U.S. patent application number 10/783729 was filed with the patent office on 2005-08-25 for compositions and methods for cleaning textile substrates.
Invention is credited to Brown, Steven E., Chan, Marie S., McDonald, Michael J., Metcalf, J. Michael, Moore, Patrick D., Valenti, Michael A..
Application Number | 20050183207 10/783729 |
Document ID | / |
Family ID | 34861317 |
Filed Date | 2005-08-25 |
United States Patent
Application |
20050183207 |
Kind Code |
A1 |
Chan, Marie S. ; et
al. |
August 25, 2005 |
Compositions and methods for cleaning textile substrates
Abstract
This invention relates to new compositions and methods for
cleaning textile substrates, especially carpet and upholstery
fabrics. More particularly, this invention relates to liquid
compositions that contain absorbent particles in a flowable fluid
dispersion, which dries to a soil ladened powder, that can be
removed by vacuuming, brushing, and/or laundering methods. The
composition includes dispersion stabilizing additives such that the
composition is presented as a stable dispersion or as a composition
that may be easily redispersed prior to application.
Inventors: |
Chan, Marie S.; (Forest
City, NC) ; Brown, Steven E.; (Spartanburg, SC)
; Moore, Patrick D.; (Pacolet, SC) ; Metcalf, J.
Michael; (Boiling Springs, SC) ; Valenti, Michael
A.; (Greenville, SC) ; McDonald, Michael J.;
(Newman, GA) |
Correspondence
Address: |
Milliken & Company
P.O. Box 1927
Spartanburg
SC
29304
US
|
Family ID: |
34861317 |
Appl. No.: |
10/783729 |
Filed: |
February 20, 2004 |
Current U.S.
Class: |
8/137 |
Current CPC
Class: |
C11D 3/3765 20130101;
C11D 3/323 20130101; C11D 17/0013 20130101; D06L 1/00 20130101;
C11D 3/1266 20130101; C11D 3/222 20130101; D06L 1/12 20130101; C11D
3/3773 20130101; C11D 3/3753 20130101 |
Class at
Publication: |
008/137 |
International
Class: |
D06L 001/00 |
Claims
1. A liquid cleaning composition for a textile substrate consisting
essentially of: (a) less than about 75 parts by weight of at least
one absorbent particulate selected from the group consisting of a
urea formaldehyde polymeric material, polyurethane, polystyrene,
phenol-formaldehyde resin particles, water insoluble inorganic salt
adjuvants, cellulosic particles, diatomaceous earth particles, wood
particles, particles made from grains and other vegetable matter,
cellulosic particles, inorganic particles and mixtures thereof,
wherein said absorbent particulate has an average particle size of
from about 10 to about 300 microns in diameter and an oil
absorption value of at least 40; (b) at least 35 parts water,
wherein said water contains a surfactant sufficient to provide a
surface tension of less than about 40 dynes per centimeter; and (c)
from about 0.01 to about 50 parts by weight of a dispersion
stabilizing agent selected from the group consisting of air,
cellulosic polymers, starches, clay compounds, xanthan gums,
polyacrylic acids and esters, polyacrylamide, polyvinyl alcohol and
mixtures thereof, wherein said dispersion stabilizing agent is
present in an amount sufficient to produce a stable or easily
redispersed dispersion.
2. The liquid cleaning composition of claim 1, wherein said average
particle size of said absorbent particulate is from about 10 to
about 200 microns.
3. The liquid cleaning composition of claim 1, wherein said average
particle size of said absorbent particulate is from about 10 to
about 105 microns.
4. The liquid cleaning composition of claim 1, wherein said average
particle size of said absorbent particulate is from about 35 to
about 105 microns.
5. The liquid cleaning composition of claim 1, wherein said
absorbent particulate is urea formaldehyde polymeric material.
6. The liquid cleaning composition of claim 1, wherein said water
insoluble inorganic salt adjuvant is selected the group consisting
of sulfates, carbonates, borates, citrates, phosphates,
metasilicates and mixtures thereof.
7. The liquid cleaning composition of claim 6, wherein said water
insoluble inorganic salt adjuvant is calcium carbonate.
8. The liquid cleaning composition of claim 1, wherein said liquid
cleaning composition comprises at least 50 parts water.
9. The liquid cleaning composition of claim 1, wherein said liquid
cleaning composition comprises at least 75 parts water.
10. The liquid cleaning composition of claim 1, wherein said
surfactant is selected from the group consisting of nonionic
surfactants, anionic surfactants, cationic surfactants, and
combinations thereof.
11. The liquid cleaning composition of claim 10, wherein said
surfactant is a nonionic surfactant, and wherein said nonionic
surfactant has the formula: 2where n is 0 or 1, m is 3 to 20,
R.sup.1 is OH or OCH.sub.3, R is C.sub.12 to C.sub.22 alkyl or
phenyl or naphthyl optionally substituted by C.sub.1 to C.sub.10
alkyl groups.
12. The liquid cleaning composition of claim 10, wherein said
surfactant is an anionic surfactant, and wherein said anionic
surfactant is a long chain alcohol sulfate ester or an alkylene
oxide additive of C.sub.6-C.sub.10 mono and diesters of
ortho-phosphoric acid.
13. The liquid cleaning composition of claim 1, wherein said liquid
cleaning composition further includes an organic liquid.
14. The liquid cleaning composition of claim 13, wherein said
organic liquid is selected from the group consisting of C.sub.1 to
C.sub.4 aliphatic alcohols, high boiling hydrocarbon solvents and
mixtures thereof.
15. The liquid cleaning composition of claim 14, wherein said
organic liquid is a high boiling hydrocarbon solvent.
16. The liquid cleaning composition of claim 1, wherein said liquid
cleaning composition further includes an acrylic stain resist
agent.
17. The liquid cleaning composition of claim 1, wherein said liquid
cleaning composition further includes a biocide.
18. The liquid cleaning composition of claim 17, wherein said
biocide is selected from the group consisting of potassium sorbate,
an isothiazolone compound and mixtures thereof.
19. The liquid cleaning composition of claim 17, wherein said
liquid cleaning composition further includes an aerosol
propellant.
20. The liquid cleaning composition of claim 1, wherein said
aerosol propellant is selected from the group consisting of
propane, butane, carbon dioxide and mixtures thereof.
21. The liquid cleaning composition of claim 14, wherein said
liquid cleaning composition further includes a static reducing
additive.
22. The liquid cleaning of claim 21, wherein said static reducing
additive Is aluminum silicate clay.
23. The liquid cleaning composition of claim 1, wherein said liquid
cleaning composition further includes a dust suppressing
additive.
24. The liquid cleaning composition of claim 23, wherein said dust
suppressing additive is selected from the group consisting of
polyoxyalkylene materials, non-volatile organic solvents, and
mixtures thereof.
25. The liquid cleaning composition of claim 24, wherein said dust
suppressing additive is dipropylene glycol.
25. (canceled)
26. The liquid cleaning composition of claim 1, wherein said liquid
cleaning composition further includes a vacuum retrieval
additive.
27. The liquid cleaning composition of claim 26, wherein said
vacuum retrieval additive is selected from the group consisting of
polyoxyalkylene materials, aluminum silicate clay, hydrolyzed
styrene maleic anhydride, and mixtures thereof.
28. The cleaning composition of claim 1, wherein said cleaning
composition further includes a metal ion chelator.
29. The cleaning composition of claim 1, wherein said cleaning
composition further includes a pH adjuster.
30. The cleaning composition of claim 1, wherein said cleaning
composition further includes a fragrance.
31. A liquid cleaning composition for a textile substrate comprised
of: (a) less than about 75 parts by weight of at least one
absorbent particulate selected from the group consisting of a urea
formaldehyde polymeric material, polyurethane, polystyrene,
phenol-formaldehyde resin particles, water insoluble inorganic salt
adjuvants, cellulosic particles, diatomaceous earth particles, wood
particles, particles made from grains and other vegetable matter,
cellulosic particles, inorganic particles and mixtures thereof,
wherein said absorbent particulate has an average particle size of
from about 10 to about 300 microns in diameter and an oil
absorption value of at least 40; (b) at least 35 parts water,
wherein said water contains a surfactant sufficient to provide a
surface tension of less than about 40 dynes per centimeter; (c)
from about 0.01 to about 50 parts by weight of a dispersion
stabilizing agent selected from the group consisting of air,
cellulosic polymers, starches, clay compounds, xanthan gums,
polyacrylic acids and esters, polyacrylamide, polyvinyl alcohol and
mixtures thereof, wherein said dispersion stabilizing agent is
present in an amount sufficient to produce a stable or easily
redispersed dispersion; and (d) from about 0.01 to about 50 parts
by weight of a vacuum retrieval additive selected from the group
consisting of polyoxyalkylene materials, aluminum silicate clay,
hydrolyzed styrene maleic anhydride, and mixtures thereof.
32. The liquid cleaning composition of claim 31, wherein said
liquid cleaning composition further includes an organic liquid
selected from the group consisting of C.sub.1 to C.sub.4 aliphatic
alcohols, high boiling hydrocarbon solvents, and mixtures
thereof.
33. The liquid cleaning composition of claim 31, wherein said
liquid composition further includes a dust suppressing
additive.
34. A liquid cleaning composition for a textile substrate comprised
of: (a) less than about 75 parts by weight of at least one
absorbent particulate selected from the group consisting of a urea
formaldehyde polymeric material, polyurethane, polystyrene,
phenol-formaldehyde resin particles, water insoluble inorganic salt
adjuvants, cellulosic particles, diatomaceous earth particles, wood
particles, particles made from grains and other vegetable matter,
cellulosic particles, inorganic particles and mixtures thereof,
wherein said absorbent particulate has an average particle size of
from about 10 to about 300 microns in diameter and an oil
absorption value of at least 40; (b) at least 35 parts water,
wherein said water contains a surfactant sufficient to provide a
surface tension of less than about 40 dynes per centimeter; (c)
from about 0.01 to about 50 parts by weight of a dispersion
stabilizing agent selected from the group consisting of air,
cellulosic polymers, starches, clay compounds, xanthan gums,
polyacrylic acids and esters, polyacrylamide, polyvinyl alcohol and
mixtures thereof, wherein said dispersion stabilizing agent is
present in an amount sufficient to produce a stable or easily
redispersed dispersion; (d) from about 0.01 to about 50 parts by
weight of a vacuum retrieval additive selected from the group
consisting of polyoxyalkylene materials, aluminum silicate clay,
hydrolyzed styrene maleic anhydride, and mixtures thereof; and (e)
from about 0.01 to about 50 parts by weight of an organic liquid
selected from the group consisting of C.sub.1 to C.sub.4 aliphatic
alcohols, high boiling hydrocarbon solvents, and mixtures
thereof.
35. The liquid cleaning composition of claim 34, wherein said
liquid composition further includes a pH adjuster.
