Note: Descriptions are shown in the official language in which they were submitted.
TI TLE 1 3 .~ 8
TREATMEt'JT O~ CARPETS
FIELD OF THE INVENTION
The present invention concerns improvements in
and relating to the treatment of carpets, especially those
carpets whose pile fibers comprise polyamide fibers, and
is more particularly concerned with a new process that
improves their stain-resistance by treatment of the
carpets in place.
BAC ~GROUND O F TH E I NVENT I ON
Polyamide fibers ~generally referred to as
nylon) are preferred fibers for use as pile fibers in
carpets, and are used for this purpose both in the form of
continuous filament yarns, generally bulked continuous
filament yarns, and in various forms as cut fiber, often
called staple fiber. For many years, both nylon 66 and
nylon 6 have been used in large quantities in carpeting;
each polymer has its advantages, for certain purposes; as
will be noted herein, nylon 6 has a greater affinity for
many dyestuffs than does nylon 66. Although there are
many different types of nylon carpeting, a conventional
type is manufactured by inserting, e.g., plied nylon yarn
into a conventional primary backing, e.g., of jute or
polypropylene fibers, and then, after dyeing, applying a
conventional carpet backing adhesive composition,
sometimes referred to as latex, which is adhered also to a
secondary backing material, as described, e.g., for a
conventional tufted nylon carpet in Ucci, U.S. Patent
No. 4,579,762, issued April 1, 1986. Another type of
secondary backing that is frequently used is a foam-
backing, i.e. a layer of, e.g., polyurethane foam that can
be attached directly to the primary backing without any
-1- ~
-2- 13~8~
need for such adhesive. Generally, especially when usinq
carpeting on flooring, in addition to such primary
backing, (any adhesive composition) and secondary backing
(all underneath the nylon fiber pile), most householders
install a conventional underlay or underpad of felted
fibers or foam, e.g. of polyurethane, which conventional
underlay is generally an entirely separate layer that is
not integrally or overall attached to the carpet per se in
the same way as the adhesive backing and secondary backing
are integrally attached to the primary backing (carrying
the nylon pile that is the top or outer surface of the
carpet). During commercial manufacture, when such carpets
are dyed, the dyeing process is carried out on the nylon
pile when it is attached to the primary backing only,
i.e., before (any adhesive latex composition and) the
secondary backing is secured to the primary backing, and
the dyeing process is carried out in conventional manner,
e.g., in a beck dyeing machine, generally by a continuous
process in which this primary carpet (i.e., the nylon pile
and the primary backing only) is immersed in the dye
liquor at the boil so as to effect contact and effective
and rapid penetration of the dyestuff into the nylon pile,
although there are other methods of coloring nylon, e.g.,
by producer-dyeing, i.e., including pigmentation into the
nylon polymer before ~pinning.
Recently, there has been major commercial
- interest in imparting ~tain-resistance" to nylon fibers
and carpets, as described, for instance, in Textile Month,
October, 1987, pages 32-34, and ~everal patents are being
published on various aspects of imparting stain-resistance
to nylon carpetc and/or carpet fibers. A major concern of
the customer is the durability of the treatment during the
various types of treatment that may be encountered during
the life of a carpet.
1~3~88
Munk et al., U.S. Patent No. 4,699,812, issued
October 13, 1987, claims a process for impartin~ stain-
resistance to polyamide, wool and silk fibers by
contacting the fibers with a solution of an aliphatic
sulfonic acid under specified conditions of acid pH and
temperature. The primary interest appears to be nylon
carpets, but the procedure in, e.g., Example l shows
vigorous mechanical agitation of a woven nylon 6 fiber
"sleeve", in an aqueous solution of a commercial aliphatic
sulfonic acid, at a pH adjusted to 2, and at a temperature
of 50~C, for 15 minutes, followed by drying with paper
towels and in an oven. Variants may be used, at a
manufacturing stage prior to the finished product, such as
is often done in carpet manufacture; immersing the
fabrics, removing excess solution by passing through
rollers, and air-drying of the moist fibers at ambient
temperature is mentioned; ~praying onto the carpet is also
mentioned; in particular, the treatment may be during or
immediately subsequent the dyeing stage (column 4).
Example VII shows that treatment at a pH of 3.8 shows far
less improvement in stain resistance than treatment at a
pH of 2. Accordingly, a pH between about 1.5 and about
3.0 is said to give more effective results (column 3,
lines 56-7). Example III shows that the stain resistance
(of Example I) remains after vigorous agitation for 15
minutes at 50~C in an aqueous detergent solution at a pH
of 9.5, rinsing and oven-drying.
Blyth et al., U.S. Patent No. 4,680,212, issued
July 14, 1987, discloses a process of applying a ~pin
finish to nylon fibers during the melt polymerization
process by which the fibers are prepared, the finish
containing one or more stain blocker~s) in specified
amounts. Stain blockers are described and distinguished
from fluorochemicals that are used to reduce the tendency
of soil to adhere to the fiber. Fluorochemicals are used,
however, in combination with a stain-blocker, to improve
-4~ 8
the durability of stain-resistance imparted by the stain-
blocker, in the sense that the carpet retains more stain-
resistance after being subjected to much traffic.
Blyth et al., U.S. Patent No. 4,S92,940, issued
June 3, 1986, discloses a process of immersing a carpet in
a boiling aqueous solution of a selected phenol-
formaldehyde condensation product at an acid pH (4.5 or
less). The durability of treated carpets is tested
variously, including by subjecting carpet eamples to two
wash cycles in a heavy-duty washing machine using
detergent before applying the stain.
Ucci, U.S. Patent No. 4,579,762, i~ued April 1,
1986, is referred to above, and claims a carpet having a
primary backing coated with an adhesive composition
(containing a fluorochemical) and with a pile of nylon
fibers (the nylon polymer being modified to contain
aromatic sulfonate units). In other words, the stain-
resistance is obtained by incorporating stain-resistance
into the nylon polymer itself, by chemical modification.
The vulnerability of the typical carpet system to water,
and the problems caused by the slow process of drying are
emphasized in the lower portion of column 1, and at the
top of column 2.
Ucci et al., U.S. Patent No. 4,501,591, issued
February 26, 1985, claims a process for imparting etain-
resistance during a proccs6 for continuously dyeing a
carpet, involving adding a silicate and a sulfonated
phenol- or napthol-formaldehyde condensation product to
the aqueous dye liquor at specified liquor ratios, and
then subjecting the carpet to an atmosphere of steam,
washing with water and drying. The pH of the liquor in
the only Example is 4.5, but is said typically to be in
the range of 4.5 to 8 ~column 3, lines 22-3). Durability
is tested by carrying out a Stain Resistance Test on 5 cm
x 5 cm carpet eamples alternating with heavy duty cleaning
using Streamex (Steamex) commercial units. Ucci, like
-5- 133~8~
others, disparages (column 1, lines 46-59) the prior usage
of fluorochemicals to minimize staining.
