FIELD OF THE INVENTION This invention relates to aqueous cleaning formulations particularly useful in the hot water extraction cleaning of textile fabrics such as rugs, carpets and upholstery.

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATION This application is a continuation-in-part of application Serial No.

08/626,080, filed April 1, 1996 (RD-7145).

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

Hot water extraction is currently a preferred method for cleaning textile fabrics such as rugs, carpets and upholstery. In such a method, hot, aqueous cleaning solution is sprayed onto the fabric to be cleaned, e.g., a carpet, and then rapidly removed by vacuum. Typically, application is by a wand which contains both a sprayer and vacuum head. Under optimum conditions, one pass of the wand would restore a dirty carpet to its original cleanliness. However, in practice it takes many passes of the wand to restore a carpet to a condition approaching its original cleanliness.

The literature contains many cleaning formulations suitable for use in hot water extraction cleaning systems. It would be advantageous if a cleaning formulation could be developed which would reduce the number of times that the wand must be passed over the carpet in order to obtain a satisfactorily cleaned carpet. Such a cleaning formulation would have environmental benefits, since less water and cleaning ingredients would be needed to clean the carpet. A further advantage would be if the residue from a cleaning formulation left on a carpet did not attract dirt and food additives. The present invention provides such cleaning formulations.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

This invention provides aqueous cleaning formulations comprising 0.1 to 50 grams of an inorganic or organic builder per gallon of cleaning formulation, 0.1 to 100 grams of a mixed alkyl ethoxylate (Cjo-Ciό) nonionic surfactant, with a hydrophile-lipophile balance (HLB) value in the range of 10.5 to 15, per gallon of

cleaning formulation, and 0.1 to 100 grams of a fluorosurfactant per gallon of cleaning formulation.

In addition, the aqueous cleaning formulation may contain 1.0 to 500 grams of soil-resist agent per gallon of cleaning formulation and/or 1.0 to 500 grams of stain-resist agent per gallon of cleaning formulation. Suitable soil-resist agents include, for example, fluorochemicals and poly(methyl methacrylate). Suitable stain-resist agents include those selected from the group consisting of a polymer of hydrolyzed maleic anhydride with an aliphatic alpha olefin, an aromatic olefin, or vinyl ether and a polymer of methacrylic acid.

The builder in the cleaning formulation may be an inorganic builder selected from the group consisting of sodium tripolyphosphate, sodium sesquicarbonate and mixtures thereof, as well as other materials normally considered as builders in cleaning formulations, such as ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA). The fluorosurfactant in the cleaning formulation may comprise any anionic or nonionic compound or mixture of compounds such as, for example, the compounds of Formula I and Formula II,

where Formula I is:

F(CF ₂ ) _n -CH ₂ CH2-S-CH2CH2-COOLi I

wherein n is an integer having a value of 6 to 12; and where Formula II is:

O-

CF ₃ CF2(CF ₂ CF2) _m -CH2CH2-0-P=0 II O-

4 wherein m is an integer having a value of 2 to 5.

One example of the cleaning formulation of this invention comprises sodium tripolyphosphate as the inorganic builder, a mixed alkyl ethoxylate (Cjo- iό) having a hydrophile-lipophile balance value of 12.8 as the nonionic surfactant, and the above-described mixture of fluorosurfactant compounds. In such a formulation, the concentration of sodium tripolyphosphate may be about 1 to 30 grams/gallon of formulation, the concentration of mixed alkyl ethoxylate

nonionic surfactant may be about 1 to 30 grams/gallon of formulation, and the concentration of fluorosurfactant may be about 1 to 20 grams/gallon of formulation.

