Received: 22 November 2020 Revised: 17 March 2021 Accepted: 6 April 2021

DOI: 10.1002/col.22671

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Assessment of the factors affecting the weathering

properties of Pigment Yellow 74 in decorative paint

Pramod Nikam | Chandrashekara R. Haramagatti | Amit Joshi

Research & Technology Centre, Asian

Paints Limited, Navi Mumbai, India
Correspondence
Chandrashekara R. Haramagatti,
Research & Technology Centre, Asian
Paints Limited, Plot No. C3-B/1, TTC
MIDC, Pawane, Thane–Belapur Road,
Navi Mumbai 400703, Maharashtra, India.
Email: chandrashekara.haramagatti@
asianpaints.com
Abstract
Color or shade fading is one of the major issues observed in decorative paints.
Here we have carried out a systematic artificial weathering study using QUV
and ATLAS weathering test chambers for Pigment Yellow 74 (PY 74). Pigment
dispersion of PY 74 received from three different manufacturers are prepared.
Various factors, such as the processing parameter, for example, grinding tem-
perature (with and without cooling water circulation during the processing of
pigment dispersion), with respect to paints the factors such as primers and
clear base paints of different batches, and as for the ATLAS and QUV weather-
ability test concerned, test panels of different lots, and multiple QUV chambers
are evaluated. The color difference was recorded at regular time intervals for
the panels exposed to ATLAS and QUV test of 1000 hours using color spectro-
photometer. A significant color difference was recorded for the panels coated
with paints based on pigment dispersion prepared using PY 74 from different
manufacturers, and the difference in grinding temperature. These results show
the importance of process parameters such as grinding temperature on
weathering properties, and systematic testing approaches for QUV/ATLAS for
the pigments from different manufacturers.

KEYWORDS
artificial weathering, color fading, organic pigments, pigment dispersion

1 | INTRODUCTION surface preparation, wrong painting practices, and envi-

Paint is used to decorate and enhance the aesthetic of the
walls/house, metals, wood etc., not only that it protects
the surface from various unfavorable elements. Therefore,
protection of the surface from the environmental condi-
tions and increasing the life of the surface is mainly
achieved from paints and coatings.1 However, the perfor-
mance of these paints and coatings under various environ-
mental parameters is a concern. Fading, blistering,
peeling, grinning, chalking, running, sagging, flaking,
blooming, wrinkling, flashing, saponification, alligatoring,
checking, cracking, pin holing, and mottling are some of
the paint defects observed due to faulty design, improper
ronmental conditions.1,2 Color/shade fading is a most
commonly observed defect in the exterior decorative
paints, since the shade fading in the interior paint appears
over time and may not be as distinct as fading in exterior
paints. Variation in environmental conditions, such as
temperature, presence of salts, and moisture present in the
air makes surrounding environment more conducive and
it speeds up the shade fading of exterior paints.3 Apart
from these factors, poor performance of paint might also
be due to the quality of raw material used in the paints.
The composition of paints plays a major role in withstand-
ing the harsh environmental conditions. Binder and pig-
ments are the two such crucial ingredients. The main

Color Res Appl. 2021;46:1313–1320. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/col © 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC. 1313

