Use of Ultrasonic Energy in the Enzymatic Treatment of Cotton Fabric

Application of enzymes in the textile industry is becoming increasingly popular because of mild processing conditions and the capability for replacing harsh organic/inorganic chemicals. The combination of ultrasound with conventional enzymatic treatment of cotton offers significant advantages such a...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Industrial & engineering chemistry research Vol. 37; no. 10; pp. 3919 - 3923
Main Authors: Yachmenev, Val G, Blanchard, Eugene J, Lambert, Allan H
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: Washington, DC American Chemical Society 05-10-1998
Subjects:
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Application of enzymes in the textile industry is becoming increasingly popular because of mild processing conditions and the capability for replacing harsh organic/inorganic chemicals. The combination of ultrasound with conventional enzymatic treatment of cotton offers significant advantages such as less consumption of expensive enzymes, shorter processing time, less fiber damage, and better uniformity of enzymatic treatment. Our laboratory research has shown that introduction of ultrasonic energy during enzymatic treatment resulted in significant improvement in the performance of cellulase enzyme (CELLUSOFT L). It was established that ultrasound does not inactivate the complex structure of the enzyme molecules and weight loss of cotton fabric sonicated and treated with cellulase enzyme increased up to 25−35%. The experimental data indicate that the maximum benefit provided by sonification occurs at relatively low enzyme concentrations. Ultrasonic energy significantly intensified the enzymatic treatment of the cotton fabrics but did not contribute to a decrease in tensile strength of the cotton textiles.
Bibliography:ark:/67375/TPS-8JNV7JQ9-S
Specific company, product, and equipment names are given to provide an exact description of the experimental details. Their mention does not imply recommendation or endorsement by the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
istex:FF5AC73C9F8E25B56A295552C0E9D92076EE75F0
ISSN:0888-5885
1520-5045
DOI:10.1021/ie980274j