Evaluation of comfort properties of polyester knitted spacer fabrics finished with water repellent...

Fibers and Polymers 2007, Vol.8, No.4, 386-392

386

Evaluation of Comfort Properties of Polyester Knitted Spacer Fabrics

Finished with Water Repellent and Antimicrobial Agents

R. Bagherzadeh*, M. Montazer, M. Latifi, M. Sheikhzadeh1, and M. Sattari

2

Textile Engineering Department, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran 1Textile Engineering Department, Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan, Iran

2Bacteriology Department, School of Medical Sciences, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran

(Received December 24, 2006; Revised May 20, 2007; Accepted May 29, 2007)

Abstract: In order to impart barrier properties against water and microorganisms on breathable three dimensional spacer fab-rics as medical or technical textiles, fabric samples were treated with two water repellent agents and a quaternary ammoniumsalt namely cetyltrimethylammonium bromide (CTAB), using pad-dry-cure method. Two different water repellent agentsbased on hydrocarbon and acrylic copolymer were used. The water repellent property of samples was tested by Bundesmannand contact angle tests. Antimicrobial activity of samples was analyzed quantitatively according to AATCC 100. Simulta-neous finishing of samples was done with 3 % CTAB and 4 % fluoroalkyl acrylic copolymer. To study the effect of varioustreatments on comfort related properties, air and water vapor permeability, water repellency and compression were measured.The results showed that the antimicrobial and water repellent spacer fabrics can be achieved applying selected material with-out significant changes on their comfort properties. Also a regression model was presented to predict the water vapour perme-ability of knitted spacer fabrics based on course density (CPC) changing.

Keywords: Spacer fabric, Water repellent, Antimicrobial, Comfort

Introduction

The basic construction of three dimensional spacer fabrics

is formed of two textile layers held by spacer threads in a

defined spacing. This structure provides tortuous spaces

which let heat and moisture to be transferred through the

fabric with air easily. These characteristics of the spacer

fabrics make them suitable to use for medical purpose such

as beds, supporting pillows, bandages, shoes, operation

tables and so on.

One of the most important finishing techniques for

outdoor clothing or medical and protective purposes is water

repellent finish, which is impermeable to liquid penetration

but permeable to water vapor transfer (i.e. perspiration) [1].

Fluoroalkyl copolymers and hydrocarbon polymers are mostly

used as water repellent agents in textile finishing process.

They can also give a reasonable oil and soil repellency to

finished fabrics [2-5]. Cross-transmission of diseases in

hospitals is a major threat [6]. Surgical apparel should not

only provide protection against microbial attack, but should

also have blood barrier properties since most infections are

caused by blood-borne pathogens such as HIV and HBV [7,8].

To prevent or minimize infection or transmission of diseases

and to protect patients and surgical staff from infectious

liquid, it is very important to treat these textile materials with

antimicrobial and liquid repellent finishes [9,10].

Antimicrobial activity of textile fabrics is a very desirable

property for medical application and other uses that need

noxious odor such as footwear to be reduced. Various anti-

microbial agents, including aromatic halogen compounds,

organo-metallic and metal salts, quaternary ammonium salts,

and organo-silicon quaternary ammonium salts have been

applied to impart antimicrobial properties to textiles [11].

Sun and co-workers, have extended the technology to its use

in rendering fabrics containing cellulose biocidal [12,13]. It

has been also demonstrated that nylon can be rendered

biocidal [14,15]. Recent reports have demonstrated that

polyethylene terephethalate (PET) can also be antimicrobial

by several method and material [16,17]. Yang and co-workers

treated 100 % polyester fabric with 2-hydroxy-2,4,4-trichloro-

diphenyl ether, and reported the weak bactericidal efficacy

against Staphylococcus aureus and Escherichia coli before

and after multiple washes [18]. Huh and co-workers produced

chitosan-grafted and quaternized chitosan-grafted PET follow-

ing a glow-discharge graft of acrylic acid onto the fiber. The

treated PET was able to inhibit the growth of bacteria after

long contact times [19]. Antimicrobial activity of small ions

like silver, zinc, copper and quaternary ammonium compounds

is well documented. One of the available disinfectant agents

is CTAB (cetyltrimethylammonium bromide) which is a

quaternary ammonium salt with a positively charged nitrogen

ion that can interact with the cell membrane of microorganism

and destroy it [20]. Also CTAB has a hydrophobic long chain

that makes it a compatible compound using in co-application

with water repellent agents.

