CA2225589A1 - Carpet cleaning composition - Google Patents
Carpet cleaning composition Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- CA2225589A1 CA2225589A1 CA 2225589 CA2225589A CA2225589A1 CA 2225589 A1 CA2225589 A1 CA 2225589A1 CA 2225589 CA2225589 CA 2225589 CA 2225589 A CA2225589 A CA 2225589A CA 2225589 A1 CA2225589 A1 CA 2225589A1
- Authority
- CA
- Canada
- Prior art keywords
- cleaner
- emulsifying
- organic solvent
- dispersing agent
- surfactant
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Abandoned
Links
Classifications
-
- D—TEXTILES; PAPER
- D06—TREATMENT OF TEXTILES OR THE LIKE; LAUNDERING; FLEXIBLE MATERIALS NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- D06L—DRY-CLEANING, WASHING OR BLEACHING FIBRES, FILAMENTS, THREADS, YARNS, FABRICS, FEATHERS OR MADE-UP FIBROUS GOODS; BLEACHING LEATHER OR FURS
- D06L1/00—Dry-cleaning or washing fibres, filaments, threads, yarns, fabrics, feathers or made-up fibrous goods
- D06L1/02—Dry-cleaning or washing fibres, filaments, threads, yarns, fabrics, feathers or made-up fibrous goods using organic solvents
- D06L1/04—Dry-cleaning or washing fibres, filaments, threads, yarns, fabrics, feathers or made-up fibrous goods using organic solvents combined with specific additives
-
- C—CHEMISTRY; METALLURGY
- C11—ANIMAL OR VEGETABLE OILS, FATS, FATTY SUBSTANCES OR WAXES; FATTY ACIDS THEREFROM; DETERGENTS; CANDLES
- C11D—DETERGENT COMPOSITIONS; USE OF SINGLE SUBSTANCES AS DETERGENTS; SOAP OR SOAP-MAKING; RESIN SOAPS; RECOVERY OF GLYCEROL
- C11D3/00—Other compounding ingredients of detergent compositions covered in group C11D1/00
- C11D3/0005—Other compounding ingredients characterised by their effect
- C11D3/0031—Carpet, upholstery, fur or leather cleansers
-
- C—CHEMISTRY; METALLURGY
- C11—ANIMAL OR VEGETABLE OILS, FATS, FATTY SUBSTANCES OR WAXES; FATTY ACIDS THEREFROM; DETERGENTS; CANDLES
- C11D—DETERGENT COMPOSITIONS; USE OF SINGLE SUBSTANCES AS DETERGENTS; SOAP OR SOAP-MAKING; RESIN SOAPS; RECOVERY OF GLYCEROL
- C11D3/00—Other compounding ingredients of detergent compositions covered in group C11D1/00
- C11D3/16—Organic compounds
- C11D3/20—Organic compounds containing oxygen
- C11D3/2068—Ethers
-
- C—CHEMISTRY; METALLURGY
- C11—ANIMAL OR VEGETABLE OILS, FATS, FATTY SUBSTANCES OR WAXES; FATTY ACIDS THEREFROM; DETERGENTS; CANDLES
- C11D—DETERGENT COMPOSITIONS; USE OF SINGLE SUBSTANCES AS DETERGENTS; SOAP OR SOAP-MAKING; RESIN SOAPS; RECOVERY OF GLYCEROL
- C11D3/00—Other compounding ingredients of detergent compositions covered in group C11D1/00
- C11D3/39—Organic or inorganic per-compounds
- C11D3/3947—Liquid compositions
-
- C—CHEMISTRY; METALLURGY
- C11—ANIMAL OR VEGETABLE OILS, FATS, FATTY SUBSTANCES OR WAXES; FATTY ACIDS THEREFROM; DETERGENTS; CANDLES
- C11D—DETERGENT COMPOSITIONS; USE OF SINGLE SUBSTANCES AS DETERGENTS; SOAP OR SOAP-MAKING; RESIN SOAPS; RECOVERY OF GLYCEROL
- C11D3/00—Other compounding ingredients of detergent compositions covered in group C11D1/00
- C11D3/43—Solvents
-
- C—CHEMISTRY; METALLURGY
- C11—ANIMAL OR VEGETABLE OILS, FATS, FATTY SUBSTANCES OR WAXES; FATTY ACIDS THEREFROM; DETERGENTS; CANDLES
- C11D—DETERGENT COMPOSITIONS; USE OF SINGLE SUBSTANCES AS DETERGENTS; SOAP OR SOAP-MAKING; RESIN SOAPS; RECOVERY OF GLYCEROL
- C11D1/00—Detergent compositions based essentially on surface-active compounds; Use of these compounds as a detergent
- C11D1/66—Non-ionic compounds
- C11D1/72—Ethers of polyoxyalkylene glycols
-
- C—CHEMISTRY; METALLURGY
- C11—ANIMAL OR VEGETABLE OILS, FATS, FATTY SUBSTANCES OR WAXES; FATTY ACIDS THEREFROM; DETERGENTS; CANDLES
- C11D—DETERGENT COMPOSITIONS; USE OF SINGLE SUBSTANCES AS DETERGENTS; SOAP OR SOAP-MAKING; RESIN SOAPS; RECOVERY OF GLYCEROL
- C11D1/00—Detergent compositions based essentially on surface-active compounds; Use of these compounds as a detergent
- C11D1/66—Non-ionic compounds
- C11D1/722—Ethers of polyoxyalkylene glycols having mixed oxyalkylene groups; Polyalkoxylated fatty alcohols or polyalkoxylated alkylaryl alcohols with mixed oxyalkylele groups
Landscapes
- Chemical & Material Sciences (AREA)
- Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
- Life Sciences & Earth Sciences (AREA)
- Chemical Kinetics & Catalysis (AREA)
- Oil, Petroleum & Natural Gas (AREA)
- Wood Science & Technology (AREA)
- Organic Chemistry (AREA)
- Health & Medical Sciences (AREA)
- Emergency Medicine (AREA)
- Inorganic Chemistry (AREA)
- Textile Engineering (AREA)
- Detergent Compositions (AREA)
Abstract
A cleaning composition for carpets, rugs and the like is provided. The dispensable cleaner includes: a) an effective amount of an organic solvent having a Hansen solubility parameter of less than about 10; b) an effective amount of an emulsifying or dispersing agent; c) an effective amount of a source of hydrogen peroxide; and d) the balance being water. Emulsifying or dispersing agents that are surfactants having an HLB of less than about 10 are particularly suited for removing oily from absorbent or adsorbent surfaces.
Optional components include sequestering agents, fragrances, builders and soil retardants.
Optional components include sequestering agents, fragrances, builders and soil retardants.
Description
PATENT
Attorney Docket No.00627~039 CARPET CLEAN~G COMPOSITION
Field of the Invention The present invention relates generally to carpet cleaners and particularly to a cle~ning col~lpo~ition that includes hydrogen peroxide, a hydrophobic solvent, and an emulsifying or dispersing agent.
S Back~round of the Invention A variety of carpet cleaning formulations are available for household use. Some are aerosol foam forming compositions that are ~icpence~ from cans whereby after the foam collapses into the carpet some of the solvents in the co..-~ition interact with the dirt in the carpet which is later removed by 10 vacuum. Other carpet cleaning formulations are aqueous compositions containing a variety of solvents, surfactants, and adjuvants. A number of these include hydrogen peroxide in combination with hydrophilic solvents and surf~-hn~c Despite their conveni~nc~, convention~l carpet cle~ning formulations suffer from a ml---ber of disadvantages. With respect to aqueous non-foan~ing formul~tiQnc, while they are able to remove water soluble stains, they have not been particularly effective in removing heavy traffic soil stains. Thus one resorts to vigorous scrubbing with a wet mop, sponge, or other means in 20 conjunction with more caustic cleaning formulations in the hopes of dissolving and removing the greasy stains. This latter type of formulation causes fabric damage and negates the convenit-nce associated with these carpet cleaners.