1314
function of binders is to hold the pigments, extenders etc.
intact with the surface.4 Pigments provide color and optical
properties (opacity, reflectance) to the paint film.5 The pig-
ments are also more susceptible to the heat. Exposure of the
pigment to the heat results into the change in the crystal
structure which then leads to the fading of shade.6 Gener-
ally, the pigment or pigment particle surface is modified
with functional moieties to enhance the performance prop-
erties of the pigments.7 Inorganic pigments have low
chroma and tinting strength but they have good hiding
power, excellent lightfastness, and chemical resistance,
whereas organic pigments have bright color, and the
weather fastness is inferior compared to the inorganic
pigments.8,9 Among the various chemistries of organic
pigments, monoazo yellow pigments possess inferior
weather fastness and chemical resistance.10,11 However,
there were efforts to improve the storage stability, and parti-
cle size stability of Pigment Yellow 74 (PY 74) by controlling
the crystal structure parameters.12 Besides that, the other
parameters such as deviations in the quality of pigments
among the different manufacturers, surface preparation,
etc. will also lead to fading of the color. Generally artificial
weathering (UV chambers from Q-Labs [QUV], and
weather-O-meter from ATLAS) tests are performed to these
pigment dispersions to understand their performances.
Here in this article, pigment dispersion of monoazo
yellow pigment (PY 74) was prepared using PY 74 from
different manufacturers. The effect of various factors
such as temperature during dispersion process, alkalinity
of the QUV and ATLAS panels, and surface preparation
of QUV and ATLAS test panels on the fading of the color-
ants is studied.
2 | EXPERIME N TAL METH OD
2.1 | Materials
The PY 74 from three different manufacturers, calcium
carbonate as extender, attapulgite as thickener,
ethoxylate of fatty oil ester, fatty acid modified emulsifier,
and soya lecithin as wetting and dispersing agents, bio-
cides, defoamer as additives, and DM water are used in
the study. All the raw materials are of commercial grade
and used as received; manufacturers details are not given
to avoid product promotion.
2.2 | Pigment dispersion
Pigment dispersions were prepared in 1 L stainless steel-
jacketed vessel using high speed disperser (Dispermat-
VMA-Getzmann, Germany). Liquid ingredients were
15206378, 2021, 6, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/col.22671 by Egyptian National Sti. Network (Enstinet), Wiley Online Library on [05/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
NIKAM ET AL.
added and mixed at low speed of
500 rpm for
10 minutes on the dispermat. The powder ingredients
pigment, extender followed by rheology additive were
added, the mixture was mixed well for 10 minutes at
800 rpm. Grinding was performed for 30 minutes at

3000 rpm. The chilling (by circulation of cool water)
was provided during grinding stage to maintain tempera-
ture of mixer between 8 C to 25 C.
2.3 | QUV/ATLAS panel preparation and
paint application
The preparation of the primer for panel application
started with 100 mL of water-based primer (acrylic emul-
sion based, pigment volume concentration [PVC]
70%,
and coverage
30-33 m2/L) in a 200 mL metal container.
This was diluted at 1:1 with water, and was mixed well
using gyro shaker for 5 minutes.
For the prepation of the exterior paint for panel appli-
cation, 100 mL of acrylic emulsion exterior paint (PVC

40%, and coverage
16-18 m2/L) and 10 mL of pre-
pared PY 74 colorant were placed in a 200 mL metal con-
tainer; then mixed well using gyro shaker for 5 minutes.
This paint was diluted at 1:0.4 with water and mixed well
for 3 minutes with a spatula.
Fiber cement panels of dimension 150 mm × 75 mm
for QUV, and 145 mm × 65 mm for ATLAS were used in
the study. The fiber cement panels were cleaned thor-
oughly under running tap to clean the dirt from the sur-
face. These panels were then allowed to dry overnight at
room temperature. A single coat of primer was applied
by brush on these panels, and allowed to dry for 4 hours
at room temperature. This was followed by two coats
(applied by brush) of acrylic emulsion exterior paint with
an interval of
8 hours between two coats. Then panels
were allowed to cure at room temperature for 7 days
before subjecting them to the ATLAS and QUV
chambers.
2.4 | Characterization
Infrared (IR) spectroscopy: Infrared spectra are recorded
using IR spectrometer from PerkinElmer. The samples
for IR spectroscopy were prepared by grinding pigment
and KBr using mortar and pestle, and then made pellet
by using pellet die.
Particle size: Mastersizer 2000 from Malvern instru-
ment, which operates on static light scattering principle,
was used to record the particle size distribution. The sample
was prepared by dispersing 0.5 g of pigment in 10 mL of 1%
sodium lauryl sulphate solution by sonication for 1 minute.
 15206378, 2021, 6, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/col.22671 by Egyptian National Sti. Network (Enstinet), Wiley Online Library on [05/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
NIKAM ET AL. 1315

