Patent Grant
6877196
1. Field of the Invention
This invention relates to decreasing the anisotropy of nonwoven materials and particularly spunlaced nonwovens.
2. Description of Related Art
In the manufacture of nonwoven fabrics, it is common to experience anisotropic properties. Probably the most important property is tensile strength of the fabric, wherein the strength in the “machine-direction” (MD) is notably higher than that in the “cross-machine-direction” (XD). This MD/XD ratio of strength, typically greater than unity, is a disadvantage versus other fabrics such as woven goods where the strengths are relatively balanced. In nonwovens, this MD/XD ratio is often at least 2:1. It is often higher in the case of fabrics made from carded web substrates where the ratio can approach 4:1 or even 5:1. Even spunbonded fabrics exhibit this same imbalance of properties, which is exacerbated by high laydown speeds.
Attempts to control or reduce this ratio by conventional means include cross-lapping of air-laid or carded webs, stretching a formed fabric in the XD direction, or the use of a “scrambler” roll after a card doffer roll. In the case of spunbonded fabrics, such as Typar®, available from E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company, Wilmington, Del. (hereafter DuPont), curtains of fibers are oscillated with rotary air jets in both the MD or XD direction. To achieve balanced properties, fibers must be oriented in the direction of the desired strength. The relatively small number of fibers in the cross machine direction in contrast to the larger number in the machine direction corresponds to the relatively lower XD strength.
This invention is a method for changing the orientation of fibers in a nonwoven web wherein a portion of the fibers are oriented in substantially the machine direction and a portion of the fibers are oriented in substantially the cross-machine direction comprising the steps of
providing a plurality of fluid jets offset at an appreciable angle from the perpendicular with respect to the web,
applying a stream of fluid from the jets onto a surface of the nonwoven web at a pressure sufficient to move the fibers into a different orientation wherein the streams form a substantially coplanar curtain,
locking the moved fibers of the nonwoven web to maintain the different orientation of the fibers of the nonwoven web.
The instant invention is a method to perturb fibers already laid on a belt with jets (or streams) of fluid, typically water, angled to the belt. Herein, angled means that the main axis of a jet is at an angle of at least about 10° from the vertical. This jet, located early in a hydroentangling process (wherein the fibers are still mobile) perturbs the fiber ends in a more-cross-machine direction where they are subsequently entangled with other fibers. Without being held to any specific theory, it is believed that the final form of such perturbed fibers could be S-shaped, Z-shaped, curved such as in a C-shape, or variants thereof. This fiber deformation has been confirmed through the use of black tracer threads laid atop the web before perturbation and entanglement. It is noted here that perturb means to move fibers or sections of fiber from one position or orientation to a different position or orientation and can further include changing the shape of such fibers.
The perturbing jet can be of normal, straight (i.e., non-angled) manufacture; i.e., its main axis would be vertical when mounted in a jet housing or body. Such arrangements are typical for hydroentangling processes wherein it is intended that the jet of water travels perpendicularly to the fiber web. Such a normal jet can be mounted in a jet body which is angled relative to the unbonded fabric web and as such the jet of water would travel at the same angle. That is, the fluid could be directed onto the leading ends or against the trailing ends of fibers which would perturb the fiber ends into a more XD-orientation.
As a point of clarification, the term jet strip will be used to refer to a distribution device that provides a passageway for the specifically sized streams of fluid and the angle at which the streams of fluid are directed. A simple jet strip 100 is depicted schematically in FIG 1. The holes 110 in the jet strip are typically small and closely spaced. Depending on context, the term jets may refer to the holes in the jets strip or the streams that issue from the jet strip. Although holes 110 in the jet strip are shown as angled downward from left to right it is understood that the holes could also be angled from right to left or front to back or back to front within the jet strip 100. Also, the terms jet body or jet housing will be used to refer to a device that holds the jet strip and that can be rotated about its major axis to provide for delivery of streams of fluid at different angles. Moreover, a combination of jet strips with angled holes and rotated jet housing can provide fluid streams at many different angles and directions. Typically the holes in the jet strips are arranged in rows as generally shown in FIG. 1 and provide for passage of fluid so that the streams are substantially coplanar. When the fluids are liquids, the closely spaced holes in the jet strip provides what amounts to a “curtain” or “wall” of the liquid as depicted, for example, as element 11 in FIG 2.