PATENT
Attorney Docket No.006270-039 Summary of the Invention The present invention is directed to a cleaning composition that is particularly suited for rle~ning carpets, rugs, and the like. The invention is based in part on the discovery that a combination of hydrogen peroxide and a hydrophobic solvent or surfactant provides for a composition that exhibits exc~p~ional abilities in dislo~lging greasy or oily soil from fabrics that can then be removed with a vacuum cleaner, mop, sponge or other device. Greasy soils are espe~ y problematic as they usually contain an oily, fluid component as well as a particulate co,--ponent. The cleaning composition is also excellent for removing conventional stains.
In one aspect, the invention is directed to a dispensable cleaner e~ ly adapted for removing oily soils from absoll.ent or adsorbent surfaces, the cleaner including:
a. an effective amount of an organic solvent having a Hansen solubility parameter of less than about 10;
b. an effective amount of an emulsifying or dispersing agent;
c. an effective arnount of a source of hydrogen peroxide; and d. the rem~in-ler, water.
In another aspect, the invention is dirccled to a method for cl~ning soiled fabrics having fibers collt~ininp soil that inrludes the steps of:
a. forming a cleaner espe~i~lly adapted for removing oily soils from 25 absoll~nt or adso.l,ent surfaces, the cleaner having the formulation set forth above;
b. applying said cleaner to a surface of a fabric containing a soil;
c. allowing said cleaner to penetrate into said fabric; and PATENT
Attorney Docket No.006270-039 d. removing said soil.
In a p~fe.,~;l embodiment, said emulsifying or dispersing agent is a surfactant that has an HLB of less than about 10. In another prefc.,~d emb~imPrlt the method further includes the step of allowing at least some of the water to evaporate from the fabric before removing said soil.
Detailed Des~ liytion of Preferred Embodiments The present invention relates to an aqueous carpet cleaning formulation that generally includes:
a. an effective amount of a hydrophobic organic solvent having a Hansen solubility parameter of less than about 10;
b. an effective amount of an emulsifying or dispersing agent;
c. an effective amount of a source of hydrogen peroxide; and d. optionally, one or more other cleaner and/or ~sthetic adjunct with the balance comprising water.
A critical aspect of the invention is that the presence of the hydrogen peroxide and hydrophobic organic solvent uneA~;ledly provides synergistic cle~ning of oily and greasy stains that have been difficult to remove. No e~ccessive brushing, mopping, or other physical treatment is required. The dislodged soil is removed by conventional means including, for example, a vacuum cleaner, mop, or sponge.
The hydrophobic organic solvent inch~des any suitable organic solvent or mixture of solvents that has a Hansen solubility parameter of less than about 10. This parameter is a standard used in the solvent industry and lep~ nts a combination of dispersion, polar, and hydrogen bonding forces. A table of CA 0222~89 1997-12-23 PATENT
Attorney Docket No.006270-039 calculated values is presented in C. M. Hansen and K. Skaarup, "Independent Calculation of the Parameter Componentsn, Journal of Paint Technolo~y 39 (1967) No. 511 and is further described in Wisniewski et. al., UThree-Dimensional Solubility Parameter: simple and effective determination of compatibility regionsn, Pro~ress in Organic Coatings, 26 (1995) 265-274 and Robert Griffith, "Solubility Parameters", American Ink Maker. Dec. 1989, 15-17, which are incorporated herein. While the exact reason for the advantageous combination of hydrogen peroxide with a hydrophobic solvent of low Hansen solubility parameter in cle~ning greasy soils is unknown, the Hansen solubility 10 coefficient is known to predict the dispersion of dyes and pigments and the swelling of polymers, see C. M. Hansen, "The Three-Dimensional Solubility Parameter-Key to Paint Component Affinitiesn, Journal of Paint Technology. 39 (1967) No. 505. The term "hydrophobic" is meant herein to encompass solvents which are poorly soluble in water as well as solvents that would be 15 e ~Ec~:l to interact with hydrophobic materials, such as greasy soils. For the present invention, suitable hydrophobic solvents have a Hansen solubility pa~rneter of less than about 10.
Suitable hydrophobic solvents generally include, for example, glycol 20 ethers, alcohols, ethers, ketones and esters such as ~cet~s ~efe~r~d solventsare ethylene glycol ethers and propylene glycol ethers, and mixtures thereof.
Such solvents include, for example, ethylene glycol ethyl hexyl ether, tripropylene glycol n-butyl ether, tripropylene glycol methyl ether, dipropyleneglycol n-butyl ether, dipropylene glycol t-butyl ether, dipropylene glycol n-25 propyl ether, propylene glycol n-butyl ether, propylene glycol t-butyl ether,dipropylene glycol methyl ether acetate, propylene glycol ethyl ether ~cet~te, diethylene glycol ethyl ether acetate and mixtures thereof. These solvents are available from Arco Chemical Company, Newton Square, PA. Solvents with a PATENT
Attorney Docket No.00627~039 low Hansen solubility parameter (i.e., less than 10) may be mixed with other solvents having higher Hansen solubility parameters, such as, for example, diethylene glycol, ethylene glycol, propylene glycol, and isopr~panol. Suitable solvent mixtures of hydrophobic solvents for the present cleaning composition 5 must also have a Hansen solubility parameter of less than about 10. The hydrophobic organic solvent preferably comprises about O.5~o to 30%, more preferably about l~ to 10%, and most preferably about 2% to 5% of the cle~ning composition. All percentages herein are on a weight basis.
The hydrogen peroxide acts as an oxidizing agent. The hydrogen peroxide preferably comprises about 0.1% to 20%, more preferably about 0.5%
to 10%, and most preferably about 1% to 5% of the cleaning col..position.
Hydrogen peroxide is typically available in the form of an aqueous solution comprising about 30% to 70% H2O2.
The emulsifying or dispersing agent includes any suitable surfactant which is col,lp~lible with the organic solvent. Most preferably the surfactant is characL~ ed by having a hydrophilic-lipophilic-balance (HLB) of less than about 10. P~fe.,~d surfactants include, for example, anionic, nonionic, and 20 cationic surfa~t~n~ and mixtures thereof. Plcfe~led nonionic surfart~nt~
include, for example, alcohol ethoxylates and propoxylates and aLtcylphenol ethoxylates and plopo~ylates, and mixtures thereof. Preferably, the surfactant preferably comprises about 0.1% to 5%, more preferably about 0.3~o to 3%, and most preferably about 0.4% to 0.6% of the cle~ninE~ composition.
The pH of the cleaning composition preferably ranges from about pH 2 to pH lO and more preferably ranges from about pH 3 to pH 5. The cleaner may further include one or more cleaning and/or aesthetic ad~uncts. These PATENT
Attorney Docket No.006270-039 include, for exarnple, sequestering agents, builders, fragrances, soil retardants, and mixtures thereof.
Sequestering agents and builders act to stabili~ the composition against 5 metal ions and changes in pH. Preferred shbili~rs include, for example, tetrasodium ethylen~i~min~tetraacetic acid, which is available as VERSENE
100~ from Dow Ch~mic~l~ Midland, MI and borax decahydrate, which is available from Aldrich Chemical, Milwaukee, WI. Other sequestering agents and builders may include, for example, aminopolyphosphonates (such as, for 10 exarnple, DEQUEST 2000~ from Monsanto Co.), phosphonates, phosphates, zeolites, lower carboxylic acids and the salts thereof, such as, ~t~tes citrates, polyacrylates, and soaps. When employed, the sequestering agent preferably comprises from about 0.1 % to 10% of the cleaning composition.
Fragrances are usually blends of volatile oils that are composed of organic compounds such as esters, aldehydes, ketones or mixtures thereof.
