EFFECTS of BIO-FINISHING on COTTON and COTTON/WOOL BLENDED FABRICS by SHRIDHAR CHIKODI, B.Tech. a THESIS in CLOTHING, TEXTILES
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
EFFECTS OF BIO-FINISHING ON COTTON AND COTTON/WOOL BLENDED FABRICS by SHRIDHAR CHIKODI, B.Tech. A THESIS IN CLOTHING, TEXTILES, AND MERCHANDISING Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Texas Tech University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Approved Accepted May, 1994 fjC fl£1-1 ;q;:; u goS TJ Jh ~t/'li I qq.lf /V/). I U>p·~ © 1994 Shridhar Chikodi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS In accomplishing this work, there are many people who have inspired my determination. To begin with, I would like to thank my thesis committee chairman, Dr. Samina Khan, for her invaluable guidance and encouragement throughout this project. I am thankful to Dr. Shelley Harp for the consistent support and attention to detail which was invaluable. I extend my sincere thanks to Dr. R.D. Mehta whose research expertise has been crucial to the success of this project. I am also grateful to Dr. Jerry Mason, for his support throughout my stay at Tech. I am indebted to the personnel at International Center for Textile Research and Development and to Mark Grimson at Scanning Electron Microscopy lab, for their contribution to this research. I would like to express my heartfelt thanks to my parents, for their undying love, faith and immeasurable sacrifices they have made on my behalf. I truly owe them everything. A final acknowledgement I extend to my close friend Janie, for her never-ending encouragement, support, and assistance in the past two years. 11 TABLE OF CONTENTS .. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . ll LIST OF TABLES . vi LIST OF FIGURES . viii CHAPTERS I . INTRODUCTION 1 Statement of Problem . 2 Purpose of the Study . 3 Assumptions 4 Hypotheses . 5 Limitations 5 Definition of Terms 6 II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE . 10 Structural Properties of Cotton Fibers . 12 Structural Properties of Wool Fibers . 16 A Review of Cellulase and Protease Enzymes . 21 Cellulase Enzymes . 21 Protease Enzymes . 23 Summary . 23 III. METHODOLOGY 25 Description of the Experimental Fabrics . 25 Fabric Development Procedure . 25 Warp and Filling Yarn Production . 27 Fabric Construction . 2 7 Enzyme Treatment on Experimental Fabrics . • 2 8 Application of Cellulase Enzymes . 28 iii Application of Protease Enzymes . • 2 9 Physical Tests . 2 9 Test for Breaking Strength . 31 Test for Abrasion Resistance . 3 3 Test for Dimensional Stability to Laundering . 33 Test for Fabric Stiffness . 33 Test for Wrinkle Recovery . 34 Test for Pilling Resistance . 34 Fabric Hand . 34 Scanning Electron Microscope . 35 Analysis of Data . • • • 3 6 IV. ANALYSIS OF DATA . 37 Description of Sample . 3 7 Analysis of Hypotheses . • • 3 8 Hypothesis 1.a • • • 3 9 Hypothesis 1.b . 43 Hypothesis 1.c . 52 Hypothesis 1.d . 60 Hypothesis 1.e . 64 Hypothesis 2 . 70 Scanning Electron Micrograph Results of Surface Appearance . 77 Hypothesis 3 . 82 Summary of Data Analyses . 85 V. SUMMARY, FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS . 89 Summary of the Study . 90 Discussion of Findings and Conclusions . 91 iv Hypothesis l.a . 91 Hypothesis l.b . 92 Hypothesis l.c . • 92 Hypothesis l.d . 93 Hypothesis l.e . 93 Hypothesis 2 . 94 Hypothesis 3 . 94 Recommendations for Further Research . • 93 REFERENCES . 96 APPENDIX: WEIGHT LOSS TEST RESULTS . • 9 9 v LIST OF TABLES 3.1 Physical Properties of the Experimental Fibers and Fabrics . 26 3.2 Description of Physical Tests . 30 3.3 Rating Scale Score Sheet . • • 3 2 4.1 Means and Standard Deviations of Breaking Strength (lbs) in Warp and Filling Directions . 4 0 4.2 Percentage Strength Loss After Enzyme Treatments .. 41 4.3 One-Way ANOVA and Tukey's Studentized Range Test Results--Influence of Fiber Content on Breaking Strength in Warp Direction . 44 4.4 One-Way ANOVA and Tukey's Studentized Range Test Results--Influence of Fiber Content on Breaking Strength in Filling Direction . 45 4.5 Means and Standard Deviations of Abrasion Resistance (cycles) in Warp and Filling Directions . 47 4.6 Percentage Loss in Abrasion Resistance After Enzyme Treatments . 48 4.7 One-Way ANOVA and Tukey's Studentized Range Test Results--Influence of Fiber Content on Abrasion Resistance in Warp Direction . 50 4.8 One-Way ANOVA and Tukey's Studentized Range Test Results--Influence of Fiber Content on Abrasion Resistance in Filling Direction . 51 4.9 Means and Standard Deviations of Dimensional Stability (inches) in Warp Direction . 53 4.10 Percentage Shrinkage in Warp Direction After Enzyme Treatments . 54 4.11 One-Way ANOVA and Tukey's Studentized Range Test Results--Influence of Fiber Content on Dimensional Stability in Warp Direction with 3% Treatment . 58 4.12 One-Way ANOVA and Tukey's Studentized Range Test Results--Influence of Fiber Content on Dimensional Stability in Warp Direction with 5% Treatment . 59 . Vl 4.13 Means and Standard Deviations of Fabric Stiffness in Warp and Filling Directions . 