There is a general agreement that the transmission of air

and water vapor through a garment are probably the most

important factors in clothing comfort. Comfort, as felt by the

user, is a complex factor depending upon the above attributes.

Many medical products including clothes, pillowcases,

operation tables and etc, are closely related to comfort feeling.

Some early study reported various aspects of comfort related*Corresponding author: [email protected]

Evaluation of Comfort Properties of Polyester Fibers and Polymers 2007, Vol.8, No.4 387

to properties of fabrics [21-25].

The low-load compression behavior of fabrics is very

important in terms of handle and comfort. Mukhopadyhay et

al. [26] carried out exhaustive work on the thickness and

compressional characteristics of air-jet textured yarn woven

fabrics. They concluded that compressibility, thickness recovery,

compressional energy, recovered energy and resiliency were

influenced by fabric constructional parameters. Most of the

results were based on the compression-recovery graph obtained

from Instron. Postle et al. [27] concluded that fabric bending,

compression and surface characteristics were the three most

important characteristics for predicting overall handle and

associated quality attributes. Taylor and Pollet [28] used the

equation proposed by van Wyk [29] to approximate static

low-load compression curves of both woven and knitted

fabrics and developed the three-parameter model which was

initially proposed by de-Jong et al. [30]. A theoretical model

was proposed by Soe et al. [31] and the compression

properties of plain knitted fabrics were predicted from yarn

properties and fabric geometry. Recently, Bakhtiari, Najar

and co-workers [32], showed that Acrylic weft-knitted fabrics

with knit-tuck structure exhibit higher compression rigidity

and lower softness than the plain and knit-miss structures.

The objectives of the present study was to investigate the

effect of water repellent and antimicrobial finishing and

structural characteristic (CPC, course density) on the comfort

properties of 3D knitted spacer fabrics, and also obtaining a

multifunctional water repellent antimicrobial spacer fabric

with no sacrifice of comfort properties. To do this, in this

research work CTAB was used as an antimicrobial agent due

to its disinfectant properties and availability. Two different

water repellent agents were also applied on the raw and dyed

spacer fabrics to develop multi-functional textiles and also

comfort related properties including air and water vapor

permeability and compression of samples were evaluated.

Experimental

Materials and Methods

Characteristics of the fabrics used in this study are described

in Table 1. Two different knitted spacer fabrics including raw

and dyed fabrics (fabric dyed with disperse dye in jet) were

provided from Bonyad Polypropylene Fiber Production Co.

(Iran). The water repellent agents used, were fluoroalkyl

acrylic copolymer namely, BAYGARD AFF (Bayer Co.),

and a hydrocarbon based polymer namely, ADRATEX-CA

(P-574) (ADRASA Co.). The symbols of AFF and P-574

were used as representatives of the agents. A quaternary

ammonium salt, namely hexadecyltrimethylammonium bromide

(CTAB) used as antimicrobial agent (Merck Co.) [33].

Various concentrations of CTAB (1, 3, and 5 %) and 2.5 %

citric acid were added to distilled water. The spacer fabrics

were impregnated in the bath of 1, 3, and 5 % CTAB

finishing solutions, individually, and then padded to a wet

pickup of 85 %, dried at 110oC for 2 minutes and cured at

140 oC for 1 minute. To provide water repellent finish, samples

were impregnated in the bath of 4 and 6 % of P-574 and

AFF solution, individually, and then padded to a wet pickup

of about 85 %. The samples were then dried at 130 oC for

2 minutes and cured at 160oC for 1 minute. For simultaneous

finishing, samples were impregnated in the bath of 4 % AFF

and 3 % CTAB solution, and then padded to a wet pickup of

about 85 %, dried at 110oC for 2 minutes and cured at

150 oC for 1 minute.

Testing and Analysis of Treated Fabrics

Water repellency of the samples was measured by

Bundesmann test method according to BS 5066 and contact

angle was measured according to ASTM D 724-99 test

method. The antimicrobial activity of the samples was

evaluated quantitavely according to AATCC 100-1993. The

colonies of the bacterium on the agar plate were counted and

the reduction in numbers of bacterium was calculated using

the following equation:

Reduction rate (%) = 100 × (A − B)/A (1)

where A is the number of bacterial colonies from an untreated

fabric, and B is the number of bacterial colonies from the

CTAB-treated fabrics [34].