Greschler et al., EP A1 0235989, published
September 9, 1987, and corresponding to U.S. Patent
No. 4,780,099, discloses a process for applying sulfonated
phenol- or naphthol-formaldehyde condensation products to
nylon carpets, after dyeing, in a bath at a pH of between
1 and 2.5, whereby yellowing of the treated articles due
to exposure to NO2 is reduced.
Mesitol~NBS is mentioned by Greschler as a
commercially available material (available from Mobay
Chemical Corporation). This is stated in Product Bulletin
T.D.S. #1246/1 (Revised) August, 1981, to be an anionic
after treating agent and a reserving agent to minimize the
staining by selected direct dyes of the polyamide portion
in polyamide cellulosic fiber blends, and the ~Application
Procedures" indicate that the fabric should be treated in
a bath. It is understood that stain-blockers are dye-
resists or dye-reserving agents such as have long been
known and widely used in textile applications, such as
resist-printing of nylon fibers. In other words, the
mechanism of stain-blocking (in the sense of dye-
reserving) has been used for many years.
As indicated in the above patent specifications,
and in the analysi6 in the October l9, 1987, issue of
Textile Month, referred to a~ove, hitherto, the emphasis
on process techniques, as regards imparting stain-
resistance, has been reported to achieve this during the
dyeing of the primary carpet, or earlier in the
manufacturing process, e.g., by incorporation of modifiers
into the nylon polymer, or by engineering or treatment of
the fiber itself. So far as is known, prior to the
present invention, it had not been disclosed that a
significant improvement in stain-resistance could be
effective when applied to "in place" carpet that had
already been installed with any appropriate secondary
* denotes ~rade mark
--5--
A~'
~,..
1~39~8~
backing, and normally also an underpad, as opposed to
conventional immersion of the primary carpet in a dye
liquor or equivalent application, usually under acid
conditions, followed by conventional processing, such as
washing, fixing, squeezing, and appropriate drying
treatments at elevated temperatures during a manufacturing
process.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
I have now found, according to the present
invention, that a significant improvement in stain-
resistance may be effected by applying stain-blockers to
installed carpets, in contrast with the immersion or other
manufacturing treatments that have been referred to, and
that the results of thi~ ~n-place treatment have been
acceptable to a surprising extent.
Accordingly, there is provided, according to the
invention, a process of imparting stain-resistance to an
installed nylon carpet by a process that includes the
steps of treating the installed nylon carpet, especially a
carpet of nylon 66 fiber, by applying thereto a stain-
blocker in sufficient amount and in such manner as to
obtain a significant improvement in stain-resistance, and
of allowing the treated carpet to dry in the atmosphere.
The process of the invention i~ described in
more detail and with preferred embodiments hereinafter,
and is expected to have considerable commercial
significance, as will be described. For in~tance, a
preferred commercial application is expected to be by
overall treatment by appropriately-trained personnel to
obtain the type of professional appearance that a customer
normally expects. This is expected to be especially
useful when applied as a supplement to stain-resist and/or
soil-resist treatments that have already been applied
- during the manufacturing process, as described in the
3~ prior art referred to already. However, overall treatment
of carpets that have not been treated with stain-blocker
-7- ~3~'3~
(durin~ manufacture or otherwise) is also feasible, and
may prove useful, also. These types of overall treatment,
to give an appearance that is commercially acceptable, are
generally to be preferred in contrast with spot or
localized treatments such as may result from application
topically to an installed carpet by use of a spray can.
However, as will be seen, spot cleaning with detergents
may affect the durability of stain-resist performance, so
that certain topical applications to installed carpets may
be advantageous, depending on circumstances.
I was surprised to discover that a ~ignificant
improvement and a satisfactory commercially-satisfying
appearance could be obtained by the process of the
invention, i.e., application to an installed carpet,
lS (especially to deep pile carpets with a pile height of
about l/4-inch or more, more particularly 1/2-inch, or
3/4-inch or more) since there has been a prejudice in the
trade against this technique and in favor of application
during the manufacturing process, as indicated
hereinbefore, e.g., by Ucci.
I have also discovered that stain-resistance may
be imparted to an in-place nylon carpet whose stain-
resistance has been reduced due to treatment with anti-
microbial agents, including commonly-used household
disinfectants, and/or with deodorizers. Such treatments,
when applied to a stain-resistant carpet, tend to destroy
or substantially diminish the stain-resistance. By
applying a stain-blocker after treatment with such
products, the stain-resistance of the disinfected and/or
deodorized carpet can be restored and even improved. This
embodiment may also serve, of course, to impart stain-
resistance to an in-place carpet which was not previously
stain-resistant.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWING
The file of this patent contains at least one
drawing executed in color. Copies of this patent with
-8- 1~398~
color drawing(s) will be provided by the Patent and
Trademark Office upon request and payment of the necessary
fee.
The Figure is a color photograph to show the
Stain Rating Scale that was used herein.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION
The treating step must be carried out in such
manner and with stain-blocker in sufficient amount that a
significant improvement in stain-resistance is obtained.
I believe that a significant increase in stain-resistance
will be readily apparent to a ~killed person with the aid
of a suitable test. As will be recognized by those
experienced in the treatment of nylon carpets, however,
the precise treatment conditions that may be necessary
will depend on the nature of the carpet, e.g., its
construction (various features being mentioned herein),
the type of nylon fiber used, and the stain-resistance of
the nylon fibers in the pile before commencing the
treatment. Experience in determining suitable conditions
can be obtained empirically in conjunction with the
~ information contained herein, especially in the Examples.