Such fragrances are usually proprietary materials commercially available from such manufacturers as Quest, lntemational Flavors and Fragrances, Givaudan and Firmenich, Inc. Examples of fragrances which may be suitable for use in the present invention may be found in Laufer et al., U.S. Pat. No. 3,876,551, and Boden et al, U.S. Pat. No. 4,390,448, which are inco.~ldted herein.
When employed, fragrances preferably comprise from about 0.1 % to 0.5% of the cle~ning co...l)os;lion.
Soil retardants are typically hydrocarbon and fluorocarbon polymers which protect the carpet against resoiling. Useful soil r~rdant polymers include, for example, ZONYL 7950TY, ZONYL 5180n', ZONYL 6885n', and ZELAN 338m from DuPont Chemicals, Wilmington, DE, FLUORAD FC-661 PATENT
Attomey Docket No.006270-039 employed, the soil retardant preferably comprises from about 0.01 to 5% of the composition.
The cle~ning composition of the present invention is preferably spayed 5 directly onto stained surfaces by conventional means.
Expenmentat Comparative evaluations were conducted to demonstrate the unexpected 10 cle~ning pe.rol-llance of the inventive cGI~lposition. White color carpet made from 100% nylon which m~Yimi7~s the contrast between a stain and the carpet was employed. Swatches (4x4 in. (10.16 x 10.16 cm)) were stained with heavy traffic soils or grape juice as follows:
Heavy Traffic - 10 grams of Shapsburg clay soil was thoroughly mixed with 1 gram of Chevron Supreme Motor Oil~ SAE 10W-40. Half a gram of this mixture was applied onto a 3 x 3 in (7.62 x 7.62 cm) area on swatches.
The stain was atlowed to dry completely before cle~ning.
Grape Juice (WELCH'S~) - 3 grams of grape juice (undiluted) was applied onto a 3 x 3 in (7.62 x 7.62 cm) area on swatches. The stain was allowed to dry completely before cl~ning.
Inventive and comparative cleaning compositions were tested using the foltowing protocol. Three grams of cG~ oaition was sprayed on a stained swatch. The stain was cleaned with a damp sponge in an automatic carpet scrubbing machine with 25 swipes. Another three grams of the cleaner was apptied and the scrubbing was re~ted. The swatch was atlowed to dry PATENT
Attorney Docket No.00627~039 overnight before being vacuumed with a portable vacuum cleaner and evaluated with a Hunter colorimeter model 6000 without a uv filter. Four replicate readings of the swatches were made per composition. Whiteness was det~ ined by making refle~t~nce measurements before and after cleaning the 5 stained swatches. Based on the reflectance reading, the amount of rem~inine stain and the percent stain removal were calc~ t~d.
In this study, the unexpected ability to clean soiled fabric by inventive 10 cl~ning composition A which comprises (1) hydrogen peroxide, (2) a hydrophobic organic solvent, tripropylene glycol methyl ether (TPM), having a Hansen solubility coefficient of 9.8, and (3) a hydrophobic surfactant (i.e., emulsifier), Sl RFONIC 112-2.6TM, having an HLB of 8.0 was demolls~rated.
The co~l~nents that comprise each rle~ning composition (as a pef~er.t~ge by 15 weight) and their pe.~~ ance as measured by the percentage of soil removed from heavy traffic stains are listed in Table 1. As is evident, composition A
was superior to composition B which did not include hydrogen peroxide, and to cG,.,I)osition C which did not include a hydrophobic solvent or a hydrophobic sulr~c~nt. Composition A was also superior to comparative compositions D, 20 E, and F which did not contain a hydrophobic surfactant or solvent but rather included the more hydrophilic surfactant, SULFONIC L12-~M (HLB 12.4), and the more hydrophilic solvents isopropanol (HS: 12.1), ethylene glycol (HS: 16.3), and ethylene glycol butyl ether (HS: 10.2), ~ ely.
PATENT
Attorney Docket No.00627~039 Table 1 A B C D E F
H2O2 (50~o) 5 0 5 5 5 5 Hansen Solubility (HS) TPM 9.8 5 5 Isoprol~anol 12.1 5 Ethylene glycol 16.3 5 Ethylene glycol 10.2 5 butyl ether STEPANOL 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 WACrM (1) HLB
SURFONIC 8 0.1 0.1 L12-2.6TM (2) SURFONIC 12.4 0.1 0.1 0.1 L12-6TM (3) Water q.s. q.s. q.s. q.s. q.s. q.s.
Heavy Traffic 80.1 73.7 73.2 76.1 71.6 73.4 % Soil Removed (1) 30~o sodium lauryl sulfate, available from Stepan Co., Northfield, Il (2) Cl0-Cl2, 2.6 mole ethoxylate nonionic surfactant, available from Texaco 25 Ch~mir~l Co., Austin, TX
Attorney Docket No.00627~039 CARPET CLEAN~G COMPOSITION
Field of the Invention The present invention relates generally to carpet cleaners and particularly to a cle~ning col~lpo~ition that includes hydrogen peroxide, a hydrophobic solvent, and an emulsifying or dispersing agent.
S Back~round of the Invention A variety of carpet cleaning formulations are available for household use. Some are aerosol foam forming compositions that are ~icpence~ from cans whereby after the foam collapses into the carpet some of the solvents in the co..-~ition interact with the dirt in the carpet which is later removed by 10 vacuum. Other carpet cleaning formulations are aqueous compositions containing a variety of solvents, surfactants, and adjuvants. A number of these include hydrogen peroxide in combination with hydrophilic solvents and surf~-hn~c Despite their conveni~nc~, convention~l carpet cle~ning formulations suffer from a ml---ber of disadvantages. With respect to aqueous non-foan~ing formul~tiQnc, while they are able to remove water soluble stains, they have not been particularly effective in removing heavy traffic soil stains. Thus one resorts to vigorous scrubbing with a wet mop, sponge, or other means in 20 conjunction with more caustic cleaning formulations in the hopes of dissolving and removing the greasy stains. This latter type of formulation causes fabric damage and negates the convenit-nce associated with these carpet cleaners.
PATENT
Attorney Docket No.006270-039 Summary of the Invention The present invention is directed to a cleaning composition that is particularly suited for rle~ning carpets, rugs, and the like. The invention is based in part on the discovery that a combination of hydrogen peroxide and a hydrophobic solvent or surfactant provides for a composition that exhibits exc~p~ional abilities in dislo~lging greasy or oily soil from fabrics that can then be removed with a vacuum cleaner, mop, sponge or other device. Greasy soils are espe~ y problematic as they usually contain an oily, fluid component as well as a particulate co,--ponent. The cleaning composition is also excellent for removing conventional stains.
In one aspect, the invention is directed to a dispensable cleaner e~ ly adapted for removing oily soils from absoll.ent or adsorbent surfaces, the cleaner including:
a. an effective amount of an organic solvent having a Hansen solubility parameter of less than about 10;
b. an effective amount of an emulsifying or dispersing agent;
c. an effective arnount of a source of hydrogen peroxide; and d. the rem~in-ler, water.
In another aspect, the invention is dirccled to a method for cl~ning soiled fabrics having fibers collt~ininp soil that inrludes the steps of:
a. forming a cleaner espe~i~lly adapted for removing oily soils from 25 absoll~nt or adso.l,ent surfaces, the cleaner having the formulation set forth above;
b. applying said cleaner to a surface of a fabric containing a soil;
c. allowing said cleaner to penetrate into said fabric; and PATENT
Attorney Docket No.006270-039 d. removing said soil.
In a p~fe.,~;l embodiment, said emulsifying or dispersing agent is a surfactant that has an HLB of less than about 10. In another prefc.,~d emb~imPrlt the method further includes the step of allowing at least some of the water to evaporate from the fabric before removing said soil.
Detailed Des~ liytion of Preferred Embodiments The present invention relates to an aqueous carpet cleaning formulation that generally includes:
a. an effective amount of a hydrophobic organic solvent having a Hansen solubility parameter of less than about 10;
b. an effective amount of an emulsifying or dispersing agent;
c. an effective amount of a source of hydrogen peroxide; and d. optionally, one or more other cleaner and/or ~sthetic adjunct with the balance comprising water.
