Method of making a multi-ply wiper/towel product with cellulosic microfibers

Description

BACKGROUND

Lyocell fibers are typically used in textiles or filter media. See, for example, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2003/0177909, now U.S. Pat. No. 6,872,311, and No. 2003/0168401, now U.S. Pat. No. 6,835,311, both to Koslow, as well as to U.S. Pat. No. 6.511,746 to Collier et al. On the other hand, high efficiency wipers for cleaning glass and other substrates are typically made from thermoplastic fibers.

U.S. Pat. No. 6,890,649 to Hobbs et al. (3M) discloses polyester microfibers for use in a wiper product. According to the '649 patent, the microfibers have an average effective diameter of less than 20 microns and, generally, from 0.01 microns to 10 microns. See column 2, lines 38 to 40. These microfibers are prepared by fibrillating a film suffice and then harvesting the fibers.

U.S. Pat. No. 6,849,329 to Perez et al. discloses microfibers for use in cleaning wipes. These fibers are similar to those described in the '649 patent discussed above. U.S. Pat. No. 6,645,618 to Hobbs et al. also discloses microfibers in fibrous mats such as those used for removal of oil from water or those used as wipers.

U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2005/0148264 to Varona et al., discloses a wiper with a bimodal pore size distribution. The wipe is made from melt blown fibers, as well as coarser fibers, and papermaking fibers. See page 2, paragraph 16.

U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2004/0203306 lo Grafe et al., discloses a flexible wipe including a non-woven layer and at least one adhered nanofiber layer. The nanofiber layer is illustrated in numerous photographs, it is noted on page 1, paragraph 9. that the microfibers have a fiber diameter of from about 0.05 microns to about 2 microns. In this patent application, the nanofiber webs were evaluated for cleaning automotive dashboards, automotive windows, and so forth. For example, see page 8, paragraphs 55 and 56.

U.S. Pat. No. 4,931,201 to Julemont discloses a non-woven wiper incorporating melt-blown fiber. U.S. Pat. No. 4,906,513 to Kebbell et al. also discloses a wiper having melt-blown fiber. Here, polypropylene microfibers are used, and the wipers are reported to provide streak-free wiping properties. This patent is of general interest, as is U.S. Pat. No. 4,436,780 to Hotchkiss et al., which discloses a wiper having a layer of melt-blown polypropylene fibers and, on either side, a spun bonded polypropylene filament layer. See also U.S. Pat. No. 4,426,417 to Meitner et al., which discloses a non-woven wiper having a matrix of non-woven fibers including microfiber and staple fiber. U.S. Pat. No. 4,307,143 to Meitner discloses a low cost wiper for industrial applications, which includes thermoplastic, melt-blown fibers.

U.S. Pat. No. 4,100,324 to Anderson et al. discloses a non-woven fabric useful as a wiper that incorporates wood pulp fibers.

U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2006/0141881, now U.S. Pat. No. 7,691,760, to Bergsten et al., discloses a wipe with melt-blown fibers. This publication also describes a drag test, at pages 7 and 9. Note, for example, page 7, paragraph 59. According to the test results on page 9, microfiber increases the drag of the wipes on a surface.

U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2003/0200991 to Keck et al., discloses a dual texture absorbent web. Note pages 12 and 13, which describe cleaning tests and a Gardner wet abrasion scrub test.

U.S. Pat. No. 6,573,204 to Philipp et al. discloses a cleaning cloth having a non-woven structure made from micro staple fibers of at least two different polymers, and secondary staple fibers bound into the micro staple fibers. The split fiber is reported to have a titer of 0.17 to 3.0 dtex prior to being split. See column 2, lines 7 through 9. Note also, U.S. Pat. No. 6,624,100 to Pike, which discloses splittable fiber for use in microfiber webs.

TECHNICAL FIELD

This application relates to multi-ply wipers comprising at least one variable local basis weight absorbent sheet including a significant proportion of fibrillated cellulose microfiber having a plurality of arched or domed regions interconnected by a generally planar, densified fibrous network including at least some areas of consolidated fiber bordering the domed areas. The domed regions have a leading edge with a relatively high local basis weight and, at their lower portions, transition sections that include upwardly and inwardly inflected sidewall areas of consolidated fiber.

While there have been advances in the art as to high efficiency wipers, existing products tend to be relatively difficult and expensive to produce. Many do not have the absorbent capacity of premium paper towels and are not readily re-pulped or recycled. Moreover, the wipers of the invention are capable of removing micro-particles and, if not substantially all of the residue from, a surface, then, at least almost all, reducing the need for biocides and cleaning solutions in typical cleaning or sanitizing operations.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

The present invention is directed, in part, to multi-ply absorbent sheets incorporating cellulose microfiber that are suitable for paper towels and wipers. The sheets exhibit high absorbency (SAT) values as well as low-residue, “wipe-dry” characteristics. The sheets can accordingly be used as high efficiency wipers, or as ordinary paper towels, eliminating the need for multiple products.

In one embodiment, the present invention is a multi-ply absorbent sheet exhibiting a wipe-dry time of less than 20 seconds, preferably, 10 seconds or less, and an SAT capacity in the range of 9.5 to 11 g/g. In a further embodiment, the absorbent sheet exhibits an SAT rate in the range of 0.05 to 0.25 g/s^0.5.

A preferred variable basis weight ply is prepared by a belt-creping process including compactively dewatering a nascent web containing from about 10% to about 60% of fibrillated cellulosic microfiber, applying the dewatered web to a transfer surface with an apparently random distribution of fibers, and belt-creping the web under pressure with nip parameters selected so as to rearrange the fiber orientation and, optionally, providing local basis weight variation. The plies of this invention will exhibit a repeating structure of raised arched portions that define hollow areas on their opposite side. The raised arched portions or domes have a relatively high local basis weight interconnected, with a network of densified fiber. Transition areas bridging the connecting regions and the domes include upwardly and optionally inwardly inflected consolidated fiber. Generally speaking, the furnish is selected and the steps of belt creping, applying vacuum and drying are controlled such that a dried web is formed having a plurality of fiber-enriched hollow domed regions protruding from the upper surface of the sheet, the hollow domed regions having a sidewall of a relatively high local basis weight formed along at least a leading edge thereof and connecting regions forming a network interconnecting the fiber-enriched hollow domed regions of the sheet, wherein consolidated groupings of fibers extend upwardly from, the connecting regions into the sidewalls of the fiber-enriched hollow domed regions along at least the leading edge thereof. Fibrillated cellulosic microfiber present at the surface of such consolidated groupings forms venation over the surface of the consolidated grouping, while fibrillated cellulosic microfiber present within the consolidated groupings appears to enhance the bonding and consolidation therein, both apparently contributing to an increase in very small pores in the sheet structure. Preferably, such consolidated groupings of fibers are present at least at the leading and bailing edges of the domed areas. In many cases, the consolidated groupings of fibers form saddle shaped regions extending at least partially around the domed areas, wherein a venation of cellulosic microfibers extends over the surface of the consolidated regions. In other less consolidated regions of the ply, the fibrillated cellulosic microfibers are present as intermittently bonded fibers distributed through less consolidated regions of the ply, and intermingled with conventional papermaking fibers therein, and bonded thereto largely at crossover regions where the fibers contact.

The superior wipe-dry characteristics of the inventive products are surprising in view of the very low SAT rates observed. FIGS. 1A to 1H, 1J to 1N, and 1P to 1T are photomicrographs illustrating the microstructure at a surface of multi-ply products of the invention (FIGS. 1G, 1J, and 1L), along with a variety of somewhat similar products. It is considered to be quite surprising that such greatly improved wipe dry characteristics can be observed when apparent porosity is suppressed to the extreme shown here. Without intending to be bound by theory, it is believed that the microfiber venation seen on the surfaces of the consolidated regions in the inventive products FIGS. 1G, 1J, and 1L (formed by creping from a transfer drum using a perforated polymeric belt) provides a very slow observed SAT rate and a high capillary pressure due to a large percentage of very small, easily accessible pores, as described hereafter, as well as the large number of very small pores distributed throughout the consolidated groupings. The inventive products are remarkably efficient wipers for cleaning surfaces, leaving little, if any, residue, thus, providing streak-free cleaning that is especially desirable for glass and glossy surfaces, and much preferred for sanitation purposes. Briefly, “Wipe Dry” is the time it takes for residual Windex® original glass cleaner to evaporate from a plate after a wiper substrate is dragged across a wetted surface. Low values indicate less residual liquid that results in less streaking. Without being bound by theory, it is hypothesized that Campbell's forces draw the fibrillated cellulosic microfibers into rather intimate adhesion to the consolidated fibrous regions, so that rather than bonds being formed only at crossover points between fibers, in areas of venation, line-surface adhesion can be observed between the fibrillated cellulosic microfibers and the underlying consolidated fibrous region, creating numerous highly accessible micropores therebetween, contributing to the excellent wipe dry properties. In any event, the sheets of the present invention formed by creping from a transfer surface using perforated polymeric belts exhibit both remarkable microporosity and remarkably quick wipe dry limes, while maintaining satisfactory SAT capacity. Overall, sheets that are more highly consolidated exhibit shorter wipe dry times than more open sheets.

The products of the invention also exhibit wet tensiles significantly above those of commercial towel products, but have similar SAT capacity, so that the wipe-dry characteristics endure as the product absorbs liquid. FIG. 2 shows the combined attributes of wipe-dry, absorbency. and wet strength achieved in a two-ply product of the invention. Wipe-dry times approach 10 seconds or less with a cellulosic micro fiber (CMF) content of 40% as compared to 25 to 30 seconds for a conventional towel.

While exhibiting very high strength, die products of the invention also exhibit an unexpectedly high level of softness, as is appreciated from FIG. 3, which illustrates softness as a function of wet tensile and cellulosic microfiber (CMF) content. It is seen in FIG. 3 that elevated softness levels are achieved even at wet tensiles, more than twice that of conventional towel. Preferred products of the present invention will exhibit a differential pore volume for pores under 5 microns in a diameter of at least about 75 mm³/g/micron.

Further details and advantages will become apparent from the discussion provided hereafter.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The invention is described with reference to the drawings, wherein:

FIGS. 1A, 1C, and 1E illustrate cellulose microfiber (CMF) containing wipers formed by creping a nascent web from a transfer cylinder using a creping fabric and are placed for easy comparison of these to similarly formed wipers without CMF, in FIGS. 1B, 1D and 1F.

FIGS. 1G, 1J, and 1L illustrate venation on CMF containing wipers formed by creping a nascent web from a transfer cylinder using a perforated polymeric creping belt and are placed for easy comparison of those to through-air dried (TAD) formed wipers, without CMF, in FIGS. 1H, 1K, and 1M.

FIGS. 1N, 1Q, and 1S illustrate CMF containing wipers formed by conventional wet press technology and are placed for easy comparison of these to similarly formed wipers, without CMF, in FIGS. 1F, 1R, and 1T.

FIG. 2 illustrates the wipe dry times of three commercially available kitchen roll towel products as compared to two ply wipers containing varying amounts of CMF formed by belt creping from a transfer cylinder using an exemplary perforated belt as described herein and illustrated in FIG. 7.

FIG. 3 illustrates the relationship among softness, wet tensile strength, and fibrillated cellulosic microfiber content in wipers.

FIG. 4 illustrates the distribution of fiber lengths in a cellulosic microfiber, which is preferred for the practice of the present invention.

FIG. 5 illustrates the extraordinarily high percentage of very long cellulosic fibers attainable with fibrillated cellulosic microfiber.

FIG. 6 illustrates the emboss pattern known as “Fantale” mentioned in Example 2.

FIG. 7 illustrates the sheet contact surface of a perforated polymeric belt mentioned in Example 1.

FIG. 8 illustrates the extrusion/intrusion porosimetry system used for measuring pore volume and pore size distribution.

FIG. 9 is a schematic diagram illustrating the interaction between the pressure plate and the sample in the apparatus for measurement of pore volume distribution.

FIG. 10 illustrates the extraordinarily high percentage of very small pores attainable in wipers comprising various amounts of fibrillated cellulosic micro fibers.

FIG. 11 illustrates the relationship between wipe dry times and capillary pressure in wipers.

FIG. 12 illustrates the relationship between capillary pressure and fibrillated cellulosic microfiber content in wipers.

FIG. 13 illustrates the inter-relationship among wet tensile strength, wipe dry time, and content of fibrillated cellulosic microfiber content in a wiper.

FIG. 14 illustrates the softness of a variety of wipers as a function of GM tensile strength with fibrillated cellulosic microfiber content being indicated as a parameter.

FIG. 15 illustrates the softness of a variety of wipers as a function of cross machine direction (CD) wet tensile strength with fibrillated cellulosic microfiber content being indicated as a parameter.

FIG. 16 illustrates wipe dry times as a function of SAT capacity with fibrillated cellulosic microfiber content being indicated as a parameter.

FIG. 17 illustrates wipe dry times as a function of water holding capacity with fibrillated cellulosic microfiber content being indicated as a parameter.

FIG. 18 illustrates wipe dry times as a function of SAT rate with fibrillated cellulosic microfiber content being indicated as a parameter.

FIG. 19 illustrates wipe dry times as a function of fibrillated cellulosic microfiber content with wet strength resin content being indicated as a parameter.

FIG. 20 illustrates variation in wet extracted lint for a variety of wipers with fibrillated cellulosic microfiber content, wet strength agent content, and debonder content being indicated.

FIG. 21 illustrates the response of caliper and SAT capacity in wipers to calendering.

FIG. 22 illustrates variation in the cross machine direction (CD) wet tensile strength for a variety of towels as a function of basis weight.

FIG. 23 illustrates the response of basesheet caliper to shoe press load in a variety of wipers.

FIG. 24 illustrates basesheet caliper as a function of fibrillated cellulosic microfiber content at a constant shoe press load.

FIGS. 25A and 25B illustrate an emboss pattern known as “Little Circles” mentioned in Example 2.

FIG. 26 illustrates an emboss pattern known as “Patchwork” mentioned in Example 2.

FIG. 27 illustrates the CD wet tensile strength of a variety of towels as a function of basis weight.

FIG. 28 is a schematic scale drawing of a preferred belt usable in the practice of the present invention.

FIG. 29 illustrates the CD wet tensile strength of a variety of towels as a function of caliper.

FIG. 30 illustrates the SAT capacity of a variety of towels as a function of caliper.

FIG. 31 illustrates variation in SAT capacity for a variety of towels as a function of basis weight.

FIG. 32 illustrates the relationship between CD wet tensile strength and Sensory Softness for a variety of towels.

FIG. 33 presents SAT capacity and wipe dry times for both black glass and stainless steel surfaces for the wipers of Example 2.

FIG. 34 is a sectional scanning electron micrograph (SEM) illustrating a consolidated region in a sheet formed by belt creping using a perforated polymeric belt.

FIG. 35 is an enlarged view of a portion of FIG. 34 illustrating a domed region and a consolidated region in more detail.

FIG. 36 is a sectional scanning electron micrograph (SEM) illustrating another consolidated region in a sheet formed by belt creping using a perforated polymeric belt.

FIG. 37 compares the relative improvements in wipe dry of wipers made by creping with a woven fabric as compared to wipers made by belt creping using a perforated polymeric belt.

FIG. 38 compares wipe dry of wipers made by creping with a woven fabric as compared to wipers made by belt creping using a perforated polymeric belt.

FIG. 39 illustrates the effect of excessive quaternary ammonium salt release agent on wipers made by belt creping using a perforated polymeric belt.

FIG. 40 is an isometric schematic illustrating a device to measure roll compression of tissue products.

FIG. 41 is a sectional view taken along line 41-41 of FIG. 40.

FIG. 42 illustrates the dimensions of a marked microscope slide used in evaluating the resistance of the products of the present invention to wet linting.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

The invention is described in detail below with reference to several embodiments and numerous examples. Such a discussion is for purposes of illustration only. Modifications to particular examples within the spirit and scope of the present invention, set forth in the appended claims, will be readily apparent to one of skill in the art.

Terminology used herein is given its ordinary meaning, for example, mils refers to thousandths of an inch, mg refers to milligrams and m²refers to square meters, percent means weight percent (dry basis), “ton” means short ton (2000 pounds), unless otherwise indicated “ream” means 3000 ft², and so forth. A “ton” is 2000 pounds while a “tonne” is a metric ton of 100 kg or 2204.62 pounds. Unless otherwise specified, in an abbreviation “t” stands for “ton”. Unless otherwise specified, the version of a test method applied is that in effect as of Jan. 1, 2010, and test specimens are prepared under standard TAPPI conditions, that is, preconditioned for 24 hours, then conditioned in an atmosphere of 23°±1.0° C. (73.4°±1.8° F.) at 50% relative humidity for at least about 2 hours.

Test methods, materials, equipment, manufacturing techniques, and terminology are those enumerated in the applications referred to above as supplemented herein.

Throughout this specification and claims, when we refer to a nascent web having an apparently random distribution of fiber orientation (or use like terminology), we are referring to the distribution of fiber orientation that results when known forming techniques are used tor depositing a furnish on the forming fabric. When examined microscopically, the fibers give the appearance of being randomly oriented, even though, depending on the jet to wire speed ratio, there may be a significant bias toward machine direction orientation making the machine direction tensile strength of the web exceed the cross machine direction tensile strength.