Stain-resistance may be determined, if desired, by any of
a number of published tests, but herein, stain-resistance
levels are measured according to Stain Test 1, unless
stated otherwise. Generally, the starting carpet (i.e.,
the carpet before treatment) will be treated because it is
considered to have insufficient stain-resistance. As will
be shown hereinafter, however, detergent-cleaning and wear
can reduce the stain-resictance of a carpet, at least so
far as the durability of the stain-resistance is
concerned. Accordingly, even if a ~tarting carpet already
passes a recognized test for stain-resistance, an
improvement in stain-resistance, at least in the sense of
~ the durability of the stain-resistance, may be obtained by
in-place treatment with ctain-blocker as described herein
(it being understood, however, that it may be undesirable
9 ~339$~3
to build up too much coating of stain-blocker, e.g. for
aesthetic reasons). However, for most purposes, according
to the present invention, since a starting carpet will
generally have inadequate stain-resistance, as can be
shown by a stain-rating of 4 or less (as described
hereinafter with regard to Stain Test 1, with staining for
30 minutes) a significant improvement in stain-resistance
can be demonstrated for the ~urposes of the present
invention by improvement from such a stain-rating of 4, to
a stain-rating of 5. As will be shown in some Examples,
however, it is possible to improve carpets by using the
process of the invention from even lower starting stain-
ratings, and such more effective treatments are generally
preferred. For instance, a much improved stain-resistance
can be shown using a longer staining time of 24 hours for
Stain Test 1, and improving from a stain-rating of 4 to 5,
and treatments to obtain this are preferred. Once
appropriate treatment conditions have been cstablished for
any particular type of carpet, using as starting carpet a
sample having a low stain-rating, and improving to the
desired high stain-rating, preferably of 5, and thus
determining that a significant improvement in (or much
improved) stain-resistance is obtainable using such
conditions, including the amounts of stain-blocker and
conditions for that particular type of carpet, eguivalent
treatment conditions may be applied, according to the
invention, including to ~tarting carpets having a higher
stain-rating, and even a ~tain-rating or 5, so as to
improve the durability of the stain-resistance by
treatment according to the invention. Thus, as indicated,
although other staining tests may be perfectly
satisfactory, and even preferred by some operators or for
certain purposes, for ease of understanding and
- consistency throughout the remainder of this
specification, it will be understood that references to
stain-ratings herein will be to this Stain ~est 1.
-lo- ~ 339~
STAIN TEST l
In this standardized Stain Test 1, each carpet
specimen is first stained and then spot cleaned by hand in
an attempt to remove the stain, and the various samples
are then compared. As will be apparent, essentially the
same procedure is used, but the duration of the ~taining
period may be increased so as to increase the ceverity of
the staining test. The staining agent is cherry-flavored,
sugar-sweetened Kool-Aid~ (sold commercially), mixed in
amount 45 gms (+ l) of Kool-Aid~ in 500 ccs water, and
allowed to reach room temperature, i.e., 75~F (+ 5) or
24~C (+ 3), before using.
The specimen is placed on a flat non-absorbent
surface, 20 ml of Kool-Aid~ are poured onto the carpet
specimen from a height of 12 inches (30 cm) above the
carpet surface, and the cpecimen ic then left undisturbed
for a staining period that may be, e.g., 5 min., 30 min.
or 24 hours, according to the desired severity of the
test. (Although the 5 min. staining period is not
referred to in the Examples herein, earlier tests have
used a staining period as ~hort as this.)
Excess stain is blotted with a clean white cloth
or clean white paper towel or scooped up as much as
possible, without scrubbing. Blotting is always performed
from the outer edge of cpill in towards the middle to keep
the spill from ~preading. Cold water is applied with a
- clean white cloth or a sponge over the 6tained area,
gently rubbing against the pile from left to right and
then reversing the direction from right to left. The
excess is blotted.
A detergent cleaning solution (15 gms (+ 1) of
TIDE detergent mixed in 1000 cc of water, and also allowed
to reach room temperature before using), is applied with a
clean white cloth or a eponge directly to the ~pot, gently
rubbing the pile from left to right and then reversing the
direction from right to left. The entire stain is
--1 0--
39~3
treated, all the way to the bottom of the pile, and then
the blotting is repeated.
The cold water treatment is repeated, and the
carpet is blotted thoroughly, to remove the stain and also
the cleaning solution, so the carpet does not feel sticky
or soapy.
The cold water and detergent cleaning steps are
repeated until the stain is no longer visible, or no
further progress can be achieved. The carpet is blotted
completely to absorb all the moisture.
The stain-resistance of the carpet is visually
determined by the amount of color left in the stained area
of the carpet after this cleaning treatment. This is
referred to as the stain-rating, and is herein determined
according to the Stain Rating Scale (that is illustrated
in the Figure, being a photograph of a Stain Rating Scale)
that is currently used by and available from the Carpet
Fibers Division of E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company,
Wilmington, Delaware 19898. These colors can be
categorized according to the following standards:
5 - no staining
4 - slight staining
3 - noticeable staining
2 ~ considerable staining
1 ~ heavy staining
In other wôrds, a ~tain-rating of 5 is
excellent, showing excellent stain-resistance, whereas 1
is a bad rating, showing persistence of heavy ~taining.
As will be understood, and shown hereinafter in the
Examples, even an improvement in stain-rating from 1 to 3
(after a 30 min. staining period) shows a significant
increase in stain-resistance. As can be seen from the
Stain Rating Scale, a dramatic difference in color is
shown by changes in ~tain-rating at these low levels,
while it is recognized that it is generally more difficult
to improve stain-ratings above 4.
-12- 133~8~
Suitable stain-blockers that may be used according
to the invention include those described in Blyth et al.,
U.S. Patent No. 4,680,212, and the sulfonated condensation
products described (as stain-resist agents) in Greschler
et al., EP Al 0235 989, and the improved materials, being
acetylated or etherified sulfonated phenol-formaldehyde
condensation products referred to in EP Al 0235 980,
published September 9, 1987, in the name of Liss (directed
to synthetic polyamide textile substrates, such as
carpeting, treated with such improved condensation products,
so as to impart stain-resistance to the substrate without
suffering from a yellowing problem associated with prior art
materials) and also the compositions listed in copending
Canadian applications 586,055 and 586,056, both filed
1988 December 15 (corresponding to U.S. 4,883,839 and
5,001,004). To avoid any misunderstanding, a staining agent
itself is not regarded as a "stain-blocker" (as the term is
used herein) as the objective is to achieve stain-resistance
and to avoid or minimize color changes in the carpet, as a
result of treatments according to the invention.
As indicated in the Background above, and in the
prior art referred to, the term stain-resist agent has
sometimes been used broadly to include fluorochemicals that
should be and are herein more correctly described as soil-
resist agents, whereas the term stain-blocker has been and
is herein used more narrowly to exclude soil-resist agents
that do not have the capability of resisting staining by red
food dyes such as found in Kool-Aid~, e.g. Red Dye No. 40.
In addition to treatment of the installed nylon
carpet with a stain-blocker, in accordance with the
-12-
:,
-13- 1333~
present invention, the durability of the stain-resistance
may be improved by treatment of the installed carpet with
a compound to improve the anti-soiling characteristic,
especially a fluorochemical (sometimes referred to as a
stain-resist agent) as described in Blyth et al., U.S.
Patent No. 4,680,212 and herein~ and in the other
references that are mentioned herein.
As described herein, and more particularly in
the Examples, different materials may be applied in
combination, being applied from a common aqueous or other
carrier, or separately.
