.2 indicated in Table 1.
3 Aluminium(iii) oxide, Al2O3 3.394
4 Silicon (iv) oxide, SiO2 40.463 Concentration
5 Phosphorus (v) oxide, P2O5 3.857 Serial Number Element
(Weight %)
6 Sulphur (iv) oxide, SO3 16.517 1 Na2O 0
7 Chlorine, Cl 10.675 2 MgO 0
8 Potassium oxide, K2O 0.242 3 Al2O3 3.454
9 Calcium oxide, CaO 0 4 SiO2 86.579
10 Titanium oxide, TiO2 23.437
5 P2O5 6.931
11 Chromium (iii) oxide, Cr2O3 0.792 6 SO3 1.715
12 Manganese (iii) oxide, Mn2O3 0.399 7 Cl 0.704
13 Iron (iii) oxide, Fe2O3 0.054 8 K2O 0.167
14 Zinc oxide, ZnO 0 9 CaO 0.238
15 Strontium oxide, SrO 0.067 10 TiO2 0.03
Table 2: Chemical Test Analysis (Analyte Concentration) 11 Cr2O3 0.031
for Standard Ink 1 (XRF). 12 Mn2O3 0.036
13 Fe2O3 0.116
The pH of standard ink is 5.5 making it slightly acidic. 14 ZnO 0
This is due to the presence of Sulphur (VI) Oxide SO3, an
15 SrO 0
acidic gas which is a precursor of H2SO4. The ink is not
highly acidic due to the presence of other basic Table 3: Chemical Test Analysis (Analyte Concentration)
substances shown in the XRF analysis such as chlorine for Standard Ink 2 (XRF).
and magnesium oxide. The pH of sample A is 6.6 making it
slightly acidic, pH of sample B is 2.2 which are acidic and Chromium, magnesium and manganese are heavy
pH of sample C is 4.3 which are moderately acidic. The metals which are responsible for the toxicity. The
difference in pH is as a result of the type of dye used, i.e. percentage of these heavy metals are in minute and
whether it is oil or water based. Samples A and C are negligible quantities in all the ink samples in Tables 4-6
closer to neutrality although sample B can also be used which shows that the ink samples are non-toxic and are
since the ink does not come in bodily contact with the therefore friendly to the user health wise. Silicon (iv)
user. Therefore the best ink formulation proves to be oxide has the highest percentage in both the standard and
sample A. locally produced ink as shown in Tables 2 to 6. This is
because silicone is an anti-caking agent that prevents the
The ink samples produced were also subjected to ink from precipitating and solidifying with time, it also
chemical analysis. The results are contained in tables 2 to makes the ink slippery in order to prevent the colourant

Nwosibe PO, et al. Erasable Ink Production for White Board Marker Using Locally Copyright© Nwosibe PO, et al.
Sourced Dye. Med & Analy Chem Int J 2018, 2(2): 000117.
5
Medicinal & Analytical Chemistry International Journal
from coming in direct contact with the writing surface. Concentration
Serial Number Element
Silicon is also an antifoaming agent that regulates foam (Weight %)
efficiency, which prevents the ink from foaming so that 1 Na2O 0.192
the markings can be clear and consistent [15]. 2 MgO 0
3 Al2O3 2.083
Concentration 4 SiO2 49.385
Serial Number Element
(Wt %) 5 P2O5 19.768
1 Na2O 0 6 SO3 7.235
2 MgO 0.059 7 Cl 4.905
3 Al2O3 1.698 8 K2O 15.188
4 SiO2 52.926 9 CaO 0.965
5 P2O5 17.101 10 TiO2 0.04
11 Cr2O3 0.012
6 SO3 5.506
12 Mn2O3 0.012
7 Cl 2.895
13 Fe2O3 0.069
8 K2O 10.724 14 ZnO 0.146
9 CaO 8.763 15 SrO 0
10 TiO2 0.021
Table 6: Chemical Test Analysis (analyte concentration)
11 Cr2O3 0.011 for Sample C (XRF).
12 Mn2O3s 0.033
13 Fe2O3 0.166 Conclusion
14 ZnO 0.063
From the various findings, the following conclusions
15 SrO 0.034
were made; the ink produced is a high quality, quick
Table 4: Chemical Test Analysis (Analyte Concentration) drying erasable ink. Dye and the other locally sourced
for Sample A (XRF). materials are economically viable for the production of
erasable ink. And the ink produced can compete favorably
Concentration with commercial ink brands presently available in the
Serial Number Element market. These facts were based on the comparison made
(Weight %)
1 Na2O 0 on the pH, drying time, viscosity, erasability, eligibility
2 MgO 0 and XRF analysis with those of the standard ink.
3 Al2O3 2.553
4 SiO2 71.017
Recommendation
5 P2O5 7.567 Much research work has not been made on this issue
6 SO3 14.057 of erasable ink production, so the recommendation would
7 Cl 1.848 be basically on concern for future research on the subject:
8 K2O 1.142 a. Further work should be done to improve the erasability
9 CaO 1.356 and drying time of the ink.
b. Production of the body of the marker pen should be
10 TiO2 0.044
considered.
11 Cr2O3 0
12 Mn2O3 0.319 References
13 Fe2O3 0.097
14 ZnO 0 1. Ainsworth, Mitchell C (1904) “Inks and their
15 SrO 0 composition and manufacture”. Griffin C & Company
limited.
Table 5: Chemical Test Analysis (analyte concentration)
for Sample B (XRF). 2. Sharon, Huntington J (2004) “Think ink!”. Christian
Science monitor.

Nwosibe PO, et al. Erasable Ink Production for White Board Marker Using Locally Copyright© Nwosibe PO, et al.
Sourced Dye. Med & Analy Chem Int J 2018, 2(2): 000117.
6
Medicinal & Analytical Chemistry International Journal
3. Smith, Joseph A (1992) The pen and ink book: 9. Baker RW (2000) Kirk-Othmer Encyclopedia of
Materials and techniques for today’s artists. Chemical Technology: Membrane Technology.

4. Akande MT, Nwosibe PO (2012) Production of ink 10. Cordova A (2008) Washable marker ink composition.
from cashew nut shell liquid. Unpublished HND
dissertation, Chemical Engineering Department, 11. Cueppers, Christoph (1989) “On the manufacture of
Kaduna Polytechnic. ink” Nepal – Journal of the Department of
Archaeology, Number 113, pp: 1-7.
5. Loftin R (1993) Erasable ink. Retrieved 9th December
1993. 12. Carrol, Clifford C (1997) “US patent US6031023A”.

6. David A Black (1967) “Fibre tipped pens” 57 Journal 13. Bisset DE (2005) (3rd Edn) The ink manual Van
of Criminology. L. Criminology & Police Sci 521. Nostrand Reinhold Co. Ltd, UK, pp: 114-157.

7. Newman, Lee W (1910) Marking pen, US patent 14. McCabe et al. (1986). Momentum Heat and Mass
946149. Transfer Fundamentals edited by Robert Greenhorn.
85800004725.
8. David N Carvalho’s (1904) Forty centuries of Ink,
First Edition New York. The Bank Law publishing Co. 15. Larrie RA, Deardurff A (2013) Erasable inkjet ink
composition.

Nwosibe PO, et al. Erasable Ink Production for White Board Marker Using Locally Copyright© Nwosibe PO, et al.
Sourced Dye. Med & Analy Chem Int J 2018, 2(2): 000117.