36. The liquid cleaning composition of claim 34, wherein said
liquid composition further includes a fragrance.
37. A liquid cleaning composition for a textile substrate comprised
of: (a) less than about 75 parts by weight of at least one
absorbent particulate selected from the group consisting of a urea
formaldehyde polymeric material, polyurethane, polystyrene,
phenol-formaldehyde resin particles, water insoluble inorganic salt
adjuvants, cellulosic particles, diatomaceous earth particles, wood
particles, particles made from grains and other vegetable matter,
cellulosic particles, inorganic particles and mixtures thereof,
wherein said absorbent particulate has an average particle size of
from about 10 to about 300 microns in diameter and an oil
absorption value of at least 40; (b) at least 35 parts water,
wherein said water contains a surfactant sufficient to provide a
surface tension of less than about 40 dynes per centimeter; and (c)
from about 0.01 to about 50 parts by weight of a dispersion
stabilizing agent selected from the group consisting of air,
cellulosic polymers, starches, clay compounds, xanthan gums,
polyacrylic acids and esters, polyacrylamide, polyvinyl alcohol and
mixtures thereof, wherein said dispersion stabilizing agent is
present in an amount sufficient to produce a stable or easily
redispersed dispersion; and (d) from about 0.01 to about 50 parts
by weight of an acrylic stain resist agent.
38. The liquid cleaning composition of claim 24, wherein said dust
suppressing additive is mineral oil.
Description
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
[0001] This invention relates to new compositions and methods for
cleaning textile substrates, especially carpet and upholstery
fabrics. More particularly, this invention relates to liquid
compositions that contain absorbent particles in a flowable fluid
dispersion, which dries to a soil ladened powder, that can be
removed by vacuum, brushing, and/or laundering methods. Previous
efforts in this area show a continuing need to improve four
important features of the textile substrate, especially of the
carpet or upholstery cleaning process. These features include: (a)
the convenience of applying a cleaning composition, (b) the
cleaning efficiency of the cleaning composition, (c) the length of
time a cleaned textile is wet, and (d) the reduction of the resoil
rate caused by residual surfactant.
[0002] The methods of cleaning of textile substrates may be
generally placed into three categories. The first category involves
the immersion of the textile into a cleaning solvent followed by
agitation and removal of soiled solvent. In this case, water is the
preferred solvent, provided that the fiber and/or textile substrate
is stable to it. Typically, the additives used to facilitate soil
removal by the solvent are surfactants, ionic chelators, and pH
adjusters. Other minor ingredients are generally included to
enhance the cleaning process. These include fragrances, bleaches,
optical brighteners, and anti-resoil ingredients. For example, U.S.
Pat. Nos. 5,786,317; 6,010,539; and 5,714,449 to Donker, et al.,
describe a non-aqueous liquid cleaning composition containing solid
particles suspended by the use of hydrophobically modified silica
particles. This composition is designed for liquid detergent
concentrates for washing machine applications and the particles are
active bleaching agents. If the textile is small, this process
generally uses standard washing machines or dry cleaning machines
to clean the textile. If the textile is large or physically affixed
to an object, this process uses portable liquid applicators and
vacuum retrieval of the soiled fluid. This method, often referred
to as "hot water extraction," applies a substantial amount of water
based cleaning solution to the textiles, such as a carpet or
upholstery, and uses vacuum extraction to partially remove the soil
and surfactant laden cleaning solution. This process typically
leaves a residual surfactant on a carpet that attracts dirt to its
surface and provides a wet textile that can take many hours to
completely dry. The water in the composition is known to cause rust
stains if it comes into contact with iron-containing objects, as
well as, to provide enhanced growing conditions for mold and other
microorganisms. These deficiencies are substantially overcome by
low water, powdered cleaning compositions.
[0003] The second general category of methods for cleaning textiles
involves applying foam-containing solvents and surfactants to the
textile followed by agitation with a brush or damp mop. Typically,
the applied foam collapses after contact with the textile, and the
spots and soil become less visible. While the appearance on the
surface of the textile, such as a carpet, is improved, very little
dirt or surfactant is actually removed. The main advantages of this
method are the ability to use household tools and equipment and the
rapid cleaning cycle. Canadian Patent No. 985113, assigned to
Unilever Limited, shows a variation on this wherein a non-scrub
foam, which contains soil retardant particles, is applied to the
carpet. These soil retardant particles remain as a residue on the
carpet after the other components of the foam are removed by
vacuuming. While this method can be used to improve the appearance
of a carpet, it is not an effective method of removing dirt and
furthermore, it leaves a substantial residue on the carpet.
[0004] The third general category of methods of cleaning textiles
involves applying a solid composition that contains a solvent and a
cleaning surfactant to the textile followed by agitation.
Typically, the solvent is allowed to evaporate and the soiled
particles are retrieved with a vacuum cleaner or removed by
brushing. Powdered cleaning compositions, or other dry-type
cleaning compositions, generally contain, in addition to a liquid
component and surfactant component, any of a rather wide variety of
both natural and synthetic solid particulate materials. Natural
solid particulate materials include, for example, buckwheat flour
(see U.S. Pat. No. 2,165,586 to Studer), wood flour, and
diatomaceous earth of specific particle size and low bulk density
(see U.S. Pat. No. 3,418,243 to Hoxie). Synthetic solid particulate
materials include, for example, polymeric materials such as
polyurethanes, polystyrenes and phenolformaldehyde resin particles,
as disclosed, for example, in French Patent No. 2,015,972. Several
examples of powdered cleaning compositions are discussed below.
[0005] U.S. Pat. No. 4,013,594 to Froehlich, et al. discloses a
powdered cleaning composition that contains, as a major component,
solid polymeric urea-formaldehyde particles and a solvent component
which may be chosen from water, high boiling hydrocarbon or
chlorinated hydrocarbon solvents, aliphatic alcohols and mixtures
of such compounds.
[0006] U.S. Pat. No. 4,108,800 to Froehlich discloses a semi-dry
powdered cleaning composition which further contains polyethylene
glycol as an aid to prevent the adherence of fine particles to the
fibers being cleaned. This reference further describes the visual
problem of "frosting" that occurs when small particles are formed
from particle to particle attrition as a result of agitation, such
as brushing.
[0007] U.S. Pat. No. 4,194,993 to Deal discloses a process for
making a powdered cleaning composition which includes the steps of
polymerizing urea and formaldehyde in acidic solution to form
particles of a desired size, centrifuging the particles, blending
polyethyleneoxide into the polymer, and spraying a fine mist of
detergent solution onto the polymer mass as it is blended.
[0008] U.S. Pat. No. 4,434,067 to Malone, et al. discloses a
powdered cleaning composition that contains, in addition to a
particulate polymeric material such as urea formaldehyde, an
inorganic salt adjuvant and an aqueous or organic fluid component.
The Examples and the Tables illustrate that the maximum content of
fluid in these powdered cleaning compositions as 40% of the total
composition. They further describe the formation of pastes and
non-flowable solids when the liquid level or the inorganic salt
adjuvant component represents too high a proportion of the total
composition.
[0009] U.S. Pat. No. 4,802,997 to Fox, et al. discloses a polymer
gel cleaning composition that may be sprinkled on a carpet wherein
the polymer is insoluble in water yet highly swellable with water.
This composition is sponge-like in that it is capable of ejecting
solvent under mechanical pressure or brushing and then reabsorbing
the solvent when the mechanical pressure or brushing is removed.
The pea-sized particles can be removed by vacuuming, even if the
solvent has not yet evaporated. The polymers suitable for hydrogel
formation can absorb 0.3 to 300 times their weight in water. The
swollen gels can be blended with calcium carbonate or wood powder
to improve flow characteristics.
[0010] U.S. Pat. No. 4,659,494 to Soldanski, et al. describes a
cellulose powder containing dry carpet cleaner with reduced
dusting, particularly if the carpet cleaner did not contain added
surfactant.
[0011] U.S. Pat. No. 4,908,149 to Moore, et al. discloses improved
carpet cleaning compositions that include acid dye stain blocker
additives. These compositions range from particle free solutions to
dry-type powders with a minimum of 30% solid particle content.
[0012] U.S. Pat. No. 4,873,000 to Weller discloses a powdered
freshening and deodorizing composition for carpets. The composition
contains inorganic salts in combination with aluminum silicate clay
to improve vacuum retrieval. The composition further contains a
maximum of 4% liquid comprised of fragrance and organic
agglomerating agent.
[0013] EP 1,063,282 B1 to Lang, et al. discloses a cellulose-based,
porous, particle gel carpet cleaning composition in combination
with water and alcohol. This composition remains in the gel state
even in the presence of an 80% water and alcohol mixture.
[0014] U.S. Pat. No. 5,783,543 to Fleckenstein discloses a
scatterable powdered cleaning composition incorporating viscose
sponge flakes from 3 to 10 mm in length. The improved composition
results in less disruption of the carpet fibers due to the brushing
process.
[0015] EP 1184449 to Gagliardi, et al. describes a solid cleaning
composition with low water content that is particularly useful for
cleaning wet spills. The composition incorporates water swellable
polymers and anhydrous salts to absorb liquid and turn wet spills
into powders that can be removed by vacuum cleaners. The cleaning
of wet spills by conventional powdered cleaning agents is
problematic due to the potential to form pastes that are not vacuum
retrievable.
[0016] U.S. Pat. No. 6,569,210 to Chao, et al. describes a novel
fabric cleaning method whereby soils are treated with a
particulating chemical, such as a colorless sulfonated dye site
blocker, to generate particles that are then removed by gas jet
interaction.
[0017] U.S. Pat. No. 6,010,539 to Pesco discloses a modern example
of cleaning compositions for hot water extraction systems. This
composition is free of organic solvents and contains water,
detergent builders (such as sodium tripolyphosphate), EDTA,
non-ionic surfactants, stain soluble resist polymers (such as
methacrylic acid salts) and a fluorosurfactant.
[0018] There have been a few previous attempts by others to create
textile cleaning methods and compositions that use liquid or paste
systems with particles and solvent. These are briefly described
below.
[0019] U.S. Pat. No. 3,910,848 to Froehlich et al. discloses a
cleaning formulation that comprises a halogenated solvent and urea
formaldehyde polymer particles as major components. The composition
further contains small amounts of an antistatic agent and an
anti-settling agent and optionally, a chlorofluorinated propellant
for aerosol applications. The high liquid density of the
halogenated solvent helps to suspend the particles but its human
and ecological impact make it undesirable for consumer use. The
reference fails to recommend or suggest the use of water as a
solvent.
[0020] U.S. Pat. No. 3,956,162 to Lautenberger describes a
thixotropic cleaning paste for cleaning non-horizontal surfaces.
