Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Textile Research Journal
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Tester, D.H.
Right arrow Articles by Makinson, K. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

A TEM Study of the Causes of Failure in the Chlorine-Hercosett® Shrink-Resist Process

D.H. Tester

CSIRO Division of Textile Physics, 338 Blaxland Road, Ryde, NSW, 2112, Australia

K. Rachel Makinson

CSIRO Division of Textile Physics, 338 Blaxland Road, Ryde, NSW, 2112, Australia

Examination by transmission electron microscopy of fibers drawn from two card slivers commercially treated by the chlorine-Hercosett® process showed the Hercosett film to be continuous over each fiber. One sliver had passed the Superwash test; almost all of the cuticular scales were flattened or sloping. Most of the fibers retained no steep scales, and none retained more than 20%. Previous work indicates that the modified scales would be much softer in water than unmodified scales. The Hercosett film on these fibers was at least 0.1 µm thick everywhere.

The other sliver had failed the Superwash test, half the fibers resembled those in the first sliver, but among the other half a high proportion of the scales (from 30- 70% on different fibers) remained steep (and, correspondingly, relatively hard). On half of these the film thickness was 0. 1 µm or greater; on the other half it was less than 0.05 µm either all over or on the remaining steep scale faces.

The character of these differences is such as to explain the failure of the process in the case of the second sliver. The difference in the scale shape indicates that the

failure resulted from non-uniformity of chlorination. The resin considerably pene trated the cuticle.

Textile Research Journal, Vol. 53, No. 7, 415-419 (1983)
DOI: 10.1177/004051758305300704
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?