An embodiment for practicing the invention is depicted in
The jet strips or jet bodies can be arranged in various ways to achieve the desired perturbation of the fibers in the webs.
In yet another embodiment, curtains can be used either in single or double row configuration that incorporate compound angles. As shown in
Much of the development of the subject invention was performed on a laboratory scale table washer that would allow relaxation of the perturbed fibers (due to resetting the belt position) before entangling steps which are performed as batch processes. It was found that even greater improvement could be seen on a fill scale commercial lines, where the hydroentangling will take place in-line immediately after perturbation.
It is also believed that pulsating jets of fluid may be used to produce discontinuous perturbation of fibers, that spray nozzles of liquid or air may be used instead of conventional jet technology, such as described in U.S. Pat. No. 3,485,706 to Evans. Air jets can be used in dry areas, where the introduction of liquid would be deleterious to the product or process. For example, air could be used even when making certain styles of Sontara® products (available from DuPont) having a cellulose addition and where no consolidator jets are present. The fiber can be perturbed with air jets onto a carded web before the cellulose addition.
The perturbing operation is preferably conducted at relatively low pressures compared to the pressures typically used in hydroentangled products, such as Sontara.
Although typically one jet housing was used, a greater number could be used to achieve the desired perturbation, without any loss in isotropy.
The jet height was defined as the distance from the bottom of the jet body to the upper surface of the belt on which the web is supported. The jet height could vary between about 10 and 55 mm, with 25 mm as a preferred jet height.
In addition to applicability to air-laid or card-fed nonwovens, the concept should also find utility in resin-bonded and thermal bonded nonwovens, needlepunched fabrics, and, perhaps to a lesser extent, to spunbonded fabrics if perturbation is done before bonding, when the fibers can still be moved. The perturbed webs need to be subjected to some means for “locking in” the fibers in their new orientation to maintain the improved isotropy of the webs. Depending on how the nonwoven web was made, the locking in step can be hydroentangling or some type of bonding step that would preclude the perturbed fibers from reverting to their original position or orientation.
The fabrics described here were made on a table washer at 40 yards per minute (ypm) unless otherwise noted, using a jet profile (after fiber perturbation and consolidation) as shown below for each set of examples. Varying degrees of angled jet perturbation were imparted to the webs. The inventive jet strip was located at jet position #1 (normally occupied by a consolidator jet in certain commercial hydroentangling lines). The jet strip had 10 jet holes/inch with a diameter of 13.5 mils drilled at a 30° angle to the vertical and the holes were directed toward one side of the web. Pressure for the perturbation ranged from less than about 40 psi to 200 psi.
In all cases, subsequent to the initial perturbation, the webs were hydroentangled with about 10 milli-HP-hr-Ibforce/lbmass, (known in common parlance as 10 IxE) to represent each of the belt and drum entanglement stations. The jet profile is representative of a “belt” and “drum” entanglement system as found on some commercial scale hydroentangling lines. A single 5/40 jet (40 holes per inch of 5 mil diameter) was used, and multiple passes in the same direction of travel were made, adjusting pressure as indicated to simulate a series of different jets as would be experienced in a commercial scale line.
Except as otherwise indicated, all of the examples provided below utilized webs of 100% polyester fiber. Similar results would be expected with other fibers, either in unblended form, or blended with other staple fibers, synthetic or not. Such webs can be composed of all rayon, lyocell, nylon, polypropylene, cotton, and other natural or synthetic fibers; as well as from blends of polyester and lyocell; polyester and rayon; polyester and polypropylene; and all combinations thereof.
In these examples and throughout the specification, the fabric strength will be presented as “sheet grab tensile” (SGT) measurements taken in the machine direction (MD) and the cross-machine direction (XD). The SGT test is performed according to ASTM D5034 (latest edition 1995) “Standard Test Method for Breaking Strength and Elongation of Textile Fabrics (Grab Test)”.
Control samples are designated by capital letters and working examples are designated by number.