The paste contains particles with oil absorption values above 90,
minor amounts of water, both low and high boiling hydrocarbon or
halogenated hydrocarbon solvents, surfactant, silica (to provide
thixotropic flow characteristics), and various other additives.
This composition dries to apparently free flowing particles that
can be removed by vacuuming or brushing. This thick composition is
not suitable for spraying and contains either the undesirable
flammability of hydrocarbon solvents or the undesirable health
effects of halogenated solvents.
[0021] U.S. Pat. No. 4,685,930 to Kasprzak describes a cleaning
method of applying liquid cyclic siloxane solvents to soiled
textiles and then removing the solvents and dirt by blotting with
absorbent paper towels. Alternatively, a solid mixture of cyclic
siloxane solvent and an absorbent material selected from mineral
particulates, organic particulates, and synthetic porous polymers
may be applied to the soiled textile and subsequently removed by
brushing or vacuuming. Method claims directed to absorbent
particles are limited to cyclic siloxane solvents and stains
derived from oil, grease, or sebum.
[0022] U.S. Pat. No. 5,259,984 to Hull describes a water-containing
polymer cleaning solution that contains a volatile alcohol and a
polyamine. This gel or lotion-like solution is spread over the
carpet or upholstery, allowed to thicken by evaporation, and then
rubbed into soft absorbent polymer gel balls that absorb dirt which
may then be removed by brushing or vacuuming. This method seems
well suited to rinse-free cleaning of hands, where rubbing and
brushing is effective, but is of questionable utility on textile
products where the gel may be entrapped within the textile
structure and where a fully dried polymer solution may prove
intractable.
[0023] Finally, in US Patent Application No. 2003/0092589 and
related US Patent Application No. 2003/0109399 to Todini et al. a
liquid nanolatex and surfactant containing composition and method
of cleaning carpets is disclosed. Due to the small size of the
nanolatex particles, the particles form suspensions in water. It is
further disclosed that upon drying, the nanolatex particles
agglomerate and can be removed by vacuum methods. The soil removal
index in the table on page 7 of both applications shows several
examples of cleaning compositions without illustrating a clear
advantage over vacuuming alone.
[0024] Thus, as is illustrated by the previous efforts of others,
the use of solid cleaning agents for carpet or upholstery has been
recognized as the superior method of cleaning. Its low water
content allows both for rapid drying and safe cleaning of even
expensive wool carpets. The hand application (i.e. sprinkling and
spraying methods) and brushing followed by retrieval using the
household vacuum cleaner requires no specialized machinery. The
particles absorb both sticky soils and residual surfactants so that
the textile remains cleaner much longer. In addition, solid
cleaning agents have been established to effectively remove
allergens, while not promoting the growth of micro-organisms.
[0025] There are, however, limitations to the use of solid cleaning
agents. The solid cleaning agents may be characterized by the
classical Critical Pigment Volume (CPV) effect. The CPV is also
known as the oil value, which may be determined by ASTM D281 and
which is described, for example, in U.S. Pat. No. 3,956,162 to
Lautenberger. To remain a flowable powder, the maximum liquid
content is restricted to below the CPV. For particles of a certain
shape, the CPV is the volume between particles filled with air. As
the air is displaced by a fluid, the flow properties of the powder
are reduced until, at the CPV, all the particles are surrounded by
liquid. At that point, the mass has the consistency of putty. If
more fluid is added, the putty gradually thins until a paint-like
dispersion is generated. The practical problem of prior art solid
cleaning compositions is that when wet spills are cleaned with
powdered cleaning agents, it is possible to generate a paste
consistency that, when brushed, does not remain free flowing. This
creates a spot that is very difficult to remove. In addition, if
brushing occurs at the thick dispersion or paste stage the particle
size can be mechanically reduced by particle to particle attrition.
Particles having a particle size of less than about 5 microns are
held very tightly by electrostatic force and are very difficult to
remove by vacuum cleaners. This also leads to an observable
residual spot of cleaner on the textile. Therefore, there is the
need to provide a solid containing cleaning composition that avoids
the practical side effects of the Critical Pigment Volume.
[0026] Another limitation of powdered cleaning agents falls into
the area of consumer and market perception. Consumers have
continued to greatly prefer hot water extraction due to their
perception that water and soap are needed to really clean surfaces.
Most consumers bathe, clean clothes, clean dishes, and clean hard
surfaces with soap and water. There is, therefore, a need to
provide a water and soap like cleaning agent without the negative
properties of rapid resoil, promotion of microbial growth, and
water damage to expensive carpets and other textiles.
[0027] Another limitation of powdered cleaning agents and other
prior art cleaning methods is the number of steps required to
complete the cleaning cycle. For example, the procedure for using
the Capture.RTM. dry cleaning product, available from Milliken
& Company of Spartanburg, S.C., includes the steps of: (1)
applying a water based premist solution to the carpet, (2)
broadcasting the Capture.RTM. dry cleaning composition, (3)
brushing the cleaning the composition into the carpet, (4) allowing
the product to dry for 30 minutes, and (5) retrieving the soil
laden powder using a vacuum cleaner. In comparison, the hot water
extraction cleaning process preferred by consumers includes the
steps of: (1) vacuuming and removing obstacles and furniture from
the area to be cleaned, (2) alternating between applying detergent
fluid to the carpet and vacuum extracting the soiled fluid, (3)
alternating between applying rinse water and removing soiled rinse
water by vacuum extraction, (4) allowing the wet carpet to dry, and
(5) returning the removed furniture. Thus, there is a need to
provide a cleaning composition and a cleaning method that allows
fewer steps.
[0028] In summary, there is a need to provide a water-based liquid
cleaning composition that dries much faster than hot water
extraction systems, that does not exhibit the negative effects of
Critical Pigment Volume, that does not require specialized
machinery, that provides vacuum retrieval of sticky dirt and
residual surfactants, that exhibits reduced resoil rates, and that
provides reduced number of steps in the cleaning cycle.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION
[0029] Reference now will be made to the embodiments of the
invention, one or more examples of which are set forth below. Each
example is provided by way of explanation of the invention, not as
a limitation of the invention. In fact, it will be apparent to
those skilled in the art that various modifications and variations
can be made in this invention without departing from the scope or
spirit of the invention. All patents, published patent
applications, and any other publications mentioned in this patent
application are herein incorporated by reference.
[0030] This invention relates to compositions and methods for
cleaning textile substrates, particularly carpet and upholstery
fabrics. More particularly, the present invention relates to
compositions that retain the advantages of dry carpet cleaning
compositions. These dry carpet cleaning compositions are typically
applied in a liquid form, yet they allow for vacuum removal of
absorbent particles that contain oil and water based carpet stains
and residual surfactants.
[0031] The inventive aqueous fluid compositions contain one or more
of the following components: organic liquids, absorbent particles,
surfactants, surface active agents, dispersion stabilizing
additives, static reducing additives, dust suppressing additives,
vacuum retrieval additives, metal ion chelators, stain resist
agents, pH adjusters, fragrance, biocides, and aerosol propellants.
Aerosol propellants may be utilized to assist in providing a
cleaning composition that is a stable, sprayable dispersion or that
is an easily redispersed (such as by shaking the composition)
composition suitable for spraying. These components of the
inventive aqueous fluid composition may be present in the inventive
composition in any of a number of combinations, as may be
determined by the specific end-use of the inventive
composition.
[0032] It may be ideal that the cleaning formulation is comprised
of less than about 75 parts by weight of an absorbent particulate
and at least about 35 parts by weight water, wherein the water may
also contain a surfactant sufficient to provide a surface tension
of less than about 40 dynes per centimeter. It may be more
preferable that the cleaning composition is comprised of less than
about 50 parts by weight of an absorbent particulate. Further, it
may be preferable that the cleaning formulation is comprised of at
least 50 parts by weight water, and even more preferable, at least
75 parts by weight water, wherein the water may also contain a
surfactant sufficient to provide a surface tension of less than
about 40 dynes per centimeter. The other various additives and
liquids that may be included in the cleaning composition, such as
dispersion stabilizers, vacuum retrieval additives, organic
liquids, etc., may be present in amounts from about 0.01 to about
50 parts by weight.
[0033] Examples of organic liquids which can be used include,
without limitation, C.sub.1 to C.sub.4 aliphatic alcohols, high
boiling hydrocarbon solvents, and mixtures thereof. The hydrocarbon
solvents are generally the petroleum distillates with a boiling
point between about 100.degree. C. and about 30.degree. C. Low
boiling organic liquids are generally unsuitable from a standpoint
of vapors and flammability, and higher boiling organic liquids do
not evaporate from the carpet fibers at an adequately rapid rate.
Examples of commercially available hydrocarbon solvents include
Stoddard solvent and odorless hydrocarbon solvent. These solvents
usually consist of a petroleum distillate with a boiling point
between about 105.degree. and about 200.degree. C. Properties of
these solvents are comparable to those of British Standard White
Spirits and domestic mineral spirits. Chemically these solvents
consist of a number of hydrocarbons, principally aliphatic, in the
decane region. One potentially preferred, non-limiting organic
liquid is a high boiling hydrocarbon solvent.
[0034] The absorbent particles may be selected from a wide variety
of solid materials. The solid materials may include naturally
occurring materials, such as wood particles (like sawdust or wood
flour), particles made from grains and other vegetable matter,
diatomaceous earth particles, cellulosic particles and inorganic
particles (such as silicates, borates, etc.). The solid material
may also be a synthetic material, such as a synthetic resin
material. Synthetic resin materials include, for example, urea
formaldehyde polymer, such as those disclosed in commonly assigned
U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,434,067 and 4,908,149. Other synthetic resin
materials include, for example, polyurethane, polystyrene, and
phenol-formaldehyde resin particles, similar to the type disclosed
in French Patent No. 2,015,972 assigned to Henkel Et Co Gmbh. Still
other absorbent particles include water insoluble inorganic salt
adjuvants such as, for example, sulfates, carbonates (such as
calcium carbonate), borates, citrates, phosphates, metasilicates
and mixtures thereof.
[0035] Average particle size of the particles may be from about 10
microns to about 300 microns in diameter as determined by sieve
analysis. It may be more preferable that the average particle size
of the particles is from about 10 microns to about 200 microns in
diameter as determined by sieve analysis. It may be even more
preferable that the average particle size of the particles is from
about 10 microns to about 105 microns in diameter as determined by
sieve analysis. It may yet be even more preferable that the average
particle size of the particles is from about 35 microns to about
105 microns as determined by sieve analysis. In general, it may be
preferable for some applications that the particle size
distribution should be such that not more than about 10 percent of
the particles are larger than about 105 microns and in general no
more than about 5 percent of the particles are smaller than about
10 microns. Larger particles typically do not penetrate carpet
material adequately, and use of such particles would result in only
superficial cleaning at best. Larger particles also have
insufficient surface area to absorb a large amount of soil per unit
of weight. If the particles are smaller than about 10 microns in
diameter, they may adhere to the individual carpet fibers and have
a delustering or dulling effect on the color of the carpet. While
particles between about 10 and 35 microns may be tolerated, they
may not contribute to cleaning efficiency to any substantial extent
so that the average particle size should be in excess of 35
microns.