As described more particularly hereinafter, in
the Examples, the efficacy of the stain-resistance that is
imparted is generally improved by improving the overall
distribution and opportunity for contact between the nylon
fibers and the materials applied, especially by achieving
thorough and essentially uniform overall wetting of the
nylon fibers, especially reaching down to impart stain-
resistance to the base of the pile fiber, as far as will
be visible, during normal wear, and when the pile fibers
are parted for any reason. This is generally and most
conveniently achieved by applying an aqueous detergent
solution to achieve the desired objective of overall and
thorough wetting of the nylon pile fibers, and preferably
by mechanical working to improve contact, distribution and
penetration, e.g., by a pile brush operated by hand or
automatically, for instance using a cleaning device such
as may be available commercially. Application of a
detergent solution may conveniently be achieved by first
cleaning the carpet, e.g., using a cleaning machine that
is commercially available with a detergent that is sold
for such purpose, especially if the carpet is initially in
soiled condition, and then, while the carpet fibers are
still in moist condition, the stain-blocker (and
fluorochemical soil-resist agent, if desired) may be
-13-
-
1~39888
-14-
ap~lied and preferably worked into the carpet. However,
as indicated hereinafter, good results have also been
achieved by applying the stain-blocker together with a
detergent.
As indicated, it will generally be desirable to
apply materials in such way as to avoid or minimize shade
changes and spotty results, such as would recult from
inappropriate and/or uneven application. However, as
indicated elsewhere, spot cleaning or other topical-type
cleaning can reduce the stain-resistance that has already
been imparted to nylon fibers, and so can remove some of
the effectiveness of any existing stain-blocker on the
fibers, and this may make it desirable to apply spot or
other topical applications to achieve as uniform and
overall result as possible on the installed carpet. It
will be understood that the term overall i5 used herein in
contrast to spot or localized applications.
An essential feature of the present invention,
as it will be applied in commercial practice, is treatment
of the installed carpet in place, i.e., without removal of
the carpeting from the floor or whatever location is
normal (although it will be understood that, for testing
purposes, e.g., in the laboratory, carpets and samples of
carpeting can and will be treated in other locations), as
opposed to treatment of a carpet (or precursor nylon fiber
or even polymer) by a 6tain-blocker by immercion or
otherwise during a manufacturing process. Accordingly,
depending on the location of the installed carpet, and the
surrounding environment, it will generally be desirable to
use appropriate conditions and precautions, e.g., limiting
the amount of water, ~ince drying of the treated carpet
will generally not be so easily achievable as during a
manufacturing process. However, an advantage of treatment
of an installed carpet is that (depending on the
convenience of the owner of the carpet) the stain-blocker
may be left in contact with the nylon fiberc for a longer
-14-
-15- 1~3~;3
period, overnight, or even over a weekend, than would be
practical in most manufacturing processes. This feature
means that some limitations that may have been applicable
in practice to limit the use of potential known dye-resist
agents (as potential stain-blockers) may not apply for use
according to the present invention, and broadens the scope
of applicability of the present invention to other stain-
blockers that have not been used hitherto in the
manufacturing process. It is of the essence of the
present invention that the treated carpet cannot be dried
in an oven, as have been the case after application of
stain-blockers in a manufacturing process. Accordingly,
the treated carpet is allowed to dry in the air, but it
will generally be preferable to assist the drying of the
treated carpet by blowing hot air through the pile of the
installed carpet. As indicated, it will generally be
desirable to allow the stain-blocker to remain in contact
with the nylon fibers in moist condition for several
hours, e.g., at least six hours, and preferably overnight,
before completing the drying of the treated carpet, e.g.,
- by blowing hot air.
As can be seen from the Examples herein,
significant improvements in stain-resistance have been
obtained according to the invention by treatment with
stain-blocker at normal to alkaline pH values, e.g., from
pH values of about 7 up to about 11. This is contrary to
what has been indicated in the art, where emphasis has
been on the advantages of applying ~tain-blockers under
acidic conditions, and usually at pH values of less than
5, and sometimes at acidic pH values much less than 5.
Although it may be possible to treat the carpets at such
acidic pH values, depending on the environment of the
installed carpets, the treatment step according to the
present invention will generally be preferably carried out
at pH values that are not too far from normal, e.g., from
about 4 to about 11, even though a value of about 6 or
-16- 3
more is generally to be preferred over more acid pH
- values.
Additional processes of this invention relate to
the application of anti-microbial a~ents and/or
deodorizers to in-place nylon carpets followed by the
application of a stain-blocker, optionally in combination
with a soil-resist agent such as a fluorochemical. Many
anti-microbial agents, including common household
disinfectants, and deodorizers, when applied to nylon
carpets, destroy or significantly neutralize any
stain-resistance the carpet may have had. The subsequent
application of a stain-blocker renews the stain-resistance
of the carpet or imparts such properties to carpets never
previously having been stain-resistant.
The term "anti-microbialn, as used herein,
refers to broad spectrum agents which are active against
most bacteria, against insects, fungi and odors caused by
bacteria and germs. The term also encompasses common
mildewcides, disinfectants, bactericides, fungicides and
insecticides. Such compounds may be classified either as
"non-residual", most commonly quaternary ammonium
compounds which kill on contact and have no residual
effect, or as "residual" agents which do remain active for
a finite period of time after application. Both classes
of compounds generally rely upon cationic active
ingredients; thus when they are applied to a nylon carpet
whose fibers have previously been treated with stain-
blockers which are anionic in nature, the stain-resistance
is largely neutralized. Anti-microbial agents are
typically applied to nylon carpets either topically or by
injection through the carpet-backing. (In the latter
case, the carpet is first lifted from the underpad in the
area where the agent is to be injected.) Anti-microbials
- are commonly used on carpets as disinfectants to kill
bacteria or other targets introduced into the carpet by a
wide variety of sources, including, for example, water
-16-
-17- ~3~
dama~e, sewer back-up, uncleaned spills, pet excretions,
etc.
The term "deodorizer" or "deodorizing agent", as
used herein, refers either to compounds containing merely
a perfume or a similar substance used to mask odors or to
an active material which usually is comprised of both an
odor masker and a small amount of one or more anti-
microbial agents, typically a disinfectant. Deodorizers
too -- particularly cationic and some nonionic types --
have a neutralizing effect on stain-resistance.
I have now found that in-place nylon carpets may
be disinfected and imparted with stain-resistance by first
wetting the carpet, applying an anti-microbial agent to
the carpet, and then, while the carpet is still moist,
applying a stain-blocker to the pile fibers in sufficient
amount and in such manner as to obtain significant
improvement in stain-resistance, following which
application the carpet is allowed to dry in the
atmosphere.