Physical and comfort properties including: thickness, air

and water vapor permeability, and compression of samples

were measured under constant conditions. Fabric thickness

was measured according to ASTM D 1777 test method, with

a Shirley digital thickness tester. Air permeability was

Table 1. Characteristics of PET knitted spacer fabrics

Sample Yarn count

(Tex)

Course per

centimeter

(CPC)

Fabric

thickness

(mm)

Raw fabric

(R)

Back layer 7.78(34 f)

17 3.16 Spacer layer 2.23(mono)

Front layer 11.12(48 f)

Dyed fabric

(D)




Samples with different CPC

CPC 17




CPC 20

Back layer 7.78(34f)



CPC 22




388 Fibers and Polymers 2007, Vol.8, No.4 R. Bagherzadeh et al.

measured according to BS 5636. Ten samples were tested

and the mean value was reported. Water vapor permeability

was measured by cup method according to BS 7209 which

four samples were measured and the mean value was

recorded. The weight loss was converted to water vapor

permeability according to equations (2)-(4). The water vapor

permeability index is calculated by expressing the water

vapor permeability (WVP) of the fabric as a percentage of

the WVP of reference fabric which is tested simultaneously

with the specimen.

(2)

(3)

Water vapor permeability index = (4)

where M is loss in mass (g), t is time between weighing (hr),

A is internal area of dish (m2) d is internal diameter of dish

(mm), WVPf is the water vapor permeability of the test

fabric, and WVPr is the water vapor permeability of the

reference.

Compression of samples was measured by an Instron Model

5566 Tensile Tester according to the method used in previous

works [35,36]. In order to evaluate the compression behavior

of fabrics, different parameters similar to those introduced

by Kawabata [37] in KES-F system were used. Four tests

were conducted for each fabric sample. Results from com-

pression and recovery tests were recorded and plotted.

The compression parameters including the work of

compression (WC; area under of the compression curve), the

work of recovery from compression (W'C; area under of the

recovery curve), the dissipated compression energy (Em), the

resilience of the fabric (RC), and energy lost (EL) can be

defined as below:

(5)

(6)

(7)

(8)

(9)

From equations (7), (8) and (9)

(10)

Where suffix c refers to the compression, suffix r refers to

the recovery state, P is pressure, V is fabric volume or

thickness, T0c is initial thickness, and Tm is maximum

thickness.

WC and W'C were measured by a program developed with

MATLAB software.

Contact angle of fabric samples were experimented

according to ASTM D 724-99 test method.

Results and Discussion

Fabric Thickness

The changes of fabric thickness under loading and unloading

are illustrated in Figure 1. The hysteresis observed between

the loading and unloading curves could be due to the internal

friction of fabric and the elastic recovery of mono filament

yarns [38]. The results also indicate that water repellent and

antimicrobial treatments have no influence on fabric thickness

and the small variation observed is due to variation in the

fabric construction.

Fabric Air Permeability

The air permeability results of different samples are shown

in Table 2. It can be found that, there is not a significant

difference between the air permeability of untreated and treated

WVP g·m2–·day

1–( )

24M

At-----------=

Aπd

210

6–×

4-------------------------=

WVP( )f

WVP( )r------------------- 100×

WC Pc VdT0c

Tm

∫=

W′C Pr VdTm

T0r

∫=

Em WC W′C–=

RCW′C

WC-----------=

EL

Em

WC---------=

ELWC W′C–

WC-------------------------- 1

W′C

WC-----------– 1 RC–= = =

Figure 1. Change in thickness with increasing of pressure.