This invention also includes cleaning concentrates suitable for making the aqueous cleaning formulations of this invention. The cleaning concentrate comprises: (a) an inorganic or organic builder, (b) a mixed alkyl ethoxylate (CIQ- Cjg) nonionic surfactant with a hydrophile-lipophile balance value in the range of 10.5 to 15 , and (c) a fluorosurfactant, whereby the concentrate is capable of being diluted with an appropriate amount of water to produce an aqueous cleaning formulation having a concentration of 0.1 to 50 grams of inorganic or organic builder per gallon of cleaning formulation, 0.1 to 100 grams of mixed alkyl ethoxylate (Cj Q-CI g) nonionic surfactant, with a hydrophile-lipophile balance value in the range of 10.5 to 15, per gallon of cleaning formulation, and 0.1 to 100 grams of fluorosurfactant per gallon of cleaning formulation. The cleaning concentrate may further comprise a soil-resist agent and/or a stain-resist agent. These concentrates are capable of being used to make aqueous cleaning formulations having 1.0 to 500 grams of soil-resist agent and/or stain-resist agent per gallon of cleaning formulation.

This invention also provides a method of using the above-described aqueous cleaning formulations to clean a textile fabric, such as rugs, carpets, and upholstery, having soil on its surface comprising the steps of spraying the formulation having a temperature in the range of room temperature to 160°F onto the surface of the textile fabric such that at least some of the soil on the surface is loosened; and removing the loosened soil. The loosened soil may be removed by vacuum or other suitable means.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE FIGURES Figure 1 is a graph showing the percent changes in ΔE versus the number of wand passes with Control Sample Cleaning Formulations 1-21 as reported in Table I.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION This invention provides an aqueous cleaning formulation which, when used in a hot water extraction cleaning process, improves the cleaning rate of the process (i.e. reduces the number of times the extraction wand must be run over the same area of the textile fabric to be cleaned in order to achieve the desired degree

of cleanliness). This invention also relates to a method of using the cleaning formulation to clean textile fabrics.

In the method of this invention, the selected cleaning formulation having a temperature in the range of room temperature to 160°F is sprayed onto the surface of the textile fabric in such a manner that at least some of the soil on the fabric's surface is loosened, and this loosened soil is then removed. Some of the loosened soil may be dispersed in the formulation. Suitable means for removing the loosened soil include vacuuming.

The aqueous cleaning formulations of this invention comprise (a) an inorganic or organic builder; (b) a mixed alkyl ethoxylate (C^Q-C IO) nonionic surfactant with an HLB (hydrophile-lipophile balance) value in the range of 10.5 to 15, preferably 10.5 to 13, for example "Merpol" SH, (available from DuPont Co., Wilmington, DE) and (c) a fluorosurfactant.

Suitable inorganic builders include, for example, sodium tripolyphosphate, sodium sesquicarbonate, and mixtures thereof. Suitable organic builders include, for example, ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA). By the term "builder", it is meant a chemical which softens water by chelating metal ions. Mixtures of inorganic and organic builders can also be used. By the term, "mixed alkyl ethoxylate (C10-C1 )" it is meant a mixture of alkyl ethoxylate compounds having a carbon chain length in the range of C \ Q to C \ . Suitable fluorosurfactants include but not limited to, for example, those compounds commercially available from DuPont, 3M. Mixtures of fluorosurfactants may also be used. A suitable mixture of fluorosurfactants is that of the compounds of Formula I and Formula II, where Formula I is:

F(CF ₂ )n-CH ₂ CH2-S-CH2CH2-COOLi I

wherein n is an integer having a value of 6 to 12 and may be identified as an -{2-

[(2-carboxyethyl)thio]ethyl}-ω-fluoro-poly-(difluorometh ylene) lithium salt, and wherein Formula II is an amine salt of a perfluoroalkyl phosphate as represented by the general formula: O-

CF ₃ CF2(CF2CF2) _n -CH2CH ₂ -0-P=0 II

O-

wherein n is an integer having a value of 6 to 12. The weight ratio of Formula I to the perfluoroalkyl phosphate of Formula II in the mixture is in the range of from about 1 :1 to about 1:2. The compound of Formula I is available from DuPont as "Zonyl" FSA and the compound of Formula II is available from DuPont as "Zonyl" FSP.