In many applications related to U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2004/0238135, entitled “Fabric Crepe Process for Making Absorbent Sheet”, now U.S. Pat. No. 7,399,378. the importance of the distinction between creping using a woven fabric and a creping belt formed by perforating a solid belt was of minor importance, so the term “belt” could apply to either creping medium. In this application, however, as well as in U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2010/0186913, entitled “Belt-Creped, Variable Local Basis Weight Absorbent Sheet Prepared With Perforated Polymeric Belt”, now U.S. Pat. No. 8,293,072, the distinction between the use of a creping fabric and a perforated polymeric belt is of considerable importance, as it has been found that the use of a perforated polymeric belt makes it possible to obtain consolidated regions, particularly, consolidated saddle shaped regions, in the web giving, it improved physical properties over the webs previously formed using the technique of creping from a transfer drum. For convenience; we refer to this method of forming a sheet as Fiber Reorienting Belt Creping or FRBC. Further, in this application, it is demonstrated that CMF containing wipers made using a perforated polymeric belt have substantial performance advantages over wipers made using a woven creping fabric, which we term Fiber Reorienting Fabric Creping or FRFC. Throughout this application, we have endeavored to make this distinction explicit, but, definitional language in applications incorporated by reference notwithstanding, in this application, belts and creping fabrics should not be considered to be synonymous.

Unless otherwise specified, “basis weight”, BWT, bwt, BW, and so forth, refers to the weight of a 3000 square-foot (278.7 m²) ream of product (basis weight is also expressed in g/m²or gsm). Likewise, “ream” means a 3000 square-foot (278.7 m²) ream unless otherwise specified. Local basis weights and differences therebetween are calculated by measuring the local basis weight at two or more representative low basis weight areas within the low basis weight regions and comparing the average basis weight to the average basis weight at two or more representative areas within the relatively high local basis weight regions. For example, if the representative areas within the low basis weight regions have an average basis weight of 15 lbs/3000 ft²(24.5 g/m²) ream and the average measured local basis weight for the representative areas within the relatively high local basis regions is 20 lbs/3000ft²ream (32.6 g/m²), the representative areas within the high local basis weight regions have a characteristic basis weight of ((20−15)/15)×100% or 33% higher than the representative areas within the low basis weight regions. Preferably, the local basis weight is measured using a beta, particle attenuation technique as referenced herein. In some cases, X-ray techniques can be suitable, provided that the X-rays are sufficiently “soft”—that the energy of the photons is sufficiently low and the basis weight differences between the various regions of the sheet are sufficiently high that significant differences in attenuation are attained.

Calipers and/or bulk reported herein may be measured at 8 or 16 sheet calipers as specified. The sheets are stacked and the caliper measurement taken about the central portion of the stack. Preferably, the test samples are conditioned in an atmosphere of 23°±1.0° C. (73.4°±1.8° F.) at 50% relative humidity for at least about 2 hours and then measured with a Thwing-Albert Model 89-II-JR. or Progage Electronic Thickness Tester with 2 in. (50.8-mm) diameter anvils. 539±10 grams dead weight load, and 0.231 in/sec (5.87 mm/sec) descent rate. For finished product testing, each sheet of product to be tested must have the same number of plies as the product as sold. For testing in general, eight sheets are selected and stacked together. For napkin testing, napkins are unfolded prior to stacking. For base sheet testing off of winders, each sheet to be tested must have the same number of plies as produced off of the winder. For base sheet testing off of the papermachine reel, single plies must be used. Sheets are stacked together aligned in the machine direction (MD). Bulk may also be expressed in units of volume/weight by dividing caliper by basis weight.

Consolidated fibrous structures are those that have been so highly densified that the fibers therein have been compressed to ribbon-like structures and the void volume is reduced to levels approaching or perhaps even less than those found in flat papers, such as are used for communications purposes. In preferred structures, the fibers are so densely packed and closely matted that the distance between adjacent fibers is typically less than the fiber width, often less than half or even less than a quarter of the fiber width. In the most preferred structures, the fibers are largely collinear and strongly biased in the MD. The presence of consolidated fiber or consolidated fibrous structures can be confirmed by examining thin sections that have been embedded in resin, then microtomed in accordance with known techniques. Alternatively, if SEM's of both faces of a region are so heavily matted as to resemble flat paper, then that region can be considered to be consolidated. Sections prepared by focused ion beam cross section polishers, such as those offered by JEOL®, 11 Dearborn Road, Peabody, Mass., 01960, are especially suitable for observing densification throughout the thickness of the sheet, to determine whether regions in the tissue products of the present invention have been so highly densified as to become consolidated.

Creping belt, and like terminology, refers to a belt that bears a perforated pattern suitable fur practicing the process of the present invention. In addition to perforations, the belt may have features, such as raised portions and/or recesses between perforations, if so desired. Preferably, the perforations are tapered, which appears to facilitate transfer of the web, especially, from the creping belt to a dryer, for example. Typically, the face of the sheet contacting the web during the fabric creping step will have a greater open area than, the face away from the web. In some embodiments, the creping belt may include decorative features, such as geometric designs, floral designs, and so forth, formed by rearrangement, deletion, and/or a combination of perforations having varying sizes and shapes.

“Dome”, “domed”, “dome-like,” and so forth, as used in the description and claims, refers generally to hollow, arched protuberances in the sheet of the class seen in the various FIGS., and is not limited to a specific type of dome structure as is illustrated in FIGS. 34 to 36. The terminology refers to vaulted configurations, generally, whether symmetric or asymmetric about a plane bisecting the domed area. Thus, “dome” generally refers to spherical domes, spheroidal domes, elliptical domes, ellipsoidal domes, oval domes, domes with polygonal bases, and related structures, generally including a cap and sidewalls, preferably inwardly and upwardly inclined, that is, the sidewalls being inclined toward the cap along at least a portion of their length.

Extractable Lint Test

To quantify the amount of lint removed from towel, tissue, and related products when used dry (“Extractable Lint”), a Sutherland Rub Tester with a 4.0-lb sled is used. This apparatus is available from: Danilee Company, 27223 Starry Mountain Street, San Antonio, Tex. 78260, 810-438-7737, 800-438-7738 (FAX). The 4.0-lb rub block for the Rub Tester has dimensions of 2″ by 4″, so that the pressure exerted during testing is 0.5 psi.

After the samples to be evaluated are preconditioned at 10 to 35% RH at 22° to 40° C. for 24 hours, then conditioned at 50.0%±2.0% RH and 23.0±1.0° C. for 2 hours, all of the subsequent procedures are performed within the confines of a room maintained at between 48 to 53% RH and a temperature of between 22° C. and 24° C.

Two stacks of four 2.25 in.×4.5 in. test strips with a 4.5 in, length in the machine direction are cut from the sample with the top (exterior of roll) side up.

Two 2.5 in.×6 in, strips of black felt are cut with the 6 in. length in the machine direction, and the lop side labeled with sample ID numbers.

A baseline reading for the felt is determined by taking one L*lightness color reading on the labeled side of each black felt strip used tor testing in the middle of what will be the rubbed area using a GretagMacbeth® Ci5 spectrophotometer using the following settings on the spectrophotometer: Large area view, Specular component excluded, UV Source C, 2 degree observer, and Illuminant C. (In this connection, the asterisk “*” is not a reference mark directing the reader to some other location in this document, but a portion of the commonly used symbol for CIE 1976 lightness “L*”, “L*” as used in this connection relates to CIE 1976, also known as CIELAB measurement of lightness, and should not be confused with Hunger lightness typically denominated “L”.) The GretagMacbeth® spectrophotometer Model Ci5 is available from: GretagMacbeth®, 617 Little Britain Road, New Windsor, N.Y. 12553, 914-565-7660, 914-565-0390 (FAX): www.gretagmacbeth.com. The “before testing” reading is later compared to the “after testing” reading in the same area of the black felt strip on the same side, so particular care is taken, to be sure that a comparison is made only between the same felt strips.

To evaluate a specimen, the specimen is taped to the galvanized plate on the Sutherland Rub Tester with the top side up, so that rubbing will be in the machine direction with care being observed to ensure that each specimen is taped in the same rub area each time the test is performed. The first black felt specimen is taped, labeled side out, to the bottom of the 4.0-lb rub block of the Sutherland Rub Tester, the number of strokes on the rub tester is set to four, and the slow speed selected (#2 setting for 4 speed model or #1 setting for 2 speed model), the rub block is placed on the Sutherland Rub Tester carriage arm and the “Start” button pressed to start testing. After the four strokes are completed, the rub block is removed from the tester and the black felt is removed from the bottom of the rub block with the black felt being preserved for L* “after testing” color reading. The specimen is removed from the galvanized plate and discarded.

One L* color reading is taken on the labeled side of each black felt strip, reading the same spot used to obtain the “before testing” value, in the middle of the rubbed area. The “after testing” reading is paired up with the appropriate “before testing” reading to calculate difference between the readings −“ΔL*”.

For each sample, the average, standard deviation, minimum and maximum test results are recorded as measured to the nearest 0.01 L* unit for both the before testing and after testing values. The difference value of the after reading minus the before reading is indicative of the lint removal by the standardized dry rubbing procedure.

Wet Abrasion Lint Test

Two tests are used herein to evaluate wet linting of tissue samples: in one approach, fiber is rubbed against a wetted pigskin under controlled conditions, the resulting fiber is washed off of the pigskin and the number of fibers removed is measured using an OpTest® Fiber Quality Analyzer. In the second, tissue is rubbed against wetted black felt under controlled conditions and the area of the lint left behind is measured using a flat bed seamier as described below.

Area Test

To evaluate a tissue sample for lint removal by wet abrasion, the sample is first subjected to simulated wet use against a sample of standard black felt with a Crockmeter Rub Tester, modified as described herein, then, the area in mm²of the lint left on the felt is measured with an Epson Perfection 4490 flat bed scanner and Apogee, SpecScan Software, version 2.3.6.

The Crockmeter Rub is available from: SDL Atlas. LLC, 3934 Airway Drive, Rock Hill, S.C. 29732, (803) 329-2110. To be used to measure wet lint as described herein, the Crockmeter is modified to accept a 360 gram arm and a 1″×2″ foot that exerts a pressure on the specimen of 0.435 psi. The weight of the rub block is 355 g for the weighted arm supported on one end, and 36 g for the rub foot. These weights are exerted on a 1″×2″ area, for a pressure of 391 g/12.9 cm²=30.3 g/cm². In contrast, the method of evaluating wet abrasion in U.S. Pat. No. 5,958,187 to Bhat et al., and U.S. Pat. No. 6,059,928 to Luu et al., used a 135 g sled placed, on a 2×3″ sample for a pressure of 135 g/38.7 cm²=3.5 g/cm².

Research Dimensions, at 1720 Oakridge Road, Neenah, Wis. 54956, 920-722-2289, will modify Crockmeter Rub Testers to conform hereto.

Suitable black felt is 3/16-inch thick, part number 113308F-24 available from Aetna Felt Corporation, 2401 W. Emails Avenue, Allentown, Pa. 18103, 800-526-4451.

To test a sample, the outer three layers of tissue are removed from the roll. Three sheets of tissue are cut at the perforations and placed in a stack using a paper cutter ensuring that the tissue sheets are placed in the same orientation relative to the direction and the side of the roll. From the stack, samples that are 2 inches by 2.5 inches are cut with the long dimension being the machine direction. Enough samples are cut tor 4 replicates. The short (2″) side of the tissue is marked with a small dot to indicate the surface of the tissue that was outwardly facing when on the roll. The foot is mounted to the arm of the Crockmeter with the short dimension parallel to the stroke of the Crockmeter and the stroke distance set at 4″±⅛ inch, and the stroke speed is set to ten strokes per minute. The black felt is cut into 3 inch by 6 inch pieces with the inside surface being marked along the short edge. In this test, the tissue sample to be tested will be rubbed against the inside of the felt starting at the mark. A 12 inch by 12 inch sheet of Black Acrylic, a 2 inch by 3 inch glass microscope slide marked as shown in FIG. 42, a tape, a pipette, and a beaker of distilled water are located on any nearby convenient flat surface. The Crockmeter is turned on, then turned off, to position the arm at its furthest back position. The spacer is placed under the arm to hold it above the rubbing surface. A clean piece of black felt is taped to the base of the Crockmeter over the rubbing surface with the marked surface oriented upward with the marked end up adjacent to the beginning point of the stroke of the foot. A sample is taped along one shorter edge to the foot with the fop side of the tissue facing up, and the length of the tissue is wrapped around the foot and attached to the arm of the Crockmeter with the taped side and the marked location on the tissue sample facing the operator at the forward portion of the Crockmeter. The type of tape used is not critical. Office tape commonly referred to as cellophane tape or sold under the trademark “Scotch® Tape” is suitable. The spacer is removed from under the arm and the arm with the attached foot is set down on the black fell with the long dimension of the foot perpendicular to the rub direction, and the foot is fixed in place. The glass microscope slide is placed on the felt forward of the foot and 3 volumes of 200 μL of distilled water each are dispensed from the pipette onto the cross-marks on the glass slide. The sample, foot and arm are gently lifted, the glass slide is placed under the sample, and the sample is lowered to allow the water to wet the sample for 5 seconds, after which time the arm is lilted, the glass slide removed and the Crockmeter activated to allow the sample to make three forward strokes on the felt with the arm being lifted manually at the beginning of each return stroke to prevent the sample from contacting the felt during the return strokes. After three forward strokes, the Crockmeter is inactivated and the spacer placed under die arm so that the black felt can be removed without disturbing the abraded lint thereupon. Three minutes after the felt is removed from the rubbing surface, the felt is scanned in an Epson, Perfection 4490 flat bed scanner using Apogee SpecScan Software version 2.3.36 with the software being set for “lint” in the “Scanner Settings” window, with “5” being set in the “Process Groups of:” window on the “Defaults panel”, the “Resolution” being set at “600 dots/inch”, the “Scanner Mode” being set to “256-Grayscale” the “Area Setting” being set to “Special”, the “Scan Image” being set to “Reverse Image”, the “Upper Limit” window on the “Dirt Histogram” panel being set to “>=5.000” the “Lower Limit” window of that panel being set to “0.013-0.020” and the “X Scale:” window being set to “25”; and the “PPM” window of the “Bad Handsheet” panel set to “2500.0”. On the “Printout Settings:” panel, the “Gray-Summary”, “Sheet Summary” and “Gray Histogram” boxes are checked, the “Copies” window is set to “1”, while the “Dirt Histogram”. “Categories” and “XY Location boxes on that panel are unchecked. Both the “Enable Display” and “Enable Zoom” boxes are checked on the Display Mode panel. On the “Scanner Setup” panel, the “White” box is set for “255” while the “Black” box is set for “0”, the “Contrast Filter” box is set for “0.000”, the upper “Threshold=” box is set for 80.0 [% percent of background plus] while the lower “Threshold=” box is set for “0.0” [grayscale value]. The “Percent of Background, plus offset” box on the “Scanner Setup” panel is checked while the “Manual Threshold Setting” and “Function of StdDev of Background” boxes are unchecked. If desired, the “Grade Identification:” and “Reel/Load Number:” boxes may be used to record indicia related to the identification of the samples being tested. On the “Special Area Definition” panel, “Inches” is checked in the “Dimensions:” region while “Rectangular” is checked in the “Shape:” region. In the “Border at top and left:” region, “0.15” [in.] is entered in the “At the left side: (X)” box and “0.625” [in.] is entered in the “At the top: (Y)” box. In the “Area to scan:” regions “2.7” [in.] is entered in the “Width (X)” box and “5.2” [in.] is entered in die “Height (Y)” box. After scanning, the area in mm²of the abraded lint left on the black felt is output in the “SHEETS” Table in the “Total Area” column under the “Sample Sheet(s)” heading on the “Sheet & Category Summary” screen. This result is sometimes referred to herein as “WALA” for Wet Abraded Lint Area, which is reported in mm².

Fiber Count Test

In other cases, rather than using black felt, a pigskin comparable to human

skin is substituted therefore, the fiber removed will be washed off and the solution subjected to testing in an Optest® Fiber Quality Analyzer to determine the number of fibers removed having a length in excess of 40 μm. The Optest® Fiber Quality Analyzer has become a standard in the paper industry for determining fiber length distributions and fiber counts (above a certain minimal length, which keeps decreasing periodically, as Optest® continually upgrades their technique). The Optest® Fiber Quality Analyzer is available from:

- OpTest Equipment Inc.
- 900 Tupper St.—Hawkesbury—ON—K6A 3S3—Canada
- Phone: 613-632-5169 Fax: 613-632-3744.

Fpm refers to feet per minute, while fps refers to feet per second.

MD means machine direction and CD means cross-machine direction.

“Predominantly” means more than 50% of the specified component, by weight unless otherwise indicated.

Roll Compression Test

Roll compression is measured by compressing roll 285 under a 1500 g fiat platen 281 of a test apparatus 283 similar to that shown in FIGS. 40 and 41, then measuring the difference in height between the uncompressed roll and the compressed roll while in the fixture. Sample rolls 285 are conditioned and tested in an atmosphere of 23.0°±1.0° C. (73.4°±1.8° F.). A suitable test apparatus 283 with a movable 1500 g platen 281 (referred to as a Height Gauge) is available from:

- Research Dimensions
- 1720 Oakridge Road
- Neenah, Wis. 54956
- 920-722-2289
- 920-725-6874 (FAX).