Fabric samples were formed from “Rando-carded” web (manufactured on a Rando-Webber) of about 2 oz/yd2 basis weight and having a denier per filament (dpf) of 1.35 and a length of about 0.8 inches. There were two controls and two working examples. The jet profile used was as follows:
Initial fabric side after consolidation (Belt) (psi): 500, 1000, 1300, 1500, 1500, 1000, 1000
Second fabric side, after belt (Drum) (psi):500, 1500, 1500, 1500, 1500, 1000.
In the above table, the consolidation process is shown in the second column, the first descriptor being the first jet in the consolidator-simulation (whether angled or not), and the second descriptor being the second consolidator jet, a straight (not angled) 5/40 jet or normal manufacture. (In all cases the fabric was turned over along the machine direction axis between belt and drum simulation processes to achieve the equivalent of two-sided needling and to retain the relative web motion to the jets.)
The web used had been formed on a Rando-Webber that provides relatively isotropic properties. It is postulated that the reason more improvement was not seen with this Rando-Web feedstock is that the fibers oriented in a more-or-less machine direction were perturbed towards the XD direction (as desired), but that those already-present fibers which were oriented in a more-or-less cross-machine direction were perturbed towards the MD direction, thereby lessening the overall impact. It is believed that webs with higher MD/XD inherent ratio, will yield even greater improvement, because they have more MD-oriented fibers to perturb.
Two layers of 100% polyester, 0.73 oz/yd2 basis weight carded web of 1.2 dpf, 1.5 inch cut length from DuPont and carded by Hollingsworth, Inc. were used. Five samples were prepared, two being controls (C and D) with no intended fiber perturbation, and three working examples with varying degrees and methods of perturbation. The same jet profile used in Examples 1-2 was used.
In Example 4 an angled jet stream was applied after the simulated belt-needling process, but before the simulated drum-needling process. This was based on the observation of fuzziness on the bottom side of webs when they were turned over on the table washer. This indicates a high number of free ends that would be available for cross-machine perturbation after the belt washer.
An alternate method to demonstrate cross-machine fiber perturbation using a standard jet of good quality and greater holes per inch than the 10 hole/in jet described above was to use a standard jet strip (holes not angled). This is shown in Example 5. The standard jet strip was positioned in a jet housing and the housing itself is angled to the normal vertical direction and is combined with a 90° rotation of the sample on the belt. This arrangement did provide a cross-machine perturbation. It has been noted that this method can perturb the full fiber length at one time, rather than incremental fiber length perturbation available with angled jet strips.
Samples of unconsolidated web were taken from a commercial line for making Sontara® using an air laid process. The samples had 1.35 dpf and a length of 0.8 inch. This unconsolidated web had been previously cross-lapped, and then re-air-laid, but had not been subjected to a consolidating jet of any type. This sample was cut into strips and processed in the manner described for Examples 3-5. Conditions were the same, only the feedstock was changed.
It was believed that similar results would result if the fluid were directed at fiber ends (through the use of a rotated jet housing) versus directed at fiber sides through the use of angled holes in a jet strip. Below are examples demonstrating this concept. There is presented a case where the fluid was directed in the direction of product flow (that is, concurrent flow) and an example where the fluid was directed against the product flow (that is, countercurrent flow). The feed web for these examples was one layer of nominal 0.9 oz/yd2 and one layer of nominal 1.2 oz/yd2 carded web provided by Hollingsworth from 1.5 inch, 1.5 dpf Dacron® polyester laid together to form a web having a basis weight of 2.1 oz/yd2. A “scrambler” roll was used at the Hollingsworth card exit to reduce MD/XD ratio.
All of the examples in the table immediately below were made with the perturbation stream impacting on the web from the angled jet housing at a position over a vacuum slot beneath the moving belt. Previous examples cited were prepared with the angled jet housing rotated so that the impacting stream did not fall over a vacuum slot. In all cases, however, the perturbation stream from the angled jet strip (angled holes) did fall over a vacuum slot, since this was the natural spatial relationship of the jet and slot.
The examples below were intended to more nearly represent a commercial process, where production rate was calculated to be 20 pounds of product per inch of machine width per hour, not atypical for commercial production. Belt speed was 91 ypm, versus the 40 ypm reported in earlier examples. The belt and drum processes for entangling were represented by utilizing a 5/40 jet profile with the following pressures used:
Belt: 500, 1000, 1500, 1700, 1800, 1800, 1600, 1500, 1500, 1000 (psi) for 10.4 IxE for a nominal 2.1 oz/yd2 fabric.
