Solvent and Ultrasonic Alternatives to -

Perchloroethylene Drycleaning of Textiles

By Robert E. McCall, Farhan M. A. Patel, Gary N. Mock, and Perry L. Grady, North Carolina State University, Raleigh

depleter. Under EPA’s design for the ented devices and numerous published
D rycleaning is a n activity that is
conducted at a large number of fa-
cilities around the world. The most
environment program, approaches
range from tightening process opera-
laboratory tests have shown positive
results. A paper titled Aging and Re-
prominent solvent used for dry- tions to replacing organic solvents with moval of Stains on Cotton and Wool
cleaning of textiles is perchloroethyl- water-based “wet” cleaning methods. presents the results of removing oily
ene (PCE). Approximately 40-45% of The objective i n this study was to stains from textile using ultrasound as
all the PCE produced is used by the evaluate and develop environmentally one of the removal methods and with
drycleaning industry. PCE has been preferable alternatives to PCE dry- reasonable results.2
declared a suspected carcinogen, haz- cleaning. Ultrasound cleaning is one of Since ultrasound is widely used in
ardous air pollutant, and ozone several alternatives being studied.l the metal parts cleaning industry with
very good results, it can be concluded
Ultrasound in Cleaning and that it may be possible to apply ultra-
Drycleaning of Fabrics sound i n cleaning of textiles both in
ABSTRACT Drycleaning equipment has remained laundry and d r y ~ l e a n i n g .The
~ . ~ aim of
basically the same for the last 40-50 the current project is to find an alter-
Ultrasound has been evaluated as an years. The technique uses the rotation nate solventlsystem for PCE i n
alternative to replacing of a drum filled with a cleaning solvent drycleaning of fabrics. Since PCE, other
perchloroethylene with nontoxic to impart a tumbling action that gener- halocarbons, and hydrocarbons used in
alternative solvents and aqueous ates the mechanical energy required to today’s drycleaning establishment
systems. Over 130 solvents were clean the garments. The main problems have excellent cleaning properties, it is
screened based on their ability to encountered are: to be studied whether some of the non-
dissolve fats, waxes, and grease. Garments are subjected to twisting toxic environmentally friendly sol-
Those with adverse properties were and pounding actions that tend to dis- vents or aqueous-based cleaning sys-
eliminated, leaving 11 solvents. Five tort the garment shape, tear seams, tems can provide an alternative to the
fiber types were tested for cleaning
effectiveness, redeposition, and
and break and dislodge buttons and present cleaning solvents and, when
shrinkage using ultrasound. Three any other attached accessories coupled with ultrasonics, can achieve
hard-to-remove soils were selected The agitation increases the shrinkage better results.
for evaluation. Soiled samples were of the garments
The garments, after cleaning, require Test Parameters
cleaned in both an Atlas Launder-
Ometer and an ultrasonic cleaning a great deal of pressing
Labor is costly since the garments Fabric Specifications
system and cleaning performance
was evaluated using the AATCC Gray must be sorted, weighed, and carried The fabrics used in this research were
Scale for Staining. through the cycle wool, cotton, linen, polyester, and
It was observed that soil removal Sizeable amounts of cleaning solvent rayon. The fabric specifications are
is very solvent-soil specific. Cleaning is required given in Table I. Out of these, wool,
trials showed that three solvents Excessive pressing removes the “like linen, and rayon are usually dry-
performed similar to new” body from the material cleaned while cotton and polyester are
perchloroethylene. Results showed The main advantage of using ultra- wetcleaned. The fabrics were cut into
that if a solvent is capable of sound in fabric cleaning is the applica- 3 x 15 clii stiips along the warp. For
removing a particular soil using the tion of mechanical action without large shrinkage measurements, two cross
Launder-Ometer,then ultrasound is scale fabric movement. For several marks were sewn on at 5-cm intervals.
also capable of removing years, the use of ultrasonics has been The fabrics were conditioned for 24
hydrophobic soils using aqueous-
proposed and tested as a method of hours in a climate chamber (T = 21C,
based recipes of about 6% solvent
cleaning fabrics and garments. Pat- RH = 65%) before soiling.
and 90% water, indicating that
ultrasonic wetcleaning could be a
~ ~ ~

possible way of cleaning textiles that Table 1. Fabric Specifications

are normally drycleaned.
Fabric Type Fabric Construction oz/yd2 Warp/lnch WefVlnch Thickness (mm)
KEY TERMS Wool Twill 6.39 70 55 0.50
Drycleaning Cotton Twill 7.79 110 55 0.45
Linen Plain weave 4.79 56 48 0.40
Perchloroethylene (PCE) Polyester Knitted 4.94 Knitted Knitted 0.039
Wetcleaning Rayon Plain weave 6.80 76 70 0.24

