Summary Various textile fabrics were exposed to a wide range of climatic conditions. Those exposed to waterlogged conditions were destroyed rapidly. In the case of cellulose fabrics this destruction was due solely to bacteria, and not to fungi or actinomycetes. In the case of wool, the evidence of microbiological action was not conclusive. Cellulose, wool, silk and cellulose rayon fabrics disintegrated on exposure in microbiologically active soils. The destruction was due to microbiological action, the rate being governed by the moisture content of the soil and, to a lesser extent, by the temperature. Cellulose acetate rayon was completely resistant. Cellulose and wool fabrics exposed in the shade to very humid tropical conditions were damaged much less rapidly than in soil, although there was extensive “mildewing”. “With fabrics exposed for a year in the shade at stations with subtropical or temperate climates, and with a rainfall of about 30 in., the microbiological damage suffered was insufficient to affect the strength of the fabric, but there was much”mildewing“. No microbiological damage or”mildewing“was observed in shade‐exposed fabrics in arid climates where the annual rainfall did not exceed 9·5 in. Where fabrics were exposed to the action of sun as well as rain and wind, microbiological damage occurred when the moisture conditions were suitable for the growth of micro‐organisms. This damage was invariably less than that of fabrics exposed in the shade at the same station. Exposure of cellulose fabrics both in sun and shade caused a lowering in viscosity, whereas soil exposure, which causes more extensive microbiological destruction, did not affect the viscosity. All sun‐ and shade‐exposed samples showed a lowering in pH value during the first 3 months, but subsequent exposure caused little further change. Soil exposure caused practically no change. Inert substances such as glass, metals and rubber, when used as a covering for cellulosic fabrics, retard microbiological decay in soil and sea exposures. Some commercial protective substances owe their value to their shielding action. The parenchymatous and epidermal tissues surrounding the fibre bundles of jute exert no shielding effect. In a micro‐biologically active soil, flax, hemp and jute fabrics decay at approximately the same rate as cotton, which contains no protective tissue. A provisional technique is described by which the relative merits of “mildew”‘ protective treatments may be evaluated. The only treatment which has been found to give permanent protection in the case of cellulosic fabrics is partial acetylation.

No abstract

No abstract

ChemInform is a weekly Abstracting Service, delivering concise information at a glance that was extracted from about 100 leading journals. To access a ChemInform Abstract of an article which was published elsewhere, please select a “Full Text” option. The original article is trackable via the “References” option.