Other suitable fluorosurfactants include the compounds of Formula III and IV, wherein Formula III is:

F(CF2CF ₂ ) _n -CH2CH2-0-(CH2CH2) _y -OH III

wherein n is an integer having a value of 6 to 12.

and wherein Formula IV is:

F(CF ₂ CF2) _n -CH2CH2-0-(CH ₂ CH2) _x -OH IV

wherein n is an integer having a value of 6 to 12, y is an integer having a value of less than 20, and x is an integer having a value of less than y.

The compound of Formula III is available from DuPont as "Zonyl" FSN and the compound of Formula IV is available from DuPont as "Zonyl" FSO. Fluorosurfactants available from 3M may also be used including "Florad" products designated as FC-93, FC-100, FC-120, FC-129, and FC-117.

As will be demonstrated in the Examples hereinafter, the choice of nonionic surfactant is critical to the efficacy of the cleaning formulation. Nonionic surfactants having HLB values outside of the range of 10.5 to 15 either do not clean as well as those having HLB values within that range or their residue left on the carpet attracts dirt (increases resoiling) more than nonionic surfactants having HLB values within that range.

Depending on the actual builder, nonionic surfactant, and fluorosurfactant used in the cleaning formulation, the useful concentrations of each ingredient will vary. Generally, the concentration of the inorganic or organic builder should be in the range of 0.1 to 50 grams per gallon of cleaning formulation, the concentration of the mixed alkyl ethoxylate (CjQ-Cig) nonionic surfactant with a HLB value in

the range of 10.5 to 15 should be in the range of 0.1 to 100 grams per gallon of cleaning formulation, and the concentration of fluorosurfactant should be in the range of 0.1 to 100 grams per gallon of cleaning formulation.

Optionally, the cleaning formulation may contain a polymeric chemical, usually a polymer containing fluorine such as commercial products made by DuPont, 3M, etc., in order to reduce resoiling and may also optionally contain a stain-resist agent, preferably a styrene maleic anhydride, in order to reduce restaining. By "resoiling" it is meant the tendency of a cleaned carpet to attract dirt because of cleaning formulation left on the caφet after cleaning. Similarly, by "restaining" it is meant the tendency of a cleaned carpet to attract stains which may be caused in part because of cleaning formulation left on the caφet after cleaning.

One embodiment of the cleaning formulation of this invention contains 0.5 to 50 g/gal. of sodium tripolyphosphate builder, 0.1 to 50 g/gal. of sodium sesquicarbonate builder, 1 to 50 g/gal. of Meφol SH, and 0.5 to 100 g/gal. of a fluorosurfactant mixture of the above Formula I compound and Formula II compound. Preferably, the concentration of sodium tripolyphosphate is about 1 to 30 g/gal., sodium sesquicarbonate is about 0.5 g/gal., "Meφol" SH is about 1 to 30 g/gal., and fluorosurfactant is about 1 to 20 g/gal. All concentrations are based on a gallon of the cleaning formulation, unless otherwise indicated.

If resistance to resoiling is required, 1 to 500 g/gal. soil resist agent may be added to the basic formulations described above. By "soil resist agent" it is meant compositions which resist or repel dirt, oil, or other substances not normally intended to be present on the textile fabric. Suitable soil-resist agents include fiuorochemicals and poly (methyl methacrylate). Fluorochemical soil resist agents may include polymers or compounds having pendent or end groups of perfluoroalkyl moieties, fluorosurfactants, or fluoro-intermediates. Examples of some suitable fluorochemical soil resist agents include "Zonyl" 5180, available from DuPont and "Scotchgard" available from 3M. "Zonyl" 5180 works very well at a concentration of about 50-250 g/gal. Depending on the desired end-use of the aqueous cleaning formulation, the amount of soil-resist agent and other ingredients should be adjusted. If the primary use of the cleaning formulation is to improve cleaning efficiency, less soil-resist agent should be added to the formulation. If the primary use of the cleaning formulation is to improve resoiling performance, more soil-resist agent should be added to the formulation.

