the test ball provided a much greater sensitivity to small amounts of wear results are provided in table 4 the results show that formulations 2 4 and 5 have a reduced abrasivity compared to formulation c1 which may mean that equipment used to coat the formulations 2 4 and 5 may wear less quickly and therefore would not need to be replaced as frequently compared to if formulation c1 was used a 0 3 mm gauge aluminum alloy sheet of designation aa1050 was cut to a size of 500 mm by 250 mm and degreased by immersion in a 1 wt aqueous solution of sodium hydroxide the coating formulation of example 1 was then applied to the aluminum sheet using a wire wound bar to achieve a dry film weight of about 6 g m 2 the coating was dried in a convection oven at 130 u00b0 c for 80 seconds and then immersed in aluminum sulphate solution 10 w w in distilled water at 40 u00b0 c for 120 seconds using an aura processor to neutralize the alkaline surface and to seal the surface of the substrate the substrate was then rinsed with tap water and dried before being coated with capricorn u00ae dh using a wire wound bar to achieve a dry film.