Table 2. Simultaneous effect of water repellent and antimicrobial

finishes on air permeability of sample

Samples (R)

Air

permeability

(ml·sec−1)

Samples (D)

Air

permeability

(ml·sec−1)

Control sample 225.0 ± 2.5 Control sample 325.0 ± 2.1

AFF 4 % 216.0 ± 3.0 AFF 4 % 309.5 ± 2.0

AFF 6 % 216.5 ± 3.3 AFF) 6 % 307.5 ± 2.6

P-574 4 % 231.5 ± 1.5 P-574 4 % 324.0 ± 1.4

P-574 6 % 236.0 ± 2.1 P-574 6 % 325.5 ± 1.3

CTAB 1 % 235.0 ± 1.2 CTAB 1 % 312.0 ± 2.1

CTAB 3 % 236.0 ± 1.0 CTAB 3 % 314.0 ± 2.0

CTAB 5 % 232.5 ± 1.5 CTAB 5 % 309.5 ± 1.5

CTAB 3 % &

AFF 4 % 237.5 ± 1.9

CTAB 3 % &

AFF 4 % 327.0 ± 1.9


fabrics. This can be attributed to the open construction of the

spacer fabric which is not affected by the water repellent

treatment. However, dyed samples show a higher amount of

air permeability. This is due to the dyeing process and tension

applied during the drying which leads to lower thickness and

higher fabric porosity. These results approve to the results of

Kaminsayaka [30]. Effects of water repellent and antimicrobial

finishing on raw and dyed fabrics are similar. The air perme-

ability results show that dyed fabrics are more air permeable

than raw fabrics. Co-application of water repellent and anti-

microbial finishes on the fabric has no significant influence

on fabric air permeability.

Fabric Water Vapor Permeability

Water vapor permeability is an important parameter in

evaluating comfort characteristics of a fabric, as it represents

ability of transferring perspiration. It can be concluded from

Table 3 that fabric WVP is changed marginally by the

increasing of concentration of finishing agents. This could

be as a result of thicker layer produced on the fibers and/or

yarns surfaces. The WVP of the dyed samples are higher

than the raw samples.

Two mechanisms can be considered for water vapor

transfer through the fabric: one is through fabric pores and

the second is through absorption by fabric and then

evaporation from fabric surface. Although the increase of

concentration of water repellent agent can interrupt the

second mechanism, this is not much considered for

hydrophobic polyester fabrics. Thus, increasing of water

repellent agents have no significant influence on the

polyester fabric WVP (with 95 % confidence intervals).

Water Repellency of Fabrics

The water repellent characteristic of fabrics was measured

by Bundesmann test method. The results of water absorbed

and water passed through fabrics are illustrated in Table 4.

The results show that the use of AFF leads to a fabric with

better water repellent property as the lower percentage of

water passed and absorbed by a fabric treated with AFF.

This is due to the lower surface tension caused by the

fluorochemical based water repellent agent (AFF). Increasing

of concentration of both water repellent agents leads to

lower amount of passed and absorbed water. It is because a

more uniform layer of hydrophobic chemical is coated on

the fiber surfaces which decrease the fiber surface tension.

Thus a fabric with higher water repellent property is

achieved. Co-application of CTAB with both water repellent

agents helps to produce a better water repellent fabric as well

as preventing growing of microorganisms. Similarly dyed

samples with larger pores let a higher percentages of water

to be passed and absorbed due to a lower thickness caused

by the tension during drying of wet dyed samples.

Contact Angles

Figure 2 demonstrates the contact angle results for the

treated fabrics. The contact angle for the control sample (R)

is 37 ± 2o and for control sample (D) is 54 ± 1.5

o. Since it

can be seen, contact angle increases as water repellent con-

centration increases. Overall, the results of Bundesmann test

reported previously for the treated fabrics are confirmed by

contact angle results (with 95 % confidence intervals). However,

Table 3. Simultaneous effect of water repellent and antimicrobial finishes on water vapor permeability (WVP)

Samples (R) WVP (g·m−2·day−1) WVP index (%) Samples (D) WVP (g·m−2·day−1) WVP index (%)

Control sample 16.44 ± 1.0 − Control sample 17.90 ± 1.2 −

AFF 4 % 12.33 ± 1.2 74.99 AFF 4 % 16.11 ± 1.3 90.00

AFF 6 % 10.15 ± 2.0 61.74 AFF 6 % 14.21 ± 2.1 79.39

P-574 4 % 12.89 ± 1.4 78.41 P-574 4 % 13.83 ± 2.6 77.26

P-574 6 % 10.09 ± 1.3 61.37 P-574 6 % 12.08 ± 0.7 67.49

CTAB 1 % 15.48 ± 1.7 94.16 CTAB 1 % 17.70 ± 1.2 98.88

CTAB 3 % 15.37 ± 1.0 93.49 CTAB 3 % 16.75 ± 1.1 93.58

CTAB 5 % 12.32 ± 2.1 74.94 CTAB 5 % 16.55 ± 2.1 92.46

CTAB 3 % & AFF 4 % 15.52 ± 0.8 94.40 CTAB 3 % & AFF 4 % 16.80 ± 1.3 93.85

Table 4. Water absorbed by and water passed through the spacer

fabric

Samples Water passed (%) Water absorbed (%)