If resistance to restaining is required, 1 to 500 g/gal. of a stain-resist agent may be added to any of the above formulations. By "stain-resist agent" it is meant chemicals which impart partial or total resistance to staining. Staining is defined as discoloration due to a material (such as food or liquid) adding color that exhibits resistance to removal by standard cleaning methods. Stain resist agents may include compounds such as hydrolyzed maleic anhydride co- or teφolymers with aliphatic alpha olefins, aromatic olefins or vinyl ethers, and homo- or copolymers of methacrylic acid. Preferably the stain resist agent is "Zelan" 338 which is available from the DuPont. "Zelan" 338 works very well at about 50-250 g/gal. Depending on the desired end-use of the aqueous cleaning formulation, the amount of stain-resist agent and other ingredients should be adjusted. If the primary use of the cleaning formulation is to improve cleaning efficiency, less stain-resist agent should be added to the formulation. If the primary use of the cleaning formulation is to improve restaining performance, more stain-resist agent should be added to the formulation.

Other chemical agents, such as fragrances, softeners, buffers, and brighteners may be added to the cleaning formulation to obtain special effects on the cleaned caφet fiber.

As described above, the aqueous cleaning formulations of this invention refer to the formulations as they are applied to textile fabrics such as caφets. It is recognized that cleaning concentrates suitable for making the aqueous cleaning formulations of this invention by dilution with water can also be made. These cleaning concentrates would then be provided to the caφet cleaner or other end- user. The present invention also encompasses such cleaning concentrates. The cleaning concentrate comprises: (a) an inorganic or organic builder, (b) a mixed alkyl ethoxylate (C> o ^_ Ci6) nonionic surfactant with a hydrophile-lipophile balance value in the range of 10.5 to 15 , and (c) a fluorosurfactant, whereby the concentrate is capable of being diluted with an appropriate amount of water to produce an aqueous cleaning formulation having a concentration of 0.1 to 50 grams of inorganic or organic builder per gallon of cleaning formulation, 0.1 to 100 grams of mixed alkyl ethoxylate (Ci Q-C IO) nonionic surfactant with a hydrophile-lipophile balance value in the range of 10.5 to 15, per gallon of cleaning formulation, and 0.1 to 100 grams of fluorosurfactant per gallon of cleaning formulation. The cleaning concentrate may further comprise a soil-resist agent and/or a stain-resist agent. These concentrates may be used to make

aqueous cleaning formulations having 1.0 to 500 grams of soil-resist agent and/or stain-resist agent per gallon of cleaning formulation.

The following Examples are illustrative of this invention but should not be construed as limiting the scope of this invention.

TEST METHODS

Cleaning Efficiency - Cleaning efficiency refers to both the cleaning rate and cleaning ceiling which are determined by these test procedures. Cleaning rate is a measure of how many times a hot water extraction wand has to be run over the same area of a soiled carpet before a desired degree of cleanliness is achieved. Cleaning ceiling is a measure of the efficacy of a cleaning formulation towards returning a soiled carpet to its original, unsoiled condition by repeated cleanings with the hot water extraction wand.

The equipment used was a standard hot water extractor (Stallion Walk Behind Unit Model No. 8SC) equipped with an in-line heater and 3.5 inch upholstery cleaning head with 1 jet. A Minolta CR-100 Chroma Meter was used to measure Δ E of the carpets before cleaning and intermittently throughout the cleaning process. Δ E is a measure of cleanliness since dirty caφets appear dark and they lighten on cleaning.

In preparation for cleaning the caφet with the cleaning formulation, the formulation to be tested was loaded in the extractor, the line was flushed, and the caφet was vacuumed prior to application of the formulation. The cleaning procedure involved the following steps.

(a) The spray and vacuum head (wand) was run on the designated test area of the carpet to be cleaned at a steady linear motion of about 2 sec/foot. This was followed immediately with a vacuum cycle only; the area cleaned was about 8-10 inches by 3.5 inches.

(b) The change in appearance Δ E was measured and recorded.

(c) After one minute, step (a) was repeated twice and Δ E measured again.

Step (c) was repeated as many times as necessary, until the measured Δ E no longer changed significantly (usually 2-3 sets). These Δ E measurements were made at different places within the test area of the caφet. The average value of the Δ E measurements from the different places within the test area of the caφet was reported.