A critical aspect of the invention is that the presence of the hydrogen peroxide and hydrophobic organic solvent uneA~;ledly provides synergistic cle~ning of oily and greasy stains that have been difficult to remove. No e~ccessive brushing, mopping, or other physical treatment is required. The dislodged soil is removed by conventional means including, for example, a vacuum cleaner, mop, or sponge.
The hydrophobic organic solvent inch~des any suitable organic solvent or mixture of solvents that has a Hansen solubility parameter of less than about 10. This parameter is a standard used in the solvent industry and lep~ nts a combination of dispersion, polar, and hydrogen bonding forces. A table of CA 0222~89 1997-12-23 PATENT
Attorney Docket No.006270-039 calculated values is presented in C. M. Hansen and K. Skaarup, "Independent Calculation of the Parameter Componentsn, Journal of Paint Technolo~y 39 (1967) No. 511 and is further described in Wisniewski et. al., UThree-Dimensional Solubility Parameter: simple and effective determination of compatibility regionsn, Pro~ress in Organic Coatings, 26 (1995) 265-274 and Robert Griffith, "Solubility Parameters", American Ink Maker. Dec. 1989, 15-17, which are incorporated herein. While the exact reason for the advantageous combination of hydrogen peroxide with a hydrophobic solvent of low Hansen solubility parameter in cle~ning greasy soils is unknown, the Hansen solubility 10 coefficient is known to predict the dispersion of dyes and pigments and the swelling of polymers, see C. M. Hansen, "The Three-Dimensional Solubility Parameter-Key to Paint Component Affinitiesn, Journal of Paint Technology. 39 (1967) No. 505. The term "hydrophobic" is meant herein to encompass solvents which are poorly soluble in water as well as solvents that would be 15 e ~Ec~:l to interact with hydrophobic materials, such as greasy soils. For the present invention, suitable hydrophobic solvents have a Hansen solubility pa~rneter of less than about 10.
Suitable hydrophobic solvents generally include, for example, glycol 20 ethers, alcohols, ethers, ketones and esters such as ~cet~s ~efe~r~d solventsare ethylene glycol ethers and propylene glycol ethers, and mixtures thereof.
Such solvents include, for example, ethylene glycol ethyl hexyl ether, tripropylene glycol n-butyl ether, tripropylene glycol methyl ether, dipropyleneglycol n-butyl ether, dipropylene glycol t-butyl ether, dipropylene glycol n-25 propyl ether, propylene glycol n-butyl ether, propylene glycol t-butyl ether,dipropylene glycol methyl ether acetate, propylene glycol ethyl ether ~cet~te, diethylene glycol ethyl ether acetate and mixtures thereof. These solvents are available from Arco Chemical Company, Newton Square, PA. Solvents with a PATENT
Attorney Docket No.00627~039 low Hansen solubility parameter (i.e., less than 10) may be mixed with other solvents having higher Hansen solubility parameters, such as, for example, diethylene glycol, ethylene glycol, propylene glycol, and isopr~panol. Suitable solvent mixtures of hydrophobic solvents for the present cleaning composition 5 must also have a Hansen solubility parameter of less than about 10. The hydrophobic organic solvent preferably comprises about O.5~o to 30%, more preferably about l~ to 10%, and most preferably about 2% to 5% of the cle~ning composition. All percentages herein are on a weight basis.
The hydrogen peroxide acts as an oxidizing agent. The hydrogen peroxide preferably comprises about 0.1% to 20%, more preferably about 0.5%
to 10%, and most preferably about 1% to 5% of the cleaning col..position.
Hydrogen peroxide is typically available in the form of an aqueous solution comprising about 30% to 70% H2O2.
The emulsifying or dispersing agent includes any suitable surfactant which is col,lp~lible with the organic solvent. Most preferably the surfactant is characL~ ed by having a hydrophilic-lipophilic-balance (HLB) of less than about 10. P~fe.,~d surfactants include, for example, anionic, nonionic, and 20 cationic surfa~t~n~ and mixtures thereof. Plcfe~led nonionic surfart~nt~
include, for example, alcohol ethoxylates and propoxylates and aLtcylphenol ethoxylates and plopo~ylates, and mixtures thereof. Preferably, the surfactant preferably comprises about 0.1% to 5%, more preferably about 0.3~o to 3%, and most preferably about 0.4% to 0.6% of the cle~ninE~ composition.
The pH of the cleaning composition preferably ranges from about pH 2 to pH lO and more preferably ranges from about pH 3 to pH 5. The cleaner may further include one or more cleaning and/or aesthetic ad~uncts. These PATENT
Attorney Docket No.006270-039 include, for exarnple, sequestering agents, builders, fragrances, soil retardants, and mixtures thereof.
Sequestering agents and builders act to stabili~ the composition against 5 metal ions and changes in pH. Preferred shbili~rs include, for example, tetrasodium ethylen~i~min~tetraacetic acid, which is available as VERSENE
100~ from Dow Ch~mic~l~ Midland, MI and borax decahydrate, which is available from Aldrich Chemical, Milwaukee, WI. Other sequestering agents and builders may include, for example, aminopolyphosphonates (such as, for 10 exarnple, DEQUEST 2000~ from Monsanto Co.), phosphonates, phosphates, zeolites, lower carboxylic acids and the salts thereof, such as, ~t~tes citrates, polyacrylates, and soaps. When employed, the sequestering agent preferably comprises from about 0.1 % to 10% of the cleaning composition.
Fragrances are usually blends of volatile oils that are composed of organic compounds such as esters, aldehydes, ketones or mixtures thereof.
Such fragrances are usually proprietary materials commercially available from such manufacturers as Quest, lntemational Flavors and Fragrances, Givaudan and Firmenich, Inc. Examples of fragrances which may be suitable for use in the present invention may be found in Laufer et al., U.S. Pat. No. 3,876,551, and Boden et al, U.S. Pat. No. 4,390,448, which are inco.~ldted herein.
When employed, fragrances preferably comprise from about 0.1 % to 0.5% of the cle~ning co...l)os;lion.
Soil retardants are typically hydrocarbon and fluorocarbon polymers which protect the carpet against resoiling. Useful soil r~rdant polymers include, for example, ZONYL 7950TY, ZONYL 5180n', ZONYL 6885n', and ZELAN 338m from DuPont Chemicals, Wilmington, DE, FLUORAD FC-661 PATENT
Attomey Docket No.006270-039 employed, the soil retardant preferably comprises from about 0.01 to 5% of the composition.
The cle~ning composition of the present invention is preferably spayed 5 directly onto stained surfaces by conventional means.
Expenmentat Comparative evaluations were conducted to demonstrate the unexpected 10 cle~ning pe.rol-llance of the inventive cGI~lposition. White color carpet made from 100% nylon which m~Yimi7~s the contrast between a stain and the carpet was employed. Swatches (4x4 in. (10.16 x 10.16 cm)) were stained with heavy traffic soils or grape juice as follows:
Heavy Traffic - 10 grams of Shapsburg clay soil was thoroughly mixed with 1 gram of Chevron Supreme Motor Oil~ SAE 10W-40. Half a gram of this mixture was applied onto a 3 x 3 in (7.62 x 7.62 cm) area on swatches.
The stain was atlowed to dry completely before cle~ning.
Grape Juice (WELCH'S~) - 3 grams of grape juice (undiluted) was applied onto a 3 x 3 in (7.62 x 7.62 cm) area on swatches. The stain was allowed to dry completely before cl~ning.
