MIMOSA Extract Company (Pty) Ltd

NTE House, Redlands Estate

1 George MacFarlane Lane, Pietermaritzburg 3201
PO Box 2631, Pietermaritzburg 3200, South Africa
Telephone: +27 33 3861381 | Fax: +27 33 3861395
E-Mail: wattle@mimosa-sa.com
Web: www.mimosa-sa.com

Analytical Report: 4/2020

Analysis of GS and Solid from Zimbabwe – The Wattle Company

Five samples of GS extracts (labeled A – E) and one sample of Solid (labeled F) were received from
The Wattle Company for analysis.
Part 1: Analytical Results
Table 2: Analysis of samples A-F

GS Samples Solid
Analysis
A B C D E F
Tans* (%) 70.3 69.8 69.0 73.1 72.9 68.5
Non - Tans (%) 22.6 23.2 24.3 21.6 21.7 15.4
Insolubles (%) 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1
Moisture (%) 6.9 6.9 6.6 5.2 5.3 16.0
Lovibond red** 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.6 1.9
Lovibond yellow** 0.8 0.8 0.9 0.8 0.9 3.1
pH (10% Solution) 4.54 4.64 4.44 4.42 4.84 5.15
Ash (%) 3.30 3.42 3.15 2.85 2.54 1.52
Fe (ppm) 30 29 29 25 26 20
Residual SO2 (%) 0.95 0.94 1.00 0.84 0.68 n/a
Sludge (%) 0.32 0.15 0.22 0.21 0.04 0.35
Mimosa Grade A A A B2 C C

TANS* - by the Official SLTC Shake Method

COLOURS** - corrected according to Tans

DIRECTORS:
E W Köhne (Chairman)
H G Niebuhr (Vice Chairman) A subsidiary of:
P B B Day NTE Company (Pty) Ltd
Registration No. 2009 / 018754 / 07 www.leathernaturally.org www.vegleatherhub.com
Part 2: Visual Comparison

The five samples were compared visually to some locally produced GS. Grades A and B1 of the
locally produced GS were compared in our “doughnut test” and photographs were taken (Figures 1
and 2).

Figure 1: Doughnut Samples A -D

Figure 2: Doughnut Sample E

Comments:

1. Table 1 shows the analytical results of the 5 samples of GS and one sample of Solid
submitted from The Wattle Company; the results were characteristic of Mimosa GS and
Mimosa Solid.

2. The Solid colour was darker than Mimosa Solid and would be graded as “C” grade according
to the Mimosa system for solid grading.

3. Figure 1 and 2 shows the doughnut comparison of samples A – E. Samples A – C were the
lightest of the 5 samples and would be graded as an “A” grade.

4. Samples D and E were quite “pinkish”, visual and analytical results indicate these samples
would be B2 and “C” grades respectively. They also had less SO 2 than the other samples
which would have contributed to the darker “pinkish” color

5. All samples were well presented in terms of packaging to the laboratory as per the
recommendations on the last report. The results were a true reflection of the samples
received

Preesha A Bridglall
MEC Laboratory
09/07/2020