November 7998 Textile Chemist and Colorist 11

Soil Types myriad of high-value specialty chemi- pen ink, and lipstick; and the condi-
The three main types of soils used in cals, each grabbing small niches. tions were 15 minutes at 30C, 30 min-
this research were engine oil, ballpoint From over 130 solvents screened, utes at 30C, and 15 minutes at 50C.
ink, and lipstick. Engine oil is repre- the following were selected: PCE, The cleaning effect and redepo-
sentative of oily soils and a very impor- Exxon DF-2000 (DF-ZOOO),isopropyl sition were both measured by observ-
tant soil in drycleaning research. PCE myristate (IPM),N-methyl pyrrolidone ing the cleaned samples under daylight
is highly successful in removing such (NMP), y -butyrolactone (GBL),propy- using a Macbeth Spectralight and com-
kinds of greasy soils which are not eas- lene glycol normal propyl-ether (PNP), paring with the AATCC Gray Scale for
ily removed by normal laundering. propylene glycol tertiary butyl-ether Staining. A Gray Scale value of 5 rep-
Ballpoint ink is a very common stain in (PTB), propylene carbonate (PC), pro- resents the best soil removal and a gray
research on detergents. Lipstick was pylene glycol normal butyl-ether scale value of 1 represents the least
used to test for particulate cleaning (PNB), dibasic ester (DBE), limonene stain removal. Each individual test fab-
since it is well known that sticky solid (LIM),and isopropyl lactate (IPL). ric was evaluated three times.
soils are very difficult to remove from Fabric Sample Evaluation Discussion
textiles. The ballpoint was a blue shade
(BIC round Stic, medium, U.S.) while Fabric samples were evaluated using None of the solvents performed better
the lipstick was red (Tahitian Berry, AATCC Evaluation Procedure 2, Gray than PCE in all areas. It was observed
Coty Inc., N.Y.). Scale for Staining. Since this method is that PCE was successful in removing
subjective, some initial samples were engine oil and lipstick stains from wool
Method of Soil Application also measured using AATCC Test and cotton but not from polyester.
A drop of engine oil was released onto Method 110-1989 for Whiteness of Also, PCE could not remove ballpoint
the test fabric from a medicinal drop- Textiles with a Macbeth spectropho- ink from any of the test fabrics under
per and allowed to dry under ambient tometer to measure the tristimulus val- study. Exxon DF-2000 was similar to
conditions. The lipstick was rotated a ues (X,Y, Z) of the stained and washed PCE. However, it is surprising that both
full turn in the center of the swatch samples. The Whiteness Index was cal- these solvents were not successful in
under slight pressure to form a stain culated by the CIE equation for white- removing any of the soil from polyes-
having a diameter of 1/2 inch. In the ness using illuminant D,, and 1964 loo ter, especially the engine oil, nor were
case of the ballpoint ink, a circle was observer. It was observed that the re- they successful in removing ink from
marked in the center of the test swatch, sults obtained from this test were in any of the fabric samples. Interestingly,
having a diameter of 314 to one inch agreement with the Gray Scale values. the overall performance of IPM is very
and this circle was uniformly shaded similar to and practically as good as
Launder-Ometer Testing PCE and DF-2000 with respect to
to obtain a stain. After staining, the test
fabric swatches were left to dry in am- cleaning potential. However, it is slow
Solvent Cleaning without Additives drying. Samples cleaned in IPM neces-
bient conditions for one week before
they were cleaned. In order to have a base for comparison, sitated the use of a dryer to completely
the fabrics with the individual soils dry the samples while all other sol-
Solvents: Types and Selection were cleaned using each of the sol- vents dried at room temperature with-
The cleaning fluids for use in ultrasonic vents, without additives, in a Launder- out a dryer. Other than IPM, none of
cleaners must consider 1)the chemical Ometer, model LHT, Atlas Electric De- the solvents used in this experiment
compatibility of the cleanser with the vices Co., Ill. It holds 20 stainless steel was capable of removing engine oil
materials to be cleaned and the materi- cylinders, each of 1.2 liter capacity and from fabric samples like PCE and DF-
als of the container and 2) the effective- dimensions of 8.0 x 3.5 inches. The 2000. NMP followed by PNB was
ness of the cleaner in removing the soil. Launder-Ometer can be used to carry found to be a good solvent in removing
The chemical classification of the sol- out washing trials by tumbling the ballpoint ink and lipstick. It removed
vents and contamination is a major con- soiled fabrics in these cylinders con- ballpoint ink as if the fabric was never
sideration in the choice of solvents; i.e., taining the required solvent. Stainless stained at all. The cleaned fabric was as
polar and nonpolar. Generally, polar steel balls 6.3 mm i n diameter are clean as an unsoiled one thus warrant-
soils are removed by polar solvents and added in the cylinders during washing ing a Gray Scale value of 5. All the
nonpolar soils are removed by nonpolar trials to aid in the soil release process. other solvents performed poorer than
solvents3 The Launder-Ometer running time and PCE except that PNP removed lipstick
Many organic solvents are being temperature are adjustable. The Laun- from all the fabrics under study, PTB
phased out of products and processes der-Ometer trials simulate the removed lipstick only from wool and
for environmental and health reasons. drycleaning operation in a conven- ink from polyester, and PC removed
Unfortiinately, all the cleaning solvents tional drycleaning machine where the ink from wool. DBE gave its best per-
available are either toxic such as clothes are drycleaned by tumbling furinaiice 011 lipstick-stained polyester.
trichloroethylene, methylene chloride, them in PCE or other hydrocarbon sol- Zero degree of soil redeposition was
and PCE; highly flammable such as vents. A clean swatch of each fabric observed in all trials.
petroleum distillates and alcohols; or type was included to study soil Although increasing the time from
are slow drying like mineral spirits. redeposition. After cleaning, a single- 1 5 to 30 minutes did not significantly
Hence, there is a strong need for a drop- step rinsing with clean solvent i n a improve results, increasing the tem-
in replacement that is less damaging to beaker was performed. The samples perature from 30C to 50C improved the
the ozone and ground water, does not were then air dried and conditioned in performance of most solvents slightly
pose a flammability hazard, and is a climate chamber for 24 hours before as observed by an increase i n Gray
quick drying. As solvent use continues being evaluated. Scale values. PNB performed very well
its slow overall decline, demand for at this higher temperature and com-
Test Parameters pletely removed ink and lipstick from
solvents is shifting. Large volume sol-
vents that could seemingly dissolve The fabric types were 100% wool, all fabric types and an appreciable
anything are being replaced by a 100% cotton, and 100% polyester; the amount of engine oil from cotton. DBE
soil types were engine oil, ballpoint removed lipstick from all the fabric