61 4.14 Overall Flexural Rigidity After Enzyme Treatments . 62 4.15 One-Way ANOVA and Tukey's Studentized Range Test Results--Influence of Fiber Content on Fabric Stiffness in Warp Direction . 65 4.16 One-Way ANOVA and Tukey's Studentized Range Test Results--Influence of Fiber Content on Fabric Stiffness in Filling Direction . 66 4.17 Means and Standard Deviations of Wrinkle Recovery (degrees) in Warp and Filling Directions . 67 4.18 Wrinkle Recovery in Degrees in Warp and Filling Directions After Enzyme Treatments . 68 4.19 One-Way ANOVA and Tukey's Studentized Range Test Results--Influence of Fiber Content on Wrinkle Recovery in Warp Direction . 71 4.20 One-Way ANOVA and Tukey's Studentized Range Test Results--Influence of Fiber Content on Wrinkle Recovery in Filling Direction . 72 4.21 Means and Standard Deviations of Pilling Resistance 74 4.22 Interjudge Reliability of Pilling Ratings (Pearson Correlation Coefficients) . 76 4.23 One-Way ANOVA and Tukey's Studentized Range Test Results--Influence of Fiber Content on Pilling Resistance . 81 4.24 Mean and Standard Deviations of Fabric Hand .. 83 4.25 Interjudge Reliability of Fabric Hand Evaluation (Pearson Correlation Coefficients) . 84 4.26 One-Way ANOVA and Tukey's Studentized Range Test Results--Subjective Evaluation of Fabric Hand . 86 A.1 Percentage Weight Loss After Enzyme Treatments . 101 .. Vl.l. LIST OF FIGURES 2.1 Chemical Structure of Cellulose . 15 2.2 Chemical Reaction of Enzyme on Cellulose . 17 2.3 Chemical Structure of Wool . • • . 2 0 3.1 Rating scale Score Sheet . 32 4.1 Percentage Strength Loss . 42 4.2 Percentage Loss in Abrasion Resistance . 4 9 4.3 Percentage Shrinkage After One Wash . 55 4.4 Percentage Shrinkage After Five Washes . • 56 4.5 Fabric Stiffness . 63 4.6 Wrinkle Recovery in Degrees . 69 4.7 Pilling Resistance ................. 75 4.8 SEM's of 100% Cotton Fabrics . 78 4.9 SEM's of 90/10 Cotton/Wool Fabrics . 79 4.10 SEM's of 70/30 Cotton/Wool Fabrics ....... 80 A.1 Percentage Weight Loss After Enzyme Treatments 102 viii CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Enzymes or bio-catalysts have been utilized on a large scale for more than 75 years in medical investigation-to supplement the body digestive system, in food processing to enrich grains and cereals, in wine production to ferment grapes and in the domestic detergency area to improve overall cleaning performance by leaving fabrics smoother, with decreased ability to trap dirt. Since the beginning of the 20th century, enzymes have been used in textile desizing. However, the concept of treating fabrics produced from low-grade fibers with enzymes (also known as hie polishing or bio-finishing) to improve surface properties was first developed in Japan in 1989. The main objective of bio-finishing is to create a fabric from low-grade fibers with smooth appearance and improved softness without the use of conventional chemicals which result in toxic effluent (Garrett & Cedroni, 1990). Recent technical applications of enzymes have revealed that it is possible to remove substances such as pectin, hemicellulose, lignin, seed husks, vegetable matters, skin grease, suint and skin residue that accompany natural fibers (Hemmpel, 1991). Cotton and wool fibers are made up of fibers, some of which protrude. These loose fibers which tend to protrude 1 2 from yarn surface are responsible for the formation of "fuzz." Conventionally, the protruding fibers are removed either by burning off by flame or by infrared radiation or by passing over hot copper plates. These conventional treatments bring about a temporary change to the fabric surface. However, treatment with cellulase and protease enzymes degrades the protruding fibers permanently, giving a smoother fiber surface, which result in a simultaneous improvement of hand and luster (Schubel, 1990; Hemmpel, 1991) . Cellulase and protease enzyme treatments avoid the high alkaline pollution caused by chemicals during cotton and wool scouring processes, which otherwise would pose a high environmental risk (Hemmpel, 1990). Consequently, it is possible to permanently finish a low-grade inexpensive fabric to look and feel like a top quality fabric in a more environmentally friendly way. At this point in time, no research has been undertaken in the United States, with respect to treating cotton/wool blended fabrics with enzymes. Therefore, the void in this area of textile development serves as a basis for the present study. Statement of Problem Modification of textile materials in an environmentally safe way is of paramount certain in an increasingly technological based textile industry. Bio-finishing is one 3 such technological advancement where by means of enzymatic treatment, scouring a major textile finishing process is avoided, thus eliminating the high alkaline pollution. Research on hie-finishing 100% cotton fabrics has been reported; however, no published research exists concerning the effects of enzyme treatment on cotton/wool blended fabrics. It is expected that the study undertaken here will make a genuine contribution to the existing body of knowledge in textile finishing.