Control sample (R) 45.0 ± 2.5 29.76 ± 0.13

AFF 4 % 24.2 ± 1.2 14.02 ± 0.08

AFF 6 % 20.5 ± 1.0 9.67 ± 0.12

P-574 4 % 28.6 ± 0.8 21.88 ± 0.10

P-574 6 % 25.2 ± 1.3 18.14 ± 0.04

CTAB 3 % & AFF 4 % 22.0 ± 1.7 11.5 ± 0.13

Control sample (D) 52.3 ± 1.2 30.26 ± 0.15

AFF 4 % 28.7 ± 0.8 17.65 ± 0.08

AFF 6 % 27.4 ± 0.6 12.86 ± 0.04

P-574 4 % 32.9 ± 1.1 22.9 ± 0.05

P-574 6 % 29.6 ± 1.2 16.75 ± 0.06

CTAB 3 % & AFF 4 % 28.2 ± 0.8 12.65 ± 0.12


the dyed samples indicated higher contact angles which

could be due to the dyeing process and/or hydrophobic

disperse dye and/or auxiliaries (such as carrier).

Antimicrobial Property of Fabric Treated by CTAB

Table 5 shows the reduction of Staphylococcus aureus on

different treated spacer fabrics. It can be observed that 3 %

of CTAB is enough to produce a protective spacer fabric

against S. aureus. Increasing of CTAB concentration has no

influence on the reduction of bacteria as the result of 5 %

CTAB is the same as 3 % CTAB. A water repellent agent

based on fluorochemical along with 3 % of CTAB treated on

the spacer fabric indicates the same reduction of bacteria as

the fabric treated with 3 % of CTAB. The results of

Bundesmann test and antimicrobial test clearly show that

these two compounds are compatible and can be easily co-

applied on the PET spacer fabric. Hence, it is possible to

produce a spacer fabric with both properties of water repellent

and antimicrobial.

Effect of Course Density (CPC) on Air Permeability

The results from air permeability test for different samples

are shown in Table 6. It can be found that, there is a low

difference between the air permeability of the fabrics having

different course density (CPC). With increasing of CPC, the

air permeability of the fabrics decreases marginally.

However the statistical analysis of results indicates that

there is no significant difference between the air permeability of

samples (with confidence interval of 95 % and correlation

coefficient about 0.84).

Effect of Course Density (CPC) on Water Vapor Perme-

ability

It can be concluded from Table 7 that, the increase of

course density leads to the decrease in the percentage of

water vapor transferred through the fabric.

As it was mentioned before there are two mechanisms of

water vapor transfer through the fabric. With increasing of

course density (CPC) the first mechanism is practically

interrupted because pores spaces are filled with fibers. This

leads to decrease in the mount of water vapor transfer

through the fabric.

A linear regression equation between water vapor perme-

ability and the CPC of the spacer fabrics (Figure 3) with P-

value <<0.0005 and correlation coefficient about 0.97 can be

derived from CPC tested range. The regression equation is:

WVP = −2.654 × (CPC) + 18.291 R=0.97

Fabric Compression

A typical compression curve of spacer fabric is shown in

Figure 2. Contact angle of treated fabrics. The error bars 95 %

confidence intervals.

Table 5. Reduction of Staphylococcus aureus R (%) for the spacer

fabric

Sample Noa Treatment R (%)

1 Untreated 0

2 1 % 99

3 3 % 99.99

4 5 % 99.99

5b 3 % + 4 % 99.99aThe results are the mean of three samples. b3 % CTAB+4 % fluoroalkyl acrylic copolymer (AFF).

Table 6. Effect of CPC on air permeability of sample

CPC Mean of air permeability (ml/sec)

17 304 ± 2.1

20 296 ± 1.3

22 285 ± 0.8

Table 7. Effect of course density(CPC) on water vapor

permeability(WVP)

CPCMean of WVP

(g·m−2·day−1)

WVP index

(%)

17 15.32 ± 0.6 −

20 13.56 ± 0.4 88.51

22 10.01 ± 0.9 65.34

Figure 3. Effect of course density(CPC) on water vapor

permeability(WVP) of samples.