12 Textile Chemist and Colorist 033 Vol. 30,No. I 1

types, PC removed ink from cotton, Wool
and GBL removed lipstick from wool Detergent + Water, 30 min, 30 "C
and polyester. As usual, NMP gave its
best performance on ink and lipstick.
IPM and DF-2000 closely resembled
m
PCE in cleaning performance. PNP and .-
PTB were not used in these trials for E
safety reasons as they have a low flash G
L

point of 119F and 113F respectively. P

-aml
Solvent Cleaning with I%
21
Water and Detergent E
0
The objective of this set of trials was to
study the effect of soil removal using a Stains
mixture of solvents in the presence of
water and detergent in a Launder- a
Ometer. The cleaning was carried out Solvents
i n the Atlas Launder-Ometer for 30 Fig. 1. Gray Scale values for wool fabric drycleaned in a mixture of solvent, detergent, and
minutes at a temperature of 30C. For water in a Launder-Ometer at 30C for 30 minutes.
each solvent, the Launder-Ometer jar
was filled with 250 mL of solvent, 10 Conclusion
Results and Discussion
mL of tap water, 1 mL of drycleaning
detergent Honey, 100 stainless steel The results of the experiments for We can conclude that as such none of
balls, and one test fabric of each of the wool, cotton, and polyester fabrics the above solvents studied can be used
following types: woollengine oil, stained with engine oil, ink, and lip- as a direct drop-in substitute for PCE.
woollink, woolllipstick, woollclean, stick are shown in Figs. 1,2, and 3. It It was observed that in both cases; Le.,
cottonlengine oil, cottonlink, cotton1 is observed that inclusion of water and with and without detergent and water,
lipstick, cotton/clean, polyesterlengine detergent helped remove ink from performance of IPM and DF-2000 was
oil, polyesterlink, polyesterllipstick, wool in the case of PCE, IPM, PNP, and very close to that of PCE. IPM was very
and polyesterlclean. A clean swatch of GBL. In addition, GBL also removed slow drying and required an oven for
each fabric type was included in the ink from polyester and engine oil from complete drying. The drying was worst
cleaning trials to study soil redepo- cotton. PNP and PTB removed lipstick in the case of polyester. NMP and PNB
sition. After washing in the Launder- completely without leaving any trace performance were better than PCE with
Ometer and doing a single-step rinsing behind. NMP gave its best performance respect to the removal of ballpoint ink
with clean solvent, the samples were on ink and lipstick but very poor per- and lipstick. PNB in all the wash con-
dried by removing excess solvent be- formance on engine oil. PNB also gave ditions was also successful in remov-
tween pads of paper toweling and its best performance on ink and lipstick ing engine oil to an appreciable extent.
hanging them from a clothes line at by completely removing them from all It was observed that increasing the time
room temperature in a ventilated hood. the fabrics and also removed engine oil and temperature of drycleaning had a
After the samples were completely from wool to an appreciable extent. slight increase in soil removal by sol-
dried, they were conditioned in a cli- Surprisingly, lipstick was completely vents except for some instances of a
mate chamber for 2 4 hours before removed from polyester by DBE. IPM specific soil and solvent. Thus, a Laun-
evaluation. The cleaning effect and performed closely to PCE followed by der-Ometer drycleaning time of 30
redeposition were both measured by DF-2000. Redeposition was observed minutes at 50C gave the best results.
observing the cleaned samples under only in the case of PCE. Addition of water and detergent
daylight using a Macbeth Spectralight helped in the removal of ink and lip-
and comparing with the AATCC Gray stick in some instances, but the overall
Scale for Staining.