Inventive and comparative cleaning compositions were tested using the foltowing protocol. Three grams of cG~ oaition was sprayed on a stained swatch. The stain was cleaned with a damp sponge in an automatic carpet scrubbing machine with 25 swipes. Another three grams of the cleaner was apptied and the scrubbing was re~ted. The swatch was atlowed to dry PATENT
Attorney Docket No.00627~039 overnight before being vacuumed with a portable vacuum cleaner and evaluated with a Hunter colorimeter model 6000 without a uv filter. Four replicate readings of the swatches were made per composition. Whiteness was det~ ined by making refle~t~nce measurements before and after cleaning the 5 stained swatches. Based on the reflectance reading, the amount of rem~inine stain and the percent stain removal were calc~ t~d.
In this study, the unexpected ability to clean soiled fabric by inventive 10 cl~ning composition A which comprises (1) hydrogen peroxide, (2) a hydrophobic organic solvent, tripropylene glycol methyl ether (TPM), having a Hansen solubility coefficient of 9.8, and (3) a hydrophobic surfactant (i.e., emulsifier), Sl RFONIC 112-2.6TM, having an HLB of 8.0 was demolls~rated.
The co~l~nents that comprise each rle~ning composition (as a pef~er.t~ge by 15 weight) and their pe.~~ ance as measured by the percentage of soil removed from heavy traffic stains are listed in Table 1. As is evident, composition A
was superior to composition B which did not include hydrogen peroxide, and to cG,.,I)osition C which did not include a hydrophobic solvent or a hydrophobic sulr~c~nt. Composition A was also superior to comparative compositions D, 20 E, and F which did not contain a hydrophobic surfactant or solvent but rather included the more hydrophilic surfactant, SULFONIC L12-~M (HLB 12.4), and the more hydrophilic solvents isopropanol (HS: 12.1), ethylene glycol (HS: 16.3), and ethylene glycol butyl ether (HS: 10.2), ~ ely.
PATENT
Attorney Docket No.00627~039 Table 1 A B C D E F
H2O2 (50~o) 5 0 5 5 5 5 Hansen Solubility (HS) TPM 9.8 5 5 Isoprol~anol 12.1 5 Ethylene glycol 16.3 5 Ethylene glycol 10.2 5 butyl ether STEPANOL 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 WACrM (1) HLB
SURFONIC 8 0.1 0.1 L12-2.6TM (2) SURFONIC 12.4 0.1 0.1 0.1 L12-6TM (3) Water q.s. q.s. q.s. q.s. q.s. q.s.
Heavy Traffic 80.1 73.7 73.2 76.1 71.6 73.4 % Soil Removed (1) 30~o sodium lauryl sulfate, available from Stepan Co., Northfield, Il (2) Cl0-Cl2, 2.6 mole ethoxylate nonionic surfactant, available from Texaco 25 Ch~mir~l Co., Austin, TX
(3) Cl0-C~2, 6 mole ethoxylate nonionic surfactant, available from Texaco Chemir~l Co.
PATENT
Attorney Docket No.006270{)39 ln this study the cleaning abilities of inventive and comparative cleaning comrositions each containing, among other components: (1) 0.3% STEPANOL
WACrM, an anionic, hydrophilic surfactant, and (2) 0.5~ VERSENE 100rM, a 5 builder, was co."~rcd. With the exception of co~-~position D, each cleaning co,..ros;l;on also included 0.1% TRITON Xl00rM that comprises an octylphenol 9-10 mole ethoxylate, a hydrophilic nonionic surfactant (i.e., emulsifier) available from Union Carbide Chemical & Plastics Co., Danbury, CT. The co".l~onents that comprise each cleaning cGmposition (as a percentage by 10 weight) and their pe~Çol,l,ance as measured by the percentage of soil removed from heavy traffic stains are listed in Table 2.
As is evident, inventive compositions A and D which further included hydrogen peroxide, and a hydrophobic solvent, dipropylene glycol butyl ethyl 15 (DPNB) were superior to the co",p~dtive cleaning compositions B, C, E, F
and G that did not include both hydrogen peroxide and a hydrophobic solvent.
PATENT
Attorney Docket No.006270-039 Table 2 A B C D E F G
H202 (50%) 4 4 0 4 4 0 4 HS
DPNB 9.5 10 0 10 10 E~ylene 10.2 10 10 glycol butyl ether Iso~)~panol 12.1 10 HLB
TRITON 13.5 0.1 0.1 0.1 0 0.1 0.1 0.1 XlOOTM
STEPANOL 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 WACTM
VERSENE 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 100~
.~
Water q.s. q.s. q.s. q.s. q.s. q.s. q.s.
% Heavy 73.5 62.1 66.2 70.2 61.7 57.5 62.8 T~ffic Soil Removed PATENT
Attorney Docket No.006270-039 EXAMPLES 3, 4, AND 5 Three sets of tests were conducted using different cleaning compositions to remove heavy traffic soil or grape juice stains. In the first study, the cle~nine benefit of combining a hydrophobic surfactant (composition A) versus 5 a hydrophilic surfactant (composition B) to a cle~ning composition comprising a hydrophobic solvent, TPM, and hydrogen peroxide was demonstrated.
Composition A comprised: (1) 4% of H2O2 (50%), (2) 5% TPM (HS:9.8) (3) 0.5% SURFONIC L12-2.6TM (HLB: 8.0), (4) 0.4% VERSENE 100TM, (5) 0.3% STEPANOL WACTM, and (6) the balance, water. Composition B had the same components except that SURFONIC L12-6TM (HLB: 12.6) was used instead of SURFONIC L12-2.6TM. Composition removed 81.3% of the heavy traffic soil whereas composition removed only 76.2%. As is evident, colllpoaition A containing the hydrophobic nonionic surfactant provided better stain removal that composition B which contained the hydrophilic nonionic 15 surfactant.
In the second study, the cle~ning benefit of combining a hydrophobic surfactant (composition C) versus a hydrophilic surfactant (co-l-position D) to a cleqninP composition comprising a the hydrophilic solvent, isopropanol, and 20 hydrogen peroxide was demonstrated. Composition C comprised: (1) 4% of H2O2 (50%), (2) 5% isop,opanol (HS:12.1) (3) 0.5% SURFONIC L12-2.6TM(HLB: 8.0), (4) 0.3% Sl~ANOL WACTM, and (5) the b~l~nce, water.
Co".pos;l;on D had the same col..ponents except that SURFONIC L12-6TM
(HLB: 12.6) was used instead of SURFONIC L12-2.6rM. Composition C
25 removed 73.4% of the heavy traffic soil whereas composition removed only 65%. As is apparent, even when using the hydrophilic solvent isopropanol (Hansen solubility parameter of 12.1), the combination of hydrogen peroxide PATENT
Attorney Docket No.006270-039 with a hydrophobic nonionic surfactant provided better soil removal than the combination of hydrogen peroxide with a hydrophilic nonionic surfactant.
In the third study, the ability of the cleaning composition to remove 5 grape juice stains was demonstrated. Two formulations were tested.
Composition E comprised: (1) 4% of H2O2 (50%), (2) 4% TPM (HS:9.8) and (3) 1% isol)ropanol (HS:12.1) (4) 0.1~o SURFONIC L12-2.6TM (HLB: 8), (5) 0.3% STEPANOL WACrM, and (6) the balance, water. Composition F had the same components except that 5~o isopropanol was used and no TPM was used.
10 Co.l~position E removed 80% of the juice stain and composition F removed 76.7%. The data show that a cleaning composition having hydrogen peroxide in combination with mixed hydrophilic and hydrophobic solvents, TPM (Hansen solubility parameter of 9.8) and isopropanol (Hansen solubility parameter of 12.1), is more effective than one having hydrogen peroxide in combination with 15 the hydrophilic solvent isopropanol alone.