Figure 4. Fabric samples tested in the compression experiment

were conditioned and fully-dried relaxed under the room

temperature and humidity conditions of 20 ± 2oC and 65 ± 2 %

RH for 24 hours. In order to investigate fabric compression

property, an Instron model 5566 with cyclic loads was used.

It can be observed that the compression curve of spacer

fabric consists of three zones. At low pressure, two outer

fabrics along with spacer threads are compressed and

uniform surfaces are made by distribution of fibers in yarns

of two outer fabrics. The compression characteristic in the

first region is presumed to be elastic. Increasing of pressure

overcomes the internal friction between fibers and yarn and

the deformation of mono filament spacer threads takes place.

Thus in the second region, fabric thickness decreases

nonlinearly with increasing pressure. Further increasing in

pressure compresses the mono filament spacer threads so, in

third region a highly packed fiber layers can be considered.

The WC and W'C were derived by measuring the surface

area under the compression and recovery curves. The results

of energy lost (EL) in the Table 8 indicate that with

increasing of cycle number EL decreases for all fabric

samples. This could be due to the deformation of spacer

threads which are forced to be inclined in the first cycle of

compression. For the second cycle of compression lower

load that leads to a lower energy lost is required to apply on

the fabric. This is the same for the third cycle of

compression. For the consecutive cycle of compression the

rate of energy lost seems to be constant [35].

The statical analysis of results from Table 9 shows that

there are no significant differences between the amount of

RC and EL for AFF treated samples and control samples.

However the percentages of RC and EL for the samples

treated with P-574 differ from the control samples. The P-

574 treated samples have a lower RC and a higher EL in

comparison with control samples (Figure 5). This can be

Figure 4. A typical compression and recovery curve of spacer

fabric obtained by Instron tester.

Table 8. Changes of energy lost (EL) with different cycles for

different samples

SampleEL (%)

Cycle 1 Cycle 2 Cycle 3

Control sample (R) 57.50 55.19 48.69

Control sample (D) 56.69 54.74 50.20

AFF 4 % (R) 56.43 54.03 50.42

AFF 6 % (R) 57.05 56.70 51.39

AFF 4 % (D) 56.43 54.02 51.28

AFF 6 % (D) 56.82 50.38 45.28

P-574 (R) 4 % 66.46 52.39 51.28

P-574 (R) 6 % 63.31 62.64 56.97

P-574 (D) 4 % 62.76 61.82 56.91

P-574 (D) 6 % 60.93 60.20 55.05

CPC 17 50.38 48.87 34.55

CPC 20 48.68 46.23 31.45

CPC 22 45.88 44.52 30.58

Table 9. Fabric resiliency( RC) and energy lost (EL) results

Sample RC (%) EL (%)

Control sample (R) 0.43 0.57

Control sample (D) 0.43 0.57

AFF 4 % (R) 0.44 0.56

AFF 6 % (R) 0.43 0.57

AFF 4 % (D) 0.44 0.56

AFF 6 % (D) 0.43 0.57

P-574 (R) 4 % 0.34 0.66

P-574 (R) 6 % 0.37 0.63

P-574 (D) 4 % 0.37 0.63

P-574 (D) 6 % 0.39 0.61

CPC 17 0.50 0.50

CPC 20 0.50 0.49

CPC 22 0.54 0.46

Figure 5. Effect on resiliency (RC) and energy lost (EL) for P-574

treated fabrics.


attributed to the water repellent chemical structure of P-574

which makes fabrics harsh. Increasing of course density also

causes an increase in fabric resiliency (RC).

Conclusion

This research shows the method of producing of multi-

functional PET knitted fabric with comfort properties. Also

a regression model was presented to predict the water

vapour permeability of knitted spacer fabrics based on CPC

changing. Fluorochemical based water repellent agent produces

fabric with better water repellent property. 3 % of CTAB

produces reasonable antimicrobial PET spacer fabric. PET

spacer fabric treated with CTAB accompanied with the water

repellent agent using a pad-dry-cure technique shows excellent

compatibility, water repellency and antimicrobial properties

with reasonable comfort properties.

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to express their gratitude to Bonyad PP.

Fiber Production Co. for providing samples.

