Film-formers vs. crystallizing polymers

Jimmy L

Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2006
Messages
12,895
Location
Ne
Name
Jimmy L
Oh I use it dumbass but in the right areas and I don't over promote it nor do I tell people stupid things like " I'm going to do encapsulation on your carpet" and then explain the stupidity on how it works. Plenty of morons out there who are in the cult and over think it. Just look at some of the "Captive" forums exclusive to encapsulators. LOL!

IDIOTS!
 

Onfire_02_01

Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2016
Messages
767
Location
Minnesota
Name
Jeremy Gray
Carpet cleaning was only a small part of what dsc did. I know they just changed up thier Labeling and website. I can't find anything about a buyout but seems like I have heard that rummer before.
 

Tom Forsythe

Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2006
Messages
334
I heard of a company which if I remember correctly only did encapsulation whose name was Carpet Appearance Management. It was an under promise over deliver concept. This is why a deep cleaning (often plagued by wicking) followed by encapsulation provides the benefits of both worlds: a uniformly clean carpet.
 

rick imby

Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2009
Messages
2,174
Location
Montana
Name
Rick
I heard of a company which if I remember correctly only did encapsulation whose name was Carpet Appearance Management. It was an under promise over deliver concept. This is why a deep cleaning (often plagued by wicking) followed by encapsulation provides the benefits of both worlds: a uniformly clean carpet.
A uniformly clean "looking" carpet... Once they get dirty they are always dirty just under the fuzz.
 

Goomer

Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2009
Messages
3,398
Location
Bronx, New York
Name
Frank Mendo
Would it be true that as the soil load in a carpet increases, the LESS that "film-forming" characteristics would be desirable?

A higher film-forming product sounds like it might be used best if applied to clean carpet as a soil-resisting product, possibly even by a post application, but if ground into dirty carpet, the film that it is forming has been contaminated.

They are no longer pretty benign crystals as in the petri dishes images of manufacturer literature, but now polymers infused with filth.

Would a product with strong film-forming characteristics be best under heavy soil-load, especially when frequent post-vacuuming is an important part of the process?
 

Jimmy L

Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2006
Messages
12,895
Location
Ne
Name
Jimmy L
Let me explain this whole " ENCAPSULATION EXTREMISM" in simple terms that ya'll can understand.

They make a DRY SHAMPOO to spray on your hair and it's supposed to just brush out. Do you really think it's going to be clean? Isn't it better to WASH N' RINSE your hair? Which is going to be cleaner?
 

Larry Cobb

Supportive Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2006
Messages
5,793
Location
Dallas, Texas USA
Name
Larry Cobb
Would it be true that as the soil load in a carpet increases, the LESS that "film-forming" characteristics would be desirable?

A higher film-forming product sounds like it might be used best if applied to clean carpet as a soil-resisting product, possibly even by a post application, but if ground into dirty carpet, the film that it is forming has been contaminated.
This is a good question about "film formers". I have an carpet fiber, encap (arrows), & dirt illustration:
Encap.jpg The "encap' polymer has an affinity for the fiber.
Encap tries to wedge itself under the dirt particle (crosshatch). It does not displace all the soil particles, but it does make them more likely to be broken free of the carpet fiber. Agitation will break many of them loose from the fiber. This is how even soiled carpet is cleaned by a "film former"
 
  • Like
Reactions: Old Coastie

Jimmy L

Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2006
Messages
12,895
Location
Ne
Name
Jimmy L
If viewed under a microscope as the polymer dries on the twisted "DNA" like carpet fiber it migrates to the top.
And if you look closely at the top of the fiber there will be a dew drop of polymer sitting there. And if there were visual terms to use it would resemble the head of a penis. So in effect if it were a "Film former" it will bond to the top and be difficult to release. But if it were a "Crystal" type it would easily break away with the sudden jerk of a vacuum cleaner and it's revolving brush head. And at that moment there is extreme pleasure and joy knowing it releases from the fiber.
 

encapman

Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2006
Messages
1,837
Location
St Petersburg, FL
Name
Rick Gelinas
"Film formers" coat the fiber . . .

to keep soil from attaching to the fiber.
Larry,
I appreciate the benefit of utilizing a fluoro-chemical, that's why we included it along with the Crystalon3 polymer in Releasit. But I'm puzzled about how a "film former" alone can capture/contain soil. I'm not understanding how soil can be extracted during post-vacuuming, if there isn't an actual soil-holding component in the formula. How will the soil make the jump from the carpet to the vacuum cleaner without a soil carrying vehicle? It's obviously not going to just magically hover in the air because a "film-former" was introduced LOL. So I'm sure I must be missing something. Please help me understand how soil removal can be accomplished without a polymer. Thanks
 
  • Like
Reactions: ShortyDownUnder

Larry Cobb

Supportive Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2006
Messages
5,793
Location
Dallas, Texas USA
Name
Larry Cobb
Fluorochemical protectors are film formers.

They keep soil from attaching to the fiber or surface.

That allows removal with routine vacuuming . . .

or makes it easier with the next cleaning.
 
Last edited:

Scott S.

Supportive Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2008
Messages
3,151
Location
PA
Name
Scott
Im more concerned of these factors:
1. Does it better the appearance
2. Does it leave enough product behind to make say an entrace on and off tile to carpet a slip hazard on rainy days where moisture gets tracked onto carpet.
3. Is the polymer
A. Easily removed with hwe
B. Easily re-dissolved with additional encap application upon the next cleaning? (Or will it build up).
 

rick imby

Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2009
Messages
2,174
Location
Montana
Name
Rick
Fluorochemical protectors are film formers.

They keep soil from attaching to the fiber or surface.

That allows removal with routine vacuuming . . .

or makes it easier with the next cleaning.
OK Cobb and Rick @encapman ---We all know the dirt does not get encapsulated and then vacuumed away. It gets encapsulated and drops to the backing in the carpet.--

The chems and the agitation break the bond the dirt has with the carpet fiber. AND the carpet looks much better. Some residual chems are stuck to the fiber and make it harder for dirt to attach to the fiber (and drop down).

If you take a bunch of dry dirt and spread it over the carpet. Then run a vacuum over the carpet without any suction, a completely full bag (like 40% of the houses you go into with bags). The dirt will fall to the bottom of the carpet and look much better without any dirt removal.

The regular vacuuming does a better job of opening up the carpet to let the dirt fall to the bottom than actually sucking dirt up.---But it looks better.

Most vacuums have so little suction but the best have lots of agitation to open the carpet and let the dirt fall.

In the same house if you compare the dirt removed from a hardwood floor to the dirt removed from a carpet you will find the carpet just does a really good job of getting the dirt down into the carpet where no vacuum or HWE will get it out.

What are the best encap machines? They have the best AGITATION---
 
  • Like
Reactions: Condog and Jimmy L

Latest posts

Top