Cotton
Polyester

Solvents
Solvents

Fig. 2. Gray Scale values for cotton fabric drycleaned in a solvent, de- Fig. 3. Gray Scale values for polyester drycleaned in a solvent, deter-
tergent, and water mixture in a Launder-Ometerat 30C for 30 minutes. gent, and water mixture in a Launder-Ometerat 30C for 30 minutes.

November 1998 Textile Chemist and Colorist 13

hand and feel of the fabric especially technology would not only increase ducted using PCE and NMP to deter-
wool decreased. Also, some unraveling the speed of fabric cleaning but also mine optimum solvent conditions. The
was observed in the case of wool. give textiles a longer life by eliminat- best results were obtained with a
ing the wear and tear due to tumbling power level of 500 watts. A cleaning
Ultrasound Cleaning in normal cleaning procedures. time of 15 minutes was sufficient to
provide soil removal. A temperature of
Background Specification of the Ultrasonic Unit 30C was used for the solvent tests.
To get clothes clean, four factors in The Nearfield Acoustic Processor
proper combination are necessary: (NAP)unit used in the washing experi- Removal of Greasy Soils
time, temperature, agitation, and ments was designed by Advanced with Detergent and Water
chemistry. In normal drycleaning, the Sonics Processing and manufactured A second series of cleaning evaluations
garments are tumbled in a drycleaning by Lewis Corp. (Fig. 4). It consists of a were performed to see if ultrasound ~ ~

solvent, usually PCE, for a set time and generator and two submersible magne- could remove greasy soil from fabrics
temperature. In ultrasonic cleaning, the tostrictive-based transducers inside a using only a waterldetergent mix. Cot-
agitation factor is of a different origin- rectangular stainless steel tank of 15- ton, wool, and polyester fabrics were
instead of tumbling, ultrasound can be liter capacity. The fabric is placed be- stained with two different types of
used to create highly intense but local- tween the transducers so that the fab- soils, used engine oil and lipstick.
ized agitation in the liquid medium. ric surface is parallel to the transducer
This research is based on agitation be- surface and subjected to ultrasonic Conclusion
ing the most critical factor in the clean- waves. The generator power delivered The study showed that ultrasound
ing of garments. In general, ultrasonic to the transducers is adjustable from 0 along with water and detergent solu-
cleaning consists of immersing a sub- to 650 watts. To minimize solvent cost, tion cannot be used for removing
strate in a suitable liquid medium and a configuration with a 1-liter metal sol- greasy soils like engine oil and lipstick
agitating that medium with high fre- vent container was used to carry out from any of the fabrics for any of the
quency sound waves (20 kHz) for a ultrasound cleaning of soiled wash times used in the trials.
brief period of time, followed by rins- swatches. The immersible transducers Observed shrinkage using water and
ing with clean solvent or water and fi- were placed in the ultrasound tank detergent was minimal as follows:
nally drying. Ultrasonic cleaning is ef- separated by a distance of four inches. wool = 2%, cotton = 0%, polyester = 0%
fective because of cavitation, the The 1-liter metal container was sus- Ultrasound can be successfully
process in which microscopic bubbles pended in between the transducers. used to remove soil from fabrics when
i n the liquid medium implode or col- The fabric was held in open form in the held in open width form and subjected
lapse to produce shock waves. These container on a fabricated aluminum to ultrasound waves in the surround-
waves impinge on the surface of the frame. Using this experimental setup, ing liquid medium. Hydrophilic soils
substrate and, through a scrubbing ac- it was possible to minimize the quan- can easily be removed by using an
tion, displace or loosen particulate tity of solvent used in this study. aqueous detergent solution whereas,
matter from the surface. hydrophobic soils are best removed by
Preliminary Testing
0bjectives using a suitable solvent. The Gray
Preliminary cleaning experiments Scale for Staining can conveniently be
Alternate solvents may or may not per- were conducted to determine what ul- employed to evaluate the effectiveness
form better than PCE. The current re- trasound settings and parameters were of ultrasound in cleaning.
search aims to find how the alternative important. Water soluble stains were A washing time of 15 minutes and
solvents and aqueous-based cleaning applied to cotton, polyester, and nylon power level of 500 watts gave near op-
systems perform in drycleaning and and cleaned with a water and detergent timum results with soil removal and
wetcleaning of fabric with the help of solution in the ultrasound system. Sev- will be used as guidelines for further
ultrasound as a strong external agita- eral power levels, times, and gap dis- trials with ultrasound.
tion force on a constrained fabric held tances were tested to determine what
in a liquid medium. If successful, this was critical. Additional tests were con-