The soil removing abilities of aqueous cle~ning compositions containing (1) 4% of H2O2 (50% solution), (2) 0.3 % STEPANOL WACTM (anionic 20 surfactant) and (3) 10% organic solvent were measured. The organic solvent c~ poncnt that is present in each cle~ning co-,lposition and the ~.r-l---ances as measured by the pe~entage of soil removed from heavy traffic stains are listed in Table 3. The data show that cl~ning co~ )ositions having solvents with Hansen solubility parameters below 10 are superior to those with solvents with 25 Hansen solubility parameters above 10. As a comparison, aqueous cle~ning c~ ositions comprising (1) 4% H2O2 (50% solution), (2) 0.3% STEPANOL
WACTM but without any organic solvent removed 78.7% of the stains.
PATENT
Attorney Docket No.006270~39 Table 3 Solvent Hansen % Soil Solubility Removed Propylene glycol n-butyl ether 9.8 85.5 Dipropylene glycol n-propyl 9.6 89.6 ether Dipropylene glycol butyl ether 9.5 87.8 Propylene glycol methyl ether 11.1 76.7 Propylene glycol n-propyl ether 10.3 76.4 Ethylene glycol butyl ether 10.2 79.9 Ethylene glycol 16.3 81.4 Isopropanol 12.1 77.5 EXAMPLES 7 & 8 The superior soil removing capabilities of an inventive aqueous colllpGaition A concicting esC~ont~ y of hydrogen peroxide and an organic solvent having a Hansen solubility parameter of 9.5 versus an aqueous co..,pos;~ion B concictin~ eCcent~ y of hydrogen peroxide and an organic solvent having a Hansen solubility pararneter of 11.7 is shown in Table 4, 20 which list the co.,lponl,nts for each formulation.
Table 4 A B
H2O2 (50%) 4 4 HS
DPNB 9.5 3 Ethylene glycol hexyl 11.7 3 ether - PATENT
Attorney Docket No.006270-039 Water q.s. q.s.
~ Soil Removed65.2 62.8 The stain removing capabilities of inventive compositions can be enh~nc~l by increasing the amount of hydrogen peroxide and/or suitable organic solvent as sho-vn in Table 5. As is appa-e,lt, both cleaning co.l.positions A and B have the same components but B has higher conc~ lions of both hydrogen peroxide and organic solvent PNB. The latter exhibited higher grape juice stain removing capabilities. Composition C which does not contain hydrogen peroxide but does have 20% organic solvent shows less stain removal capabilities than co."~sition B.
Table 5 A B C
H2O2 (50~o) 0.5 20 PNB (HS:9.8) 0.5 20 20 CRODASINIC LS30TM 0.3 0.3 0.3 Water q.s q.s. q.s.
% Juice Stain 70.8 79.1 69.6 Removed CRODASINIC LS3~, is an anionic surfactant comprising 30% sodium lauroyl 25 sar~osinate, from Croda Chemical, North Humberside, UK
PATENT
Attorney Docket No.006270-039 The soil removing abilities of aqueous cleaning compositions containing (1) 4% of H2O2 (50% solution), (2) 5% propylene glycol n-butyl ether (HS:
9.8) and (3) different amphoteric, anionic, or nonionic surfactants were tested.5 The surfactant co,..ponent that is present in each cleaning co~sition (as a percentage by weight) and their pc~ço~ ance as measured by the percentage of soil removed from heavy traffic stains are listed in Table 7. Except as noted inthe table, all surf~t~ntc are anionic. The data show that cleaning compositions can be used with a variety of surfactant types.
Table 7 Surfactant Active ingredients % Juice stain removed BARLOX 12~ (1) 30% coc~m-n~ oxide (amphoteric) 66 BIOSOFT D40'Y (2) 40% sodium 72.8 dodecylbenze~e~ulfonate BIOTERGE AS-40~ (2) 40% sodium C14-16 olefin 65.9 sulfonate LONZAINE 12C~ (1) 35% sodium na~htl.~lP-lçsulfonate 76.2 NINOL LMP~ (2) lauramide monoeth~nolamine 76 (nonionic) STEOL CS-230~ (2) 30% sodium laureth sulfate 70.8 LANTHANOL LAL~ (2) 709'o sodium lauryl sulfo~t~te 76.3 ADOGEN 444~ (3) 50% palmityl trimethylammonium 68.3 chloride (cationic) PETRO BAF~ (3) 95% sodium 72.5 alkylnapht}~ nesl 1I fonate STEPANOL MG~ (2) 30% m~n~sium laurylsulfate 73.5 PATENT
Attorney Docket No.006270-039 GLYCOPON 625CS~ (4) 50% C,2-C,6 alkylpolyglycoside 71 (nonionic) STEPAN MILDSL3~ (2) 34% disodium laurethsulfosuc~in~te 73.5 (1) Lonza Inc., Fairlawn, NJ.
5 (2) Stepan Chemic~l Co., Northfield, IL.
(3) Witco Chemi~l Co., Dublin, OH.
PATENT
Attorney Docket No.006270{)39 ln this study the cleaning abilities of inventive and comparative cleaning comrositions each containing, among other components: (1) 0.3% STEPANOL
WACrM, an anionic, hydrophilic surfactant, and (2) 0.5~ VERSENE 100rM, a 5 builder, was co."~rcd. With the exception of co~-~position D, each cleaning co,..ros;l;on also included 0.1% TRITON Xl00rM that comprises an octylphenol 9-10 mole ethoxylate, a hydrophilic nonionic surfactant (i.e., emulsifier) available from Union Carbide Chemical & Plastics Co., Danbury, CT. The co".l~onents that comprise each cleaning cGmposition (as a percentage by 10 weight) and their pe~Çol,l,ance as measured by the percentage of soil removed from heavy traffic stains are listed in Table 2.
As is evident, inventive compositions A and D which further included hydrogen peroxide, and a hydrophobic solvent, dipropylene glycol butyl ethyl 15 (DPNB) were superior to the co",p~dtive cleaning compositions B, C, E, F
and G that did not include both hydrogen peroxide and a hydrophobic solvent.
PATENT
Attorney Docket No.006270-039 Table 2 A B C D E F G
H202 (50%) 4 4 0 4 4 0 4 HS
DPNB 9.5 10 0 10 10 E~ylene 10.2 10 10 glycol butyl ether Iso~)~panol 12.1 10 HLB
TRITON 13.5 0.1 0.1 0.1 0 0.1 0.1 0.1 XlOOTM
STEPANOL 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 WACTM
VERSENE 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 100~
.~
Water q.s. q.s. q.s. q.s. q.s. q.s. q.s.
% Heavy 73.5 62.1 66.2 70.2 61.7 57.5 62.8 T~ffic Soil Removed PATENT
Attorney Docket No.006270-039 EXAMPLES 3, 4, AND 5 Three sets of tests were conducted using different cleaning compositions to remove heavy traffic soil or grape juice stains. In the first study, the cle~nine benefit of combining a hydrophobic surfactant (composition A) versus 5 a hydrophilic surfactant (composition B) to a cle~ning composition comprising a hydrophobic solvent, TPM, and hydrogen peroxide was demonstrated.
Composition A comprised: (1) 4% of H2O2 (50%), (2) 5% TPM (HS:9.8) (3) 0.5% SURFONIC L12-2.6TM (HLB: 8.0), (4) 0.4% VERSENE 100TM, (5) 0.3% STEPANOL WACTM, and (6) the balance, water. Composition B had the same components except that SURFONIC L12-6TM (HLB: 12.6) was used instead of SURFONIC L12-2.6TM. Composition removed 81.3% of the heavy traffic soil whereas composition removed only 76.2%. As is evident, colllpoaition A containing the hydrophobic nonionic surfactant provided better stain removal that composition B which contained the hydrophilic nonionic 15 surfactant.
In the second study, the cle~ning benefit of combining a hydrophobic surfactant (composition C) versus a hydrophilic surfactant (co-l-position D) to a cleqninP composition comprising a the hydrophilic solvent, isopropanol, and 20 hydrogen peroxide was demonstrated. Composition C comprised: (1) 4% of H2O2 (50%), (2) 5% isop,opanol (HS:12.1) (3) 0.5% SURFONIC L12-2.6TM(HLB: 8.0), (4) 0.3% Sl~ANOL WACTM, and (5) the b~l~nce, water.