The test procedure is generally as follows:

(a) Raise the platen 281 and position the roll 285 to be tested on its side, centered under the platen 281, with the tail seal 287 to the front of me gauge and the core 289 parallel to the back of the gauge 291.

(b) Slowly lower the platen 281 until it rests on the roll 285.

(d) Raise the platen 281 and remove the roll 285.

(e) Repeat for each roll to be tested.

To calculate roll compression in percent, the following formula is used:

$RC (%) = 100 \times \frac{(initial roll diameter - compressed roll diameter)}{initial roll diameter} .$

Dry tensile strengths (MD and CD), stretch, ratios thereof, modulus, break modulus, stress and strain are measured with a standard Insiron® test device or other suitable elongation tensile tester, which may be configured hi various ways, typically, using 3 inch (76.2 mm) or 1 inch (25.4 mm) wide strips of tissue or towel, conditioned in an atmosphere of 23°±1° C. (73.4°±1° F.) at 50% relative humidity for 2 hours. The tensile test is run at a crosshead speed of 2 in/min (50.8 mm/min). Break modulus is expressed in grams/3 inches/% strain or its SI equivalent of g/mm/% strain. % strain is dimensionless and need not be specified. Unless otherwise indicated, values are break values. GM refers to the square root of the product of the MD and CD values for a particular product. Tensile energy absorption (TEA), which is defined as the area under the load/elongation (stress/strain) curve, is also measured during the procedure for measuring tensile strength. Tensile energy absorption is related to the perceived strength of the product in use. Products having a higher TEA may be perceived by users as being stronger than similar products that have lower TEA values, even if the actual tensile strength of the two products are the same. In fact, having a higher tensile energy absorption may allow a product to be perceived as being stronger than one with a lower TEA. even if the tensile strength of the high-TEA product is less than that of the product having the lower tensile energy absorption. When the term “normalized” is used in connection with a tensile strength, it simply refers to the appropriate tensile strength from which the effect of basis weight has been removed by dividing that tensile strength by the basis weight. In many cases, similar information is provided by the term “breaking length”.

Tensile ratios are simply ratios of the values determined by way of the foregoing methods. Unless otherwise specified, a tensile property is a dry sheet property.

“Upper”, “upwardly” and like terminology is used purely for convenience and does not require that the sheet be placed in a specified orientation, but rather, refers to position or direction toward the caps of the dome structures, that is, the belt side of the web, which is generally opposite to the Yankee side, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise.

“Venation” means a structure presenting a generally smooth surface having raised, generally continuous ridges defined thereacross, similar to the venation observable on the lower surface of many common leaves.

The void volume and/or void volume ratio, as referred to hereafter, are determined by saturating a sheet with a nonpolar POROFIL™ liquid, available from Coulter Electronics Ltd., (Beckman Coulter, Inc., 250 S. Kraemer Boulevard, P.O. Box 8000, Brea, Calif. 92822-8000 USA, Part No. 990245S), and measuring the amount of liquid absorbed. The volume of liquid absorbed is equivalent to the void volume within the sheet structure. The % weight increase (PWI) is expressed as grams of liquid absorbed per gram of fiber in the sheet structure times one hundred, as noted hereafter. More specifically, for each single-ply sheet sample to be tested, select 8 sheets and cut out a 1 inch by 1 inch (25.4 mm by 25.4 mm) square (1 inch (25.4 mm) in the machine direction and 1 inch (25.4 mm) in the cross machine direction). For multi-ply product samples, each ply is measured as a separate entity. Multiple samples should be separated into individual single plies and 8 sheets from each ply position used for testing. Weigh and record the dry weight of each test specimen to the nearest 0.0001 gram. Place the specimen in a dish containing POROFIL™ liquid having a specific gravity of about 1.93 grams per cubic centimeter. After 10 seconds, grasp the specimen at the very edge (1 to 2 millimeters in) of one corner with tweezers and remove from the liquid. Hold the specimen with that corner uppermost and allow excess liquid to drip tor 30 seconds. Lightly dab (less than ½ second contact) the lower corner of the specimen on #4 filter paper (Whatman Ltd., Maidstone, England) in order to remove any excess of the last partial drop. Immediately weigh the specimen, within 10 seconds, recording die weight to the nearest 0.0001 gram. The PWI for each specimen, expressed as grams of POROFIL™ liquid per gram of fiber, is calculated as follows:

PWI=[(W₂−W₁)/W1]×100,

wherein

“W₁” is the dry weight of the specimen, in grams; and

“W₂” is the wet weight of the specimen, in grams.

The PWI for all eight individual specimens is determined as described, above and the average of the eight specimens is the PWI for the sample.

The void volume ratio is calculated by dividing the PWI by 1.9 (density of fluid) to express the ratio as a percentage, whereas the void volume (gms/gm) is simply the weight increase ratio, that is, PWI divided by 100.

Water absorbency rate is related to tire time it takes for a sample to absorb a 0.1 gram droplet of water disposed on its surface by way of an automated syringe. The test specimens are preferably conditioned at 23° C.±1° C. (73.4° F.±1.8° F.) at 50% relative humidity. For each sample, four 3×3 inch test specimens are prepared. Each specimen is placed in a sample holder such that a high intensity lamp is directed toward the specimen. 0.1 ml of water is deposited on the specimen surface and a stop watch is started. When the water is absorbed, as indicated by lack of further reflection for light from the drop, the stopwatch is stopped and the time is recorded to the nearest 0.1 seconds. The procedure is repeated for each specimen and the results averaged for the sample. SAT rate is determined by graphing the weight of water absorbed by the sample (in grams) against the square root of time (in seconds). The SAT rate is the best fit slope between 10 and 60 percent of the end point (grams of water absorbed), and is expressed in g/s^0.5.

The wet tensile of a wiper of the present invention is measured generally following TAPPI Method T 576 pm-07 using a three-inch (76.2 mm) wide strip of tissue that is folded into a loop, clamped in a special fixture termed a Finch Cup. then immersed in water. A suitable Finch cup, 3 inch (76.2 mm), with base to fit a 3 inch (76.2 mm) grip, is available from:

- High-Tech Manufacturing Services, Inc.
- 3105-B NE 65^thStreet
- Vancouver, Wash. 98663
- 360-696-1611
- 360-696-9887 (FAX).

For fresh basesheet and finished product (aged 30 days or less for towel product, aged 24 hours or less for tissue product) containing wet strength additive, the test specimens are placed in a forced air oven heated to 105° C. (221° F.) for five minutes. No oven aging is needed for other samples. The Finch cup is mounted onto a tensile tester equipped with a 2.0 pound (8.9 Newton) load cell with the flange of the Finch cup clamped by the tester's lower jaw and the ends of tissue loop clamped into the upper jaw of the tensile tester. The sample is immersed in water that has been adjusted to a pH of 7.0±0.1 and the tensile is tested after a 5 second immersion time using a crosshead speed of 2 inches/minute (50.8 mm/minute), the results are expressed in g/3 in. or (g/mm), dividing the readout by two to account for the loop as appropriate.

Wipe dry times are evaluated using a turntable wipe dry instrument with a spray fluid dispensing instrument, each being as described below, for purposes of this application, two standard test surfaces are used: stainless steel and black glass. To evaluate a sample, the paper is first pre-conditioned and conditioned as described below, the test surface cleaned with Windex® original glass cleaner from S. C. Johnson and Son, Racine, Wis., and then wiped dry with a lint-free wipe.

The test sample is folded so that the fold extends in the cross machine direction and centered on the black foam side of the sample head, so that the machine direction runs perpendicular to the shaft (i.e., the machine direction is parallel to the directions of motion) and taped in position at its corners so that the sample's leading edge is the folded edge and the towel sample is flush with die right hand edge of die sample head. The sample head is placed on the test surface and the slack in the sample removed. Windex® original glass cleaner is sprayed on the test surface in an amount of 0.75±0.1 grams in the center of the area not occupied by the test head. The table is rotated for 3 revolutions at 30 to 32 rpm with the head in engagement with the test surface at a load of 1065 g spread over bearing surface dimensions of 23 cm×9.5 cm. After the turntable has made three revolutions, the area on the test surface to which the Windex® original glass cleaner was applied is observed and the elapsed time recorded until all of the Windex® original glass cleaner has evaporated. This time is recorded in seconds as the Wipe Dry Time.

To quantify the amount of lint removed from towel, tissue, and related products (Extractable Lint), a Sutherland Rub Tester with 4.0-lb rub block, is used. This is discussed above.

Two stacks of four 2.25 in.×4.5 in. test strips with 4.5 in. length in the machine direction are cut from the sample with the top (exterior of roll) side up.

Two 2.5 in.×6 in, strips of black felt are cut with the 6 in. length in the machine direction, and the top side labeled with sample ID numbers.

A baseline reading for the felt is determined by taking one L* color reading on the labeled, side of each black felt strip used for testing in the middle of what will be the rubbed area using a GretagMacbeth Spectrophotometer Model. Ci5 as discussed above. The “before testing” reading is later compared to the “after testing” reading in the same area of the black felt strip on the same side, so particular care is taken to be sure that comparison are made only between the same felt strips.

Liquid Porosimetry

Liquid porosimetry is a procedure for determining the pore volume distribution (PVD) within a porous solid matrix. Each pore is sized according to its effective radius, and the contribution of each size to foe total free volume is the principal objective of the analysis. The data reveals useful information about the structure of a porous network, including absorption and retention characteristics of a material.

The procedure generally requires quantitative monitoring of the movement of liquid either into or out of a porous structure. The effective radius R of a pore is operationally defined by the Laplace equation:

$R = \frac{2 γ \cos θ}{Δ P}$

where γ is liquid surface tension, θ is advancing or receding contact angle of the liquid, and ΔP is pressure difference across the liquid/air meniscus. For liquid to enter or to drain from a pore, an external pressure must be applied that is just enough to overcome the Laplace ΔP. Cos θ is negative when liquid must be forced in, cos θ is positive when it must be forced out. If the external pressure on a matrix having a range of pore sizes is changed, either continuously or in steps, filling or emptying will start with the largest pore and proceed in turn down to the smallest size that corresponds to the maximum applied pressure difference. Porosimetry involves recording the increment of liquid that enters or leaves with each pressure change and can be carried out in the extrusion mode, that is, liquid is forced our of the porous network rather than into it. The receding contact angle is the appropriate term in the Laplace relationship, and any stable liquid that has a known cos θ_r>0 can be used. If necessary, initial saturation with liquid can be accomplished by preevacuation of the dry material. The basic arrangement used for extrusion porosimetry measurements is illustrated in FIG. 8. The presaturated specimen is placed on a microporous membrane which is itself supported by a rigid porous plate. The gas pressure within the chamber is increased in steps, causing liquid to flow out of some of the pores, the largest ones first. The amount of liquid removed is monitored by tire top-loading recording balance. In this way, each level of applied pressure (which determines the largest effective pore size that remains filled) is related to an increment of liquid mass. The chamber is pressurized by means of a computer-controlled, reversible, motor-driven piston/cylinder arrangement that can produce the required changes in pressure to cover a pore radius range from 1 to 1000 μm.

Eight finished product samples were analyzed for pore volume distribution testing. Measurements were performed on the TRI/Autoporosimeter®. The instrument and the PVD methodology are described in the paper “Liquid Porosimetry: New Methodology and Applications” by Dr. B. Miller and Dr. I. Tyomkin, published in tire Journal of Colloid and Interface Science, 162, 163-170, (1994), the disclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference.

The test liquid was 0.1% TX-100 solution in water, surface tension 30 mN/m. TX-100 is a surfactant. For reference, water at room temperature has a surface tension of 72 dyne/cm. Sample size was 30 cm². The test started in an advancing mode and finished in a a receding mode. The advancing mode requires good contact with fine porous membrane in the test chamber. Therefore, samples were covered with a multi-pin plate as shown in FIG. 9. The pin plate area is 30 cm². It has 196 0.9×0.9 mm square pins, the height of each pin is 4 mm, the distance between pins is 3.2 mm, and the total area of pins is 159 mm². The pin plate locally compressed the sample. The total area of the pins is 5% of sample.

Data from 1 micron to 500 microns represent the advancing part of the curve, and data from 500 microns to 1 micron represent the receding part of the curve. At the end of the test at 1 micron, there was some liquid left in the sample. This liquid is a sum of liquid in swollen fibers, liquid hi pores below 1 micron, and liquid trapped in the larger pores. The amount of liquid in a sample at the end of experiment was usually below 0.5 mm³/mg.

Water Holding Capacity is determined pursuant to withdrawn ASTM Standard Method D-4250-92, Standard Method for Water-Holding Capacity of Bibulous Fibrous Products. It is considered to be generally very comparable to SAT.

Regenerated Cellulose Microfiber

In accordance with the invention, regenerated cellulose fiber is prepared from a cellulosic dope comprising cellulose dissolved in a solvent comprising tertiary amine N-oxides or ionic liquids. The solvent composition for dissolving cellulose and preparing underivatized cellulose dopes suitably includes tertiary amine oxides, such as N-methlmorpholine-N-oxide (NMMO), and similar compounds enumerated in U.S. Pat. No. 4,246,221 to McCorsley, the disclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference. Cellulose dopes may contain non-solvents for cellulose such as water, alkanols or other solvents, as will be appreciated from the discussion that follows.

Suitable cellulosic dopes are enumerated in Table 1, below.

TABLE 1

EXAMPLES OF TERTIARY AMINE N-OXIDE SOLVENTS

Tertiary Amine N-oxide
% water
% cellulose

N-methylmorpholine N-oxide
up to 22
up to 38

N,N-dimethyl-ethanol-amine N-oxide
up to 12.5
up to 31

N,N-dimethylcyclohexylamine N-oxide
up to 21
up to 44

N-methylhomopiperidine N-oxide
5.5-20
1-22

N,N,N-triethylamine N-oxide
7-29
5-15

2(2-hydroxypropoxy)-N-ethyl-N,N,-dimethyl-
5-10
2-7.5

amide N-oxide

N-methylpiperidine N-oxide
up to 17.5
5-17.5

N,N-dimethylbenzylamine N-oxide
5.5-17
1-20

See, also, U.S. Pat. No. 3,508,941 to Johnson, the disclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference.

Details with respect to preparation of cellulosic dopes including cellulose dissolved in suitable ionic liquids and cellulose regeneration therefrom are found in U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2003/0157351, now U.S. Pat. No. 6,824,599, of Swatloski et al., entitled “Dissolution and Processing of Cellulose Using Ionic Liquids”, the disclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference. Here again, suitable levels of non-solvents for cellulose may be included. This patent generally describes a process of dissolving cellulose in an ionic liquid without derivatization and regenerating the cellulose in a range of structural forms. It is reported that the cellulose solubility and the solution properties can be controlled by the selection of ionic liquid constituents with small cations and halide or pseudohalide anions favoring solution. Preferred ionic liquids for dissolving cellulose include those with cyclic cations, such as the following cations; imidazolium; pyridinum; pyridazinium; pyrimidinium; pyrazinium; pyrazolium; oxazolium; 1,2,3-triazolium; 1,2,4-triazolium; thiazolium; piperidinium; pyrrolidinium; quinolinium; and isoquinolinium.

Processing techniques for ionic liquids/cellulose dopes are also discussed in U.S. Pat. No. 6,808,557 to Holbrey et al., entitled “Cellulose Matrix Encapsulation and Method”, the disclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference. Note also, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2005/0288484, now U.S. Pat. No. 7,888,412, of Holbrey et al., entitled “Polymer Dissolution and Blend Formation in Ionic Liquids”, as well as U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2004/0038031, now U.S. Pat. No. 6,808,557, of Holbrey et al., entitled “Cellulose Matrix Encapsulation and Method”, the disclosures of which are incorporated herein by reference. With respect to ionic fluids, in general, the following documents provide further detail; U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2006/0241287, now U.S. Pat. No. 7,763,715, of Hecht et al., entitled “Extracting Biopolymers From a Biomass Using Ionic Liquids”; U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2006/0240727 of Price et al., entitled “Ionic Liquid Based Products and Method of Using The Same”; U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2006/0240728 of Price et al., entitled “Ionic Liquid Based Products and Method of Using the Same”; U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2006/0090271 of Price, et al., entitled “Processes For Modifying Textiles Using Ionic Liquids”; and U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2006/0207722 of Amano et al., entitled “Pressure Sensitive Adhesive Compositions, Pressure Sensitive Adhesive Sheets and Surface Protecting Films,” now U.S. Pat. No. 8,318,859, the disclosures of which are incorporated herein by reference. Some ionic liquids and quasi-ionic liquids that may be suitable are disclosed by Imperato et al., Chemical Communications 2005, pages 1170 to 1172, the disclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference.

“Ionic liquid”, refers to a molten composition including an ionic compound that is preferably a stable liquid at temperatures of less than 100° C. at ambient pressure. Typically, such liquids have a very low vapor pressure at 100° C., less than 75 mBar or so, and preferably, less than 50 mBar or less than 25 mBar at 100° C. Most suitable liquids will have a vapor pressure of less than 10 mBar at 100° C., and often, the vapor pressure is so low that it is negligible, and is not easily measurable, since it is less than 1 mBar at 100° C.

Suitable commercially available ionic liquids are Basionic™ ionic liquid products available from BASF (Florham Park, N.J.) and are listed in Table 2 below.