Similarly, in-place nylon carpets, the fibers of
which have previously been treated with a 6tain-blocker,
may be disinfected and imparted once again with stain-
resistance by first wetting the carpet, applying an anti-
microbial agent, then, while the carpet is still moist,
applying a stain-blocker, which is mechanically worked
into the nylon fibers of the pile of the carpet so as to
improve the distribution and contact between the stain-
blocker and the nylon fibers of the pile of the carpet,
the stain-blocker being applied in sufficient amount and
in such manner as to obtain a significant improvement in
stain-resistance. The carpet, thus treated, is then
allowed to air-dry.
The process may optionally be modified by
applying an aqueous mixture of a soil-resist agent (such
as a fluorochemical) and a stain-blocker in place of the
~ ~39~3~
stain-blocker alone, or by applying the soil-re~ist agent
- and the stain-blocker to the carpet separately.
In all these processes a quantity of anti-
microbial agent sufficient to disinfect the area of the
carpet being treated should be used, and the agent should
be applied in accordance with the manufacturer's
recommendations.
The wetting step described above ~erves to
promote effective distribution of both the anti-microbial
agent and the stain-blocker. Wetting is preferably
achieved by steam-cleaning, though other means such as
wet-vacuuming, shampooing or simply applying water may
also be used. In the event the carpet to be treated is
already wet or moist as, for example, from water damage,
the wetting step may be omitted.
Alternative processes involving the application
of the anti-microbial agent prior to or simultaneously
with the wetting or steam-cleaning of the carpet are also
effective.
To both deodorize and impart stain-resistance to
an in-place nylon carpet, an aqueous solution of a stain-
blocker and a deodorizing aqent is applied to the carpet,
the pile fibers are mechanically worked so as to improve
the distribution and contact between the stain-blocker and
the nylon fibers of the pile, the stain-blocker being
applied in sufficient amount and in such manner as to
obtain a significant improvement in stain-resistance.
Finally, the carpet is allowed to air-dry.
It should be noted that in this process the
deodorizer serves only to mask odors. To be effective as
a disinfectant, any cationic active ingredient found in
the deodorizing agent would have to be applied prior to
the stain-blocker.
Just as with anti-microbials, deodorizers should
3~ be applied in accordance with manufacturer's
-18-
-19~ 93~;3
recommendations and in sufficient quantities to deodorize
the ~rea of the carpet being treated.
Just as many anti-microbial and deodorizing
agents serve to reduce stain-resistance, other treatments
may have a similar deleterious effect. Examples of such
treatments include re-dyeing of an in-place carpet,
application of high pH (10 or more) pre-sprays used to
quickly neutralize highly soiled areas, use of some
silicone-containing soil-resist agents, and use of certain
insecticides. In each of these cases, I have been able to
attain a significant improvement in the stain-resistance
of such carpets after any such treatment. With respect to
dyeing, the improvement can be attained whether the carpet
is first redyed and then treated with the stain-blocker or
alternatively if the stain-blocker is mixed with the dye
and applied simultaneously.
In all these cases, as with the processes for
disinfecting or deodorlzing the carpet prior to imparting
stain-resistance, the preferred classes of stain-blockers
are sulfonated phenol-formaldehyde condensate polymers,
sulfonated naphthol-formaldehyde condensate polymers or
hydrolyzed vinyl aromatic-maleic anhydride polymers.
Combinations of any two or more of these stain-blockers
may also be used.
The invention is further illustrated in the
following Examples, ln which all parts and percentages are
by weight, o.w.f. is estimated weiqht of indicated active
ingredient on weight of (nylon face) fiber, and the nylon
is 66 nylon, unless otherwise indicated, and approximate
metric equivalents are given.
EXAMPLE I
A bcf (bulked continuous filament) nylon 1110-68
yarn, i.e. 1110 denier (1235 dtex) and 68 filaments (of
trilobal cross-section), was produced by a conventional
process. Two of these yarns were plied and twi~ted to
produce a yarn having a balanced twist of 4.5 tpi (turns
--19--
-20~ 9 ~ 8 ~
per inch, 1.8 turns per cm). The resulting yarn was then
heat-set at 270~~ (132~C) in a Superba heat-setting
machine. A cut pile tufted carpet was constructed from
the heat-set yarn and a conventional polypropylene primary
backing to the following specifications: - 42 oz/sq yd;
1/2 ~nch pile height; 1/10 gauge; 31 stitch r~te per
3 inches (1.4 Kg/sq m; 13 mm; 1/4 cm; 41/100 cm). This
carpet was dyed (to a light beige ~hade) and finished,
using a conventional batch dye process, dye auxilliaries
and the following dye formula, based on weight of carpet,
0.011% C.I. Acid Yellow 219, 0.0094% C.I. Acid Red 361,
0.008~ C.I. Acid Blue 277 at a pH of 6.5. After dyeing,
this carpet was rinsed. A commercial fluorochemical
(equivalent to cationic version of Teflon~ Toughcoat,
available from E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company,
Wilmington, Delaware 19898, was applied (0.9% o.w.f.) in
a conventional spray application, and the carpet was dried
in an oven. A commercially available latex composition
(Textile Rubber Co., Calhoun, GA) was applied as a carpet
backing adhesive, with a ~econdary polypropylene backing
under the Trademark Actionbac (Amoco, Atlanta, GA).
This "finished carpet" with latex and secondary
backing was then used as a specimen for "in place" treatment
with a stain-blocker. A 20g/1 solution of an acetylated
Mesitol NBS solution as referred to in EP Al 0235 980,
mentioned above, was used for the stain-blocker solution
(adjusted to pH 5.0 with citric acid) and was uniformily
applied at approximately 0.5% of active stain resist o.w.f.
by spraying at room temperature (using a Sears brand, 2
gallon (about 7.5 liter) capacity open top sprayer). The
sprayed mixture was worked into the pile fiber using a pile
brush. The treated carpet was allowed to dry at room
temperature.
Samples of the dried carpet were then tested by
staining for 30 min., using Kool-Aid~, according to Stain
-20-
-~L- ~ 3 3 ~ ~ 8 ~
~est 1. Untreated (control) samples of the same carpet,
(i.e., without the stain-blocker treatment) were also
tested, for comparative purposes. The treated carpet
samples showed only a noticeable pink stain on the fiber,
after cleaning, i.e. a stain-rating of 3, in contrast to
dark red staining (i.e. a stain-rating of l) on the
untreated carpet samples. Although even this stain-rating
(3) would not be acceptable for this half inch pile
carpet, there was significant improvement in stain-
resistance, in comparison with the rating (1) for theuntreated carpet, and it will be understood that by
changing the treatment conditions for the same carpet, or
by applying the same treatment to a different carpet
(e.g., with a less dense, shorter pile, Suessen set,
staple carpet, providing greater accessibility for the
stain-blocker), more effective stain-blocking can be
expected, and obtained, as will be seen hereinafter.