Drum: 500, 1500, 1500, 1500, 1500, 1700, 1500, 1500, 1500, 1500 (psi) for 10.3 IxE for a nominal 2.1 oz/yd2 fabric.
The samples were obtained from a commercial line for making Sontara® different from the one in Examples 6-7. The samples were carded web of fibers at 1.5 dpf and 1.5 inch fiber length. However, as above, these examples were supplied as unconsolidated webs. The web was supplied as pre-cut samples of about 1 oz/yd2. Two plies were layered to provide about a 2 oz/yd2 web, with the individual layers both oriented in the machine direction. There were no pre-consolidating or pre-bonding of these layers. Other than the perturbing and/or consolidating jet processes shown in the table itself, each example except the first was hydroentangled with the following jet profile (using 5/40 jets. Belt speed was 40 ypm, representing about 8 pounds/in/hour:
Belt: 500, 1000, 1300, 1500, 1500, 1000, 1000 (psi)
Drum: 500, 1500, 1500, 1500, 1500, 1000 (psi)
Besides the types of fabrics mentioned above, there are also fabrics compose of combinations of synthetic fibers such as polyester and short, natural fibers, such as woodpulp. It is demonstrated in the example below that the inventive feature of fiber perturbation applies to those fabrics as well. Examples shown were composed of a nominal 1.2 oz/yd2 carded polyester web with 1.5 dpf and 1.5 inch fiber length topped with paper made of pine woodpulp. The control was formed by hydroentangling these two materials together at a speed and jet profile similar to that used to produce Sontara® 8801, wherein all hydroentangling is directed onto the paper ( i.e., wood pulp) side and no fiber perturbation is introduced. The inventive example utilized the same web and same jet profile except that concurrent fiber perturbation was introduced using the angled jet housing containing a standard 5/40 jet strip with the perturbing jet stream impinging on the product while it was above a vacuum slot.
The examples immediately below were intended to represent a commercial process, where production rate was calculated to be 40 pound of product per inch of machine width per hour, not atypical for commercial production of a 2 oz/yd2 product of woodpulp and polyester. Belt speed was 192 ypm, versus the 40 and 91 ypm reported in earlier examples. The belt process for entangling utilized a 5/40 jet profile with the following pressure used:
Belt: 300, 600, 1000, 1000, 1500, 1800, 1800, 1800, 1800, 300 (psi)
These examples are of 100% polyester and demonstrate the effect of perturbing pressure on isotropy. An angled jet (5 mil/40 holes per inch/30°) was joined to sacrificial jet strips to fit full size machines. The holes were angled to the side of the web. The webs were made at a speed of 82 ypm. The control samples utilized two consolidator jets at 300 and 400 psi. The working examples had segmented angled jet strip in the No. 1 consolidator position at the pressures indicated in the table and with the No. 2 consolidator at 500 psi.
The data in the table above show the inventive process was successful in reducing the MD/XD SGT ratio, primarily through an increase in XD strength rather than a loss in MD strength. Relatively low pressures were sufficient to achieve good MD/XD results. High pressures also achieved good MD/XD results, but tended to cause jet washing that resulted in less fabric uniformity. Uniformity was rated visually on a scale of 1-5, with 1 as the best.
The examples below demonstrate the effect of variation in the perturbing jet angle on MD/XD isotropy. These examples were made from unconsolidated web of 1.5 dpf, 1.5 inch 100% polyester. The examples were formed on a table washer using a standard (non-angled 5/40 jet strip). The various angles were achieved by mounting the jet housing in angled brackets manufactured to provide angles from 5° to 50° from the perpendicular, such that the curtain was directed to the trailing ends of the fibers. To more nearly simulate the perturbing action which a jet would provide with angled holes, the web was rotated 45° on the belt before passing under the perturbing jet. After the first pass for perturbation, the web was re-oriented to its normal position and hydroentangled with the following jet profile: 300, 500, 500, 1000, 1300, 1500, 1500, 1000, 1000 psi provided by a straight 5/40 jet.