[0036] As discussed previously, the absorbent particles may be
characterized by the classical Critical Pigment Volume (CPV)
effect, also known as the oil value or oil absorption value. This
value may be determined by ASTM D281 and is described, for example,
in U.S. Pat. No. 3,956,162 to Lautenberger. To remain a flowable
powder, the maximum liquid content is restricted to below the oil
absorption value. For particles of a certain shape, the oil
absorption value is the volume between particles filled with air.
As the air is displaced by a fluid, the flow properties of the
powder are reduced until, at the oil absorption value, all the
particles are surrounded by liquid. Accordingly, it may be
preferred that the absorbent particles have an oil absorption value
of at least 40. It may be more preferable that the absorbent
particles have an oil absorption value of at least 60.
[0037] One potentially preferred, non-limiting solid material for
use in such compositions is the type which has been disclosed in
U.S. Pat. No. 4,013,594 to Froehlich, et al. wherein particulate,
polymeric urea formaldehyde particles were proposed for use in
dry-type cleaning compositions. These particulate urea formaldehyde
materials were distinguished in the Froehlich patent from those of
the earlier French Patent No. 2,015,972 based upon a fairly broad
range of parameters. Of particular interest was the disclosure that
the particles described in the Froehlich patent, as compared to the
particles of the French patent, possessed a somewhat higher bulk
density of at least about 0.2 grams per cubic centimeter. Such
higher bulk density characteristics resulted in generally increased
cleaning effectiveness as compared to the prior art particles.
[0038] Surfactants of a number of classes are satisfactory for use
in the compositions of this invention. The selection of a
surfactant is not critical but the surfactant should serve to lower
the surface tension of the water in the composition to about 40
dynes per centimeter or less. Preferred anionic surfactants are
long chain alcohol sulfate esters, such as those derived from
C.sub.10-C.sub.18 alcohols sulfated with chlorosulfonic acid and
neutralized with an alkali. Also preferred are alkylene oxide
additives of C.sub.6-C.sub.10 mono and diesters of ortho-phosphoric
acid. Representative nonionic surfactants that can be used have the
formula: 1
[0039] where n is 0 or 1, m is 3 to 20, R.sup.1 is OH or OCH.sub.3,
R is C.sub.12 to C.sub.22 alkyl or phenyl or naphthyl optionally
substituted by C, to C.sub.10 alkyl groups.
[0040] The surfactant can be a nonionic surfactant or a mixture of
a nonionic surfactant and either an anionic surfactant or a
cationic surfactant. Mixtures of anionic and cationic surfactants
are suitable only in carefully selected cases. A preferred
composition contains from about 1 to about 4% nonionic surfactant.
A satisfactory mixture of commercial anionic surfactants comprises
(1) 0.4% of the sodium salt of a mixture of C.sub.10-C.sub.18
alcohol sulfates, predominantly C.sub.12, (2) 0.4% of the
diethylcyclohexylamine salt of the same sulfate mix, and (3) 0.2%
of the product formed by reacting a mixture of n-octyl mono and
diesters of ortho-phosphoric acid with sufficient ethylene oxide to
form a neutral product, ordinarily about 2 to 4 moles of ethylene
oxide per mole of phosphoric ester. The surfactant is normally used
in amounts ranging from about 0.5 to about 5.0% by weight but
useful amounts are not limited to this range.
[0041] Examples of dispersion stabilizing additives include, for
example, such compounds as air, cellulosic polymers (such as
hydroxyethylcellulose), starches, clay compounds, xanthan gums,
polyacrylic acids and esters (such as methacrylic acid/ethyl
acrylate copolymer), polyacrylamide, polyvinyl alcohol and mixtures
thereof.
[0042] Vacuum retrieval additives include, for example, compounds
such as polyoxyalkylene materials (such as dipropylene glycol),
aluminum silicate clay, hydrolyzed styrene maleic anhydride, and
mixtures thereof. Polyoxyalkylene materials (such as dipropylene
glycol, as well as non-volatile organic solvents (such as mineral
oil), and mixtures thereof may also be used as dust suppressing
additives. Aluminum silicate clay may also be used as a static
reducing additive. Metal ion chelators include such compounds, for
example, as ethylene diamine tetraacetic acid (EDTA). Stain resist
agents include such compounds as, for example, acrylic stain
blockers. Such compounds as aqua ammonia and citric acid may be
included as pH adjusters. Biocides may be included to prolong the
shelf life of the cleaning composition. These may include, for
example, compounds such as potassium sorbate, isothiazolones and
mixtures thereof. Aerosol propellants include such compounds as
propane, butane, carbon dioxide and mixtures thereof.
[0043] The textile substrate to which the composition may be
applied is most preferably a carpet or upholstery fabric. As used
herein, the term "carpet" is intended to include, without
limitation, broadloom carpets, carpet tiles, rugs, and other
textile floor covering material that may be cleaned by the
compositions and methods described herein. The upholstery fabric
may be woven, knitted, nonwoven, or combinations thereof. The
textiles substrates may be comprised of natural fibers, synthetic
fibers, or combinations thereof. Synthetic fibers include, for
example, polyester, acrylic, polyamide, polyolefin, polyaramid,
polyurethane, regenerated cellulose, polyvinylacetate, and blends
thereof. More specifically, polyester includes, for example,
polyethylene terephthalate, polytriphenylene terephthalate,
polybutylene terephthalate, polylactic acid, and combinations
thereof. Polyamide includes, for example, nylon 6, nylon 6,6, and
combinations thereof. Polyolefin includes, for example,
polypropylene, polyethylene, and combinations thereof. Polyaramid
includes, for example, poly-p-phenyleneteraphthalamid (i.e.,
Kevlar.RTM.), poly-m-phenyleneteraphthalamid (i.e., Nomex.RTM.),
and combinations thereof. Natural fibers include, for example,
wool, cotton, flax, and blends thereof.
[0044] The textile substrate may be formed from fibers or yarns of
any size, including microdenier fibers and yarns (fibers or yarns
having less than one denier per filament). The fabric may be
comprised of fibers such as staple fiber, filament fiber, spun
fiber, or combinations thereof.
[0045] The cleaning composition may be applied to a carpet using a
trigger, pump, or electrical sprayer, wherein said electrical
sprayer is battery or power operated. This method may be well
suited for spot cleaning a textile substrate. The term "spray
application" or "spray-applied" is intended to encompass the
application of such compositions to target fabrics through the
utilization of a spray-trigger mechanism and/or device as is well
known in the art. The cleaning composition may be dispensed as a
continuous stream or as a spray of droplets. Such a mechanism
and/or device provides an effective manner of uniformly dispersing
droplets of the composition over a relatively broad surface area of
a target substrate. Thus, atomization, droplet formation and
application on an even basis, and other non-limiting and similar
spraying techniques are encompassed by such a term. It is also
contemplated that the cleaning composition could be poured from the
spray bottle to clean a textile substrate.
[0046] There are various well-known types of sprayers available,
and several examples are disclosed in the Examples section below.
Some are known as finger sprayers, which may have a spray orifice
of about 0.1 mm to about 0.8 mm in diameter. Others, such as
trigger sprayers, may have a spray orifice of about 0.4 mm to about
1.0 mm in diameter. Common pump up and electric sprayers may have a
spray orifice measuring, on average, 0.02 inches in diameter. The
method itself may also require a simple agitation, such as by
rubbing or brushing, of the target fabric surface after spray
application in order to work the composition into the soiled
substrate surface. The cleaning composition may then be retrieved
from the substrate either by immediate vacuuming or by a later
vacuuming.
[0047] Alternatively, the cleaning composition may be applied to
the textile substrate via a squeezable packaging container. This
method may also be well suited for spot cleaning a textile
substrate. The size of the container may be such that the interior
volume of the container will typically hold less than about one
gallon of cleaning composition. Such a container may have a
removable screw cap or a flip cap at one end for dispensing the
cleaning composition. The cap may also have a synthetic applicator
tip at one end comprised of a plurality of synthetic bristles,
foam, or other scrubbing mechanism. A synthetic cover may also be
provided which serves to encase the applicator tip when not in use.
The applicator tip may have an opening which allows the cleaning
composition to be dispensed from within the container when pressure
is applied to the container. The opening may have a diameter of
about 0.5 mm to about 5.0 mm. Once the cleaning composition has
been applied to the textile substrate, the bristles of the
applicator tip may serve as an agitating tool for brushing or
rubbing the composition into the soiled textile substrate surface.
As in the spray application method, the cleaning composition may
then be retrieved from the substrate either by immediate vacuuming
or by a later vacuuming.
[0048] Yet another application method includes applying the
cleaning composition to a textile substrate, particularly a carpet
or upholstery fabric, using a carpet cleaning machine. The carpet
cleaning machine may be a hot water extraction machine, a bonnet
machine, or a foaming machine. The carpet cleaning machine may be
electrical powered, battery powered, or it may be a mechanical
carpet cleaning device that his powered by human effort similar to
a kitchen mop. This application method may be well suited for
residential or commercial carpet cleaning needs. The cleaning
composition may be contained in a holding tank that is mounted on
the vertical handle of a traditional carpet cleaning machine. The
holding tank may include a stirring mechanism inside the tank which
allows for continuous stirring of the composition contained
therein. A dispensing lever, attached to the horizontal handle of
the machine, may be used to dispense the cleaning composition from
the holding tank. Suitable tubing materials may be used which is
connected to an opening in the bottom of the holding tank and
extends vertically downward to the rotating brushes located on the
bottom of the carpet cleaning machine.
[0049] The cleaning composition, when mechanically released from
the holding tank by the dispensing lever, enters the tubing at this
opening and, due to gravity, descends downward to the scrubbing
mechanism located on the underside of the carpet cleaning machine.
The scrubbing mechanism for electrical or battery powered machines
may include rotating brushes. The scrubbing mechanism for the
mechanical, mop-like cleaning machines may include abrasive foam
sponges or other any other material which will act as to work the
cleaning composition into the soiled surface. The cleaning
composition descends downward to the scrubbing mechanism until the
tubing terminates and the cleaning composition is dropped onto the
substrate. The rotating brushes will then gentle work the
composition into the soiled surface of the substrate, and then the
composition may be retrieved immediately or at a later time via
vacuuming.
[0050] Various embodiments of the invention are shown by way of the
Examples below, but the scope of the invention is not limited by
the specific Examples provided herein.
EXAMPLES
[0051] The following Examples further illustrate the present
cleaning formulation but are not to be construed as limiting the
invention as defined in the claims appended hereto. All parts and
percents given in these examples are by weight unless otherwise
indicated.