A similar result has been obtained by using
Mesitol NsS solution itself, i.e. the non-acetylated
material, in similar amounts and under similar conditions.
EXAMPLE II
This carpet was similar to that in Example I,
except that the yarn was 3.0s ~5.1 m/g) cotton count, 3. a
tpi (1.5 turns per cm) and Suessen set at 200~C, and the
carpet was 45 oz/sq yd (1.5 ~g/sq m) and 24 stitches per 3
inches (31/lO cm), and Scotchgard Fluorochemical FC 393
was applied instead of the fluorochemical used in
Example I. When this carpet was treated with the same
stain-blocker and tested under similar conditions as in
Example I, it gave only a slight pink stain (rating 4), in
contrast to the dark red staining for the untreated
carpet.
EXAMPLE III
A sample of the finished carpet, as prepared in
Example II, was placed on a padding material (metrix lO0,
prime urethane carpet cushion of 1/4 inch ~6 ~m)
* denotes trade mark
-21-
''s
~ 3 3 ~ 8
thickness, sold by General Felt Industries & Co.) to
simulate the conditions of a typical carpet "in place",
for in-home use, and then cleaned with 4 passes of a
Chemco brand soil extractor model 60DM, (available from
Accommodation Sanitary Supply Co., Philadelphia, PA) using
Spartan X-Traction II detergent solution (a standard
detergent composition also available from Accommodation
Sanitary S-~pply Co.) diluted 1:53 in room temperature
water. The damp carpet (estimated 10-20% moisture level)
was then sprayed with a mixture containing Teflon8 MF
(Du Pont brand fluorochemical): acetylated Mesitol Nss~
as in Example I: water in l:l:lS proportions at a pH of
S.0 using a pressurized sprayer, 2 gallon (7.5 liters)
capacity (brand name Aconoline, sold by B & G Equipment
Co.) in approximate amount of active stain resist
estimated to be 1% o.w.f. The sprayed mixture was then
worked into the pile fiber using a pile brush as in
Example I. The treated carpet was allowed to dry in air
and then stain tested as described in Example I, except
that the staining solution remained for 24 hours before
cleaning. The treated carpet showed no visible stain
(stain-rating of S) compared to untreated carpet (a dark
red stain with a stain-rating of 1).
This Example shows the improved effect achieved
by uniform distribution of stain resist throughout the
pile fiber by spraying the carpet while still moist after
detergent-cleaning.
EXAMPLE IV
This is similar to Example III, except that 8
cleaning passes were performed with the Chemco soil
extractor, the cleaning detergent solution consisted of 1
part of the Spartan X-Traction II detergent mixed with 0.2
parts of the same stain-blocker as in Example I, with a
resultant pH of ~.5, and the approximate amount of act~ve
stain resist was estimated to be 0.8% o.w.f. This treated
carpet showed no visible stain (stain rating of S)
* denotes trade mark
-22-
i ~ ~
~ 3 ~
co~pared to untreated carpet (a dark stain with a stain
rating of 1).
This Example shows effective distribution of a
stain-blocker throughout the pile fiber by cleaning a
carpet with a detergent solution containing the stain-
blocker.
EXAMPLE V
A commercial or contract type carpet was used
instead of the residential carpet constructions in the
earlier Examples. Du ~ont Antron XL, 1280 denier
(1420 dtex) fiber with a hollow cross-section was used for
this carpet. The construction specifications were
40 oz/sq yd (1.4 Kg/sq m), 5/16 inch (8 mm) pile height,
dyed to earth-tone beige color, using leveling acid dyes
followed by the same fluorochemical as in Example I. The
carpet was then latexed and glued down on a linoleum
padding. The carpet was placed in a corridor and
subjected to wear for 178,000 foot traffic cycles. The
carpet was then cleaned with Clarke's heavy duty steam
extraction unit model Ext-20 (available from Advance Paper
Co., Wilmington, DE) and dr~ied at room temperature. The
dried carpet was then sprayed with the same stain-resist
solution at room temperature in the same way as explained
in Example I, except the active stain resist was
approximately 1.7~ o.w.f., the sprayed mixture being
worked in using a pile brush. Samples of the dried carpet
were then stained for 30 min. by Stain Test 1. The
treated carpet showed no stain (stain-rating of 5)
compared to untreated carpet (a dark stain with a stain-
rating of 1).
EXAMPLE VI
The starting carpet was a finished carpet (nylonstaple cut pile, 40 oz/sq yd, (1.4 Kg/sq m) 1/2 inch
(13 mm) pile height, beck dyed to light beige shade,
latexed and secondary backed) that had already been
* denotes trade mark
-23-
A~ ~
~,~
~24~ 1 ri 3 9 ~ ~ 8
mill-processed with an effective amount of the stain-
blocker used in Example I during manufacturinq, and had
been stain tested using Stain Test 1 (2~ hours) to show a
visual stain-rating of 5. This carpet was then subjected
to 344,000 foot traffic cycles.
The trafficked carpet was cleaned using a
detergent and a Stanley Steemer (Dublin, Ohio1 truck mount
unit and some of this was dried. The dried carpet was
stained for 24 hours and cleaned using Stain Test 1, and
no~ showed noticeable staining (visual stain-rating of 3).
Part of the carpet that was cleaned, but which
was still partially damp (estimated to be about 10%
moisture level) was oversprayed with the same stain-
blocker as in Example I, in a detergent solution (Stanley
lS Steemer #SS76, a standard anionic detergent) at a pH of
7.8 (to a concentration of about 0.4% o.w.f. active
stain-resist), followed by Teflon2 ME fluorocarbon spray
application. The sprayer used in this case was a 2 gallon
capaeity can with Spray System Tip TEEJET 8004 (Spraying
System of Almoca Corp., Wynnewood, PA), 40-60 psi and an
application height of 12-19 inches above the carpet, 2
passes, one in each direction. This treated carpet was
air-dried at room temperature and then stain-tested for 24
hours using Stain Test 1. The carpet showed no visible
stain with a stain-rating of 5.
This Exa~ple shows that a sta~n-blocked carpet
with a stain performance that has been reduced (~tain-
rating of 3) because of detergent-cleaning and
traffickinq, can be restored to its original stain-
performance (stain-rating 5) with an in-place treatment as
described above.