TABLE 2

Exemplary Ionic Liquids

IL
Basionic ™

Abbreviation
Grade
Product name
CAS Number

STANDARD

EMIM Cl
ST 80
1-Ethyl-3-methylimidazolium chloride
65039-09-0

EMIM
ST 35
1-Ethyl-3-methylimidazolium
145022-45-3

CH₃SO₃

methanesulfonate

BMIM Cl
ST 70
1-Butyl-3-methylimidazolium chloride
79917-90-1

BMIM
ST 78
1-Butyl-3-methylimidazolium
342789-81-5

CH₃SO₃

methanesulfonate

MTBS
ST 62
Methyl-tri-n-butylammonium
13106-24-6

methylsulfate

MMMPZ
ST 33
1,2,4-Trimethylpyrazolium methylsulfate

MeOSO₃

EMMIM
ST 67
1-Ethyl-2,3-di-methylimidazolium
516474-08-01

EtOSO₃

ethylsulfate

MMMIM
ST 99
1,2,3-Trimethyl-imidazolium
65086-12-6

MeOSO₃

methylsulfate

ACIDIC

HMIM Cl
AC 75
Methylimidazolium chloride
35487-17-3

HMIM HSO₄
AC 39
Methylimidazolium hydrogensulfate
681281-87-8

EMIM HSO₄
AC 25
1-Ethyl-3-methylimidazolium
412009-61-1

hydrogensulfate

EMIM AlCl₄
AC 09
1-Ethyl-3-methylimidazolium
80432-05-9

tetrachloroaluminate

BMIM HSO_4</
AC 28
1-Butyl-3-methylimidazolium
262297-13-2

hydrogensulfate

BMIM AlCl₄
AC 01
1-Butyl-3-methylimidazolium
80432-09-3

tetrachloroaluminate

BASIC

EMIM Acetat
BC 01
1-Ethyl-3-methylimidazolium acetate
143314-17-4

BMIM Acetat
BC 02
1-Butyl-3-methylimidazolium acetate
284049-75-8

LIQUID AT RT

EMIM EtOSO₃
LQ 01
1-Ethyl-3-methylimidazolium
342573-75-5

ethylsulfate

BMIM
LQ 02
1-Butyl-3-methylimidazolium
401788-98-5

MeOSO₃

methylsulfate

LOW VISCOSITY

EMIM SCN
VS 01
1-Ethyl-3-methylimidazolium thiocyanate
331717-63-6

BMIM SCN
VS 02
1-Butyl-3-methylimidazolium thiocyanate
344790-87-0

FUNCTIONALIZED

COL Acetate
FS 85
Choline acetate
14586-35-7

COL Salicylate
FS 65
Choline salicylate
2016-36-6

MTEOA
FS 01
Tris-(2-hydroxyethyl)-
29463-06-7

MeOSO₃

methylammonium methylsulfate

Cellulose dopes, including ionic liquids having dissolved therein about 5% by weight underivatized cellulose, are commercially available from Aldrich. These compositions utilize alkyl-methylimidazolium acetate as the solvent, it has been found that choline-based ionic liquids are not particularly suitable for dissolving cellulose.

After the cellulosic dope is prepared, it is spun into fiber, fibrillated and incorporated into absorbent sheet, as described later.

A synthetic cellulose, such as lyocell, is split into micro- and nano-fibers, and added to conventional wood pulp. The fiber may be fibrillated in an unloaded disk refiner, for example, or any other suitable technique including using a PFI beater mill. Preferably, relatively short fiber is used, and the consistency kept low during fibrillation. The beneficial features of fibrillated lyocell include biodegradability, hydrogen bonding, dispersibility, repulpability, and smaller microfibers than obtainable with meltspun fibers, for example.

Fibrillated lyocell or its equivalent has advantages over splittable meltspun fibers. Synthetic microdenier fibers come in a variety of forms. For example, a 3 denier nylon/PET fiber in a so-called pie wedge configuration can be split into 16 or 32 segments, typically, in a hydroentangling process. Each segment of a 16-segment fiber would have a coarseness of about 2 mg/100 m versus eucalyptus pulp at about 7 mg/100 m. Unfortunately, a number of deficiencies has been identified with this approach for conventional wet laid applications. Dispersibility is less than optimal. Melt spun fibers must be split before sheet formation, and an efficient method is lacking. Most available polymers for these fibers are not biodegradable. The coarseness is lower than that of wood pulp, bus still high enough that they must be used in substantial amounts and form a costly part of the furnish. Finally, the lack of hydrogen bonding requires other methods of retaining the fibers in the sheet.

Fibrillated lyocell has fibrils that can be as small as 0.1 to 0.25 microns (μm) in diameter, translating to a coarseness of 0.0013 to 0.0079 mg/100 m. Assuming these fibrils are available as individual strands—separate from the parent fiber—the furnish fiber population can be dramatically increased at various addition rates. Even fibrils not separated from the parent fiber may provide benefit. Dispersibility, repulpability, hydrogen bonding, and biodegradability remain product attributes since the fibrils are cellulose.

Fibrils from lyocell fiber have important distinctions from wood pulp fibrils. The most important distinction is the length of the lyocell fibrils. Wood pulp fibrils are only perhaps microns long, and, therefore, act in the immediate area of a fiber-fiber bond. Wood pulp fibrillation from refining leads to stronger, denser sheets, Lyocell fibrils, however, are potentially as long as the parent fibers. These fibrils can act as independent fibers and improve the bulk, while maintaining or improving strength. Southern pine and mixed southern hardwood (MSHW) are two examples of fibers that are disadvantaged relative to premium pulps with respect to softness. The term “premium pulps” used herein refers to northern softwoods and eucalyptus kraft pulps commonly used in the tissue industry for producing the softest, bath, facial, and towel grades. Southern pine is coarser than northern softwood kraft, and mixed southern hardwood is both coarser and higher in fines than market eucalyptus. The lower coarseness and lower fines content of premium market pulp leads to a. higher fiber population, expressed as fibers per gram (N or N_i>0.2) in Table 3. The coarseness and length values in table 3 were obtained with an OpTest Fiber Quality Analyzer, Definitions are as follows:

$L_{n} = \frac{\sum_{all fibers} n_{i} L_{i}}{\sum_{all fibers} n_{i}} L_{n, i > 0.2} = \frac{\sum_{i > 0.2} n_{i} L_{i}}{\sum_{i > 0.2} n_{i}}$

$C = 10^{5} \times \frac{sampleweight}{\sum_{all fibers} n_{i} L_{i}} N = \frac{100}{CL} [=] millionfibers / gram$

Northern bleached softwood kraft (NBSK) and eucalyptus have more fibers per gram than do southern pine and hardwood. Lower coarseness leads to higher fiber populations and smoother sheets.

TABLE 3

Fiber Properties

Sample

C,
Fines,

N,

N_{I >}_0.2,

Type
mg/100 m
%
L_n,mm
MM/g
L_{n,i >}_0.2,mm
MM/g

Southern HW
Pulp
10.1
21
0.28
35
0.91
11

Southern HW-
Pulp
10.1
7
0.54
18
0.94
11

low fines

Aracruz Eucalyptus
Pulp
6.9
5
0.50
29
0.72
20

Southern SW
Pulp
18.7
9
0.60
9
1.57
3

Northern SW
Pulp
14.2
3
1.24
6
1.74
4

Southern
Base
11.0
18
0.31
29
0.93
10

(30 SW/70 HV)
sheet

30 Southern
Base
8.3
7
0.47
26
0.77
16

Eucalyptus
sheet

For comparison, the “parent” or “stock” fibers of unfibrillated lyocell have a coarseness 16.6 mg/100 m before fibrillation and a diameter of about 11 to 12 μm.

The fibrils of fibrillated lyocell have a coarseness on the order of 0.001 to 0.008 mg/100 m. Thus, the fiber population can be dramatically increased at relatively low addition rates. FIG. 4 illustrates the distribution of fiber lengths found in a regenerated cellulosic microfiber, which is preferred for the practice of the present invention. Fiber length of the parent fiber is selectable, and fiber length of the fibrils can depend on the starting length and the degree of cutting dining the fibrillation process, as can be seen in FIG. 5.

The dimensions of the fibers passing the 200 mesh screen are on the order of 0.2 micron by 100 micron long. Using these dimensions, one calculates a fiber population of 200 billion fibers per gram. For perspective, southern pine might be three mil lion fibers per gram and eucalyptus might be twenty million fibers per gram (Table 3). It appears that these fibers are the fibrils that are broken away from the original unrefined fibers. Different fiber shapes with lyocell intended to readily fibrillate could result in 0.2 micron diameter fibers that are perhaps 1000 microns or more long, instead of 100. As noted above, fibrillated fibers of regenerated cellulose may be made by producing “stock” fibers having a diameter of 10 to 12 microns, or so, followed by fibrillating the parent fibers. Alternatively, fibrillated lyocell microfibers have recently become available from Engineered Fibers Technology (Shelton, Conn.) having suitable properties.

Particularly preferred materials contain more than 4033 fiber that is finer than 14 mesh and exhibit a very low coarseness (low freeness). For ready reference, mesh sizes appear in Table 4, below.

TABLE 4

Mesh Size

Sieve Mesh #
Inches
Microns

14
.0555
1400

28
.028
700

60
.0098
250

100
.0059
150

200
.0029
74

Details as to fractionation using the Bauer-McNett Classifier appear in Goading et al., “Fractionation in a Bauer-McNett Classifier”, Journal of Pulp and Paper Science, Vol. 27, No. 12, December 2001, the disclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference. A particularly preferred microfiber is shown in Table 4A.

TABLE 4A

Fiber Length Distribution of Preferred

Regenerated Cellulosic Microfiber

Fiber Length
Weight %

+14 mesh
2.3%

28 mesh
20.5%

48 mesh
10.6%

100 mesh
15.6%

200 mesh
17.2%

<200 mesh
33.8%

FIG. 5 is a plot showing fiber length as measured by a Fiber Quality Analyzer (FQA) for various samples of regenerated cellulosic microfiber. From this data, it is appreciated that much of the fine fiber is excluded by the FQA and length prior to fibrillation has an effect on fineness. The Optest Fiber Quality Analyzer has become a standard in the paper industry for determining fiber length distributions and fiber counts (above a certain minimum length that keeps decreasing steadily as Optest continually upgrades their technology). The OpTest Fiber Quality Analyzer is available from;

- OpTest Equipment Inc.
- 900 Tapper St.—Hawkesbury—ON—K6A 3S3—Canada
- Phone: 613-632-5169 Fax: 613-632-3744.

Example 1
Perforated Polymeric Belt Creping

A series of belt-creped base-sheets was prepared with the materials and layering described in Table 5, with the CMF having the approximate fiber length distribution shown in FIG. 4.

TABLE 5

Base-sheet Cells

NBSK
CMF
BW
CMC
Amres

Cell
%
%
lb/R
lb/t
lb/t
Layered
Comments

1
100
0
14
0
12
No
Control, balanced charge

2
80
20
14
0
12
No
20% CMF, two-ply towel

3
60
40
14
0
12
No
40% CMF, two-ply towel

4
40
60
14
0
12
No
60% CMF, two-ply towel

5
100
0
14
12
40
No
Control, high resin

6
80
20
14
12
40
No
20% CMF, two-ply towel, high wet

7
60
40
14
12
40
No
40% CMF, two-ply towel, high wet

8
40
60
14
12
40
No
60% CMF, two-ply towel, high wet

9
60
40
14
12
40
Yes
100% CMF on surface

10
60
40
14
12
40
Yes
100% CMF on surface, calender

11
40
60
14
12
40
No
High wet/dry 3 lb/t GP-C in

MC 1 and MC 2

12
40
60
14
12
40
No
High wet/dry 3 lb/t GP-C, calender

13
60
40
14
12
40
No
High wet/dry 3 lb/t GP-C in

MC 1 and MC 2

100% NBSK was delivered from a first machine chest. 100% CMF was supplied from a second machine chest. The softwood fiber was refined an average of 2.2 HPD/ton based on total flow, requiring less refined horsepower as softwood fiber content decreased. The average freeness of the softwood fiber across the trial was 541 ml CSF.

Amres® HP 100, from Georgia-Pacific Resins, Inc., was split proportionally to the suction of each machine chest pump. Amtex Gelycel® carboxymethylcellulose (CMC) was split proportionally to the static mixer or stuff box. Titratable charge averaged 0.02 ml/10 ml for cells with no CMC and 12 lb/ton Amres®. Titratable charge averaged −0.17 ml/10 ml for cells with 12 lb/ton CMC and 40 lb/ton Amres®.

Trial speed averages appear in Table 6:

TABLE 6

Trial Speed Averages

Jet Speed, fpm
2450

Form Roll Speed, fpm
1574

Small Dryer Speed, fpm
1559

Yankee Speed, fpm
1251

Reel Speed, fpm
1190

Jet/Wire Ratio
1.56

Fabric Crepe Ratio
1.25

Reel Crepe Ratio
1.05

Total Crepe Ratio
1.31

A perforated polymer creping belt was used as described in U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2010/0186913, entitled “Belt-Creped, Variable Local Basis Weight Absorbent Sheet Prepared With Perforated Polymeric Belt”, the disclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference. The sheet contact surface of the perforated polymeric belt is illustrated in FIG. 7.

The basesheets produced had the properties set forth in Table 7. Base-sheets were converted to two-ply sheet using Fantale emboss pattern, FIG. 6, with a THVS configuration, that is. the pattern is embossed into only one of the two plies, which is joined to the non-embossed ply by glue lamination in points to the inside configuration, such that the outer surface of the embossed ply is debossed, and the asperities created by embossing bear against and are shielded by the unembossed ply.

Softness panel, wet lint, and wipe dry tests were completed, in addition to conventional strength and absorbency tests described above. Porosity of the sheers is discussed in some detail below. The results of these tests are set forth in Table 8.

TABLE 7

Basesheet (perforated polymeric belt creped)

Caliper
Basis
MD
MD
CD
CD
CD Wet Tens
SAT
GM
GM Break
CD Tensile

CMF
Amres ®,
8 Sheet
Weight
Tensile
Stretch
Tensile
Stretch
Finch Cured
Capacity
Tensile
Modulus
Wet/Dry

Roll
Percent
lb/t
mils/8 sht
lb/3000 ft²
g/3 in.
%
g/3 in.
%
g/3 in.
g/m²
g/3 in.
gms/%
Unitless

22989
0
12
77.7
14.0
1891
31.7
1556
6.5
345
364
1714
121
0.22

22988
0
12
77.5
14.5
1928
33.7
1539
6.4
317
354
1722
119
0.21

22990
20
12
74.6
14.1
1939
37.3
2068
7.6
554
336
2002
119
0.27

22992
20
12
73.4
14.3
2177
36.1
1886
6.4
561
332
2026
135
0.30

22996
40
12
86.9
14.0
1802
40.3
1931
9.1
486
377
1865
99
0.25

22997
40
12
83.9
14.5
1837
39.1
1766
8.6
544
373
1799
101
0.31

22998
60
12
94.8
13.8
1419
39.2
1324
9.1
445
392
1369
73
0.34

22999
60
12
94.6
14.8
1756
42.2
1340
9.9
520
404
1534
74
0.39

23010
0
40
88.2
14.3
1881
25.3
2490
6.6
924
403
2162
170
0.37

23012
0
40
84.2
14.9
2877
32.7
2086
6.4
696
435
2449
168
0.33

23015
20
40
87.0
14.0
2335
32.3
2701
8.0
1,155
410
2615
165
0.43

23017
20
40
88.2
14.6
2307
31.1
2235
6.3
1,078
410
2266
162
0.48

23019
40
40
89.1
14.5
2833
38.0
2393
8.6
968
399
2602
146
0.40

23020
40
40
93.8
14.6
2640
39.5
2468
9.2
1,147
400
2552
134
0.46

23024
60
40
99.4
14.1
2342
37.6
2216
9.8
1,077
431
2278
117
0.49

23025
60
40
92.0
14.5
2412
36.7
1868
8.6
993
403
2123
119
0.53

23027
40
40
97.1
14.0
2148
38.0
1950
9.3
810
432
2043
112
0.42

23028
40
40
93.4
14.4
2315
37.4
2075
9.2
845
416
2192
118
0.41

23032
60
40
104.1
13.8
2761
36.7
2453
9.3
1,325
473
2602
143
0.54

23034
60
40
70.6
14.4
3286
38.1
3058
9.5
1,378
395
3169
169
0.45

23036
40 strat Y*
40
96.8
14.1
2811
38.2
2973
8.4
1,393
447
2891
159
0.47

23037
40 strat Y*
40
95.9
13.9
3080
37.1
3047
7.8
1,432
446
3063
177
0.47

23038
40 strat Y*
40
66.0
12.9
2895
37.7
2999
8.8
1,444
391
2946
163
0.48

23040
40 strat Y*
40
62.4
13.0
2172
37.9
2315
8.0
1,050
356
2242
129
0.45

*The overall composition of the Yankee side ply is 40% CMF by weight with the Yankee side layer of the headbox issuing substantially 100% CMF.

TABLE 8

Finished Product Data (perforated polymeric belt creped)

Caliper

Wet

Basis
8

Tens.

Weight
Sheet
MD
MD
CD
CD
GM
Finch

Softness
lb/3000
mils/
Tensile
Stretch
Tensile
Stretch
Tensile
Cured-CD

Description
Basesheet
CMF
Panel
ft²
8 sht
g3 in.
%
g3 in.
%
g3 in.
g3 in.