Scanning electron microscopy: Field-emission scan-
ning electron microscopy and energy-dispersive X-ray
(FESEM and EDX) analysis of the PY 74 pigment from
different manufacturers were carried out using Jeol
7100F. The dispersion was prepared by sonicating the
pigment in water at 33 kHz for 5 minutes using a
sonicator from Telsonic Ultrasonics, and then a drop of
the dispersion was placed on double-sided tape pasted on
stub, and was allowed to dry. Platinum sputter coating
for 30 seconds at 20 mA was given to the samples.
Spectrophotometer (Gretag Macbeth Color-Eye
7000A and software Propallete 3.3) was used to record
the color differences of the panels. QUV-accelerated
weathering test machine from Q-Lab USA (Operational
conditions—Condensation at 45 C, and UV at 50 C,
Irradiance—0.55 watts/m2/nm, UV radiation source—
UVB 313 EL), and ATLAS chamber (operational
conditions—6500 W water cooled Xenon Arc burner,
humidity of 60%-80%, black panel temperature of
63 C,
irradiance of
0.5 watts/m2/nm,
100 minutes of dry
cycle with continuous radiation followed by
15 minutes
of water spray under the continuous radiation)
were used.
The panels were taken out at regular intervals for
recording the color difference using spectrophotometer,
the water droplets on the panels were wiped out gently
using tissue paper, and the panels were allowed to cool
down to room temperature before recording the color dif-
ference. The coloristic values were recorded and stored in
the spectrophotometer.
scanning electron microscopy and energy dispersive X-
ray analysis. IR spectra for these three different manu-
facturers are shown in Figure 1 (IR spectra are split in
to two regions for better clarity). There is no signifi-
cant difference in IR spectral features except spectral
features near 1650 cm−1 which are the characteristics
of olefinic group observed.
Particle size distributions for pigments received from
three different manufacturers are shown in Figure 2. Par-
ticle size distribution near 200 nm is quite similar among
these three pigments. However, the difference in particle
size distribution can be observed between 1 and 90 μm.
The morphology and elemental analysis were per-
formed for the PY74 pigments. Scanning electron micro-
scopic images and EDX spectrum are shown in Figure 3.
SEM image of PS2 shows that, the particles are uniform
in shape, and EDX analysis shows only carbon and oxy-
gen elements arising from pigment particles. Whereas

3 | R ES U L T S A N D D I S C U S S I O N

Pigment received from three different manufacturers

(PS1, PS2, and PS3) are characterized for the func-
tional groups using infrared spectroscopy, particle size F I G U R E 2 Particle size distribution of Pigment Yellow (PY 74)
analysis by static light scattering technique, and pigment received from three different manufacturers

F I G U R E 1 Infrared spectra
of Pigment Yellow (PY 74)
pigment from three different
manufacturers PS1, PS2, and
PS3 at figure print to bending
vibrations (A), and stretching
vibrations (B)
 15206378, 2021, 6, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/col.22671 by Egyptian National Sti. Network (Enstinet), Wiley Online Library on [05/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
1316 NIKAM ET AL.

F I G U R E 3 Scanning electron microscopy and energy-dispersive X-ray (EDX) analysis of PS1, PS2, and PS3. EDX spectra are given for
2 difference spots for PS1 and PS2 to differentiate the pigment and plate-like structures. No plate-like structures found for PS2

SEM images of PS1 and PS3 shows plate-like structures oxygen arising from pigment particles, and the plate-like
in addition to regular uniform particles. EDX analysis of structures contained mostly aluminum, and silicon might
regular uniform particles are mostly of carbon and be from extender/additives. The main difference between