EXAMPLE VII
A lS dpf, trilobal cross-section, staple nylon
66 was produced by a conventional process. T~e yarn was
prepared as 3s cotton count, 2 ply balanced twi t of ~
turns per inch and Suessen heat set (200~C). The carpet
* denotes trade mark
-24-
~ ,t ~
-25- 1 3 ~ 8
was constructed with the following specifications:
1/10 inch gauge, ~6 oz/sq yd, 1/2 inch pile heiqht, beck
dyed to a light beige shade with the standard dyeing
auxilliaries and level acid dyes. After dyeing, the
carpet was treated in a bath containing 2.5% o.w.f. of the
same stain-blocker as in Example I at 170~F for 20 min. at
approximately 20:1 liquor ratio. The carpet was then
rinsed, topically treated with a cationic dispersion of
the fluorochemical described in Example 6 of
EP A2 172,717, and dried, latexed, cured and tip sheared.
The carpet was stain-tested for 24 ho~rs using Stain Test
1 and visually rated a stain-rating of 5. Half this
cleaned carpet was re-tested by restaining on part of the
same spot for 30 minutes using Stain Test 1. The stain-
ratin~ was now slight staining (i.e., a rating of 4). The
remaining half of the carpet was sprayed with the same
stain-blocker as in Example I at 0.16% o.w.f., and allowed
to dry at room temperature. This treated carpet was then
stain-tested similarly for 30 minutes using Stain Test 1,
to ~ive a stain-rating now of 5 aqain.
This Example shows that a sample with a reduced
stain-performance, because of detergent-cleaning, can be
restored to its earlier stain-performance by an in-place
treatment.
EXAMPLE VIII
A stain-resist-treated, cut pile eaxony carpet
was produced from a 13 dpf, bcf, trilobal cross-section
(1107 total denier) Superba heat set yarn. The latexed
and finished carpet with a secondary polypropylene backing
was tested per Stain Test 2 (described below) and was
found to have an inadequate stain rating of only 2-3,
indicating that the stain-resist-treatment was not
satisfactory. The carpet was cleaned with a Chemco brand
soil extractor model 60DM (1 pass) with a 1:100 diluted
shampoo blend (as disclosed in Example 2 of copending
Canadian applicat-ion Serial No. 586,055, filed simultaneously
-25-
~,
1~3~
here~ith), and referred to above, at a pH of 7.7 followed
~y an overspray of a mixture of the 80:20 hydrolyzed
styrene/maleic anhydride polymer: acetylated Mesitol Nss,
as described in Example 1 of the same copending
application (Serial No. 586,055): Teflon~ MF: water in
1:1:46 proportions (2 passes). The carpet was treated in
this manner "in place" at room temperature and was allowed
to dry at room temperature. This dried treated carpet
showed no visible stain (stain-rating of 5) when tested by
Stain Test 2 (24 hours).
The carpet can be treated in this manner by
multiple passes, with such a diluted shampoo, followed by
an overspray, as described, to improve the stain-rating of
a wide range of inadequately stain-resist-treated, or
untreated carpets.
STAIN TEST 2
A 6 inch x 6 inch (15 cm x 15 cm) specimen of
carpet is placed on a flat non-absorbent surface. 20 ml
of the Kool-Aid~ solution prepared as for Stain Test 1
described herein is applied to the specimen of carpet by
placing a 1-1/2 inch - 2 inch (3.8 cm - 5.1 cm) cylinder
tightly over the specimen and pouring the Kool-Aid~
solution into the cylinder to contact the carpet specimen
thereby forming a circular stain. The cylinder is then
removed and excess ~ool-Aid~ solution is worked into the
carpet tufts to achieve uniform staining. ~he ~tained
carpet specimen is left undisturbed for 24 + 4 hours,
after which it is rinsed thoroughly with cool water,
squeezed dry, and excess solution removed. The specimens
are inspected and evaluated according to the same rating
standards as described hereinabove for Stain Test 1.
EXAMPLE IX
This Example illustrates a preferred procedure
for treating soiled carpets "in place", regardless whether
they may or may not have been first cleaned with an
anionic shampoo, which may or may not have contained a
-26-
A~ !
:~33~'3~8
-27-
stain-resist agent, such carpet having been soiled or
trafficked as may happen in normal residential use.
A beige-colored, mill-processes, latexed and
secondary backed carpet was made from bcf 2-ply Superba
heat set and 38 oz/sq.yd (1.3 Kg/sq m) with a finished
pile height of about 7/16 inches (11 mm). The carpet was
stained using Stain Test 2 and was found to have a stain-
rating of 1-2. The carpet was cleaned with a Stanley
Steemer truck mount unit (4 passes) using Stanley Steemer
#SS76 brand shampoo (pH ~.8). The cleaned carpet was then
further cleaned using the same shampoo blend as in Example
VIII, but with a final dilution of 1:150 in water and 4
passes, followed by an overspray (2 passes) of the same
blend as in Example VIII: Teflon~ MF: Water in the same
1:1:46 proportions. The carpet was allowed to dry at room
temperature. This dried treated carpet showed no visible
stain (stain-rating of 5) when tested by Stain Test 2
~24 hours).
EXAMPLE X
A carpet as described in Example IX has also
first been cleaned with a commercial shampoo
(predominantly anionic, without cationic materials) and
then followed by either (1) cleaning with the same shampoo
blend and an overspray as described in Example IX or (2)
just the overspray as described in Example IX (but with
multiple passes, instead of only 2 passes), or (3)
cleaning with anionic 6hampoo materials containing the
stain-blocker, to give satisfactory high stain-ratings.
As indicated, nylon 6 has a greater affinity for
many dyestuffs than nylon 66. This means that, for a
nylon 6 carpet, a greater amount of stain-blocker may
generally have to be used to obtain equivalent improvement
in stain-resistance (equivalent to that obtained as shown
herein for nylon 66 carpets), or more passes (repeats of
the application treatment) may have to be used. This
means that more coating may build up on the nylon fiber,
-28- L~3~8
and may affect (adversely) the aesthetics of the carpet
and face fiber. Accordingly, the treatment of the
invention is preferably applied to carpets whose fiber has
already received treatment with stain-blocker during
manufacture of the carpet and/or fiber, especially, as
indicated, for nylon 6.
EXAMPLE XI
Four commercially available, stain-resistant
nylon carpet samples were used for this experiment. These
were:
Carpet #1 - nylon 66 staple, 36 oz/sq.yd, light
beige shade, ulfonated phenol formaldehyde condensate
applied by carpet mill as a stain-blocker.
Carpet #2 - nylon 66 staple, 35 oz/sq.yd, beige
shade, stain-blocker (type not known) applied by fiber
producer.
Carpet #3 - nylon 6 bulked continuous filament,
35 oz/sq.yd, light beige ehade, stain-blocker (type not
known) applied by carpet mill.