1
P3424.1
22989 22988
0
6.26
28.6
184
3,321
29
2,949
7.4
3,128
730

2
P3425.1
23010 23012
0
4.88
29.6
204
4,057
28
4,547
8.3
4,293
1,380

3
P3426.1
23033 23032
60
4.73
27.9
227
5,156
31
4,379
9.7
4,747
2,263

4
P3427.1
23034 23032
60
4.62
28.4
215
5,191
30
4,382
9.6
4,764
2,185

5
P3428.1
23036 23037
40
5.37
28.0
221
5,007
31
5,082
9.1
5,042
2,262

6
P3429.1
23038 23040
40
5.75
25.8
185
4,315
30
4,499
8.9
4,404
1,934

7
P3430.1
23024 23025
60
5.77
28.5
203
4,773
34
3,958
10.4
4,345
1,856

8
P3431.1
23028 23027
40
7.29
27.7
205
3,791
31
3,624
10.2
3,705
1,494

9
P3432,053
23020 23019
40

29.2
182
5,696
35
4,999
9.9
5,333
1,924

10
P3432,083
23020 23019
40

29.2
240
4,487
31
4,032
9.6
4,252
1,669

11
P3531,053
23028 23027
40

27.8
183
4,413
32
3,970
10.0
4,184
1,677

12
P3531,083
23028 23027
40

27.7
225
3,825
31
3,143
10.2
3,466
1,395

13
P3432.1
23020 23019
40
5.14
29.2
205
5,377
35
4,672
11.1
5,011
1,903

14
P3433.1
22999 22998
60
8.02
28.3
193
3,584
38
3,142
12.4
3,356
937

15
P3434.1
23015 23017
20
4.67
28.8
204
4,761
32
4,895
9.6
4,825
1,745

16
P3435.1
22997 22996
40
6.75
28.7
186
3,579
36
3,535
11.0
3,556
1,077

17
P3436.1
22990 22992
20
6.33
29.3
182
3,554
32
3,536
8.3
3,545
1,007

CD

Break
Wet

Tensile
SAT
SAT

Modulus
Extracted
Wipe
Wipe

Wet/Dry
Capacity
Rate
SAT
GM
Lint
Dry
Dry

Unitless
g/m²
g/s^0.5
Times
g/%
%
Tops
Bottoms

1

0.25
395
0.27
20
212
0.25
19
32

2

0.30
440
0.33
17
283
0.22
23
34

3

0.52
438
0.09
105
280
0.09
9
9

4

0.50
446
0.11
74
278
0.11
12
10

5

0.45
468
0.12
69
300
0.19
12
11

6

0.43
418
0.14
42
267
0.17
10
9

7

0.47
439
0.10
104
230
0.21
11
9

8

0.41
415
0.10
79
210
0.10
9
8

9

0.39
409
0.11
79
288
0.28
13
13

10

0.41
459
0.16
42
245
0.28
23
11

11

0.42
393
0.10
78
235
0.09
9
7

12

0.44
451
0.12
69
194
0.10
9
10

13

0.41
411
0.10
79
251
0.25
10
13

14

0.30
395
0.07
133
154
0.14
5
5

15

0.36
430
0.21
25
276
0.21
25
17

16

0.30
391
0.09
77
178
0.13
9
9

17

0.29
353
0.14
37
216
0.39
15
18

Details as to base-sheet properties and converted two-ply wiper properties appear in Tables 7 and 8. From Table 8, it can be appreciated that the addition of even 20% CMF significantly improves the wipe dry characteristics of the sheets. See lines 15 and 17 in comparison to lines 1 and 2, while improvement in wipe dry starts leveling out with the addition of 40% CMF. Compare line 16 with lines 3, 4 and 7. As is shown in line 14, however, the best overall results for wipe dry and softness were obtained with 60% CMF.

Referring to FIG. 2, it is seen that the two-ply products of the invention exhibit wipe dry and wet tensile that is far superior to that achieved with the conventional towel. As illustrated in FIGS. 10, 11, and 12, it appears that faster wipe dry times may be at least partially attributable to the micropore structure of the sheets formed. In FIG. 10, it can be seen that as CMF is increased, the number of pores less than 5 microns also increases, while the curves for products with 40 or 60% CMF are essentially similar, again, suggesting that only diminishing benefit is obtained beyond 40% CMF. This hypothesis is consistent with that shown in FIG. 10, showing that 20% CMF significantly improves wipe dry, but the effect levels off above 40% CMF. Preferred wiper towel products exhibit a differential pore volume for pores under 5 microns having a diameter of at least about 75 mm³/g/micron, more preferably, above about 100 mm³/g/micron, still more preferably, above about 150 mm³g/micron for pores under 2.5 microns.

FIG. 11 suggests that there is a correlation between wipe dry and capillary pressure at 10% saturation, both in advancing and receding mode. FIG. 12 shows increasing capillary pressure at 10% saturation as CMF is increased.

FIG. 13 shows wipe dry as a function of CMF and wet strength. Cellulose microfiber (CMF) was varied between 0 and 60%, and Amres® wet strength resin was either 12 lb/ton or 40 lb/ton. Carboxymethycellulose (CMC) was added at the higher wet strength dosage to balance charge. The non-CMF portion of the furnish was NBSWK refined at a constant net specific horsepower, so that strength changes can be primarily attributed to CMF and resin rather than NBSK refining level. The two curves at roughly constant wet tensile define three planes comprising a 3-D surface on which wipe dry time beneficially decreases as the amount of CMF in the sheet is increased, indicating that wipe dry times of under 10 seconds can be obtained with 40% CMF in the sheet. The surface in FIG. 13 can be described by Equation 1:

Wipe Dry=22.1−0.662·CMF+0.00495·CMF²+0.00493·Wet Tensile Equation (1):
R²=0.99

FIG. 3 shows the impact of CMF and wet tensile on softness, CMF has a

positive impact, while increasing wet tensile strength reduces softness. The surface in FIG. 3 can be described by Equation 2:

Softness=7.90+0.0348 CMF−0.00223 Wet Tensile Equation (2):
R²=0.99

FIGS. 2, 14, and 15 illustrate the results of analyses of towels and wipers produced in Example 1, and include retail towel data for comparison. Surprisingly, the inventive product has higher wet tensile at a given softness level than Brawny® towels or Sparkle® towels.

FIGS. 16 and 17 show that wipers with 40% or 60% CMF have very fast-wipe dry times, while also having good capacity. FIG. 16 used SAT data, while FIG. 17 used the old water holding capacity test (withdrawn ASTM Standard Method D-4250-92, Standard Method tor Water-Holding Capacity of Bibulous Fibrous Products). The general pattern of performance is similar with either test.

FIG. 18 illustrates the counter-intuitive and surprising result that, as CMF is increased, we have found that, even though SAT Rate decreases, wipe dry times decrease.

FIG. 19 illustrates the effect that CMF has upon the wipe dry times at various levels of die wet strength resins Amres® and CMC. It appears that increasing the amount of resin in the outer layers increases the wipe dry times.

FIG. 20 shows wet extracted lint for .finished product. CMF typically reduces lint at a variety of levels of CMF and wet strength resins. It can be appreciated that linting generally decreases as the amount of CMF is increased, except that the wet extracted lint generally hovered between 0.20 and 0.25 with the Amres® containing sheets for ail levels of CMF.

FIG. 21 shows that any softness benefit from calendering is obtained at a significant cost with respect to lost caliper and absorbency. In one case, a calendered, embossed ply was matched with an unembossed ply for no softness benefit and 12 mil drop in caliper. In another case, a product with two calendered plies had a 0.4 point softness increase, while dropping 35 mils of caliper (see FIG. 21) and 50 gsm SAT. In our experience with softness panels for towel products, a gain of 0.32 points of softness is enough that one product, having a softness panel score 0.32 units greater than another, would be perceived as being noticeably softer, consistently, at the 90% confidence level.

FIG. 22 illustrates the dependence of CD Wet Tensile Strength on both resin addition and CMF. The ratio is higher with CMF at a given resin dose, but the highest ratios are achieved at high CMF and high resin levels.

CMF makes the sheet more difficult to dewater compactively, as the tendency of the sheet to extrude itself out of the pressing nip increases as the CMF content is increased. Oftentimes, this is referred to as sheet crushing. When attempting to dewater a nascent web containing increasing amounts of CMF, the Visconip pressure had to be progressively reduced to prevent sheet crushing at the nip as the level of CMF in the sheet was increased (See FIG. 23). Even though increasing the proportion of CMF in a sheet increases the bulk attainable with a given basis weight (FIG. 24), the reduction in the pressing load that the sheet will sustain results in a wetter sheet going forward, which normally entails much higher expenses for drying energy.

FIG. 33 presents SAT Capacity and wipe dry times for both black glass and stainless steel surfaces for the wipers as shown in Example 2.

FIG. 34 is an SEM section (75×) along the machine direction (MD) of perforated polymeric belt creped basesheet 600, showing a domed area corresponding to a belt perforation as well as the densified pileated structure of the sheet. It is seen in FIG. 34 that the domed regions, such as region 640, have a “hollow” or domed structure with inclined and at least partially densified sidewall areas, while surround areas 618, 620 are densified, but less so than transition areas. Sidewall areas 658, 660 are inflected upwardly and inwardly, and are so highly densified as to become consolidated, especially, about the base of the dome. It is believed that these regions contribute to the very high caliper and roll firmness observed. The consolidated sidewall areas form transition areas from the densified fibrous, planar network between the domes to the domed features of the sheet and form distinct regions that may extend completely around and circumscribe the domes at their bases, or may be densified in a horseshoe or bowed shape only around part of the bases of the domes. At least portions of the transition areas are consolidated and also inflected upwardly and inwardly.

FIG. 35 is another SEM (120×) along the MD of basesheet 600 showing region 640, as well as consolidated sidewall areas 658 and 660. It is seen in this SEM that the cap 662 is fiber-enriched, of a relatively high basis weight as compared with areas 618, 620, 658, 660, CD fiber orientation bias is also apparent in the sidewalls and dome.

FIG. 36 is an SEM section (120×) along the machine direction (MD) of basesheet 700, in which consolidated sidewall areas 758, 760 are densified and are inflected inwardly and upwardly.

Example 2
Fabric Creping

Basesheets having the properties set forth in Table 9 were made using fabric

creping technology in which the nascent webs were creped from a creping cylinder using a woven creping fabric. These basesheets were converted to finished product towels by embossing one ply with the emboss pattern shown in FIG. 26 (Patches) and glue laminating it to an unembossed ply, as set forth in Tables 9 and 10.

TABLE 9

FRFC/CMF Basesheet Data, (fabric creped) Basesheet Properties

CD Wet

Tensile
CD
CD Wet

8 Sheet
Basis
MD
MD
CD
CD
Tens Finch

GM Break
Ratio
Tensile
Breaking

Emboss-
TL

Caliper
Weight
Tensile
Stretch
Tensile
Stretch
Cured-
GM Tensile
Modulus
Dry
Wet/Dry
length,
Specific Bulk

Cell
ply
2008-1905
Description
Furnish
mils/8 sht
lb/3000 ft²
g3 in.
%
g3 in.
%
g3 in.
g3 in.
gms/%
%
Unitless
m
cc/g

1
x
14-1
19721 229
50/50 M/A
85.1
15.3
1754
26.4
1638
5.5
587
1693
142
1.07
0.36
310
10.9

15-1
19723 239
50/50 M/A
83.2
15.3
1695
23.3
1527
5.8
521
1607
140
1.11
0.34
274
10.6

15 lb/ream Control Average (Calendered)
84.1
15.3
1,724
24.9
1,582
5.6
554
1,650
141
1.09
0.35
292
10.7

2

22-1
19731 1008
50/50 M/A
82.1
11.7
1745
19.8
1454
5.5
504
1590
157
1.21
0.35
346
13.7

x
24-1
19733 1030
50/50 M/A
77.1
11.6
2054
20.8
1338
5.1
520
1657
164
1.54
0.39
361
13.0

12 lb/ream Control Average (Uncalendered)
79.6
11.7
1,899
20.3
1,396
5.3
512
1,624
160
1.37
0.37
354
13.3

3
x
29-1
19738 1140
50/50
95.5
12.6
2059
30.9
1604
6.7
831
1816
126
1.29
0.52
530
14.7

M/MCF

30-1
19739 1154
50/50
94.8
12.6
1972
30.6
1526
7.4
699
1734
116
1.30
0.46
446
14.6

M/CMF

12 lb/ream Microfiber Average (Uncalendered)
95.1
12.6
2,016
30.8
1,565
7.0
765
1,775
121
1.29
0.49
488
14.7

4

36-1
19755 155
50/50
110.4
14.5
2791
33.6
2298
7.2
1,075
2532
14.6
1.21
0.47
599
14.9

M/CMF

x
37-1
19756 205
50/50
114.6
13.6
2429
37.4
2160
7.2
1,129
2290
14.7
1.13
0.52
670
16.5

M/CMF

12 lb/ream Microfiber Average (Uncal, higher FC)
112.5
14.0
2,610
36.7
1,437
8.8
621
1,442
81
1.01
0.43
507
20.9

5
x
37-1
19756 205
50/50
114.6
13.6
2429
37.4
2160
7.2
1,129
2290
141
1.13
0.52
670
16.5

M/CMF

38-1
19757 216
50/50
105.7
9.9
1,449
36.7
1,437
8.8
621
1,442
81
1.01
0.43
507
20.9

M/CMF

10 lb/ream Microfiber (Uncal, higher FC)

6

38-1
19757 216
50/50
105.7
9.9
1,449
36.7
1,437
8.8
621
1,442
81
1.01
0.43
507
20.9

M/CMF

x
43-1
19762 310
50/50
59.4
9.9
1,612
27.1
1,362
8.0
768
1,482
102
1.18
0.56
623
11.7

CMF

10 lb/ream Microfiber (Calendered)

7
x
41-1
19760 248
50/50
94.8
10.2
1796
31.2
1550
8.1
791
1668
105.2
1.16
0.51
625
18.2

M/CMF

42-1
19761 300
50/50
93.2
10.3
1921
29.3
1451
7.8
802
1669
111.1
1.32
0.55
628
17.6

M/CMF

10 lb/ream Microfiber Average (Uncalendered)
94.0
10.2
1859
30.2
1501
7.9
797
1669
108
1.24
0.53
626
17.9

M = Northern SW Kraft;

A = Aracruz Eucalyptus Kraft

TABLE 10

Base Sheet Assignment and Estimated Finished Product Physical Properties

CD Wet

Roll
Tensile

Emboss
Basesheet
Sheet
Caliper
Diameter
(“Finch Cup”)
Emboss

cell
Ply
Roll #
Count
(mils/8 sheets)
(inches)
(g/3 in.)
Penetration

1
x
19721
48
248 ± 5
5.0 ± 0.1
500
65

19723

2
x
19731
48
float
float
500
65

19733

3
x
19738
48
float
float
750
65

19739

4A
x
19755
48
float
float
1100
65

19756

4B
x
19755
48
max
>5.0
>1100
60

19756

5A
x
19756
48
float
float
850
65

19757

5B
x
19756
48
max
>5.0
>850
60

19757

6A
x
19757
48
float
float
700
65

19762

6B
x
19757
48
float
float
700
60

19762

7A
x
19760
48
float
float
800
65

19761

7B
x
19760
48
float
float
800
60

19761

7C
x
19760
48
float
float
800
55

19761

When tested tor physical properties, the results set forth in Table 11 were obtained. Subsequently, other rolls of basesheet were converted using the emboss design shown in FIG. 25A (Little Circles) in a point to point mode, i.e., registered debosses were formed in the outer surface of each ply with the depths of the debossed regions in each ply being pressed so forcefully against the debossed regions in die other, that the plies are thereby bonded to each other. In some cases, the contact regions between the plies may be glassined. When Little Circles is used in point to point mode both surfaces show the pattern of FIG. 25A. In cases when a nested mode is used, one surface bears the pattern of FIG. 25A, while the other bears the pattern of FIG. 25B. The physicals of the rolls thereby formed are set forth in Table 11 and the preliminary evaluation of performance is set forth in Table 12.