Co".pos;l;on D had the same col..ponents except that SURFONIC L12-6TM
(HLB: 12.6) was used instead of SURFONIC L12-2.6rM. Composition C
25 removed 73.4% of the heavy traffic soil whereas composition removed only 65%. As is apparent, even when using the hydrophilic solvent isopropanol (Hansen solubility parameter of 12.1), the combination of hydrogen peroxide PATENT
Attorney Docket No.006270-039 with a hydrophobic nonionic surfactant provided better soil removal than the combination of hydrogen peroxide with a hydrophilic nonionic surfactant.
In the third study, the ability of the cleaning composition to remove 5 grape juice stains was demonstrated. Two formulations were tested.
Composition E comprised: (1) 4% of H2O2 (50%), (2) 4% TPM (HS:9.8) and (3) 1% isol)ropanol (HS:12.1) (4) 0.1~o SURFONIC L12-2.6TM (HLB: 8), (5) 0.3% STEPANOL WACrM, and (6) the balance, water. Composition F had the same components except that 5~o isopropanol was used and no TPM was used.
10 Co.l~position E removed 80% of the juice stain and composition F removed 76.7%. The data show that a cleaning composition having hydrogen peroxide in combination with mixed hydrophilic and hydrophobic solvents, TPM (Hansen solubility parameter of 9.8) and isopropanol (Hansen solubility parameter of 12.1), is more effective than one having hydrogen peroxide in combination with 15 the hydrophilic solvent isopropanol alone.
The soil removing abilities of aqueous cle~ning compositions containing (1) 4% of H2O2 (50% solution), (2) 0.3 % STEPANOL WACTM (anionic 20 surfactant) and (3) 10% organic solvent were measured. The organic solvent c~ poncnt that is present in each cle~ning co-,lposition and the ~.r-l---ances as measured by the pe~entage of soil removed from heavy traffic stains are listed in Table 3. The data show that cl~ning co~ )ositions having solvents with Hansen solubility parameters below 10 are superior to those with solvents with 25 Hansen solubility parameters above 10. As a comparison, aqueous cle~ning c~ ositions comprising (1) 4% H2O2 (50% solution), (2) 0.3% STEPANOL
WACTM but without any organic solvent removed 78.7% of the stains.
PATENT
Attorney Docket No.006270~39 Table 3 Solvent Hansen % Soil Solubility Removed Propylene glycol n-butyl ether 9.8 85.5 Dipropylene glycol n-propyl 9.6 89.6 ether Dipropylene glycol butyl ether 9.5 87.8 Propylene glycol methyl ether 11.1 76.7 Propylene glycol n-propyl ether 10.3 76.4 Ethylene glycol butyl ether 10.2 79.9 Ethylene glycol 16.3 81.4 Isopropanol 12.1 77.5 EXAMPLES 7 & 8 The superior soil removing capabilities of an inventive aqueous colllpGaition A concicting esC~ont~ y of hydrogen peroxide and an organic solvent having a Hansen solubility parameter of 9.5 versus an aqueous co..,pos;~ion B concictin~ eCcent~ y of hydrogen peroxide and an organic solvent having a Hansen solubility pararneter of 11.7 is shown in Table 4, 20 which list the co.,lponl,nts for each formulation.
Table 4 A B
H2O2 (50%) 4 4 HS
DPNB 9.5 3 Ethylene glycol hexyl 11.7 3 ether - PATENT
Attorney Docket No.006270-039 Water q.s. q.s.
~ Soil Removed65.2 62.8 The stain removing capabilities of inventive compositions can be enh~nc~l by increasing the amount of hydrogen peroxide and/or suitable organic solvent as sho-vn in Table 5. As is appa-e,lt, both cleaning co.l.positions A and B have the same components but B has higher conc~ lions of both hydrogen peroxide and organic solvent PNB. The latter exhibited higher grape juice stain removing capabilities. Composition C which does not contain hydrogen peroxide but does have 20% organic solvent shows less stain removal capabilities than co."~sition B.
Table 5 A B C
H2O2 (50~o) 0.5 20 PNB (HS:9.8) 0.5 20 20 CRODASINIC LS30TM 0.3 0.3 0.3 Water q.s q.s. q.s.
% Juice Stain 70.8 79.1 69.6 Removed CRODASINIC LS3~, is an anionic surfactant comprising 30% sodium lauroyl 25 sar~osinate, from Croda Chemical, North Humberside, UK
PATENT
Attorney Docket No.006270-039 The soil removing abilities of aqueous cleaning compositions containing (1) 4% of H2O2 (50% solution), (2) 5% propylene glycol n-butyl ether (HS:
9.8) and (3) different amphoteric, anionic, or nonionic surfactants were tested.5 The surfactant co,..ponent that is present in each cleaning co~sition (as a percentage by weight) and their pc~ço~ ance as measured by the percentage of soil removed from heavy traffic stains are listed in Table 7. Except as noted inthe table, all surf~t~ntc are anionic. The data show that cleaning compositions can be used with a variety of surfactant types.
Table 7 Surfactant Active ingredients % Juice stain removed BARLOX 12~ (1) 30% coc~m-n~ oxide (amphoteric) 66 BIOSOFT D40'Y (2) 40% sodium 72.8 dodecylbenze~e~ulfonate BIOTERGE AS-40~ (2) 40% sodium C14-16 olefin 65.9 sulfonate LONZAINE 12C~ (1) 35% sodium na~htl.~lP-lçsulfonate 76.2 NINOL LMP~ (2) lauramide monoeth~nolamine 76 (nonionic) STEOL CS-230~ (2) 30% sodium laureth sulfate 70.8 LANTHANOL LAL~ (2) 709'o sodium lauryl sulfo~t~te 76.3 ADOGEN 444~ (3) 50% palmityl trimethylammonium 68.3 chloride (cationic) PETRO BAF~ (3) 95% sodium 72.5 alkylnapht}~ nesl 1I fonate STEPANOL MG~ (2) 30% m~n~sium laurylsulfate 73.5 PATENT
Attorney Docket No.006270-039 GLYCOPON 625CS~ (4) 50% C,2-C,6 alkylpolyglycoside 71 (nonionic) STEPAN MILDSL3~ (2) 34% disodium laurethsulfosuc~in~te 73.5 (1) Lonza Inc., Fairlawn, NJ.
5 (2) Stepan Chemic~l Co., Northfield, IL.
(3) Witco Chemi~l Co., Dublin, OH.
(4) Henkel Corp., Cincinnati, OH.
The foregoing has described the principles, plefe.,~d embo-1imPntc and 10 modes of operation of the present invention. However, the invention should not be construed as being limited to the particular embodiments ~iccucc~
Thus, the above-described embo~imentc should be regarded as illustrative rather than restrictive, and it should be appreciated that variations may be made in those em~odimen~c by workers skilled in the art. without departing from the 15 scope of the present invention as defined by the following claims.
The foregoing has described the principles, plefe.,~d embo-1imPntc and 10 modes of operation of the present invention. However, the invention should not be construed as being limited to the particular embodiments ~iccucc~
Thus, the above-described embo~imentc should be regarded as illustrative rather than restrictive, and it should be appreciated that variations may be made in those em~odimen~c by workers skilled in the art. without departing from the 15 scope of the present invention as defined by the following claims.
Claims (27)
1. A dispensable cleaner especially adapted for removing oily soils from absorbent or adsorbent surfaces, the cleaner comprising:
a. an effective amount of an organic solvent having a Hansen solubility parameter of less than 10;
b. an effective amount of an emulsifying or dispersing agent;
c. an effective amount of a source of hydrogen peroxide; and d. the remainder, water.
a. an effective amount of an organic solvent having a Hansen solubility parameter of less than 10;
b. an effective amount of an emulsifying or dispersing agent;
c. an effective amount of a source of hydrogen peroxide; and d. the remainder, water.