Carpet #4 - nylon 6 staple, 35 oz/sq.yd, light
beige shade, stain-blocker (type not known) applied by
carpet mill.
Treatment A
Samples of each of the above carpets were steam
cleaned, dried, and stained with ~ool-Aid0 using Stain
~est 2 as described above. After 24 hours each was stain-
- rated.
Treatment B
A second sample of each of the above carpets was
steam cleaned, and, while the fibers were still in moist
condition, was topically oversprayed with an antimicrobial
known as Microban X-SB00 manufactured by Microban
Germicide Co., P. O. Box 777, Braddock, PA 15104.
- Microban X-5800 is described as a broad spectrum
disinfectant useful against most bacteria, insects, fungus
and odors caused by bacteria and germs. (The composition
-28-
-29- 1~ 3 ~
of Microban X-5B0~ is said to be isopropyl alcohol 25.0%,
para-di-iso-butyl-phenoxyethoxyethyl-dimethylbenzyl-
ammonium-o-phenylphenate bromine complex 0.852%, n-octyl-
bi-cycloheptane-di-carboxyimide 0.4%, piperonyl butoxide
0.2~, pyrethrins 0.1%, and inert ingredients 73.448~). The
same model two gallon (7.5 liter) capacity pressurized
sprayer used in Example III was used for this overspray
application. The anti-microbial agent was applied in
accordance with the manufacturer's recommended procedures,
and the sprayed mixture was then worked into the pile
fiber using a pile brush. The treated samples were
allowed to air dry and then stain-tested as per Stain
Test 2.
Treatment C
A third cample of each of the above carpets was
steam cleaned and sprayed with the antimicrobial Microban
X-580~ as per Treatment B. Fifteen minutec following this
treatment, while the carpets were still in a moist
condition, the samples were overcprayed with a mixture
containinq Intratex 30~, Teflon MF~ and water in 2.24:1:30
(by volume) proportion: Intratex 30~ is a commercial
sulfonated phenol formaldehyde condensate sold by Crompton
& Knowles Corporation. Teflon MF~ is an anionic
fluorochemical manufactured by E. I. du Pont de Nemours
and Company. The estimated amount of active stain-resist
was 0.4~ owf. The oversprayed mixture was then worked
into the pile fiber and air-dried samples were stain-
tested, as per Stain Test 2.
The stain results for the above treatments were
as follows:
-29-
--3 0--
~ .~ 3 ~
STAIN-RATING
Treatment A Treatment B Treatment C
Carpet #1 4-5 3-2 5
Carpet #2 4 3 5
Carpet #3 3 1-2 3-4
Carpet #4 4 1 4
EXAMPLE XI I
Treatment A
A commercially-available, bulked continuous
filament 36 oz./sq.yd nylon carpet, ~liqht beige shade)
was tested using Stain Test 2 and found to have a stain
rating of 5.
Treatment B
A second sample of the ~ame carpet was cleaned
with Sear's detergent (Cleanmore~ Carpet Cleaner #1) in
accordance with the manufacturer's recommended procedures,
and, while still in a moist condition, the carpet was
oversprayed with Microban X-580~ using a Preval~ spray
unit (Precision Valve Corp., Yonkers, NY 10702). The
antimicrobial agent was worked-in using a hand-held pile
brush, and the sample was allowed to air dry. The dried
sample was then stain-tested as per Stain Test 2 and found
to have a stain-rating of 3-4, showing a deterioration in
stain performance following treatment with an
antimicrobial.
Treatment C
A third ~ample of the same carpet was steam-
cleaned and oversprayed with Microban X-580~ antimicrobial
as per Treatment B of this Example, except that the
~prayed sample was allowed to air-dry for 3 hours and was
then washed with cold tap water and again air-dried. The
sample was then stained per Stain Test 2 and found to have
-30-
-31- ~39~
a stain rating of 3-4 indicating that no difference in
stain performance is obtained merely by washing the sample
with tap water.
Treatment D
A fourth sample of the same carpet was steam-
cleaned and oversprayed with Microban X-580~ antimicrobial
as per Treatment B of this Example. Fifteen minutes
following this treatment, while the fibers were still in a
moist condition, the sample was oversprayed with the same
mixture as described in Treatment C of Example XI. The
dried sample was then tested as per Stain Test 2 and found
to have a stain-rating of 5.
EXAMPLE XI~I
Two commercially-available, bulked continuous
filament nylon carpet ~amples were used for this
experiment: a 42 oz/sq.yd carpet and a 37 oz/sq.yd
carpet, both in light beige shade. These carpets were
stain tested using Stain Test 2 and found to have a stain
rating of 5. Two deodorizing agents were ~elected to
demonstrate the effect on stain performance of these
carpets: Agent #l, a scented disinfectant containing the
active ingredients o-phenylphenol 2.0% and benzyl-o-
chlorophenol 2.7~ and Agent #2, a lemon ccented deodorizer
containing the cationic disinfectant alkyl dimethyl benzyl
ammonium chloride with a dye and fragrance.
Treatment A
Diluted aqueous solutions (2 fluid oz/gallon) of
each of the above deodorizers were prepared, and 20 ccs of
each of these diluted colutions were poured on different
samples of each of the carpets using the same technique as
described in Stain Test 2. After 15 minutes, the solution
was thoroughly blotted and wet-vacuumed so the four carpet
samples were almost dry. The ~amples were then stained
- on the same spot with Kool-Aid~ as per Stain Test 2. Both
carpets (all four samples) showed heavy ctaining with a
stain rating of 2.
-31-
8 ;3
Treatment B
Solution A - a 10 % aqueous solution was
prepared from an 80/20 mixture of hydrolyzed
styrene/maleic anhydride polymer and acetylated
Mesitol NBS, as described in Example 1 of copending
application Serial No. 07/136,033.
Solution B - 1 part of an anionic fluorochemical
was diluted with 15 parts of water.
Solution C - 50/50 volumetric mixture of
solution A and B.
Solution D - 15 ccs of diluted Agent #1 (2 fluid
oz/gallon of water) and 5 ccs of solution C.
Solution E - 15 ccs of diluted Agent #2 (2 fluid
oz/gallon of water) and 5 ccs of solution C.
Solutions D and E were separately applied to
samples of both carpets using the same technique as
described in Treatment A of this Example and stain-tested
using Stain Test 2. Both carpets (all four samples) had
the fragrance of the deodorizer and showed no visible
staining with a stain-rating of 5. Thus this Example
demonstrates that an improvement in stain-resistance can
be effectively achieved by combining a cationic
deodorizers containing germicidal disinfectants with a
stain (and soil-) resist agent, although as previously
described a soil-resist chemical is not necessary to
obtain stain improvement.
-32-