[0052] Textile Substrates:
[0053] Various carpet and fabric substrates, as described below,
were used to test the inventive cleaning compositions and
methods.
[0054] Carpet A-1:
[0055] This carpet is a dark blue color commercial grade 18"cut
pile carpet tile (available from Milliken & Company of
Spartanburg, S.C., Pattern # 542903). The carpet was a cushion back
construction of 100% nylon face fiber.
[0056] Carpet A-2:
[0057] This carpet is a light tan commercial grade 18"cut pile
carpet tile (available from Milliken & Company of Spartanburg,
S.C., Pattern # 542903). The carpet was a cushion back construction
of 100% nylon face fiber.
[0058] Carpet B:
[0059] This carpet is an off white residential top grade broadloom
carpet (available from Shaw, Profusion product). The carpet was
constructed of 100% nylon face fiber. The carpet had a fluorocarbon
treatment on its surface.
[0060] Carpet C:
[0061] This carpet was an almond colored builder grade broadloom
carpet (available from Mohawk, Commander product). The carpet was
constructed of 100% nylon face fiber. The carpet had no
fluorocarbon treatment on its surface.
[0062] Carpet D:
[0063] This carpet was a dark blue commercial grade 18"cut pile
carpet tile (available from Milliken & Company, Pattern #
542903). The carpet was a cushion back construction of 100% nylon
face fiber.
[0064] Carpet E:
[0065] This carpet was a white, cut loop pile broadloom carpet
(available from Milliken & Company). The carpet was comprised
of 100% nylon face fiber.
[0066] Fabric A:
[0067] This fabric was a 100% cotton oxford flat weave fabric
(available from Milliken & Company).
Examples 1-9
[0068] Various liquid carpet cleaning compositions containing
particles suspended in a solvent, in a slurry form, were produced
for cleaning residential and commercial carpet substrates. The
formulations and procedures are described below.
[0069] I. Formulations
Example 1
[0070] The formulation was prepared by placing 30 parts of water
and a blend of the remaining 60 parts of the other "dry"
ingredients (listed below in Table 1) into the stainless steel bowl
of a KitchenAid ProLine mixer having the whisk attachment in place.
The mixer was turned to a setting of 2 and allowed to run for 2
minutes. The result was a stable, frothy foam.
[0071] Carpet A-2 was spot stained according to the Spot Cleaning
Test Procedure described below. The formulation of Example 1 was
then applied to Carpet A-2. The stable, frothy foam remained on the
surface and was easily hand brushed into the carpet. The results
showed that, by visual evaluation, the formulation of Example 1
removed the stain spots when compared with the control carpet. The
results also indicate that air may be incorporated into the
cleaning formulation as a dispersion stabilizing additive, via a
wire whisk attachment on a mixer, to create a foam that can then be
transferred to a textile substrate for cleaning purposes.
1TABLE 1 Example 1 Formulation Component Amount (parts) Urea
Formaldehyde Polymer ("UFP", as described in 44 U.S. Pat. No.
3,910,848) (35-40% moisture content) Calcium Carbonate (inorganic
salt) 21 Water 30.4 Triton XL 80 N (a nonionic surfactant available
2.4 from Rohm and Haas) MilliGard NYS 1.0 (an acrylic stain resist
agent available from Milliken Chemical) Potassium Sorbate (a
biocide) 1.0 Kathon (an isothiazolone biocide available 0.1 from
Rohm and Haas) Fragrance 0.1
Example 2
[0072] The formulation was prepared according to the same procedure
described previously in Example 1 using the components shown below
in Table 2.
[0073] Carpet A-2 was spot stained according to the Spot Cleaning
Test Procedure described below. The formulation of Example 2 was
then applied to Carpet A-2. The stable, frothy foam remained on the
surface and was easily hand brushed into the carpet. The results
showed that, by visual evaluation, the formulation of Example 2
removed the stain spots when compared with the control carpet. The
results also indicate that air may be incorporated into the
cleaning formulation as a dispersion stabilizing additive, via a
wire whisk attachment on a mixer, to create a foam that can then be
transferred to a textile substrate for cleaning purposes.
2TABLE 2 Example 2 Formulation Component Amount (parts) UFP (35-40%
moisture content) 44 Calcium Carbonate (an inorganic salt) 21 Water
31.2 Triton XL 80 N (a nonionic surfactant) 2.4 Potassium Sorbate
(a biocide) 1.0 Kathon (a biocide) 0.1
Example 3
[0074] The formulations for Examples 3A-3E were prepared following
the procedure for Example 1 using the components shown in Table 3
below. The mixer was turned to a setting of 2 and allowed to run
for 2 minutes. The result was a stable, frothy foam. Example 3F was
also prepared following the procedure for Example 1 using the
components shown in Table 3 and by using a stream of air, instead
of a whisk, to incorporate air into the formulation as a dispersion
stabilizing additive and generate the foam. The resulting foam
flowed over the walls of the container. The foam was stable for
several minutes before collapsing. After the foam collapsed and
dried, there was residual powder present that confirmed that the
powder could be transported from a tank and delivered to a textile
substrate surface (such as a carpet) by a foaming mechanism.
[0075] Carpet A-2 was spot stained according to the Spot Cleaning
Test Procedure described below. The formulations of Examples 3A-3E
were then applied to Carpet A-2. The stable, frothy foam remained
oh the surface and was easily hand brushed into the carpet. The
results showed that, by visual evaluation, the formulations of
Examples 3A-3E removed the stain spots when compared with the
control carpet.
3TABLE 3 Example 3 Formulations (Amounts are in parts) Component 3A
3B 3C 3D 3E 3F UFP (35-40% moisture 39.5 39 40 42.4 25.8 17
content) Water 49.5 49.5 50 57.4 72.9 82 MilliGard NYS (an 10 10
0.8 0 1.0 0.8 acrylic stain resist agent) Triton XL 80 N (a 1 0 0.2
0.2 0.3 0.2 nonionic surfactant) Sodium Lauryl Sulfate 0 1.5 0 0 0
0 (an anionic surfactant)
Example 4
[0076] The formulation was prepared by placing water and a blend of
the remaining parts of the other "dry" ingredients (listed below in
Table 4) into the stainless steel bowl of a KitchenAid ProLine
mixer having the kneading attachment in place. The mixer was turned
to a setting of 2 and allowed to blend the ingredients for 5
minutes. Then 20 parts of Example 4 was packaged with 80 parts of
water into an aerosol can having a propane/butane mixture as the
propellant. When the solution was discharged from the can onto the
surface of a carpet the resulting foam did not collapse until after
2-3 minutes had elapsed.
[0077] Carpet B was spot stained according to the Spot Cleaning
Test Procedure described below. The formulation of Example 4 was
then applied to Carpet B. The stable, frothy foam remained on the
surface and was easily hand brushed into the carpet. The results
showed that, by visual evaluation, the formulation of Example 4
removed the stain spots when compared with the control carpet. The
results also show that including an aerosol propellant in the
formulation is an effective means of creating a dispersion which
could be easily applied to the surface of a textile substrate.
4TABLE 4 Example 4 Formulation Component Amount (in grams) UFP
(35-40% moisture content) 55.5 Water 44.4 Erionyl NYB (an acrylic
stain blocker) 0.09 Hydroxy Ethyl Cellulose (a dispersion 0.01
stabilizing additive)
Example 5
[0078] The formulations for Examples 5A-5D were prepared by adding
the appropriate amount of water and other liquid ingredients, as
shown in Table 5 below, into a breaker equipped with a magnetic
stir bar. Once the solution was allowed to stir, the remaining
ingredients were added and agitated for 2 minutes. The particles
quickly settled out of solution over a 1-2 minute period.
[0079] Carpet A-2 was tested for cleaning efficiency according to
the Cleaning Efficiency Test Procedure described below. The
formulations of Examples 5A-5D were then applied to Carpet A-2
using a trigger sprayer (Calmar item # TS 800, AFA Dispensing Co
Ratchett QAIII, AFA Dispensing Co. item # 5910BT) while the
solution was continuously stirred. A stable dispersion was formed
and was easily hand brushed into the carpet. The cleaning
efficiency results of each of the formulations was compared with:
(a) samples treated with water only ("Control"), (b) samples
cleaned using Capture powder and Pre-Mist Spray (both available
from Milliken & Company), and (c) samples treated with a Hoover
Steam Vac Prosteam carpet cleaning machine and the cleaning
chemicals recommended for use in the machine (performed according
to AATCC 171-97 Test Method for hot water extraction of cleaning
carpets). The results are shown in Table 5R-1 below.
[0080] The formulation of Example 5C was also applied to Carpet B
and Carpet C. The cleaning solution was applied to the carpet using
the Calmar trigger sprayer while the solution was continuously
stirred. The results showed that, by visual evaluation, the
formulation of Example 5C removed the stain spots when compared
with the control carpet.
[0081] The formulation of Example 5C was also applied to Carpet C
using an Aerus Floor Pro Encore Shampooer/Polisher machine which
gravity fed the solution to the carpet while the dispersion was
continuously circulated in a holding tank attached to the handle of
the machine. Subsequent testing of the carpet was performed
according to the Cleaning Efficiency Test Procedure; however, the
results were rated using the visual analysis technique for the Spot
Cleaning Test Procedure. The results are shown in Table 5R-2
below.
[0082] The formulation of Example 5C was also applied to Carpet B
and Carpet C using a Hoover Steam Vac Prosteam carpet cleaning
machine while the solution was continuously circulated in the
holding tank. The results showed that, by visual evaluation, the
formulation of Example 5C removed the stain spots when compared
with the control carpet. The results also indicate that the
inventive cleaning compositions may successfully be applied to a
textile substrate via a carpet cleaning machine.