References

1. M. Montazer, 5th International Conference TEXSCL 2003,

June 16-18, Liberic Czech Repablic, 2003.

2. J. T. Marsh, “An Introduction to Textile Finishing”,

pp.458-494, London, Chapman Publication, 1966.

3. J. W. Rowen and D. D. Gagliardi, Dyestuff Rep., 36, 533

(1947).

4. H. G. Weiland, “Canadian Textile Journal”, p.46, August,

1979.

5. T. R. Harding, J. Text. Inst., 42, 691 (1951).

6. W. C. Beck and T. S. Collette, Am. J. Surgery, 33(2), 125

(1952).

7. K. K. Leonas, INJ Spring, 8(1), 18 (1999).

8. J. T. Schwartz and D. E. Saunders, Surgery Cynecol.

Obstet., 4, 507 (1980).

9. J. S. Cho and G. Cho, Text. Res. J., 67(12), 875 (1997).

10. W. Huang and K. K. Leonas, Text. Res. J., 70(9), 774

(2000).

11. S. Lee, J. Cho, and G. Cho, Text. Res. J., 69(2), 104 (1999).

12. G. Sun and X. Xu, Text. Chem. Col., 30(6), 26 (1998).

13. G. Sun and X. Xu, Text. Chem. Col., 31(5), 31 (1999).

14. J. Lin, C. Winkelmann, S. D. Worley, R. M. Broughton,

and J. F. J. Williams, J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 81(4), 943

(2001).

15. J. Lin and C. V. Worley, Polymer, 42(18), 7903 (2001).

16. J. Buchenska, J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 65(5), 967 (1997).

17. L. Jian, W. Catherine, S. D. Worley, K. Jangho, C. Wei, C.

Unchin, R. M. Broughton, J. I. Santiago, and J. F.

Wolliams, J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 85, 177 (2002).

18. Y. Yang, L. Corcoran, K. Vorlicek, and S. Li, Tex. Chem.

Col., 32, 44 (2000).

19. M. W. Huh, I. K. Kang, D. H. Lee, W. S. Kim, D. H. Lee,

L. S. Park, K. E. Min, and K. H. Seo, J. Appl. Polym. Sci.,

81, 2769 (2001).

20. Y. H. Kim and G. Sun, Text. Res. J., 70, 728 (2000).

21. A. Das and M. Ishtiaque, JTATM, 3(4), 1 (2004).

22. P. W. Gibson, Text. Res. J., 63, 749 (1993).

23. K. H. Umbach, Melliand Textileberichte International

Textile Reports, 74, 174 (1993).

24. J. Smith, Text. Horizons, 5(8), 35 (1985).

25. K. Slater, Text. Prog., 9(4), 1 (1977).

26. A. Mukhopadyhay, A. K. Dash, and V. K. Kothari,

International Journal of Clothing Science and Technology,

14(2), 88 (2002).

27. R. Postel, J. Text. Inst., 62, 219 (1971).

28. P. M. Taylor and D. M. Pollet, Text. Res. J., 72, 983 (2002).

29. C. M. Van Wyk, J. Text. Inst., 37, 285 (1946).

30. S. de Jong, J. W. Snaith, and N. A. Michie, Text. Res. J.,

56, 759 (1986).

31. A. K. Soe, T. Matsuo, M. Takahashi, and M. Nakajima,

Text. Res. J., 73, 861 (2003).

32. M. Bakhtiari, S. S. Najar, S. M. Etrati, and Z. Khorram

Toosi, Fibers and Polymers, 7(3), 295 (2006).

33. Y.-A. Son and G. Sun, J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 90, 2194

(2003).

34. M. Montazer and M. G. Afjeh, J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 103,

178 (2007).

35. J. E. Booth, Arrowsmith Bristol, 1968.

36. M. H. Varkiani, Ph.D. Dissertation, AUT, Tehran, 2005.

37. S. Kawabata, “The Standardization and Anaylsis of Hand

Evaluation”, The Hand Evaluation and Standardization

Committee, Text. Mach. Soc. Japan, 1980.

38. M. Matsudaira and H. Qin, J. Text. Inst., 83, 476 (1995).

Evaluation of comfort properties of polyester knitted spacer fabrics finished with water repellent...

Documents

Transcript of Evaluation of comfort properties of polyester knitted spacer fabrics finished with water repellent...