2. The cleaner of claim 1 wherein said emulsifying or dispersing agent is a surfactant.
3. The cleaner of claim 1 further comprising e. at least one other cleaning and/or aesthetic adjunct.
4. The cleaner of claim 3 wherein the cleaning and/or aesthetic adjunct is selected from the group consisting of sequestering agents, builders, fragrances, soil retardants, and mixtures thereof.
5. The cleaner of claim 1 wherein said emulsifying or dispersing agent is a surfactant that has an HLB of less than about 10.
6. The cleaner of claim 2 wherein said organic solvent is selected from glycol ethers.
7. The cleaner of claim 1 wherein the organic solvent comprises 0.5 wt% to 30 wt% of the cleaner.
8. The cleaner of claim 7 wherein hydrogen peroxide comprises 0.1 wt% to 20 wt% of the cleaner.
9. The cleaner of claim 8 wherein the emulsifying or dispersing agent comprises 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% of the cleaner.
10. The cleaner of claim 1 wherein said organic solvent is selected from glycol ethers.
11. The cleaner of claim 1 wherein said organic solvent is selected from the group consisting of glycol ethers, alcohols, ethers, ketones and estersand mixtures thereof.
12. The cleaner of claim 10 wherein said emulsifying or dispersing agent is a surfactant that has an HLB of less than about 10.
13. The cleaner of claim 11 wherein said emulsifying or dispersing agent is a nonionic surfactant selected from the group consisting of alcohol ethoxylates and propoxylates and alkylphenol ethoxylates and propoxylates, and mixtures thereof.
14. A method for cleaning soiled fabrics having fibers containing soil that comprises the steps of:
a. forming a cleaner especially adapted for removing oily soils from absorbent or adsorbent surfaces, the cleaner comprising:
i. an effective amount of an organic solvent having a Hansen solubility parameter of less than about 10;
ii. an effective amount of an emulsifying or dispersing agent;
iii. an effective amount of a source of hydrogen peroxide; and iv. the remainder, water;
b. applying said cleaner to a surface of a fabric containing a soil;
c. allowing said cleaner to penetrate into said fabric; and d. removing said soil.
a. forming a cleaner especially adapted for removing oily soils from absorbent or adsorbent surfaces, the cleaner comprising:
i. an effective amount of an organic solvent having a Hansen solubility parameter of less than about 10;
ii. an effective amount of an emulsifying or dispersing agent;
iii. an effective amount of a source of hydrogen peroxide; and iv. the remainder, water;
b. applying said cleaner to a surface of a fabric containing a soil;
c. allowing said cleaner to penetrate into said fabric; and d. removing said soil.
15. The method of claim 14 wherein the cleaner further comprises at least one other cleaning and/or aesthetic adjunct.
16. The method of claim 14 wherein the cleaning and/or aesthetic adjunct is selected from the group consisting of sequestering agents, builders, fragrances, soil retardants, and mixtures thereof.
17. The method of claim 14 wherein said emulsifying or dispersing agent is a surfactant.
18. The method of claim 14 wherein said emulsifying or dispersing agent is a surfactant that has an HLB of less than about 10.
19. The method of claim 18 wherein said organic solvent is selected from glycol ethers.
20. The method of claim 14 wherein the organic solvent comprises 0.5 wt% to 30 wt% of the cleaner.
21. The method of claim 20 wherein hydrogen peroxide comprises 0.1 wt% to 20 wt% of the cleaner.
22. The method of claim 21 wherein the emulsifying or dispersing agent comprises 0.1 wt% to 5 wt% of the cleaner.
23. The method of claim 14 wherein said organic solvent is selected from glycol ethers.
24. The method of claim 14 wherein said organic solvent is selected from the group consisting of glycol ethers alcohols, ethers, ketones and esters and mixtures thereof.
25. The method of claim 23 wherein said emulsifying or dispersing agent is a surfactant that has an HLB of less than about 10.
26. The method of claim 17 wherein said organic solvent is selected from glycol ethers
27. The method of claim 14 wherein said emulsifying or dispersing agent is a nonionic surfactant selected from the group consisting of alcohol ethoxylates and propoxylates and alkylphenol ethoxylates and propoxylates, and mixtures thereof.
Priority Applications (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CA 2225589 CA2225589A1 (en) | 1997-12-23 | 1997-12-23 | Carpet cleaning composition |
Applications Claiming Priority (1)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| CA 2225589 CA2225589A1 (en) | 1997-12-23 | 1997-12-23 | Carpet cleaning composition |
Publications (1)
| Publication Number | Publication Date |
|---|---|
| CA2225589A1 true CA2225589A1 (en) | 1999-06-23 |
Family
ID=29408968
Family Applications (1)
| Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| CA 2225589 Abandoned CA2225589A1 (en) | 1997-12-23 | 1997-12-23 | Carpet cleaning composition |
Country Status (1)
| Country | Link |
|---|---|
| CA (1) | CA2225589A1 (en) |
Cited By (1)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| US9260679B2 (en) | 2013-05-17 | 2016-02-16 | Madison Chemcial Co., Inc. | Cleaning composition for the food and beverage industry |
-
1997
- 1997-12-23 CA CA 2225589 patent/CA2225589A1/en not_active Abandoned
Cited By (1)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| US9260679B2 (en) | 2013-05-17 | 2016-02-16 | Madison Chemcial Co., Inc. | Cleaning composition for the food and beverage industry |
Similar Documents
| Publication | Publication Date | Title |
|---|---|---|
| CA2196611C (en) | Glass cleaner compositions | |
| AU690705B2 (en) | Carpet cleaning and restoring composition | |
| US5712240A (en) | Aqueous cleaning compositions providing water and oil repellency to fiber substrates | |
| CA2258371C (en) | Stable compositions for removing stains from fabrics and carpets and inhibiting the resoiling of same | |
| US6150318A (en) | Aerosol cleaning compositions | |
| EP0888433B1 (en) | Glass cleaner compositions having good filming/streaking characteristics containing amine oxide polymers functionality | |
| JPH0819437B2 (en) | Detergent composition containing a builder containing polyalkylene glycol iminodiacetic acid | |
| JPH10501841A (en) | Soft surface cleaning composition containing hydrogen peroxide | |
| AU8457898A (en) | Glass cleaner compositions having good surface lubricity and alkaline buffer | |
| CA2444441C (en) | Non-foaming cleaning compositions and a method for their use | |
| US6113654A (en) | Carpet cleaning composition | |
| CA1323819C (en) | Carpet cleaning composition | |
| US20090143274A1 (en) | Surfactant Reduction Enabled by Use of Isopropylnaphthalene Sulfonate Linker | |
| JP2608327B2 (en) | Bathroom cleaning composition | |
| CA2225589A1 (en) | Carpet cleaning composition | |
| EP1124922A1 (en) | Alkaline carpet cleaning compositions | |
| CA2220131C (en) | Glass cleaner compositions having linear alkyl sulfate surfactants | |
| MXPA97008503A (en) | Glass cleaning compositions that have sulfate lin surfactant surgey agents | |
| JPH11500487A (en) | Liquid hard surface detergent composition containing a specific concentration of tartaric acid detergent builder | |
| CA1204361A (en) | Cleaning composition for glass and similar hard surfaces | |
| CA2248790C (en) | Glass cleaner compositions having good filming/streaking characteristics containing amine oxide polymers functionality | |
| GB2321252A (en) | Carpet cleaning compositions | |
| WO2002083828A1 (en) | Non-foaming cleaning compositions and a method for their use | |
| US7229954B1 (en) | Carpet cleaning composition with citrus | |
| GB2312445A (en) | Cleaning compositions imparting oil and water repellency |
Legal Events
| Date | Code | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| FZDE | Dead |