Journal of Cleaning, Restoration & Inspection Article on Carpet Fibers

[Larry Cobb]

IICRC has published a new impressive technical journal . . .

J.R. Webster, PhD writes about the performance characteristics of synthetic carpet fibers from the perspective of a polymer chemist.

I was amazed at some of his statements:

1. He stated that some chemicals compromised the stabilizers in Nylon carpet, specifically mentioning acid rinses.

2. He also stated that topical fluorochemical treatments improved the long term durability of the Nylon fibers by preventing degradation.

Since we are introducing the Dynachem Reverse Osmosis TM System next week @ the Experience event,

I thought that this info was timely.

You can go to the IICRC site and read the entire journal.

Larry

P.S. What happened to FREE SPEECH ???

 

[SamIam]

NNOOOOOOO! It's MIGHTY sad!

Good luck with your new mount!


....

 

[Mikey P]

P.S. What happened to FREE SPEECH ???

sleep with idiots and you wake up with the crabs.

 

[Desk Jockey]

Contrary to what one might think, lawyers limit "Free" speech.

 

[dgardner]

2. He also stated that topical fluorochemical treatments improved the long term durability of the Nylon fibers by preventing degradation.

Interesting - I got the opposite impression. He said:

"In addition, post treatments with fluorinated chemicals is also a factor in long-term durability of the carpet fiber. Residual PFOA (perfluorooctanoic acid), is a concern with all fluorinated carpet treatments."

This would seem to me to mean that he is concerned that a fluorochemical treament has the potential to leave a residual acid behind, which would be bad, right? (Mr. Forsythe to the podium, please....)

The problem with the article is he is very vague, and he doesn't quantify anything. How much is too much? How bad is it? Does "a concern" mean the carpet will fall apart, or only a trained inspector would be able to see a difference, and us mere mortals won't even notice?

(I felt completely free to type all that drivel, btw.)

 

[Larry Cobb]

Interesting - I got the opposite impression. He said:

"In addition, post treatments with fluorinated chemicals is also a factor in long-term durability of the carpet fiber. Residual PFOA (perfluorooctanoic acid), is a concern with all fluorinated carpet treatments."

This would seem to me to mean that he is concerned that a fluorochemical treament has the potential to leave a residual acid behind, which would be bad, right? (Mr. Forsythe to the podium, please....)

The problem with the article is he is very vague, and he doesn't quantify anything. How much is too much? How bad is it? Does "a concern" mean the carpet will fall apart, or only a trained inspector would be able to see a difference, and us mere mortals won't even notice?

The PFOA is a Part per Billion contaminant found in some fluorochemicals (originally found in ScotchGard) that was a concern to the EPA.

Every manufacturer I know, has reduced or eliminated that contaminant from their product.

Larry

 

[dgardner]

So is there a different place where he speaks positively about topical fluorochemical treatments? I couldn't find one.

 

[SamIam]

Its seams like a positive statement about topical treatments as long as they don't contain the bad stuff!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[Larry Cobb]

Its seams like a positive statement about topical treatments as long as they don't contain the bad stuff!

Correct . . .

That is what J.R. Webster, PhD implied.

Larry