TABLE 11

Appendix 1. Properties of Rolls Converted with THVS Emboss in THVS Mode

1
2
3
4A
4B
5A
5B
6A
6B
7A
7B
7C

Cell ID
50/50
50/50

Furnish
M/Aracruz
M/CMF

Basis Weight (lb/3000 ft²)
29.0
23.0
24.4
27.2
26.2
22.0
22.1
19.5
19.4
19.5
19.6
19.6

Caliper (mils/8 sheet)
200
180
199
230
214
207
200
175
165
176
173
169

MD Tensile (g/3 in.)
2539
2487
3599
5713
6007
3638
3856
2554
3051
3539
3680
3971

MD Stretch (%)
19.2
15.6
21.1
25.1
26.3
24.1
24.6
20.9
21.1
21.1
21.1
21.2

CD Tensile (g/3 in.)
2317
1974
2473
3739
3738
2828
3113
2332
2619
2598
2702
2983

CD Stretch (%)
5.4
5.4
7.3
6.9
7.6
8.3
8.3
8.3
8.3
8.0
7.9
8.2

GM Tensile (g/3 in.)
2423
2215
2982
4620
4736
3206
3464
2438
2824
3031
3152
3441

CD Wet Tensile - Finch (g/3 in.)
670
676
1048
1749
1683
1278
1418
1095
1141
1162
1263
1343

CD Tensile Wet/Dry (Unitless)
0.29
0.34
0.42
0.47
0.45
0.45
0.46
0.47
0.44
0.45
0.47
0.45

SAT Capacity (g/m²)
469
399
447
497
476
460
456
408
413
424
411
416

GM Break Modulus (g/%)
242.4
241.9
239.7
346.3
330.3
223.9
246.4
187.2
211.4
235.2
246.0
263.1

GM Modulus (g/% Stretch)
42.0
46.3
37.3
44.8
40.6
34.2
33.8
34.3
34.7
34.9
35.9
36.1

Roll Diameter (in)
4.98
4.78
4.82
5.25
4.89
4.81
4.77
4.55
4.35
4.67
4.63
4.34

Roll Compress Value (%)
19.7
20.4
16.5
20.9
16.4
15.7
14.5
14.6
14.3
16.5
17.2
13.5

Seasory Softness
8.19
6.76
6.19
4.30
4.52
5.54
5.26
7.35
6.94
5.75
5.47
5.12

Wet Extracted Lint (%)
0.069
0.050
0.063
0.076
0.080
0.062
0.069
0.055
0.063
0.048
0.048
0.050

Wipe Dry
Top
17
26
14
13
15
15
14
15
13
14
17
18

(Black Glass)
Bottom
16
28
12
15
13
17
20
19
18
16
20
20

(s)
Average
16
27
13
14
14
16
17
17
15
15
18
19

Wipe Dry
Top
18
26
14
16
16
22
20
24
21
25
28
21

(Stainless Steel)
Bottom
20
22
15
13
15
14
18
18
19
21
27
23

(s)
Average
20
22
15
13
15
14
18
18
19
21
27
23

Wet Lint (Pigskin) - FQA Fiber
1601
808
786
884
814
631
829
676
577
572
616
594

Count (Number)

TABLE 11

(Continued) Properties of Rolls Converted with Little Circles Emboss in Point to Point Mode

4C
4D
4E
7D
7E
7F

Cell ID
50/50

Furnish
M/CMF

Basis Weight (lb/3000 ft²)
24.8
25.9
25.9
18.2
18.3
18.6

Caliper (mils/8 sheet)
278
234
211
234
224
168

MD Tensile (g/3 in.)
5188
5555
6413
2749
3308
4242

MD Stretch (%)
18.0
17.9
20.3
13.2
14.3
15.7

CD Tensile (g/3 in.)
2952
3589
4203
1725
2065
2934

CD Stretch (%)
10.0
9.4
8.3
10.0
9.7
8.7

GM Tensile (g/3 in.)
3913
4460
5191
2174
2612
3527

CD Wet Tensile - Finch (g/3 in.)
1389
1591
1865
780
974
1349

CD Tensile Wet/Dry (Unitless)
0.47
0.44
0.44
0.45
0.47
0.46

SAT Capacity (g/m²)
406
379
405
349
345
342

GM Break Modulus (g/%)
289.6
341.4
401.6
188.5
224.5
300.1

GM Modulus (g/% Stretch)
39.1
46.0
48.8
31.2
33.8
44.2

Roll Diameter (in)
5.52
5.10
4.88
5.32
5.17
4.52

Roll Compress Value (%)
14.2
13.3
15.2
16.4
16.1
15.1

Seasory Softness
5.17
4.51
3.92
7.48
6.85
5.83

Wet Extracted Lint (%)
0.057
0.082
0.075
0.050
0.052
0.056

Wipe Dry
Top
12
12
14
10
16
16

(Black Glass)
Bottom
17
11
10
17
17
17

(s)
Average
14
11
12
14
16
17

Wipe Dry
Top
15
12
10
17
17
17

(Stainless Steel)
Bottom
12
12
14
10
16
16

(s)
Average
12
12
14
10
16
16

Wet Lint (Pigskin) - FQA Fiber
561
902
726
679
600
689

Count (Number)

TABLE 12

Wipe Dry Data using Wiper Test Method (Single Sheet) (Preliminary Results)

Cell ID
1
2
3
4A
4B
5A
5B
6A
6B
7A
4C
4D
4E
7D
7E
7F
4C
4D

50/50
50/50

Furnish
M/Aracruz
M/CMF

Basis Weight
29.0
23.0
24.4
27.2
26.2
22.0
22.1
19.5
19.4
19.5
24.8
25.9
25.9
18.2
18.3
18.6
24.8
25.9

(lb/3000 ft²)

Caliper
200
180
199
230
214
207
200
175
165
176
278
234
211
234
224
168
278
234

(mils/8 sheet)

SAT Capacity
469
399
447
497
476
460
456
408
413
424
406
379
405
349
345
342
406
379

(g/m²)

Wipe Dry
Top

92
64
95
133
134
131
123
110
231
115
155
137
165
114
231
115

(Black Glass)
Bottom
59
109
73
113
101
113
133
95
87
222
139
109
129
140
114
222
139

(s)
Average
59
101
68
104
117
123
132
109
99
227
127
132
133
152
114
227
127

Wipe Dry
Top
41
64
50
71
59
76
79
69
68
104
69
58
120
78
61
104
69

(Stainless Steel)
Bottom
43
63
56
49
71
88
81
67
76
78
70
82
134
80
66
78
70

(s)
Average
43
63
56
49
71
88
81
67
76
78
70
82
134
80
66
78
70

By comparing FIGS. 1G, 1J, and 1L, of structures formed by creping from a transfer surface with a perforated polymeric belt, with micrographs of CMF containing structures formed by a variety of other methods, including creping from a transfer surface with a woven fabric, conventional wet pressing, and through-air drying (TAD), it can be appreciated that structures formed by creping from a transfer surface with a perforated polymeric belt exhibit “venation” in some regions in which the CMF fibrils are tightly adhered to an underlying consolidated structure with line contact between the CMF and the underlying consolidated structure. This venation resembles the vein that can be seen in the undersurface of a leaf and contrasts strongly with the structure formed by the other methods, in which the CMF is part of an open structure more closely resembling ivy growing on a wail than the veins on a leaf As mentioned previously, without being bound by theory, it is hypothesized that this line surface contact may create micropores that are responsible for the remarkable wipe dry properties of these structures as discussed above. In any event, the superior wipe dry properties of the sheets formed using the perforated polymeric belt and exhibiting venation are undeniable—no matter what the explanation.

FIG. 37 compares the results of Examples 1 and 2 on a normalized basis obtained by dividing the wipe dry time for each cell by the best wipe dry time obtained with a 0% CMF in each of Examples 1 and 2, then plotting these against the CD wet tensile of the wiper in that cell with the fabric creped sheets being indicated by solid symbols, and the samples obtained by creping with a perforated polymeric belt being indicated by hollow symbols in accordance with the legend. It can be appreciated that there is quite a substantial difference between the wipers obtained using the fabric and those using the perforated polymeric belt, particularly, when it is considered that the fabric creped samples indicated, by the solid circle contain 50% CMF, while many of the belt creped samples contain far less CMF, the hollow diamonds indicating the presence of 40% CMF and the hollow squares indicating only 20%.

FIG. 38 compares the results of Examples 1 and 2 without normalization of the wipe dry times so that the wipe dry times are compared directly. Again, it can be appreciated that the wipers produced with the perforated polymeric belt are far superior to those produced with a fabric, particularly, when differences in CMF content are considered,

FIG. 39 shows the wipe dry times from Example 1 plotted against the ratio of PAE adhesive to quaternary ammonia salt based release agent in die creping package. It can be appreciated that wipe dry times suffer at low values of this ratio (high levels of quaternary ammonia salt release agent). Therefore, in those cases when, as is common, the outer surface of the wiper is the Yankee side, care should be exercised to ensure that the level of quaternary ammonium salt retained on the surface of the web is sufficiently low that the wipe dry time is not increased unduly. In the present case, this point is primarily important as being the most likely reason why a few of the wipers with 40% CMF exhibited anomalously high wipe dry times as shown in FIGS. 37 and 38.

While the invention has been described in detail, modifications within the spirit and scope of the invention will be readily apparent to those of skill in the art. In view of the foregoing discussion, relevant knowledge in the art and references including the copending applications discussed above in connection with the Background and Detailed Description, the disclosures of which are all incorporated herein by reference, further description is deemed unnecessary. In addition, it should be understood that aspects of the invention and portions of various embodiments may be combined or interchanged either in whole or in part. Furthermore, those of ordinary skill in the art will appreciate that the foregoing description is by way of example only, and is not intended to limit the invention.

Claims

1. A method of making a multi-ply wiper/towel product, the method comprising: (a) compactively dewatering a nascent web comprising atleast about 10% fibrillated regenerated cellulosie microfibers and having an apparently random distribution of fibers;(b) applying the dewatered web having the apparently random distribution of fibers to a transfer surface;(c) belt-creping the web from the transfer surface utilizing a generally planar polymeric creping belt provided with a plurality of perforations through the belt, the belt-creping step occurring under pressure in a belt creping nip defined between the transfer surface and the creping belt;(d) drying the web to form a dried web having: (i) a plurality of fiber-enriched hollow domed regions protruding from an upper side of the dried web, the hollow domed regions having respective sidewalls of a relatively high local basis weight formed along at least a leading edge thereof;(ii) connecting regions of a relatively lower local basis weight forming a network interconnecting the hollow domed regions of the dried web; and(iii) transition area with consolidated fibrous regions that transition from the connecting regions into the hollow domed regions, by extending upwardly and inwardly from the connecting regions into the respective sidewalls of the hollow domed regions; and(e) converting said dried web into a multi-ply wiper/towel.
2. The method according to claim 1, wherein the nascent web comprises at least about 40% wood pulp derived papermaking fibers.
3. The method according to claim 1, wheren the nascent web comprises from about 10% to about 60% of the fibrillated regenerated cellulosic microfibers.
4. The method according to claim 3, wherein the nascent web comprises a least about 40% wood pulp derived papermaking fibers.
5. The method according to claim 1, further comprising applying a vacuum to the creping belt while the web is held on the belt.
6. The method according to claim 1, wherein the creping belt has a non-random pattern of perforations.
7. The method according to claim 6, wherein the non-random pattern of perforations is staggered.
8. The method according to claim 1, wherein the perforations of the creping belt include tapered perforations, the tapered perforations having openings on a creping side of the belt that are larger than their openings on a machine side of the belt.
9. The method according to claim 8, wherein the creping belt defines raised lips around the openings of the perforations on the creping side of the belt.
10. The method according to claim 9, wherein the raised lips have a height from the surrounding areas of the belt of from about 10% to about 30% of the belt thickness.
11. The method according to claim 1, wherein the perforations of the creping belt have oval-shaped openings with major axes aligned in the cross-machine direction.
12. The method according to claim 1, wherein the creping belt has a thickness of from 0.2 mm to 1.5 mm.
13. The method according to claim 1, wherein the creping belt is of a generally unitary construction made from a polymer sheet selected from one of a solid polymer sheet, a reinforced polymer sheet, and a filled polymer sheet.
14. The method according to claim 1, wherein the creping belt is made from a monolithic polyester sheet by way of laser drilling.
15. A method of making a multi-ply wiper/towel product, the method comprising: (a) compactively dewatering a nascent web comprising at least about 10% fibrillated regenerated cellulosic microfibers and having on apparently random distribution of fibers;(b) applying the dewatered web having the apparently random distribution of fibers to a transfer surface;(c) belt-creping the web from the transfer surface utilizing a generally planar polymeric creping belt provided with a plurality perforations through the belt, the belt-creping step occurring under pressure in a belt creping nip defined between the transfer surface and the creping belt;(d) drying the web to from a dried web having: (i) a plurality fiber-enriched regions including (A) hollow domed portions having respective sidewalls of a relatively high local basis weight formed along at least a leading edge thereof and (B) pileated fiber-enriched portions with a cross machine direction (CD) fiber orientation bias adjacent to the hollow domed portions, the fiber-enriched portions being interconnected with;(ii) connecting regions of a relatively lower local basis weight,wherein the hollow domed portions have upwardly projecting densified sidewalls, at least a portion of each of the upwardly projecting densified sidewalls comprising a densified region that extends inwardly; and(e) converting said dried web into a multi-ply wiper/towel.
16. The method according to claim 15 wherein the nascent web comprises at least about 40% wood pulp derived papermaking fibers.
17. The method according to claim 15, wherein the nascent web comprises from about 10% to about 60% of the fibrillated regenerated cellulosic microfibers.
18. The Method according to claim 17, wherein the nascent web comprises at least about 40% wood pulp derived papermaking fibers.
19. The method according to claim 15, further comprising applying a vacuum to the creping belt while the web is held on the belt.
20. The method according to claim 15, wherein the creping belt has a non-random pattern of perforations.
21. The method according to claim 20, wherein the non-random pattern of perforations is staggered.
22. The method according to claim 15, wherein the perforations of the creping belt include tapered perforations, the tapered perforations having openings on a creping side of the belt that are larger than their openings on a machine side of the belt.
23. The method according to claim 22, wherein the creping belt defines raised lips around the openings of the perforations on the creping side of the belt.
24. The method according to claim 23, wherein the raised lips have a height from the surrounding areas of the belt of from about 10% to about 30% of the belt thickness.
25. The method according to claim 15, wherein the perforations of the creping belt have oval-shaped openings with major axes aligned in the cross-machine direction.
26. The method according to ciaim 15, wherein the creping belt has a thickness of from 0.2 mm to 1.5 mm.
27. The method according to claim 15, wherein the creping belt is of a generally unitary construction made from a polymer sheet selected from one of a solid polymer sheet, a reinforced polymer sheet, and a filled polymer sheet.
28. The method according to claim 15, wherein the creping belt is made from a monolithic polyester sheet by way of laser drilling.
29. A method of making a multi-ply wiper/towel product, the method comprising: (a) compactively dewatering a nascent web comprising at least about 10% fibrillated regenerated cellulosic microfibers and having an apparently random distribution of fibers;(b) applying the dewatered web having the apparently random distribution of fibers to a transfer surface;(c) belt-creping the web from the transfer surface utilizing a generally planar polymeric creping belt provided with a plurality of perforations through the belt, the belt-creping step occurring under pressure in a belt creping nip defined between the transfer surface and the creping belt;(d) drying the web to form a dried web having upper and lower surfaces and comprising: (i) a plurality of fiber-enriched hollow domed regions protruding from the upper surface of the dried web, the hollow domed regions having respective sidewalls of a relatively high local basis weight formed along at least a leading edge thereof;(ii) connecting regions of a relatively lower local basis weight forming a network interconnecting the fiber-enriched hollow domed regions of the dried web; and(iii) consolidated groupings of fibers extending upwardly from the connecting regions into the respective sidewalls of the fiber-enriched hollow domed regions; and(e) converting said dried web into a multi-ply wiper/towel.
30. The method according to claim 29, wherein the nascent web comprises at least about 40% wood pulp derived papermaking fibers.
31. The method according to claim 29, wherein the nascent web comprises from about 10% to about 60% fibrillated regenerated cellulosic microfibers.
32. The method according to claim 31, wherein the nascent web comprises at least about 40% wood pulp derived papermaking fibers.
33. The method according to claim 29, further comprising applying a vacuum to the creping belt while the web is held on the belt.
34. The method according to claim 29, wherein the creping belt has a non-random pattern of perforations.
35. The method according to claim 34, wherein the non-random pattern of perforations is staggered.
36. The method according to claim 29, wherein the perforations of the creping belt include tapered perforations, the tapered perforations having openings on a creping side of the belt that are larger than their openings on a machine side of the belt.
37. The method according to claim 36, wherein the creping belt defines raised lips around the opening of the perforation on the creping side of the belt.
38. The method according to claim 37, wherein the raised lips have a height from the surrounding areas of the belt of from about 10% to 30% of the belt thickness.
39. The method according to claim 29, wherein the perforations of the creping belt have oval-shaped openings with major axes aligned in the cross-machine direction.
40. The method according to claim 29, wherein the creping belt has a thickness of from 0.2 mm to 1.5 mm.
41. The method according to claim 29, wherein the creping belt is of a generally unitary construction made from a polymer sheet selected from one of a solid polymer sheet, a reinforced polymer sheet, and a filled polymer sheet.
42. The method according to claim 29, wherein the creping belt is made from a monolithic polyester sheet by way of laser drilling.
43. A method of making a multi-ply wiper/towel product, the method comprising: (a) compactively dewatering a nascent web comprising at least about 10% fibrillated regenerated cellulosic microfibers and having an apparently random distribution of fibers;(b) applying the dewatered web having the apparently random distribution of fibers to a transfer surface;(c) belt-creping the web from the transfer surface utilizing a generally planar polymeric creping belt provided with a plurality of perforations through the belt, the belt-creping step occurring under pressure in a belt creping nip defined between the transfer surface and the creping belt;(d) drying the web to form a dried web comprising: (i) a plurality of fiber-enriched regions including (A) hollow domed portions having respective sidewalls of a relatively high local basis weight formed along at least a leading edge thereof, the hollow domed portions having upwardly projecting densified sidewalls, at least a portion of each of the upwardly projecting densified sidewalls comprising a densified region that extends inwardly, and (B) pileated fiber-enriched portions with a cross machine direction (CD) fiber orientation bias adjacent to the hollow domed portions, the fiber-enriched portions being interconnected with:(ii) connecting regions of a relatively lower local basis weight; and(e) converting said dried web into a multi-ply wiper/towel.
44. The method according to claim 43, wherein the nascent web comprises at least about 40% wood pulp derived papermaking fibers.
45. The method according to claim 43, wherein the nascent web comprises from about 10% to about 60% fibrillated regenerated cellulosic microfibers.
46. The method according to claim 45, wherein the nascent web comprises at least about 40% wood pulp derived papermaking fibers.
47. The method according to claim 43, further comprising applying a vacuum to the creping belt while the web is held on the belt.
48. The method according to claim 43, wherein the creping belt has a non-random pattern of perforations.
49. The method according to claim 48, wherein the non-random pattern of perforations is staggered.
50. The method according to claim 43, wherein the perforations of the creping belt include tapered perforations, the tapered perforations having openings on a creping side of the belt that are larger than their openings on a machine side of the belt.
51. The method according to claim 50, wherein the creping belt defines raised lips around the openings of the perforations on the creping side of the belt.
52. The method according to claim 51, wherein the raised lips have a height from the surrounding areas of the belt of from about 10% to 30% of the belt thickness.
53. The method according to claim 43, wherein perforations of the creping belt have oval-shaped openings with major axes aligned in the cross-machine direction.
54. The method according to claim 43, wherein the creping belt has a thickness of from 0.2 mm to 1.5 mm.
55. The method according to claim 43, wherein the creping belt is of a generally unitary construction made from a polymer sheet selected from one of a solid polymer sheet, a reinforced polymer sheet, and a filled polymer sheet.
56. The method according to claim 43, wherein the creping belt is made from a monolithic polyester sheet by way of laser drilling.
57. A method of making a multi-ply wiper/towel product, the method comprising: (a) compactively dewatering a nascent web comprising at least about 10% fibrillated regenerated cellulosic microfibers and having an apparently random distribution of fibers;(b) applying the dewatered web having the apparently random distribution of fibers to a transfer surface;(c) belt-creping the web from the transfer surface utilizing a generally planar polymeric creping belt provided with a plurality of perforations through the belt, the bell-creping step occurring under pressure in a bolt creping nip defined between the transfer surface and the creping belt;(d) drying the web to form a dried web having upper and lower surfaces and comprising: (i) a plurality of fiber-enriched hollow domed regions protruding from the upper surface of the dried web, the hollow domed regions having respective sidewall of a relatively high local basis weight formed along at least a leading edge thereof; and(ii) connecting regions of a relatively lower local basis weight forming a network interconnecting the fiber-enriched hollow domed regions of the dried web; and(e) converting said dried web into a multi-ply wiper/towel.
58. The method according to claim 57, wherein the nascent web comprises at least about 40% wood pulp derived papermaking fibers.
59. The method according to claim 57, wherein the nascent web comprises from about 10% to about 60% fibrillated regenerated cellulosic microfibers.
60. The method according to claim 59, wherein the nascent web comprises at least about 40% wood pulp derived papermaking fibers.
61. The method according to claim 57, further comprising applying a vacuum to the creping belt while the web is held on the belt.
62. The method according to claim 57, wherein the creping belt has a non-random pattern of perforations.
63. The method according to claim 62, wherein the non-random pattern of perforations is staggered.
64. The method according to claim 57, wherein the perforations of the creping belt include tapered perforations, the tapered perforations having openings on a creping side of the belt that are larger than their openings on a machine side of the belt.
65. The method according to claim 64, wherein the creping belt defines raised lips around the openings of the perforations on the creping side of the belt.
66. The method according to claim 65, wherein the raised lips have a height from the surrounding areas of the belt of from about 10% to 30% of the belt thickness.
67. The method according to claim 57, wherein perforations of the creping belt have oval-shaped openings with major axes aligned in the cross-machine direction.
68. The method according to claim 57, wherein the creping belt has a thickness of from 0.2 mm to 1.5 mm.
69. The method according to claim 57, wherein the creping belt is of a generally unitary construction made from a polymer sheet selected from one of a solid polymer sheet, a reinforced polymer sheet, and a filled polymer sheet.
70. The method according to claim 57, wherein the creping belt is made from a monolithic polyester sheet by way of laser drilling.