5TABLE 5 Example 5 Formulations (Amounts are in parts) Component 5A
5B 5C 5D UFP (dry weight) 2.00 10.00 20.00 40.00 Water 96.829
88.956 79.084 59.262 Styrene Maleic Anhydride 0.88 0.79 0.692 0.558
(vacuum retrieval additive) Aqua Ammonia 0.02 0.016 0.014 0.011 (pH
adjuster) Sodium Lauryl Sulfate (an 0.20 0.172 0.152 0.122 anionic
surfactant) Propylene Glycol t-butyl 0.07 0.065 0.057 0.046 ether
(an organic liquid) Fragrance 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001
[0083]
6TABLE 5R-1 Example 5 Cleaning Efficiency Results Amount of
Formulation Average % Added to Ls After Lo Lc After % Cleaning
Cleaning Sample Tile (g) Soiling Original Cleaning Efficiency
Efficiency Control 1 1.42 55.855 60.644 57.699 38.50 Control 2 1.62
55.204 60.62 57.19 36.67 Control 3 1.61 54.77 60.157 56.781 37.33
38 Example 5A-1 1.47 55.735 60.2 58.546 62.96 Example 5A-2 1.57
55.995 60.52 58.698 59.73 Example 5A-3 1.73 56.19 60.537 58.667
56.98 60 Example 5B-1 1.59 55.565 60.608 58.741 62.98 Example 5B-2
1.62 55.474 60.672 58.13 51.10 Example 5B-3 1.54 55.367 60.141
58.244 60.26 58 Example 5C-1 1.52 55.454 60.553 59.086 71.23
Example 5C-2 1.52 55.015 60.828 58.965 67.95 Example 5C-3 1.51
54.925 60.529 58.686 67.11 69 Example 5D-1 2.08 55.417 60.33 58.876
70.41 Example 5D-2 1.42 55.027 60.644 58.782 66.85 Example 5D-3
1.42 54.89 60.675 59.14 73.47 70 Capture .RTM. Powder and N/a
55.232 60.35 59.193 77.39 Pre-Mist Spray 1 Capture .RTM. Powder and
N/a 55.505 60.445 58.354 57.67 Pre-Mist Spray 2 Capture .RTM.
Powder and N/a 54.874 60.251 57.674 52.07 62 Pre-Mist Spray 3
Hoover Steam Vac 1 2.15 54.762 60.492 56.067 22.77 Hoover Steam Vac
2 0.82 54.837 60.535 56.052 21.32 Hoover Steam Vac 3 1.25 54.648
60.263 55.686 18.49 21 "N/a" indicates that data was not
available.
[0084] The test results above indicate that these inventive
cleaning compositions, while requiring continuous stirring or
circulation, clearly provide greater average cleaning efficiency
for a textile substrate, such as a carpet, when compared with other
commercially available cleaning compositions and methods. The
comparative compositions include both dry (Capture.RTM. Powder)
cleaning compositions and hot water extraction cleaning systems
(Hoover Steam Vac). The results also indicate that the inventive
cleaning compositions provide far superior average cleaning
efficiency for a textile substrate, such as a carpet, when compared
with hot water extraction cleaning systems (Hoover Steam Vac).
7TABLE 5R-2 Example 5 Cleaning Results Visual Average of Visual
Sample Evaluation Evaluation Results Example 5C in Aerus 3.5
machine - 1 Example 5C in Aerus 3.5 machine - 2 Example 5C in Aerus
3.5 3.5 machine - 3 Hoover Steam Vac - 1 3.1 Hoover Steam Vac - 2
3.1 Hoover Steam Vac - 3 3.1 3.1 Capture .RTM. Powder & 3.0
Premist Spray - 1 Capture .RTM. Powder & 3.0 Premist Spray - 2
Capture .RTM. Powder & 3.0 3.0 Premist Spray - 3
[0085] The results showed that, by visual evaluation, the
formulation of Example 5C removed the stain from the soiled carpet
much better than the Capture.RTM. Powder & Premist Spray
combination. The formulation performed slightly better than the hot
water extraction system (using a Hoover Steam Vac machine with the
recommended Hoover chemicals). The results also indicate that the
inventive compositions may successfully be applied to a soiled
textile substrate via a carpet cleaning machine.
Example 6
[0086] The formulations for Examples 6A-6D were prepared by adding
the appropriate amount of water, as shown in Table 6 below, into a
breaker equipped with an overhead stir motor with a Cowles blade
attached. The agitator was adjusted to 500-700 rpm. The Laponite RD
was slowly charged over a 10 minute period. The solution was heated
to 50-60 degrees C. and Pluronic L65 LF was slowly added over a 10
minute period. The heat source was turned off and the UFP was
slowly added over a 15-20 minute period. The resulting mixture was
a stable dispersion wherein the particles did not settle out over a
period of time from between 2-3 hours and up to several days.
Therefore, the solutions did not require continuous agitation to
prevent the particles from settling. The formulations were
sprayable through both ordinary and commercially available trigger
(Calmar sprayer, described previously) and finger sprayers
(available from Seaquist, Sea Spray sprayer).
[0087] Carpet B was spot stained according to the Spot Cleaning
Test Procedure described below. The formulation of Example 6B was
then applied to Carpet B. The results showed that, by visual
evaluation, the formulation of Example 6B removed the stain spots
when compared with the control carpet.
8TABLE 6 Example 6 Formulations (Amounts are in parts) Component 6A
6B 6C 6D UFP (dry weight) 15 15 15 15 Water 82.5 82.0 81.5 81.0
Laponite RD (clay dispersion 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 stabilizing additive)
Pluronic L65 LF (surfactant) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Example 7
[0088] The procedure for Example 6 was followed to create the
formulations for Examples 7A-7G. Examples 7D-F include commercially
available carpet cleaning particles in the formulations. The
components for each Example are shown below in Table 7. The
formulations of Examples 7A-7G formed stable dispersions that were
easily hand brushed into a carpet.
[0089] Carpet A-2 was tested for cleaning efficiency according to
the Cleaning Efficiency Test Procedure described below. The
formulations of Examples 7A-7G were then applied to Carpet A-2
using a flip cap lotion bottle. The cleaning efficiency results of
each of the formulations was compared with a sample treated with
Capture.RTM. powder. The results are shown in Table 7R below.
9TABLE 7 Example 7 Formulations (Amounts are in parts) Component 7A
7B 7C 7D 7E 7F 7G UFP (dry weight) 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 Water 82 82 82 82
82 82 82 Laponite RD 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 (clay dispersion
stabilizing additive) Pluronic L65 LF 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
(surfactant) Calcium Carbonate (an 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 inorganic salt)
SolkaFloc 100 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 (cellulosic particles) Host white
(cellulosic 0 0 0 15 0 0 0 particles) Resolve .RTM. High 0 0 0 0 15
0 0 Traffic (cellulosic particles) Duo P (a European 0 0 0 0 0 15 0
particulate urethane foam) Diatomaceous earth 0 0 0 0 0 0 15
particles
[0090]
10TABLE 7R Example 7 Cleaning Efficiency Results Amount of Ls
Average % Formulation After Lo Lc After % Cleaning Cleaning Sample
Added to Tile (g) Soiling Original Cleaning Efficiency Efficiency
Capture .RTM. powder 1 4.33 54.203 63.819 59.349 53.51 Capture
.RTM. powder 2 4.02 54.236 64.159 58.986 47.87 Capture .RTM. powder
3 4.13 54.379 63.861 59.281 51.70 51 Example 7A-1 4.35 54.596
64.129 59.11 47.35 Example 7A-2 4.52 55.639 64.631 60.44 53.39
Example 7A-3 4.44 55.265 64.393 59.606 47.56 49 Example 7B-1 4.11
55.337 64.546 59.523 45.46 Example 7B-2 4.26 54.886 64.11 60.024
55.70 Example 7B-3 4.32 55.946 64.461 60.715 56.01 52 Example 7C-1
4.36 56.218 64.226 63.192 87.09 Example 7C-2 4.28 56.542 64.241
62.798 81.26 Example 7C-3 4.31 56.659 64.39 63.228 84.97 84 Example
7D-1 4.40 55.946 64.441 62.443 76.48 Example 7D-2 4.44 55.404
64.275 62.411 78.99 Example 7D-3 4.52 55.851 64.303 63.012 84.73 80
Example 7E-1 4.08 55.978 64.349 56.75 9.22 Example 7E-2 4.21 56.181
64.491 57.368 14.28 Example 7E-3 4.13 55.992 64.421 56.989 11.83 12
Example 7F-1 4.09 55.132 64.14 57.22 23.18 Example 7F-2 4.40 56.083
64.366 58.379 27.72 Example 7F-3 4.48 56.146 64.452 58.472 28.00 26
Example 7G-1 4.08 55.792 64.226 60.232 52.64 Example 7G-2 4.22
55.616 64.266 61.207 64.64 Example 7G-3 4.35 56.3 64.287 62.614
79.05 65
[0091] The test results above indicate that the inventive cleaning
compositions very good average cleaning efficiency for a textile
substrate, such as a carpet, when compared with other commercially
available cleaning compositions and methods. The comparative
compositions include both dry (Capture.RTM. Powder) cleaning
compositions and liquid formulations containing competitive carpet
cleaning products, such as Resolve.RTM. High Traffic and Duo P.
Without being bound by theory, it is believed that the formulations
of Examples 7C and 7D performed so well due to the highly absorbent
nature of the particles included in the formulations and the
resulting ability to absorb more of the stain from the substrate.
Further, and without being bound by theory, it is believed that the
formulations of Examples 7E and 7E may have performed less
optimally due to large particle size of the particulate material
used in the formulations. These large particles likely have less
surface area for absorbing stain from the substrate, thereby
providing less cleaning efficiency.
Example 8
[0092] The procedure for Example 6 was followed to create the
formulations for Examples 8A-8D. The components for each Example
are shown below in Table 8. The formulations for Examples 8A-8D
formed stable dispersions that were easily hand brushed into a
carpet.
[0093] Carpet A-2 was spot stained according to the Spot Cleaning
Test Procedure described below. The formulations of Examples 8A-8D
were then applied to Carpet A-2. A white towel was used to hand
brush Examples 8A-8D, while a Capture.RTM. brush was used to hand
brush the comparative Capture.RTM. powder. Hot water extraction
("HWE") was also performed on a comparative example using a Hoover
Steam Vac Prosteam carpet cleaning machine, according to AATCC
171-97 Test Method for hot water extraction of cleaning carpets.
The results are shown in Table 8R below.
11TABLE 8 Example 8 Formulations (Amounts are in parts) Component
8A 8B 8C 8D UFP (dry weight) 15 15 15 15 Water 80.5 75.2 75.2 75.2
Laponite RD (clay dispersion 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 stabilizing additive)
Pluronic L65 LF (surfactant) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Dipropylene Glycol (a
vacuum 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 retrieval additive) Ethanol (an organic
liquid) 0 2.3 0 0 Isopropyl Alcohol (an organic 0 0 2.3 0 liquid)
Mineral Oil (a dust 0 0 0 2.3 suppressing additive)
[0094]
12TABLE 8R Example 8 Spot Cleaning Results Spotting Substance
Coffee with French cream Salad Shoe Grape Motor & Sample
Lipstick Dressing Ketchup Cola Polish Juice Chocolate Oil Butter
sugar Average Ex. 8A 1 1 2 2 2.4 1 1 2 1 1.6 1.5 Ex. 8B 2 1 1 1.8
1.8 1 1 1 1 1.4 1.3 Ex. 8C 2 1 1 1 2.4 1 1 1 1.6 1.6 1.36 Ex. 8D 2
1 1 1 2.4 1 1 2 1.6 1.4 1.44 Capture 3 1.8 3 1 2 1.4 2.2 3 2 1 2.04
Powder HWE 5 5 5 4.8 4.4 4.6 4.4 5 3.8 2.4 4.44
[0095] The results show that all of the inventive formulations
8A-8D performed very well in removing the stains (lower values
illustrate more complete stain removal). The inventive formulations
each exhibited approximately the same degree of removal of the
stains. However, there was a noticeable difference in the removal
of the French salad dressing stain. The formulations containing
ethanol (Example 8B), isopropyl alcohol (Example 8C), and mineral
oil (Example 8D) totally removed the French salad dressing stain,
thereby illustrating, for example, the benefit of including an
organic liquid in the cleaning composition. Capture.RTM. powder did
not remove the stains as well as the inventive formulations. The
hot water extraction performed poorly, with little to no stain
removal.