NIKAM ET AL.
PS1 and PS3 is that, the size and abundance of plate-like
structures in PS3 is much higher than in PS1.
Pigments from different manufacturers PS1, PS2, and
PS3 were used to prepare pigment dispersions using the sim-
ilar formulation. Initial colorimetric values L, a, b, and the
ΔE*ab (the color difference of reference and experimental
QUV panels, here in this case, the initial readings of QUV
panels before placing them in the ATLAS and QUV cham-
bers are taken as the reference) of panels were recorded
using spectrophotometer according to the Equation (1).13
These initial readings are stored in the computer and used
in subsequent measurements to find the color difference of
the panels exposed to QUV. The panels were prepared and
exposed in duplicate, and the given results are the average of
two different panels with an experimental deviation <5%.
The QUV-exposed panels were taken out at the time interval
of 100, 250, 500, 750, 850, 1000 hours, and the coloristic of
these panels were recorded.
F I G U R E 4 The performance of different QUV chambers for
variation in color difference of pigment dispersion
FIGURE 5 Influence of primers of different batches on variation in color difference
15206378, 2021, 6, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/col.22671 by Egyptian National Sti. Network (Enstinet), Wiley Online Library on [05/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
1317
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ΔE ab = ðL2 −L1Þ2 + ða2 −a1Þ2 + ðb2 −b1Þ2 ð1Þ
where ΔE*ab is the color difference, L (Lightness), a (red-
ness/greenness), and b (yellowness/blueness) are stan-
dard CIE coordinates. Throughout this article ΔE refers
to the CIELAB color difference, which is given by Equa-
tion (1).
Experiments were conducted to rule out the variation
in QUV chambers or malfunctioning and set parameters.
Pigment dispersion from pigment PS3 was used in the
panel preparation and then the panels were exposed in
four separate QUV chambers. As shown in Figure 4, no
significant difference in ΔE was observed as a function of
exposure time of 1000 hours.
The influence of primers and the base paint (clear
base/zero TiO2 base) of different batches on the color dif-
ference during the ATLAS and QUV exposure was stud-
ied. Primers of different batches were used while
preparing the panels keeping the pigment dispersion
from PS 3, clear base 1 the same. The influence of the
primer of different batch on the color difference even
after 1000 hours of ATLAS and QUV exposure is very
minimal as shown in Figure 5. Then the panels were pre-
pared with the paints of two different clear bases keeping
the pigment dispersion from PS 3, primer 1 same. Varia-
tion in color difference during the weatherability test for
these panels is shown in Figure 6. There is a slight differ-
ence in ΔE observed as shown in Figure 6B. However,
the difference is less than 1 unit and visually also there
was not much difference found. Since there was no sig-
nificant difference in different lots of primers and clear
bases, no change in color difference/fading was observed.
Since the panels are made up of cement reinforced
with cellulose fibers, the quality of panels may contribute
to the variation in the color difference. The panels of two
different lots were immersed overnight in DM water of
pH
6.8. The panels were removed from the water, and
the pH of water was recorded. The pH of water where

1318
F I G U R E 6 Influence of base paint of different batches on
variation in color difference
F I G U R E 7 Influence of panels of different lots on variation in
color difference
panel of lot 1 was dipped shown pH 9.2, while panel of
lot 2 showed pH 10.4 indicating the panel of lot 2 is more
alkaline than panel of lot 1. These two lot panels were
coated with primer 1, paint of clear base 1, and the pig-
ment dispersion PS3. However, no significant color differ-
ence was observed after the ATLAS and QUV exposure
as shown in Figure 7. The panels of both the lots are
alkaline, and the pH difference between them was
1.2,
have not resulted in any significant difference in color
fading.
Since there was no contribution of change in QUV
chambers, primers, clear base and ATLAS, and QUV
panels on ΔE observed, the focus was given to pigment of
different manufacturers, and then the processing temper-
ature of pigment dispersion.
The major contributor to the deviation to color differ-
ence would be the pigment itself. Variation in the color
difference of ATLAS and QUV exposed panels of differ-
ent manufacturers is shown in Figure 8. Pigment from
all the three manufacturers showed quite similar ΔE
value up to 150 hours of exposure. As the panels exposed
for longer duration, the color difference among PS 1 and
PS 2 remains similar, whereas PS3 showed significantly
lower ΔE. The slope in increase of ΔE decreases after
500 hours of exposure for PS 3. Among the 3 manufac-
turers, PS 1 and PS 2 showed significantly greater color
difference when compared to the pigment from PS 3.
15206378, 2021, 6, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/col.22671 by Egyptian National Sti. Network (Enstinet), Wiley Online Library on [05/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
NIKAM ET AL.
F I G U R E 8 Variation of color difference (ΔE) of PY74 from
different manufacturers as a function of exposure time
The color fading in case of PS 3 is observed to be less
compared to the PS 1 and PS 2 indicating the better
weather fastness. The color difference ΔE of
5.5 to 7
was observed between PS3 and PS1/PS2 which is signifi-
cantly high, and the color difference can even be seen
visually as shown in Figure 9. Both ATLAS (Figure 9A)
and QUV (Figure 9B) exposed panels of pigment manu-
facturer 3 showed better retention of coloristics com-
pared to the other two manufacturers. The difference in
ΔE observed might be due to the difference in surface
treatment given to the pigments by manufacturer, or the
difference in the crystal structures obtained by different
manufacturers.14 However, the IR analysis of these three
pigments did not show any significant difference in spec-
tral features.
Since the pigment stability depends on the processing
temperature, the pigment dispersion was prepared with
and without providing the cooling water during the dis-
persion preparation. For the dispersion prepared with
cooling water circulation, the temperature during grind-
ing was 8 C to 20 C. In case of the dispersions without
cooling water circulation, the temperature during grind-
ing was 48 C to 50 C. The color difference of the panels
prepared without cooling facility showed significantly
greater ΔE (
2.5-3) in ATLAS and QUV test at
1000 hours of exposure compared to the panels of disper-
sions prepared with cooling facility as shown in
Figure 10. Color fading can also be seen visually as
shown in Figure 11 for both ATLAS and QUV exposed
panels where panels of dispersion prepared with cooling
facility showed better color retention after 1000 h of
exposures. The dispersions processed at high temperature
(without cooling water circulation) might have lost their
stability/crystal structure and hence the inferior ATLAS
and QUV performance. It is known that certain organic
pigments are sensitive to high temperature and impact
during grinding results in inferior color strength.15 The
trend of the data shown in Figure 10 is quite similar to
the trend of Figure 8 in terms of increase in difference of
ΔE as a function of ATLAS and QUV exposure time.