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS AND INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE

This application is a continuation application of copending U.S. patent application Ser. No. 13/137,216, filed on Jul. 28, 2011, published on Jan. 26, 2012, as U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2012/0021178, now U.S. Pat. No. 8,540,846, which is a continuation in part of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/694,650, filed Jan. 27, 2010, U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2010/0186913, entitled “Belt-Creped, Variable Local Basis Weight Absorbent Sheet Prepared With Perforated Polymeric Belt”, published Jul. 29, 2010, now U.S. Pat. No. 8.293,072, which was based upon U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 61/206,146, filed Jan. 28, 2009, the right of priority of the foregoing being hereby claimed. All of the foregoing applications are incorporated herein by reference. This application relates to the subject matter of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2009/0020139, published Jan. 22, 2009, based on U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/284,148, filed Sep. 17, 2008, now U.S. Pat. No. 8,187,422, entitled “High Efficiency Disposable Cellulosic Wiper”. This application also relates to the subject matter of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2009/0020248, published Jan. 22, 2009, based on U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/284,147, also filed Sep. 17, 2008, now U.S. Pat. No. 8,187,421, entitled “Absorbent Sheet Incorporating Regenerated Cellulose Microfiber”. Both U.S. patent application Ser. Nos. 12/284,148 and 12/284,147 were based, in part, on U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/725,253, filed Mar. 19, 2007, entitled “Absorbent Sheet Having Regenerated Cellulose Microfiber Network”, now U.S. Pat. No. 7,718,036. This application also relates, in part, to the subject matter of the following U.S. Provisional Patent Applications: (1) Provisional Application No. 60/784,228, filed Mar. 21, 2006; (2) Provisional Application No. 60/850,467, filed Oct. 10, 2006; (3) Provisional Application No. 60/850,681, filed Oct. 10, 2006; and (4) Provisional Application No. 60/881,310, filed on Jan. 19, 2007; (5) Provisional Application No, 60/994,344, filed Sep. 19, 2007; and (6) Provisional Application No. 60/994,483, filed Sep. 19, 2007. The disclosures of the foregoing applications are incorporated herein by reference in their entireties.

US Referenced Citations (456)