~ : Stirrer
Motor Fabric Holder
-Fabric Sample Holder
.
I.

I:
Fabric Samples

Water

Fig. 4. Nearfield Acoustical Processor and Fabric Holder.

14 Textile Chemist and Colorist CCo Vol. 30,No. 7 7

 Wool Cotton
Ultrasonic Drv-Cleanina Ultrasonic Dry-cleaning

Solvents So Ivents

Fig, 5, Comparison of Gray Scale value for stained wool fabric Fig. 6. COmpariSOn Of Gray Scale Value for stained Cotton fabric
drycleaned in ultrasonic NAP unit at 30C for 10 minutes. drycleaned in ultrasonic NAP unit at 30C for 10 minutes.

effect was measured by observing the

Ultrasound Solvent Cleaning test fabrics of each type with three dif- cleaned samples under daylight using
The objective of the following cleaning ferent soils were placed on the alumi- a Macbeth Spectralight and comparing
trials was to study the effect of ultra- num frame and held in place with clips with the AATCC Gray Scale for Stain-
sound in removing soil from a con- so that they remained constrained in ing. Comparative results for all the sol-
strained fabric using pure solvents in open form. This assembly was lowered vents are shown for each fabric in Figs.
the absence of any water or detergent. into the solvent with the fabric surface 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9.
The following series of tests used the perpendicular to the transducers. After
12 solvents previously listed and fab- immersing the fabric assembly, the ul- Discussion
ric samples of wool, cotton, linen, trasound generator was switched on Redeposition was not observed in any
polyester, and rayon listed in Table I. and washing continued for a set time of case during drycleaning in open form
The soils used were engine oil, 10 minutes and a temperature of 25- using ultrasound. PCE performed ex-
ballpoint pen ink, and lipstick. 30C. To prevent any redeposition, the cellently in removing engine oil from
The trials were conducted at 30C solvent was occasionally stirred all the fabrics except polyester. It also
because of safety reasons. Initially, the slightly with a glass rod to disperse the removed an appreciable amount of lip-
trials were conducted for two time in- loose soil near the fabric surface. After stick from wool and rayon. It was not
tervals, 10 and 20 minutes, with bench- washing, the generators were switched successful in removing ballpoint ink
mark solvents like PCE and Exxon off and the samples removed and from any of the fabrics under study
ZOOO-DF, but it was observed that the rinsed in a beaker of clean solvent. The except rayon. DF-2000, IPM, and LIM
amount of soil removed was approxi- test fabrics were then dried by remov- performed very similar to PCE in the
mately the same irrespective of this ing the excess solvent with paper tow- removal of engine oil, lipstick, and
time difference. els followed by hanging on a clothes ballpoint ink from each of the fabric
line at room temperature in a venti- types. DF-2000 and LIM were observed
Procedure lated hood. After the samples were to be quick drying like PCE, whereas
For each solvent, the metal solvent completely dried, they were again con- IPM was slow drying and required
container (Fig. 4) was filled with 800 ditioned in the climate chamber for 24 heating at 75C for about five hours. It
mL of solvent. In each washing trial, hours before evaluation. The cleaning was observed that if a solvent was ca-

Polvester
Linen
.
I Ultrasonic Dry-cleaning
Ultrasonic Dry-Cleanirmy

-1ps1ck

ne-Ol Stain

a So Ivents
Solvents

Fig. 7. Comparison of Gray Scale value for stained linen fabric Fig. 8. Comparison of Gray Scale value for stained polyester fabric
drycleaned in ultrasonic NAP unit at 30C for 10 minutes. drycleaned in ultrasonic NAP unit at 30C for 10 minutes.