NIKAM ET AL.
F I G U R E 9 Images of the ATLAS and QUV panels coated with paint based on pigment dispersion prepared using three different
pigment manufacturers
F I G U R E 1 0 Effect of with cooling and without cooling water
circulation during the grinding process on variation in color
difference at ATLAS and QUV exposures
F I G U R E 1 1 Images of the ATLAS and QUV exposed panels of
pigment dispersion prepared with and without cooling water
circulation
The major contributors for the difference in ATLAS
and QUV performance or the color fading are found to be
the quality of pigments sourced from different manufac-
turers that may arise due to difference in surface treat-
ment, crystal structures, morphology of the particles, and
the temperature during processing of the dispersion. How-
ever, IR spectral features and particle size distribution data
did not show any correlation with color difference
observed. The oil absorption (43-48 g/100 g) and bulk den-
sity (0.24-0.31 g/cm3) of PY74 from three different manu-
facturers are not significantly different. The probable
15206378, 2021, 6, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/col.22671 by Egyptian National Sti. Network (Enstinet), Wiley Online Library on [05/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
1319
F I G U R E 1 2 Difference in color (ΔE) observed for panels of all
better and poor factors studied
reason for PS3 to show superior weather fastness might be
due to the presence of large and high amount of plate-like
particles contained aluminum and silicon as characterized
by SEM and EDX which are shown in Figure 3.
The above observations were tested by combining the
set of better and set of poor performance parameters
studied individually. Set of best factors includes pigment
manufacturer (PS 3), with cooling water circulation dur-
ing the pigment dispersion, along with clear base paint
(Base 1), primer 1, panel lot 1, and set of poor factors
include pigment manufacturer (PS 1), no cooling water
circulation during the pigment dispersion, along with
clear base paint 1, primer 1 and panel lot 1. Though some
of the parameters such as clear base, primer, and
ATLAS/QUV panels did not show difference in ΔE when
studied individually, however, when combined these
with pigment of different manufacturer, and the higher
dispersion processing temperature resulted the difference
in the ΔE as shown in Figure 12.
4 | CONCLUSION
This article reveals various factors governing the color/
shade fading of dispersion of PY 74. The PY 74 pigment
from different manufacturers was used to prepare the dis-
persions and the paint was subjected to ATLAS and QUV