The entire range of angles considered provided increased isotropy over the control.
These examples demonstrate the inventive process on full-size, commercial equipment at full line speeds.
A jet strip was used measuring 146.16″ long by 0.5″ wide, having 40 holes per inch of 0.005″ diameter angled 30° from normal and directed to a side of the web. The jet strip was mounted above a vacuum slot. The product produced was a woodpulp/polyester blend of 55%/45% by weight, non-patterned and squeeze-roll dewatered. The fiber used was 1.5 inch, 1.5 denier Dacron® and the paper was pine-based, NSK 29.75 lb./ream, white in color. The jet profile, shown below in Table 9 remained constant for the test with the exception of the pressure on the angled jet and the vacuum beneath that particular jet.
A control sample was first made with no perturbing jet turned on and no vacuum under it. The working examples were made with the perturbing jets at the pressures and vacuum conditions as provided in the table below
The data are presented immediately below.
The data showed desired improvement in cross machine (XD) strength and improvement in isotropy (MD/XD ratio).
Some examples, whether representing single or double row perturbation, were simulated with single row jet(s). However, it was determined that use of a jet strip having two or more rows of holes would permit the curtains to have a variety of angles and directions without the need to angle the jet housing, which is particularly relevant for a full scale commercial line.
To that end, examples below were prepared using a jet strip as generally depicted in
The unconsolidated web was made from 1.5 dpf 100% polyester, 1.5 inch fibers. The vacuum beneath jet was 4-5 inches of H2O. All entanglement was with 5/40 jets; consolidator pressure for control was 300, 500(psi); belt profile was 500, 1000, 1500, 1700, 1800, 1800, 1600, 1500, 1500, 1500 (psi); and drum profile was 500, 1500, 1500, 1500, 1500, 1700, 1700, 1500, 1500, 1500 (psi).
Improved opacity was observed during trials on full commercial scale as described in the Examples above when a portion of a full width web was subjected to the perturbing operation and, especially where the perturbed web represented a portion of the full width web, and another portion of the web was not perturbed and the differences could be observed in real time. The improvement was measured by comparing the opacity of a control sample and a test sample using TAPPI method T-425. TAPPI is the Technical Association of Pulp and Paper Industries. The instrument used was a Macbeth Color-Eye colorimeter, model 7000A. The control N and the example 36 from Table 10 above showed an opacity of 51.21 and 53.89, respectively. This difference of 2.67% in opacity represents a significant improvement and is readily visible to the naked eye.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2665189 | Cox | Jan 1954 | A |
| 3353225 | Dodson, Jr. et al. | Nov 1967 | A |
| 3485706 | Evans | Dec 1969 | A |
| 3560326 | Bunting, Jr. et al. | Feb 1971 | A |
| 3747161 | Kalwaites | Jul 1973 | A |
| 3873255 | Kalwaites | Mar 1975 | A |
| 4228123 | Marshall | Oct 1980 | A |
| 4691417 | Vuillaume | Sep 1987 | A |
| 4693922 | Buyofsky et al. | Sep 1987 | A |
| 4960630 | Greenway et al. | Oct 1990 | A |
| 4991264 | Greenway et al. | Feb 1991 | A |
| 5005272 | Severinsen | Apr 1991 | A |
| 5235733 | Willbanks et al. | Aug 1993 | A |
| 5491857 | Love et al. | Feb 1996 | A |
| 5632072 | Simon et al. | May 1997 | A |
| 5737813 | Sternlieb et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
| 5806155 | Malaney et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
| 6253429 | Zolin | Jul 2001 | B1 |
| 6295706 | Strahm | Oct 2001 | B1 |
| 6442810 | Greenway et al. | Sep 2002 | B2 |
| 6546605 | Emery et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
| 6571441 | Kobayashi et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
| 20030101558 | Sternlieb et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country |
|---|---|---|
| 739652 | Aug 1966 | CA |
| 0337451 | Oct 1989 | EP |
| 0351949 | Jan 1990 | EP |
| 1036872 | Sep 2000 | EP |
| 432934 | Jun 1974 | RU |
| WO 9004066 | Apr 1990 | WO |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20020116801 A1 | Aug 2002 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 60223043 | Aug 2000 | US |