Number	Name	Date	Kind
1983529	Brandenberger	Dec 1934	A
2025000	Losee	Dec 1935	A
2428046	Sisson et al.	Sep 1947	A
2440761	Sisson et al.	May 1948	A
2459927	Dreyfus et al.	Jan 1949	A
2517764	Carson	Aug 1950	A
2744292	Schlosser et al.	May 1956	A
2785995	Kress	Mar 1957	A
3009822	Drelich et al.	Nov 1961	A
3173830	Wise et al.	Mar 1965	A
3175339	McDowell	Mar 1965	A
3209402	Riley et al.	Oct 1965	A
3337671	Drisch et al.	Aug 1967	A
3382140	Henderson et al.	May 1968	A
3432936	Cole et al.	Mar 1969	A
3475270	Cruz	Oct 1969	A
3508941	Johnson	Apr 1970	A
3692622	Dunning	Sep 1972	A
3785918	Kawai et al.	Jan 1974	A
3926716	Bates	Dec 1975	A
3974025	Ayers	Aug 1976	A
3994771	Morgan, Jr. et al.	Nov 1976	A
4036679	Back et al.	Jul 1977	A
4064213	Lazorisak et al.	Dec 1977	A
4100324	Anderson et al.	Jul 1978	A
4102737	Morton	Jul 1978	A
4125659	Klowak et al.	Nov 1978	A
4145532	Franks et al.	Mar 1979	A
4161195	Khan	Jul 1979	A
4182381	Gisbourne	Jan 1980	A
4184519	McDonald et al.	Jan 1980	A
4196282	Franks et al.	Apr 1980	A
4225382	Kearney et al.	Sep 1980	A
4239065	Trokhan	Dec 1980	A
4246221	McCorsley, III	Jan 1981	A
4307143	Meitner	Dec 1981	A
4314589	Buchanan et al.	Feb 1982	A
4356059	Hostetler	Oct 1982	A
4359069	Hahn	Nov 1982	A
4374702	Turbak et al.	Feb 1983	A
4376455	Hahn	Mar 1983	A
4379735	MacBean	Apr 1983	A
4420372	Hostetler	Dec 1983	A
4426228	Brandner et al.	Jan 1984	A
4426417	Meitner et al.	Jan 1984	A
4436780	Hotchkiss et al.	Mar 1984	A
4440597	Wells et al.	Apr 1984	A
4441962	Osborn, III	Apr 1984	A
4448638	Klowak	May 1984	A
4453573	Thompson	Jun 1984	A
4468428	Early et al.	Aug 1984	A
4481076	Herrick	Nov 1984	A
4481077	Herrick	Nov 1984	A
4482429	Klowak	Nov 1984	A
4483743	Turbak et al.	Nov 1984	A
4490925	Smith	Jan 1985	A
4507173	Klowak et al.	Mar 1985	A
4528239	Trokhan	Jul 1985	A
4528316	Soerens	Jul 1985	A
4529480	Trokhan	Jul 1985	A
4533437	Curran et al.	Aug 1985	A
4543156	Cheshire et al.	Sep 1985	A
4546052	Nicoll	Oct 1985	A
4551199	Weldon	Nov 1985	A
4552709	Koger, II et al.	Nov 1985	A
4556450	Chuang et al.	Dec 1985	A
4592395	Borel	Jun 1986	A
4605585	Johansson	Aug 1986	A
4610743	Salmeen et al.	Sep 1986	A
4611639	Bugge	Sep 1986	A
4614679	Farrington, Jr. et al.	Sep 1986	A
4637859	Trokhan	Jan 1987	A
4640741	Tsuneo	Feb 1987	A
4689119	Weldon	Aug 1987	A
4709732	Kinnunen	Dec 1987	A
4735849	Murakami et al.	Apr 1988	A
4759391	Waldvogel et al.	Jul 1988	A
4759976	Dutt	Jul 1988	A
4795530	Soerens et al.	Jan 1989	A
4802942	Takemura et al.	Feb 1989	A
4834838	Klowak	May 1989	A
4849054	Klowak	Jul 1989	A
4906513	Kebbell et al.	Mar 1990	A
4908097	Box	Mar 1990	A
4931201	Julemont	Jun 1990	A
4942077	Wendt et al.	Jul 1990	A
4973512	Stanley et al.	Nov 1990	A
4987632	Rowe et al.	Jan 1991	A
4998568	Vohringer	Mar 1991	A
5016678	Borel et al.	May 1991	A
5023132	Stanley et al.	Jun 1991	A
5039431	Johnson et al.	Aug 1991	A
5048589	Cook et al.	Sep 1991	A
5054525	Vohringer	Oct 1991	A
5066532	Gaisser	Nov 1991	A
5087324	Awofeso et al.	Feb 1992	A
5098519	Ramasubramanian et al.	Mar 1992	A
5098522	Smurkoski et al.	Mar 1992	A
5103874	Lee	Apr 1992	A
5114777	Gaisser	May 1992	A
5124197	Bernardin et al.	Jun 1992	A
5129988	Farrington, Jr.	Jul 1992	A
5137600	Barnes et al.	Aug 1992	A
5167261	Lee	Dec 1992	A
5182164	Eklund et al.	Jan 1993	A
5199467	Lee	Apr 1993	A
5211815	Ramasubramanian et al.	May 1993	A
5219004	Chiu	Jun 1993	A
5223096	Phan et al.	Jun 1993	A
5225269	Bohlin	Jul 1993	A
5227024	Gomez	Jul 1993	A
5245025	Trokhan et al.	Sep 1993	A
5269470	Ishikawa et al.	Dec 1993	A
5277761	Van Phan et al.	Jan 1994	A
5314584	Grinnell et al.	May 1994	A
5320710	Reeves et al.	Jun 1994	A
5328565	Rasch et al.	Jul 1994	A
5336373	Scattolino et al.	Aug 1994	A
5348620	Hermans et al.	Sep 1994	A
5354524	Sellars et al.	Oct 1994	A
5366785	Sawdai	Nov 1994	A
5368696	Cunnane, III et al.	Nov 1994	A
5372876	Johnson et al.	Dec 1994	A
5379808	Chiu	Jan 1995	A
5385640	Weibel et al.	Jan 1995	A
5411636	Hermans et al.	May 1995	A
5451353	Rezai et al.	Sep 1995	A
5492598	Hermans et al.	Feb 1996	A
5494554	Edwards et al.	Feb 1996	A
5501768	Hermans et al.	Mar 1996	A
5503715	Trokhan et al.	Apr 1996	A
5505818	Hermans et al.	Apr 1996	A
5510001	Hermans et al.	Apr 1996	A
5510002	Hermans et al.	Apr 1996	A
5549790	Van Phan	Aug 1996	A
5556509	Trokhan et al.	Sep 1996	A
5562739	Urben	Oct 1996	A
5580356	Taylor	Dec 1996	A
5582681	Back et al.	Dec 1996	A
5593545	Rugowski et al.	Jan 1997	A
5601871	Krzysik et al.	Feb 1997	A
5607551	Farrington, Jr. et al.	Mar 1997	A
5609725	Van Phan	Mar 1997	A
5614293	Krzysik et al.	Mar 1997	A
5618612	Gstrein	Apr 1997	A
H001672	Hermans et al.	Aug 1997	H
5656132	Farrington, Jr. et al.	Aug 1997	A
5657797	Townley et al.	Aug 1997	A
5667636	Engel et al.	Sep 1997	A
5672248	Wendt et al.	Sep 1997	A
5674590	Anderson et al.	Oct 1997	A
5688468	Lu	Nov 1997	A
5690149	Lee	Nov 1997	A
5695607	Oriaran et al.	Dec 1997	A
5725734	Herman et al.	Mar 1998	A
5725821	Gannon et al.	Mar 1998	A
5746887	Wendt et al.	May 1998	A
5759210	Potter et al.	Jun 1998	A
5759926	Pike et al.	Jun 1998	A
5772845	Farrington, Jr. et al.	Jun 1998	A
5779737	Potter et al.	Jul 1998	A
5814190	Van Phan	Sep 1998	A
5830321	Lindsay et al.	Nov 1998	A
5840403	Trokhan et al.	Nov 1998	A
5840404	Graff	Nov 1998	A
5851353	Fiscus et al.	Dec 1998	A
5858021	Sun et al.	Jan 1999	A
5863652	Matsumura et al.	Jan 1999	A
5865955	Ilvespaa et al.	Feb 1999	A
5866407	Foody et al.	Feb 1999	A
5888347	Engel et al.	Mar 1999	A
5895710	Sasse et al.	Apr 1999	A
5932068	Farrington, Jr. et al.	Aug 1999	A
5935381	Trokhan et al.	Aug 1999	A
5935681	Paulett	Aug 1999	A
5935880	Wang et al.	Aug 1999	A
5958187	Bhat et al.	Sep 1999	A
5964983	Dinand et al.	Oct 1999	A
5968590	Ahonen et al.	Oct 1999	A
6001218	Hsu et al.	Dec 1999	A
6001421	Ahonen et al.	Dec 1999	A
6017417	Wendt et al.	Jan 2000	A
6027611	McFarland et al.	Feb 2000	A
6033523	Dwiggins et al.	Mar 2000	A
6036820	Schiel et al.	Mar 2000	A
6042769	Gannon et al.	Mar 2000	A
6048641	Ohmory et al.	Apr 2000	A
6059928	Van Luu et al.	May 2000	A
6080279	Hada et al.	Jun 2000	A
6083346	Hermans et al.	Jul 2000	A
6093284	Hada et al.	Jul 2000	A
6096169	Hermans et al.	Aug 2000	A
6117525	Trokhan et al.	Sep 2000	A
6117545	Cavaille et al.	Sep 2000	A
6119362	Sundqvist	Sep 2000	A
6136146	Phan et al.	Oct 2000	A
6139686	Trokhan et al.	Oct 2000	A
6143135	Hada et al.	Nov 2000	A
6146499	Lin et al.	Nov 2000	A
6149767	Hermans et al.	Nov 2000	A
6153136	Collier et al.	Nov 2000	A
6162327	Batra et al.	Dec 2000	A
6171442	Farrington, Jr. et al.	Jan 2001	B1
6183596	Matsuda et al.	Feb 2001	B1
6187137	Druecke et al.	Feb 2001	B1
6197154	Chen et al.	Mar 2001	B1
6210528	Wolkowicz	Apr 2001	B1
6214163	Matsuda et al.	Apr 2001	B1
6221487	Luo et al.	Apr 2001	B1
6315864	Anderson et al.	Nov 2001	B2
6318727	Hada	Nov 2001	B1
6331230	Hermans et al.	Dec 2001	B1
6350349	Hermans et al.	Feb 2002	B1
6379496	Edwards et al.	Apr 2002	B2
6381868	Grabscheid et al.	May 2002	B1
6413368	Dwiggins et al.	Jul 2002	B1
6416631	Beck	Jul 2002	B1
6419793	Beck	Jul 2002	B1
6420013	Vinson et al.	Jul 2002	B1
6432267	Watson	Aug 2002	B1
6432270	Liu et al.	Aug 2002	B1
6436234	Chen et al.	Aug 2002	B1
6440547	Luo et al.	Aug 2002	B1
6444314	Luo et al.	Sep 2002	B1
6447640	Watson et al.	Sep 2002	B1
6447641	Wolkowicz et al.	Sep 2002	B1
6454904	Hermans et al.	Sep 2002	B1
6461474	Lindsay et al.	Oct 2002	B1
6464829	Chen et al.	Oct 2002	B1
6471727	Luo et al.	Oct 2002	B2
6478927	Chen et al.	Nov 2002	B1
6491788	Sealey, II et al.	Dec 2002	B2
6497789	Hermans et al.	Dec 2002	B1
6500302	Dwiggins et al.	Dec 2002	B2
6511746	Collier et al.	Jan 2003	B1
6514613	Luo et al.	Feb 2003	B2
6533898	Gross	Mar 2003	B2
6534151	Merker	Mar 2003	B2
6540879	Marinack et al.	Apr 2003	B2
6544912	Tanio et al.	Apr 2003	B1
6547924	Klerelid et al.	Apr 2003	B2
6551461	Hermans et al.	Apr 2003	B2
6558511	Dwiggins et al.	May 2003	B2
6565707	Behnke et al.	May 2003	B2
6573204	Philipp et al.	Jun 2003	B1
6585855	Drew et al.	Jul 2003	B2
6596033	Luo et al.	Jul 2003	B1
6602386	Takeuchi et al.	Aug 2003	B1
6607638	Drew et al.	Aug 2003	B2
6610173	Lindsay et al.	Aug 2003	B1
6624100	Pike	Sep 2003	B1
6645420	Beck	Nov 2003	B1
6645618	Hobbs et al.	Nov 2003	B2
6660362	Linsday et al.	Dec 2003	B1
6669821	Edwards et al.	Dec 2003	B2
6692827	Luo et al.	Feb 2004	B2
6699806	Takeuchi et al.	Mar 2004	B1
6701637	Lindsay et al.	Mar 2004	B2
6706237	Luo et al.	Mar 2004	B2
6706876	Luo et al.	Mar 2004	B2
6709548	Marinack et al.	Mar 2004	B2
6746558	Hoeft et al.	Jun 2004	B2
6746976	Urankar et al.	Jun 2004	B1
6749718	Takai et al.	Jun 2004	B2
6752907	Edwards et al.	Jun 2004	B2
6767634	Krishnaswamy	Jul 2004	B2
6773648	Luo et al.	Aug 2004	B2
6797115	Klerelid et al.	Sep 2004	B2
6808557	Holbrey et al.	Oct 2004	B2
6824599	Swatloski et al.	Nov 2004	B2
6824648	Edwards et al.	Nov 2004	B2
6827819	Dwiggins et al.	Dec 2004	B2
6833187	Luo et al.	Dec 2004	B2
6835311	Koslow	Dec 2004	B2
6841038	Horenziak et al.	Jan 2005	B2
6849239	Morris	Feb 2005	B2
6861023	Sealey, II et al.	Mar 2005	B2
6872311	Koslow	Mar 2005	B2
6890649	Hobbs et al.	May 2005	B2
6899790	Lee	May 2005	B2
6951895	Qin et al.	Oct 2005	B1
6964117	Parent	Nov 2005	B2
6969443	Kokko	Nov 2005	B1
6986932	Zink et al.	Jan 2006	B2
6998017	Lindsay et al.	Feb 2006	B2
6998022	Hultcrantz	Feb 2006	B2
7037405	Nguyen et al.	May 2006	B2
7067444	Luo et al.	Jun 2006	B2
7070678	Allen et al.	Jul 2006	B2
7083704	Sealey, II et al.	Aug 2006	B2
7094317	Lundberg et al.	Aug 2006	B2
7097737	Luo et al.	Aug 2006	B2
7160418	Edwards et al.	Jan 2007	B2
7195694	Von Drach et al.	Mar 2007	B2
7210205	Takeuchi et al.	May 2007	B2
7214633	Sun et al.	May 2007	B2
7229528	Vinson et al.	Jun 2007	B2
7241711	Takai et al.	Jul 2007	B2
7250382	Takai et al.	Jul 2007	B2
7258764	Mauler	Aug 2007	B2
7276166	Koslow	Oct 2007	B2
7276459	Lang et al.	Oct 2007	B1
7296691	Koslow	Nov 2007	B2
7300543	Mullally et al.	Nov 2007	B2
7320743	Freidbauer et al.	Jan 2008	B2
7381294	Suzuki et al.	Jun 2008	B2
7387706	Herman et al.	Jun 2008	B2
7399378	Edwards et al.	Jul 2008	B2
7416637	Murray et al.	Aug 2008	B2
7435312	Lindsay et al.	Oct 2008	B2
7442278	Murray et al.	Oct 2008	B2
7494563	Edwards et al.	Feb 2009	B2
7503998	Murray et al.	Mar 2009	B2
7563344	Beuther et al.	Jul 2009	B2
7566014	Koslow et al.	Jul 2009	B2
7585388	Yeh et al.	Sep 2009	B2
7585389	Yeh et al.	Sep 2009	B2
7585392	Kokko et al.	Sep 2009	B2
7588660	Edwards et al.	Sep 2009	B2
7588661	Edwards et al.	Sep 2009	B2
7588831	Akiyama et al.	Sep 2009	B2
7605096	Tomarchio et al.	Oct 2009	B2
7608164	Chou et al.	Oct 2009	B2
7651589	Murray et al.	Jan 2010	B2
7655112	Koslow	Feb 2010	B2
7662255	Murray et al.	Feb 2010	B2
7662257	Edwards et al.	Feb 2010	B2
7670457	Murray et al.	Mar 2010	B2
7691228	Edwards et al.	Apr 2010	B2
7691760	Bergsten et al.	Apr 2010	B2
7700764	Heijnesson-Hulten	Apr 2010	B2
7704349	Edwards et al.	Apr 2010	B2
7718036	Sumnicht et al.	May 2010	B2
7726349	Mullally et al.	Jun 2010	B2
7744723	Sheehan et al.	Jun 2010	B2
7758723	Vinson et al.	Jul 2010	B2
7763715	Hecht et al.	Jul 2010	B2
7785443	Hermans et al.	Aug 2010	B2
7789995	Super et al.	Sep 2010	B2
7794566	Edwards et al.	Sep 2010	B2
7799968	Chen et al.	Sep 2010	B2
7811418	Klerelid et al.	Oct 2010	B2
7820008	Edwards et al.	Oct 2010	B2
7828931	Edwards et al.	Nov 2010	B2
7850823	Chou et al.	Dec 2010	B2
7871493	Hermans et al.	Jan 2011	B2
7884037	Sirovatka et al.	Feb 2011	B2
7888412	Holbrey et al.	Feb 2011	B2
7918964	Edwards et al.	Apr 2011	B2
7927456	Murray et al.	Apr 2011	B2
7935220	Edwards et al.	May 2011	B2
7951264	Sumnicht	May 2011	B2
7951266	Kokko et al.	May 2011	B2
7972474	Underhill et al.	Jul 2011	B2
7985321	Sumnicht et al.	Jul 2011	B2
7998313	Kokko	Aug 2011	B2
8012312	Goto et al.	Sep 2011	B2
8022267	Hellstrom et al.	Sep 2011	B2
8030231	Lange et al.	Oct 2011	B2
8066849	Kokko et al.	Nov 2011	B2
8105463	Goulet et al.	Jan 2012	B2
8142612	Murray et al.	Mar 2012	B2
8152957	Edwards et al.	Apr 2012	B2
8152958	Super et al.	Apr 2012	B2
8177938	Sumnicht	May 2012	B2
8187421	Sumnicht et al.	May 2012	B2
8187422	Sumnicht et al.	May 2012	B2
8216425	Sumnicht et al.	Jul 2012	B2
8226797	Murray et al.	Jul 2012	B2
8257552	Edwards et al.	Sep 2012	B2
8293072	Super et al.	Oct 2012	B2
8318859	Amano et al.	Nov 2012	B2
8361278	Fike et al.	Jan 2013	B2
8410005	Brennan et al.	Apr 2013	B2
8444808	Koslow et al.	May 2013	B2
8513147	Gupta et al.	Aug 2013	B2
8540846	Miller et al.	Sep 2013	B2
20020162635	Hsu et al.	Nov 2002	A1
20020168912	Bond et al.	Nov 2002	A1
20020187307	Tanaka et al.	Dec 2002	A1
20030099821	Takai et al.	May 2003	A1
20030100240	Takai et al.	May 2003	A1
20030111195	Hu	Jun 2003	A1
20030144640	Nguyen	Jul 2003	A1
20030157351	Swatloski et al.	Aug 2003	A1
20030168401	Koslow	Sep 2003	A1
20030177909	Koslow	Sep 2003	A1
20030178166	Takeuchi et al.	Sep 2003	A1
20030200991	Keck et al.	Oct 2003	A1
20030203695	Polanco et al.	Oct 2003	A1
20040038031	Holbrey et al.	Feb 2004	A1
20040103507	Takeuchi et al.	Jun 2004	A1
20040203306	Grafe et al.	Oct 2004	A1
20040207110	Luo et al.	Oct 2004	A1
20040238135	Edwards et al.	Dec 2004	A1
20040248494	Hartgrove et al.	Dec 2004	A1
20040256066	Lindsay et al.	Dec 2004	A1
20050074542	Lundberg et al.	Apr 2005	A1
20050136772	Chen et al.	Jun 2005	A1
20050148264	Varona et al.	Jul 2005	A1
20050176326	Bond et al.	Aug 2005	A1
20050268274	Beuther et al.	Dec 2005	A1
20050274469	Lundberg et al.	Dec 2005	A1
20050288484	Holbrey et al.	Dec 2005	A1
20060088696	Manifold et al.	Apr 2006	A1
20060090271	Price et al.	May 2006	A1
20060141881	Bergsten et al.	Jun 2006	A1
20060207722	Amano et al.	Sep 2006	A1
20060240727	Price et al.	Oct 2006	A1
20060240728	Price et al.	Oct 2006	A1
20060241287	Hecht et al.	Oct 2006	A1
20070062656	Murray et al.	Mar 2007	A1
20070137807	Schulz et al.	Jun 2007	A1
20070137814	Gao	Jun 2007	A1
20070224419	Sumnicht et al.	Sep 2007	A1
20070228064	Brennan et al.	Oct 2007	A1
20070232180	Polat et al.	Oct 2007	A1
20080008865	Luu et al.	Jan 2008	A1
20080029235	Edwards et al.	Feb 2008	A1
20080057307	Koslow et al.	Mar 2008	A1
20080076313	Uitenbroek et al.	Mar 2008	A1
20080145664	Sirovatka et al.	Jun 2008	A1
20080173418	Sumnicht	Jul 2008	A1
20080173419	Sumnicht	Jul 2008	A1
20080311815	Gupta et al.	Dec 2008	A1
20090020139	Sumnicht et al.	Jan 2009	A1
20090020248	Sumnicht et al.	Jan 2009	A1
20090120598	Edwards et al.	May 2009	A1
20090120599	Nguyen	May 2009	A1
20090126884	Murray et al.	May 2009	A1
20090151881	Nguyen	Jun 2009	A1
20090159224	Chou et al.	Jun 2009	A1
20090259208	Hellstrom et al.	Oct 2009	A1
20090308551	Kokko et al.	Dec 2009	A1
20100065235	Fike et al.	Mar 2010	A1
20100098919	Hartgrove et al.	Apr 2010	A1
20100136268	Rasch	Jun 2010	A1
20100186913	Super et al.	Jul 2010	A1
20100212850	Sumnicht et al.	Aug 2010	A1
20100236735	Goulet et al.	Sep 2010	A1
20100272938	Mitchell et al.	Oct 2010	A1
20100282423	Super et al.	Nov 2010	A1
20100288456	Westland et al.	Nov 2010	A1
20110011545	Edwards et al.	Jan 2011	A1
20110155337	Murray et al.	Jun 2011	A1
20110265965	Sumnicht et al.	Nov 2011	A1
20110272304	Wahal et al.	Nov 2011	A1
20120021178	Miller et al.	Jan 2012	A1
20120080155	Konishi et al.	Apr 2012	A1
20120180815	Sumnicht et al.	Jul 2012	A1
20120241113	Super et al.	Sep 2012	A1
20130029105	Miller et al.	Jan 2013	A1
20130029106	Lee et al.	Jan 2013	A1
20130153164	Miller et al.	Jun 2013	A1
20130299105	Miller et al.	Nov 2013	A1
20130299106	Miller et al.	Nov 2013	A1

Foreign Referenced Citations (42)

Number	Date	Country
1 002 359	Dec 1976	CA
2 053 505	Apr 1992	CA
0 279 465	Aug 1988	EP
0 399 522	Nov 1990	EP
0 485 360	May 1992	EP
1 036 880	Sep 2000	EP
1 302 146	Apr 2003	EP
978953	Jan 1965	GB
2 319 537	May 1998	GB
2 412 083	Sep 2005	GB
8003890	Jan 1996	JP
2127343	Mar 1999	RU
2143508	Dec 1999	RU
2144101	Jan 2000	RU
2183648	Jun 2002	RU
2226231	Mar 2004	RU
2328255	Jul 2008	RU
9535399	Dec 1995	WO
9606223	Feb 1996	WO
9743484	Nov 1997	WO
9803710	Jan 1998	WO
9807914	Feb 1998	WO
0014330	Mar 2000	WO
0036212	Jun 2000	WO
0040405	Jul 2000	WO
0202869	Jan 2002	WO
0240769	May 2002	WO
2004033793	Apr 2004	WO
2005010273	Feb 2005	WO
2005106117	Nov 2005	WO
2006113025	Oct 2006	WO
2006115817	Nov 2006	WO
2007001837	Jan 2007	WO
2007109259	Sep 2007	WO
2007139726	Dec 2007	WO
2008045770	Apr 2008	WO
2008146454	Dec 2008	WO
2008156454	Dec 2008	WO
2009038730	Mar 2009	WO
2009038735	Mar 2009	WO
2010088359	Aug 2010	WO
2011069532	Jun 2011	WO

Non-Patent Literature Citations (18)

Entry
Miller, Bernard and Ilya Tyomkin. “Liquid Porosimetry: New Methodology and Applications,” Journal of Colloid and Interface Science, 1994, 162, pp. 163-170, TRI/Princeton.
Gooding, R.W. and J.A. Olson. “Fractionation in a Bauer-McNett Classifier,” Journal of Pulp and Paper Science, Dec. 12, 2001, vol. 27, No. 12, pp. 423-428.
Imperato, Giovanni, et al. “Low-melting sugar-urea-salt mixtures as solvents for Diels-Alder reactions,” Chemical Communications, 2005, Issue 9, pp. 1170-1172, RSC Publishing.
Ozturk, Hale Bahar and Thomas Bechtold, “Splitting Tendency of Cellulosic Fibers,” Lenzinger Berichte, 84, 2005, pp. 123-129.
Sung, Y.J., et al., “Applications of Thickness and Apparent Density Mapping by Laser Profilometry,” 13th Fundamental Research Symposium, Cambridge, Sep. 2005, pp. 961-1007.
Klerelid, Ingvar and Ola Thomasson, “Advantage (TM) NTT (TM): low energy, high quality,” Tissue World, Oct./ Nov. 2008, pp. 49-52.
Dymrose-Peterson, Katherine. “Smart Materials for Liquid Control,” Nonwovens World, Oct.-Nov., 1999, pp. 95-99.
Keller, D.S. and J.J. Pawlak, “B(Beta)-Radiographic Imaging of Paper Formation Using Storage Phosphor Screens,” Journal of Pulp and Paper Science, vol. 27, No. 4, Apr. 2001, pp. 117-123.
Waterhouse, J.F. “On-Line Formation Measurements and Paper Quality,” Institute of Paper Science and Technology, 1996, IPST Technical Paper Series 604.
Cresson, Thierry M., et al. “Characterization of paper formation Part 1: sensing paper formation,” Tappi Journal, Jul. 1990, pp. 153-159.
International Search Report mailed Mar. 27, 2013, issued in corresponding International Application No. PCT/US2012/048046.
Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority mailed Mar. 27, 2013, issued in corresponding International Application No. PCT/US2012/048046.
International Search Report and Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority mailed Jul. 2, 2010, issued in corresponding International Application No. PCT/US2009/057078.
International Search Report and Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority mailed Jun. 4, 2010, issued in corresponding International Application No. PCT/US07/06892.
International Search Report and Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority mailed Dec. 1, 2008, issued in corresponding International Application No. PCT/US08/10840.
International Search Report and Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority mailed Dec. 12, 2008, issued in corresponding International Application No. PCT/US08/10833.
Notification of and International Preliminary Report on Patentability completed Jan. 28, 2014, and mailed Feb. 6, 2014, in corresponding International Application No. PCT/US2012/048046.
Notification of and International Preliminary Report on Patentability issued May 2, 2014, and mailed May 12, 2014, in counterpart International Application No. PCT/US12/48046.

Related Publications (1)

	Number	Date	Country
	20130299106 A1	Nov 2013	US

Provisional Applications (1)

	Number	Date	Country
	61206146	Jan 2009	US

Continuations (1)

	Number	Date	Country
Parent	13137216	Jul 2011	US
Child	13942855		US

Continuation in Parts (1)

	Number	Date	Country
Parent	12694650	Jan 2010	US
Child	13137216		US

Method of making a multi-ply wiper/towel product with cellulosic microfibers

Information

Patent Number

Date Filed

Date Issued

Inventors

Original Assignees

Examiners

Agents

CPC

US Classifications

Field of Search

US

CPC

International Classifications

Disclaimer

Abstract