November 1998 Textile Chemist and Colorist 15

 Rayon Wool, Wet Cleaning
Ultrasonic Dry-cleaning

Solvents

9. Comparison of Gray Scale value for stained rayon fabric Solvents

:leaned in ultrasonic NAP unit at 30C for 10 minutes. 7g. 10. Comparison of Gray Scale value for stained wool fabric
wetcleaned in ultrasonic unit at 50C for 15 minutes.

pable of removing a soil from the given DBE performed better than PCE in lipstick from all fabric types, but only
fabric, then the entire process of soil removing lipstick from all the fabrics removed engine oil from rayon. It
removal was over in a couple of min- and it also removed engine oil from showed very poor results in the re-
utes. As the frame containing the fab- rayon to a greater extent. IPL also per- moval of engine oil and ink from the
ric was introduced in the solvent, the formed similar to DBE in the complete test fabrics. PTB performed similar to
soil was partially loosened by the sol- removal of engine oil from all fabrics. PNP in removal of lipstick from all fab-
vent. The moment the ultrasound gen- NMP was highly successful in remov- ric types and engine oil from rayon.
erators were switched on, a cloud of ing ink and lipstick from all fabric Similar to PNP, it gave poor perfor-
soil burst out from the fabric stain and types and also removed engine oil from mance in removing engine oil and ink.
dispersed and diffused into the sol- polyester and rayon to a greater extent PNB removed engine oil from wool,
vent. When this occured, the fabric was as indicated by a Gray Scale value of 4. linen, and rayon to an appreciable ex-
cleaned in a couple of minutes, with a However, it could not remove ink com- tent while it was highly successful in
maximum of five minutes and a mini- pletely from rayon, this result being removing lipstick from all the fabric
mum of a few seconds. It was because contrary to its performance with other types under study.
of this short cleaning time that times of fabrics. It is interesting to note that ul- Overall it was observed that differ-
20 minutes were dropped from further trasound helped NMP in removing en- ent solvents can remove stains from
trials. Thus using ultrasound and a gine oil from polyester and rayon and, different types of fabrics. No shrinkage
proper cleaning liquid system, it was to an appreciable extent, from wool was observed for any of the fabric stud-
possible to remove soil in a very short and linen. GBL also removed ink from ied in any of the solvents. The results
time period. Sometimes it became nec- all the fabric types. PC was successful were similar to the Launder-Ometer
essary to stir this soil cloud in the sol- in the complete removal of ink from trials with respect to soil removal,
vent with a glass rod to hasten the dif- wool, cotton, linen, and polyester and much better when the time of cleaning
fusion of soil away from the fabric and an appreciable removal from rayon. and fabric wear and tear during tum-
to prevent redeposition. This was espe- However, it could not remove engine bling is taken into consideration, thus
cially true in the case of a sticky par- oil and lipstick from any of the fabrics. making ultrasound very feasible.
ticulate soil like lipstick. PNP was highly efficient in removing
Cotton, Wet Cleaning Linen, Wet Cleaning

Solvents Solvents

Fig. 1 1 . Comparison of Gray Scale value for stained cotton fabric Fig. 12. Comparison of Gray Scale value for stained linen fab-
wetcleaned in ultrasonic unit at 50C for 15 minutes. ric wetcleaned in ultrasonic unit at 50C for 15 minutes.

16 Textile Chemist and Colorist cco Vol. 30, No. I 1

Conclusion Procedure to those with DBS. A 1%Tide concen-
Different solvents will remove different The recipe provided by ARC0 Chemi- tration was used to maintain the clar-
stains from different fabric types to dif- cals was solvent (5.8%),sodium meta- ity of the cleaning solution. In yet an-
ferent extents. It was observed that DF- silicate pentahydrate 0.20% (0.2%), other set of trials, washing was carried
2000,IPM, and LIM performed similar monoethanolamine (0.2%), Triton X- out in a solution having a recipe the
to PCE with respect to soil removal. 100 (1.0%), sodium dodecyl benzene same as described above, but with no
NMP and PNB were found to be better sulfonate (DBS) ( 2 . 0 % ) , and water solvent. Hence these trials were in a
than PCE with respect to ink and lip- (90.8%). solvent-free, aqueous-based cleaning
stick stains. If these solvents have some The above components were mea- system with either DBS or Tide as the ~~ ~