1320
weathering test to analyze various factors on color or
shade fading. Among the factors studied, PY 74 from pig-
ment manufacturers 1 and 2, and/or the higher tempera-
ture during the grinding resulted higher color difference.
ATLAS and QUV panels applied with paint based on Pig-
ment manufacturer 3, and/or the cooling water circulation
during pigment dispersion resulted better color retention
and hence a significantly lower ΔE. There was no contri-
bution of primers, and base paint of different batches,
ATLAS/QUV panels of different lots, and various QUV
chambers on color/shade fading. These findings will help
in identifying the effect of grinding temperature, and also
the approaches for pigment testing for weatherability.
A C K N O WL E D G M E N T S
The authors thank the Asian Paints Ltd. for the support
to publish the research work. We also thank the modern
instrumentation laboratory for analytical tests.
ORCID
Chandrashekara R. Haramagatti https://orcid.org/
0000-0002-1108-1606
R EF E RE N C E S
[1] Malshe, VC, Sikchi, MA, Basics of Paint Technology, Part 1,
India. Mumbai, India: Basics of Paint Technology part I - V. C.
Malshe - Google Books; 2004.
[2] Schoff CK. Surface defects: diagnosis and cure. J Coat Tech.
1999;71:56-73.
[3] Burakowski T, Wierzchon T. Surface Engineering of Metals:
Principles, Equipment, Technologies. CRC Press: USA; 1999:
211-214.
[4] Freitag W, Stoye D. Paints, Coatings and Solvents. 2nd ed. Ger-
many: Wiley-VCH verlag GmbH; 1998:1-8.
[5] Gürses A, Açıkyıldız M, Güneş K, Gürses MS. Classification of
dye and pigments. MS Dyes and Pigments. Switzerland:
Springer; 2016:31-35.
[6] Berrie BH, Strumfels Y. Change is permanent; thoughts on the
fading of cochineal-based watercolor pigments. Heritage Sci.
2017;5(30):1-9.
[7] Schweikart, KH, Blum, D, Grimm, FW, Schmidt, MU, Geisenberger,
J, Use of Pigment Composition Comprising Mixed Crystals Based on
CI Pigment Yellow 74. US Patent 7416596B2, 2008.
[8] Kazuyuki, H, Keisuke, I, Mineko, O, Yusuke S, Hiroko, M,
Organic and Inorganic Composite Pigments, and Paint and
Resin Composition Using the Same. European Patent
1270686A2, 2003.
[9] Baptista J. Four Steps to Effective Pigment Dispersions. New Jer-
sey, USA: Coatings World; 2017.
[10] Hays, BG, Strong Green-Shade Yellow Disazo Pigment, US
Patent 5889162A, 1999
[11] Benkhaya S, Rabet SM, Harfi AE. Classification, properties,
recent synthesis, and application of Azo dyes. Heliyon. 2020;6
(1):E03271.
15206378, 2021, 6, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/col.22671 by Egyptian National Sti. Network (Enstinet), Wiley Online Library on [05/02/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
NIKAM ET AL.
[12] Hoshino, R, Nagasato, S, Takayama, M, Inoue, S,
Matsuzaki, S, CI Pigment Yellow 74 (Insoluble Azo Pigment),
and Coloring Composition Using Same. US Patent
20140335358A1, 2014.
[13] CIElab, Colorimetry, CIE Pub. No. 15.2 Commission Inter-
nationale de l'Eclairage, Austria 1986 ISBN:3-900-734-00-3
[14] Lomax SQ. The application of x-ray powder diffraction for the
analysis of synthetic organic pigments. Part 1: dry pigments.
J Coat Technol Res. 2010;7:331-346.
[15] Herbst W. Dispersion of organic pigments with modern disper-
sion equipment. Pigm Resin Technol. 1974;3:12-25.
AUTHOR BIOGRAPHIES
Pramod Nikam completed an MS in analytical
chemistry in 2010 at Institute of Science, Mumbai,
India. For the past 11 years, he has been working at
Research & Technology Centre of Asian Paints Ltd. in
the area of quality analysis, and formulation of pig-
ment concentrates.
Chandrashekara R. Haramagatti has received an
MS in industrial chemistry from Kuvempu University,
Karnataka. India, in 2000. He did research at IISc
Bangalore from 2000 to 2002 before he moved to
Goettingen, Germany to work on a doctorate. In 2006
received a PhD in chemistry from University of
Goettingen. Then moved to University of Bayreuth,
Germany for a postdoctoral position from 2008 to
2010. For the last 10 years, he has been working on
emulsion polymers, pigment dispersions, synthesis of
resin for paints and coatings at Research & Technol-
ogy Centre of Asian Paints Ltd.
Amit Joshi has received an MS in chemistry from
Mumbai University in 1999 and a PhD from the Insti-
tute of Chemical Technology, Mumbai in 2005. He
received a fellowship from Gretag Macbeth, United
States for his doctoral work on coloration and color
measurement of plastic and paint systems. For the
past 15 years, he has been working with Asian Paints
research team mainly in the area of formulation of
pigment concentrates and color matching.
How to cite this article: Nikam P,
Haramagatti CR, Joshi A. Assessment of the factors
affecting the weathering properties of Pigment
Yellow 74 in decorative paint. Color Res Appl. 2021;
46:1313–1320. https://doi.org/10.1002/col.22671