Example 9
[0096] The procedure for Example 6 was followed to create the
formulations for Examples 9A-9F. The components for each Example
are shown below in Table 9. The formulations of Examples 9A-9F
formed stable dispersions that were easily applied to a carpet.
[0097] The formulations of Examples 9A-9F were applied to Carpet
A-1 according to the Dusting Test Procedure described below to
compare the amount residual dust or powder left after cleaning the
carpet (often known as "frosting"). The results are shown in Table
9R below.
13TABLE 9 Example 9 Formulations (Amounts are in parts) Component
9A 9B 9C 9D 9E 9F UFP (dry weight) 15 15 15 15 15 15 Water 82 81.85
81.25 79.75 77.5 75.25 Laponite RD (clay dispersion 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
1.5 1.5 stabilizing additive) Pluronic L65 LF (surfactant) 1.5 1.5
1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 Dipropylene Glycol 0 0.15 0.75 0 0 0 (a vacuum
retrieval additive) Pyrax WA (aluminum silicate 0 0 0 2.25 4.5 6.75
clay, a vacuum retrieval additive)
[0098]
14TABLE 9R Example 9 Dusting Test Results Average of Dusting
Dusting Level Sample Lo Value Lc Value Level Values Example 9A
15.636 18.894 3.258 15.092 18.382 3.29 15.961 18.173 2.212 2.92
Example 9B 15.922 17.296 1.374 16.052 16.62 0.568 15.02 15.832
0.812 0.92 Example 9C 15.713 16.559 0.846 15.409 16.268 0.859 15.22
16.277 1.057 0.92 Example 9D 15.097 17.837 2.74 15.35 17.994 2.644
16.117 18.462 2.345 2.58 Example 9E 16.02 18.425 2.405 15.872
18.505 2.633 16.012 18.157 2.145 2.39 Example 9F 15.362 19.581
4.219 15.751 19.66 3.909 15.81 18.59 2.78 3.64
[0099] The results indicate that using a vacuum retrieval additive
in the inventive cleaning formulation may reduce the amount of
cleaning composition that remains on the textile substrate after
removal by vacuuming (lower number indicates less cleaning
composition left behind on the carpet). More specifically,
dipropylene glycol appears to be a preferred retrieval additive
when compared with aluminum silicate clay. The results also show
that adding more vacuum retrieval additive to the formulation does
not necessarily achieve a higher rate of retrieval. Thus, this
Example illustrates that by including a vacuum retrieval additive
in the cleaning composition, the amount of cleaning composition
removed from the substrate may be increased. In turn, the amount of
cleaning composition that is left on the substrate is reduced. This
is advantageous because the lowering the amount of residual
cleaning compositions left on the substrate will reduce the textile
substrate resoil rate.
[0100] II. Test Procedures and Discussion of Results
[0101] Spot Cleaning Test Procedure
[0102] This procedure was used to determine the effectiveness of
various carpet cleaners to remove common household stains from
carpet. This method also provided a way to compare different
cleaners in their ability to remove stains.
Procedure
[0103] 1. The carpet specimen was cut into pieces 10".times.13."
One 10".times.13" piece was used to test up to ten stains per
cleaner. Enough pieces were cut to test all cleaners on each stain
to be evaluated plus one additional sample was cut for use as a
control. For example, to test 12 cleaners on each of 10 stains, 13
of the 10".times.13" pieces were needed.
[0104] 2. The ten stains were placed on each carpet piece using a
standard carpet staining technique. Each staining material was
applied to each piece of carpet. The typical household stains that
were tested were: lipstick, French salad dressing, ketchup, cola,
shoe polish, grape juice, chocolate, motor oil, butter and coffee
(cream & sugar). Stains are allowed to dry overnight after
applying to the carpet.
[0105] 3. One stain blanket to be cleaned by each cleaner was
labeled. A Sharpie marker was used to label the backs of each stain
blanket with the designated carpet cleaner. A code was used for
each cleaner so that the evaluation will not be biased. One stain
blanket was not cleaned and was used as a control to compare the
effectiveness of each cleaner on stain removal.
[0106] 4. Each stain was cleaned with the designated cleaner
according to the package instructions (if commercial product) and
allowed to dry overnight.
[0107] 5. Five people, not involved in this project, were used to
rank the residual stains after cleaning ranking from best to worse
with 1 being the best. Rating: 1=completely removed, 2=very good
(acceptable), 3=pretty good (borderline), 4=poor (unacceptable),
5=nothing removed (same as original).
[0108] 6. The rankings were then averaged by cleaner and by stain.
In some instances, only a visual notation was made to indicate
whether the stains were removed in comparison to the control
sample.
[0109] Cleaning Efficiency Test Procedure
[0110] This procedure was used to compare the cleaning ability
(efficiency) of carpet cleaners using a standard soil in order to
mimic carpet soiled by foot traffic.
Materials
[0111] Light colored carpet tiles (available from Milliken &
Company of Spartanburg, S.C.,
[0112] Pattern # 542903)
[0113] 3M Soil
[0114] CSI Tumbler and Soil Bomb
[0115] Analytical balance
[0116] Top-loading balances
[0117] GLS scrubbing Machine, Whittaker
[0118] Windsor vacuum cleaner
[0119] GretagMacbeth Color-Eye7000A Colorimeter
Preparation
[0120] 1. A clicking machine was used to cut 41/2".times.41/2"
pieces of light tan commercial grade 18"cut pile carpet tile. Each
product or formulation tested was run in triplicate.
[0121] 2. A template was prepared by clicking a 41/2".times.41/2"
piece from the center of a tile. 1/8" of carpet was trimmed from
the inside edges of the hole in the template to allow for a good
fit.
[0122] 3. Another whole tile was taped to the bottom edge of the
template.
Procedure
[0123] 1. A 41/2".times.41/2" piece of tile was placed into the
hole in the template.
[0124] 2. The GLS machine was used to make 2 passes (up and back)
over the template and test carpet.
[0125] 3. The Windsor vacuum was used to make 5 passes over the
template and test carpet. Going up and back is considered one
pass.
[0126] 4. Steps 1-3 were repeated for each carpet piece.
[0127] 5. The LAB values of each carpet piece was measured on the
Color-Eye. This reading was recorded as "Lo."
[0128] 6. 1.5 g of 3M soil was added to the soil bomb.
[0129] 7. Four of the prepared test carpet pieces were placed on
the Soiling Tumbler and the soil bomb was added.
[0130] 8. Samples were tumbled for 30 minutes.
[0131] 9. Carpet pieces were removed from the tumbler, and vacuum
as in step #3.
[0132] 10. The LAB values were measured on the Color-Eye; these
values were called "Ls." Ls values must be within +/-3% (ex:
Ls=42.0+/-1.3). Soiled pieces outside the proper range were not
used.
[0133] 11. Each tile was soiled, vacuumed and the LAB values were
measured for all test carpet pieces as in steps 6-10.
[0134] 12. The cleaning composition was then applied to the soiled
carpet as described for each specific Example above.
[0135] 13. The piece of carpet was then placed in the template.
[0136] 14. The cleaning composition was scrubbed into the carpet
using 3 passes with the GLS.
[0137] 15. The carpet was removed from the template and was set
aside to dry.
[0138] 16. The empty template was vacuumed as in Step 3 above.
[0139] 17. Steps 12-16 were repeated until all samples had been
scrubbed.
[0140] 18. When the cleaning composition had dried for 30 minutes
(or the desired drying time), each piece was placed into the
template and 5 passes were made with the Windsor vacuum.
[0141] 19. The pieces were removed from the template and read on
the Color-Eye; these values were called "Lc."
[0142] 20. The cleaning efficiency was calculated for each piece
using the formula below: 1 Cleaning Efficiency = Lc - Ls Lo - Ls
.times. 100
[0143] 21. Since three carpet pieces were used for each product or
formulation, the average of the three cleaning efficiency values
was reported.
[0144] Dusting Test Procedure
[0145] This procedure was used to compare the amount residual dust
or powder left after cleaning carpet (often known as
"frosting").
Materials
[0146] Dark colored carpet tiles (available from Milliken &
Company, Pattern # 542903)
[0147] Windsor vacuum cleaner
[0148] Gretag Macbeth Color-Eye7000A Colorimeter
Preparation
[0149] 1. A clicking machine was used to cut 41/2".times.41/2"
pieces of light tan commercial grade 18"cut pile carpet tile. Each
product or formulation tested was run in triplicate.
[0150] 2. A template was prepared by clicking a 41/2".times.41/2"
piece from the center of a tile. 1/8" of carpet was trimmed from
the inside edges of the hole in the template to allow for a good
fit.
[0151] 3. Another whole tile was taped to the bottom edge of the
template.
Procedure
[0152] 1. A 41/2".times.41/2" piece of tile was placed into the
hole in the template.
[0153] 2. The GLS machine was used to make 2 passes (up and back)
over the template and test carpet.
[0154] 3. The Windsor vacuum was used to make 5 passes over the
template and test carpet. Going up and back is considered one
pass.
[0155] 4. Steps 1-3 were repeated for each carpet piece.
[0156] 5. The LAB values of each carpet piece was measured on the
Color-Eye. This reading was recorded as Lo.
[0157] 6. The cleaning composition was then applied to the soiled
carpet as described for each specific Example above.
[0158] 7. The piece of carpet was placed in the template.
[0159] 8. The cleaning formulation was scrubbed into the carpet
using 3 passes with the GLS.
[0160] 9. The carpet was removed from the template and was set
aside to dry.
[0161] 10. The empty template was vacuumed as in Step 3 above.
[0162] 11. Steps 12-17 were repeated until all samples had been
scrubbed.
[0163] 12. When the formulation had dried for 30 minutes (or the
desired drying time), each piece was placed into the template and 5
passes were made with the Windsor vacuum.
[0164] 13. The pieces were removed from the template and read on
the Color-Eye; these values were called Lc.
[0165] 14. The relative amount of dusting was calculated for each
piece using the formula below:
Dusting Level=Lc-Lo (higher number indicates greater amount of
dusting)
[0166] 15. Since three carpet pieces were used for each product or
formulation, the average of the three cleaning efficiency values
was reported.