cosolvents or other ingredients as ad- sured, mixed together, and stirred well main cleaning ingredient. The results
ditives, which can help remove greasy with a glass rod to form a homogenous of all the aqueous cleaning systems at
soil like engine oil, then NMP and PNB solution. The metal can in the ultra- 50C are shown in Figs. 10, 11, 1 2 , 13, ~

could possibly be used as an environ- sound unit was filled with one liter of and 14.
mentally friendly substitute for PCE. the above prepared recipe. This Discussion
Ultrasound worked very well as the amount of solution was sufficient to
agitation factor, providing cleaning immerse three fabric swatches From initial trials it became clear that
similar to the Launder-Ometer but mounted on an aluminum frame. In soil removal using aqueous-based sys-
within a much shorter cleaning time. each washing trial, the test fabric of one tems was better at 50C than at 25C.
type with three different soils were Thus, washing at 50C for 15 minutes
Ultrasound Wetcleaning used together. After immersing the fab- was chosen as the optimum washing
ric assembly in the can, the ultrasound condition for these trials.
Objective generators were switched on and wash- At 50C, the PTB+DBS recipe was
The objective of these experiments was ing continued for 15 minutes at two found to be capable of removing an
to study soil removal from fabrics with sets of temperatures initially, 30 and appreciable amount of engine oil and
the help of ultrasound using aqueous- 50C. PTB and PNP recipes showed bet- ink from all fabric types. Lipstick was
based systems containing about 90% ter results at 50C; thus, the remaining removed to a greater extent from linen,
water, only 5.8% solvent, and some trials were carried out only at 50C. rayon, and polyester. When Tide was
other additives such as surfactants. Occasionally, the solvent was stirred substituted for DBS, the results were
This is typical of an aqueous-based in- with a glass rod to facilitate movement much better. This recipe with Tide was
dustrial cleaning formulation that re- of the soil away from the fabric surface. capable of clearing all the soils from all
moves soils that are both hydrophobic After washing, the samples were re- the fabric types under study to a greater
and hydrophilic in nature. The aim moved and rinsed in running tap wa- extent. It completely removed all the
was to develop a “greener” cleaning ter. The test fabrics were then dried soil types from polyester. It is surpris-
system that removes complex soil from and conditioned in the climate cham- ing that this water-based recipe was
fabrics and minimizes or almost elimi- ber for 24 hours before evaluation. The highly successful in removing engine
nates the use of non-aqueous solvents. cleaning effect was measured by ob- oil from polyester since this was not
serving the cleaned fabric under day- possible by PCE. Similarly, it also re-
Test Parameters light using the Macbeth Spectralight moved engine oil and lipstick com-
The fabric types, soils, and method of and comparing with AATCC Gray pletely from linen, lipstick completely
soil application were the same as in the Scale for Evaluating Staining. In a sec- from rayon, and ink from wool.
previous experiments using pure sol- ond set of trials, sodium dodecyl ben- PNP+DBS removed ink stain com-
vents. However, PTB, PNP, GBL, NMP, zene sulfonate (DBS) was replaced by pletely from polyester, while engine oil
PC, and PNB are the only solvents used commercially available Tide detergent and lipstick were removed to an appre-
in these experiments. All these solvent in powder form (regular formula) and ciable extent from linen, polyester, and
samples are completely miscible in washing trials were carried out similar rayon. Its performance on wool was the
water. poorest. In this case, substitution of

Polyester, Wet Cleaning

Rayon, Wet Cleaning

Solvents Solvents

Fig. 13. Comparison of Gray Scale value for stained polyester fabric Fig. 14. Comparison of Gray Scale value for stained rayon fabric
wetcleaned in ultrasonic unit at 50C for 15 minutes. wetcleaned in ultrasonic unit at 50C for 15 minutes.