Examples 10A-10G
Example 10
Cleaning Solutions Using Various Dispersion Stabilizing
Additives
[0167] I. Formulations
[0168] A base formulation was first prepared by mixing together the
components of Example 10A. Various dispersion stabilizing additives
were then added to this base formulation as shown below in Examples
10B-10E. Example 10F did not use this base formulation.
Example 10A
[0169] i. A slurry base formulation was made according to the
formulation in Example 5C above.
Example 10B
Thickened with 0.5% hydroxyethylcellulose (HEC)
[0170] i. To 300 g of the slurry made by the above formulation in
Example 10A, 1.5 g of HEC was gradually added and stirred for 30
minutes.
[0171] ii. PH of the final mixture was 8.5 and a stable dispersion
was formed.
[0172] Example 10C, 0.5% Kelzan S, a xanthan gum
[0173] i. To 300 g of the slurry made by the above formulation in
Example 10A, 1.5 grams of Kelzan S was added and stirred for an
hour.
[0174] ii. A stable dispersion was formed.
Example 10D
0.5% Kelzan S
[0175] i. 6 grams of Kelzan S was first dispersed in 294 grams of
water and put under a lab homogenizer to mix for 2 minutes.
[0176] ii. 114.7 grams of this Kelzan S solution (i) was blended
into 293 grams of the slurry made by the above formulation in
Example 10A.
[0177] iii. The resultant mixture was a white, uniform stable
dispersion.
Example 10E
1% methacrylic acid/ethyl acrylate copolymer
[0178] i. To 300 g of the slurry made by the above formulation in
Example 10A, 3.0 grams of PD-75 (65/35 methacrylic acid/ethyl
acrylate copolymer) was added. PH of the mix was 5-6.
[0179] ii. 50% sodium hydroxide was gradually added until pH was
9.8 and the mix turned somewhat viscous.
[0180] iii. The mix was stirred for 1 hour. A stable dispersion was
formed.
Example 10F
2% polyacrylamide
[0181] i. To 300 grams hot tap water was added 6.0 grams of
polyacrylamide (Trade Name Cyanatex 695).
[0182] ii. The granules dispersed and the mix was allowed to stir
for 1 hour to form a very viscous fluid.
[0183] iii. After the viscosity had developed fully overnight 60
grams of UF polymer was added.
[0184] iv. Then 100 grams of Capture.RTM. Spot & Stain remover
(available from Milliken and Company) was added and stirred for 30
minutes.
[0185] v. A very viscous, white stable dispersion was formed.
[0186] II. Test Procedures and Discussion of Results
[0187] a. The formulation of Example 10C above was placed into a
plastic squeeze bottle with plastic bristles. The formulation was
squeezed onto a dirty spot on the carpet tiles and brushed in with
the bristles. After the product dried, the dirty spot was no longer
visible, nor was the dried dispersion.
[0188] b. The formulation of Example 10C was placed into a trigger
spray bottle and was determined to be sprayable through the nozzle.
No cleaning evaluation was done with the sprayed composition.
[0189] c. The formulation of Example 10D above was tested similarly
on a larger dirty spot on broadloom carpet. Only part of the spot
was treated. After the mixture dried, a white residue was visible
where it was applied. After vacuuming the entire spot, the white
residue was no longer visible. The treated area was lighter in
color, like the clean areas of the rest of the carpet, whereas the
untreated area was still dark with stain.
[0190] d. The formulation of Examples 10A above was tested on
fabric to verify that the method of using the inventive cleaning
composition does not adversely affect fabrics that will undergo
standard laundering processes:
[0191] i. Testing substrate was 100% cotton oxford flat weave.
[0192] ii. Stain medium was burnt motor oil as defined in AATCC
Method 130 (Soil Release: Oily Stain Release Method) and the fabric
was stained with three rows of 4 stains each according to the
staining procedure.
[0193] iii. One row was treated with the formulation of Example 10A
and brushed in and one was left untreated.
[0194] iv. After the row with the formulation of Example 10A was
dried, the entire substrate was washed and dried according to the
Washing Procedure of AATCC Method 130, using Tide.RTM. Quick
Dissolving Powder detergent, with a dummy load at 105 degrees
F.
[0195] v. The fabric was observed to be free from any defects
(fraying, frizzing, disintegrating, etc.) after laundering,
indicating that the inventive compositions and methods of cleaning
with the compositions may be used on textile substrates such as
fabrics, in addition to carpets.
[0196] e. The viscosity profile for the formulation of Example 10D
was determined using a Brookfield RVT, spindle #6. The results are
shown in Table 10 below.
15TABLE 10 Viscosity of Example 10D RPM Viscosity (cps) 100 470 50
820 20 1750 10 3100 5 5400 2.5 9200 1 19000
Examples 11A-11C
[0197] The following Examples are provided to illustrate the
differences in drying time and humidity in an area after the carpet
in that area has been cleaned. These Examples compare the
differences between: Example 11A--cleaning the carpet with
Capture.RTM. dry powder cleaner, Example 11B--cleaning the carpet
using hot water extraction, and Example 11C--cleaning the carpet
using the inventive cleaning composition. The results are shown in
Table 11 below. The humidity is measured as percent humidity and
the temperature is measured in degrees F.
[0198] For each Example, an area of carpet measuring 18'.times.9.5'
was cleaned. The humidity and temperature of the room and of the
carpet was recorded before any cleaning was started. An EXTECH
Humidity/Temperature Pen #445580 was placed on a surface 30" above
the floor to obtain a reading for the room, and it was placed
directly on the carpet to obtain a reading for the carpet. The door
to the room remained closed throughout the cleaning session.
Example 11A
Cleaning Procedure for a Room using Capture.RTM. Dry Carpet
Cleaner
[0199] (a) one pound of Capture.RTM. was sifted onto the carpet and
brushed in by attaching a Capture.RTM. brush to a handle (28.59
g/m.sup.2 of Capture.RTM. was dispensed on the carpet); and
[0200] (b) the humidity and temperature readings for the room and
carpet were recorded every 15 minutes after cleaning was
completed.
Example 11B
Cleaning Procedure for a Room using Hot Water Extraction (HWE)
[0201] (a) a Hoover Steam Vac V2 was used to clean the room;
[0202] (b) the directions for the steam vac were followed (one
forward pass dispensed the chemical, one backward pass rinsed the
carpet, and two full passes forward and backward retrieved any
remaining liquid);
[0203] (c) three gallons of water and 15 ounces of steam cleaner
chemical were needed to clean the room (713.85 g/m.sup.2 of steam
cleaner chemical was dispensed on the carpet); and
[0204] (d) the humidity and temperature readings for the room and
carpet were recorded every 15 minutes after cleaning was
completed.
Example 11C
Cleaning Procedure for a Room using the Inventive Cleaning
Composition
[0205] (a) the inventive cleaning composition used above in Example
9A was applied to the carpet throughout the entire room using a
trigger sprayer and was then was brushed into the surface of the
carpet by attaching a Capture.RTM. brush to a handle;
[0206] (b) 227 g of the inventive cleaning composition was applied
to the carpet (14.29 g/m.sup.2 of inventive cleaning composition
was dispensed on the carpet); and
[0207] (c) the humidity and temperature readings for the room and
carpet were recorded every 15 minutes after cleaning was
completed.
16TABLE 11 Comparison of % Humidity and Temperature Readings Ex.
11A Ex. 11A Ex. 11B Ex. 11B Ex. 11C Ex. 11C Room Carpet Room Carpet
Room Carpet Elapsed Time Humidity Humidity Humidity Humidity
Humidity Humidity (hour:min) (Temp.) (Temp.) (Temp.) (Temp.)
(Temp.) (Temp.) 0:00 17.1 17.1 17.6 17.6 24.9 24.9 (71.6) (71.6)
(71.6) (75.5) (75.5) (71.6) 0:15 23.2 30.9 56.4 80.2 29.9 30.9
(72.9) (72.7) (72.7) (74.9) (74.8) (72.4) 0:30 22.2 26.7 65 84 28.2
28.3 (73.9) (73) (73.3) (73.6) (72) (73.2) 0:45 21.8 22.6 55.5 77.5
28.6 28.3 (73) (72.7) (73.3) (73.9) (73.3) (72.6) 1:00 19.9 21 52.4
72.5 26 26 (74) (74.1) (74) (73.8) (73.4) (73.8) 1:15 20 20.5 50.2
73.2 26 26 (74.1) (73) (73.1) (73) (72.9) (74.1) 1:30 20.3 20.5
47.3 74.8 N/a N/a (73.4) (73.6) (73.3) (72.4) 1:45 N/a N/a 45.1
66.5 N/a N/a (73.7) (73.1) 2.00 N/a N/a 45.1 69.5 N/a N/a (73.1)
(72.6) 2:15 N/a N/a 41.5 67.6 N/a N/a (73.7) (73.4) 2:30 N/a N/a 41
67.3 N/a N/a (73.5) (72.8) 2:45 N/a N/a 39.1 56.6 N/a N/a (73.8)
(73.3) 3:00 N/a N/a 39.5 54.2 N/a N/a (73.6) (73.1) 3:15 N/a N/a
36.9 47.1 N/a N/a (74) (73.8)
[0208] "N/a" indicates no data was available.
[0209] The results in Table 11 illustrate the advantage of using
the inventive cleaning composition, in a slurry or dispersion form,
for cleaning carpet. The humidity and temperature recovery times
are, by far, much shorter for the inventive cleaning composition of
Example 11C than those for the hot water extraction cleaning
procedure of Example 11B. This is advantageous because the cleaning
cycle time is much shorter due to the ability of the inventive
cleaning composition to adequately clean soiled carpet without
overwetting the carpet surface, thereby providing a faster dry
time. This allows for furniture and other items to be moved back
onto the carpet more quickly. The results also illustrate that the
inventive cleaning dispersion does not wet the carpet significantly
more than the dry carpet cleaner of Example 11A, since humidity and
temperature recovery times for both Example 11A and 11C are much
more similar to each other than either are to Example 11B.
[0210] Thus, the inventive cleaning composition described herein
provides clear textile substrate cleaning advantages over the prior
art cleaning systems, such as hot water extraction cleaning systems
and dry carpet cleaners. More specifically, and as illustrated by
the Examples provided herein, the inventive cleaning composition
provides many improvements over the prior art by improving, without
limitation,: (a) the convenience of applying a cleaning
composition, (b) the cleaning efficiency of the cleaning
composition, (c) the time a cleaned textile is wet, and (d) the
reduction of the resoil rate caused by residual cleaning
composition.
[0211] These and other modifications and variations to the present
invention may be practiced by those of ordinary skill in the art,
without departing from the spirit and scope of the present
invention. Furthermore, those of ordinary skill in the art will
appreciate that the foregoing description is by way of example
only, and is not intended to limit the scope of the invention
described in the appended claims.
* * * * *