November 7998 Textile Chemist and Colorist 17

 Summa ry Com pa r i m ? engine oil from polyester under any of
the trials.
Even though the performance of
these water-based wetcleaning recipes
are exceptionally good in removing
hydrophobic soil from fabrics, the dis-
advantage is that the fabric hand dete-
riorates. This is observed in the case of
wool, linen, and rayon.
Cleaning
Method
Fig. 1 5 shows the average Gray
Scale results for all the tests. Ultra-
sound with water and either PTB, PNB,
or PNP gave excellent cleaning results,
US - H20 & Solvent comparable or better than PCE in the
US - Solvent Only Launder-Ometer. Ultrasound wet-
0.0 L-Omter Solvent & H20 cleaning has been shown to provide a
L-Omter Solvent Only potential replacement for conventional
cleaning methods.
Solvent References
1. Patel, Farhan Mushtaq Ahmed, Solvent and
Fig. 15. Average Gray Scale Comparison of the Launder-Ometer and the Ultrasound. Ultrasonic Alternatives to Perchloroethylene
Drycleaning of Textile Fabrics, MS Thesis,
North Carolina State University, College of
Textiles, 1996.
Tide for DBS greatly improved the per- Ind engine nil appreciably from wool, 2. Tate, L., Textile Chemist and Colorist, Vol. 20,
formance of the recipe. inen, polyester, and rayon. However, No. 2, February 1988, p23.
GBL+DBS removed an appreciable nk was only removed appreciably 3. Ensminger, D., Ultrasonic Fundamentals,
Technology, Application, 2nd edition, Marcel
amount of ink and lipstick from all the rom wool and cotton. Dekker Inc., New York, N.Y., 1988.
fabric types except polyester. It re- 4. Porter, D., et al., An Environmentally Con-
moved engine oil from linen and rayon :onclusion scious Approach to Clothes Maintenance,
as indicated by a Gray Scale value of ;ince the recipes used in these experi- Small Business Initiative CRDA, KCP-94-1006,
December 1995.
3.5 and 4 respectively. Substitution of nents having about 90% water and a 5. Kuttrkuff, H., Elsevier Applied Science, New
Tide for the DBS greatly improved the mall percentage of solvent were ca- York, 1991.
performance of soil removal, especially )able of removing an appreciable 6. deAraujo, A., American Dyestuff Reporter,
from polyester, where all the soil types mount of soil from fabrics, the authors Vol. 41, No. 20, September 1952, p615.
were completely removed as seen by an conclude that water-based clean-
the Gray Scale value of 5 . Its perfor- ng systems with ultrasound can be Acknowledgements
mance on linen and rayon was also ised to remove complex water-in- The work presented here was, in a
noticeable. However it removed ink oluble soil from fabrics and such sys- large part, sponsored by the United
from wool to a greater extent and en- ems hold strong potential in today’s States Environmental Protection
gine oil and lipstick to a lesser extent. nvironmentally conscious laundry Agency (EPA), National Risk Manage-
Performance on cotton was poorer than nd drycleaning industry. ment Research Laboratory, Air Pollu-
with the DBS recipe. Among all the solvents used i n tion Prevention and Control Division,
NMP+DBS performance is not good, vetcleaning, it is observed that water- Research Triangle Park, N.C.
not even in the case of ink removal lased recipes with PTB, PNP, and PNB
where NMP has shown to perform very ave better results than PCE in many Author’s Address
well when present alone as seen in the lut not all respects. It is interesting to Robert McCall, College of Textiles,
Launder-Ometer trials and drycleaning iote that such recipes were capable of North Carolina State University, P.O.
trials. However, with Tide, the perfor- emoving engine oil completely from Box 8301, Raleigh, N.C. 27695-8301;
mance was found to be better. It re- iolyester when cleaning was carried telephone 919-515-6591; fax 919-515-
moved appreciable amounts of soils ut at 50C for 15 minutes. It must be 6532; e-mail rmccall@tx.ncsu.edu.
from wool, linen, polyester, and rayon. ioted that even PCE could not remove
The performance of PNB in water
with Tide was the best of all the solvent
combinations. It was successful in re-
moving almost all the soil types from
all the fabric types under study, either
completely or at least to an appreciable
1 Crease Appearance Replicas
These replicas are used to visually evaluate crease retention of pressed-in creases
extent. It removed lipstick completely
from all fabric types giving a Gray Scale in fabrics after repeated home laundering. The replicas represent grades of 1-5
of 5 , ink completely from wool and with a five being the best crease retention and a one being the least crease retention.
polyester, and engine oil completely Any washable fabric may be evaluated for crease appearance using AATCC Test
from polyester. PNB+Tide also re- Methods 88C and 143. Order No. 8720 ..............................................
$330.00
moved lipstick completely from linen
and polyester and ink to an appreciable U.S. orders include shipping and handling. Orders outside the U.S. must request a proforma invoice
extent from all fabric types. AATCC
When using only DBS and Tide P.O.Box 12215 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
alone with water, the Tide formulation Tel: 919-549-8141 Fax: 919-549-8933 e-mail: ordersQaatcc.org
worked the best. Lipstick was com- Visa, Mastercard or American Express Accepted
pletely removed from all fabric types

18 Textile Chemist and Colorist Vol. 30,No. 11