Cleaning rate is determined by the change in the Δ E with each wand or pair of wand passes (cleaning treatments). However since the caφet has been soiled by actual people walking on the caφet, some areas of the caφet are more soiled than others and there is a variation in the degree of soiling in any selected test area of caφet. In order to compensate for variations in the Δ E of the soiled, uncleaned caφet, the change in Δ E with each wand pass was divided by the Δ E of the initial soiled test area of the caφet which was subjected to the wand pass. This cleaning rate for each wand pass may be expressed as a percentage change in Δ E per the following equation:

(Δ E of soiled carpet) - (Δ E of carpet after wand pass) J QO (Δ E of soiled caφet)

The percentage change in Δ E is tantamount to measuring the cleaning percentage of the caφet with 100% representing the appearance of new, clean caφet and 0% representing soiled, uncleaned caφet. New, clean caφet was available and was used as the standard (target) in the Minolta measurements and for determining the efficacy, (as a percentage change in Δ E) of the cleaning formulation toward returning the soiled caφet to its original condition. The standard value of the new clean caφet was first measured by the Minolta Chroma Meter and this value was then stored in the memory of the Minolta Chroma Meter. The value of the soiled caφet was then measured by the Minolta Chroma Meter, and the Δ E was calculated therefrom.

Resoiling Test - The ability of a cleaned caφet to resist resoiling was determined by an accelerated soiling test wherein a cleaned caφet was exposed to a controlled amount of soil for a specified time, vacuumed to remove loose soil and the Δ E measured. As in the Cleaning Efficiency Test, new, clean caφet was used as the standard (target) in the Minolta measurements. The standard value for the new, clean caφet was first measured and the Δ E of the resoiled caφet was calculated therefrom.

In addition to the Minolta Chroma Meter, the equipment used in this Resoiling Test included a ball mill having a drum 10.5 inches deep, 40 inches in circumference and dirty polymer pellets (used to introduce a controlled amount of soil). The dirty polymer pellets were prepared by adding 3g of synthetic soil to lOOOg of nylon polymer pellets and mixing in the ball mill for 10 minutes at 30 φm. The synthetic soil was prepared according to AATCC Test Method 123- 1989 and contained (percentages are by weight): 38% dark peat moss, 17% Portland cement, 17% kaolin clay, 17% silica (200 mesh), 1.75% carbon black (furnace or lamp black), 0.5% red iron oxide and 8.75%) mineral oil (medicinal grade).

Caφets were soiled by mounting them in the clean drum, double taping at the seams. 500g of soiled polymer pellets were then added along with cylindrical grinding stones (12 x 67.5g stones and 200 4.5g stones). The mill was run at 30 φm for 30 minutes. Caφets were removed, vacuumed with a vacuum cleaner not having a beater bar to remove loose dirt, and the Δ E was measured.

EXAMPLES

Control Samples 1-21 In order to illustrate the improvement in cleaning efficiency obtained by using the cleaning formulations of this invention, control cleaning formulations of 21 commercially available cleaners were first used to clean a soiled test caφet. The above-described hot water extraction method was used to clean the caφets, and the cleaning efficiency was determined per the above-described Test Methods. The caφet used was a nylon carpet made from DuPont "Antron" Legacy nylon 6,6 fibers. The color of the nylon caφet was a light beige and was installed in a busy commercial setting where it was subjected to heavy traffic daily.

The data showing the percentage changes in Δ E data are contained in Table I and shown graphically in Figure 1.

TABLE I CLEANING EFFICIENCY

(Percent Change In Δ E Measured For 0 To 20 Wand Passes)

No. of Wand Passes

Control 0 1 3 5 7 10 15 20

Cleaning

Formulation

1 0% 0% 24% 29% 33% 39% 47% 51%

2 0% 26% 46% 51% 54% 58% 62% 66%

3 0% -3% 15% 29% 37% 45% 54% 62%

4 0% -6% 6% 15% 27% 39% 49% 55%

5 0% 22% 60% 71% 74% 78% 82% 84%

6 0% 13% 45% 57% 63% 70% 76% 79%

7 0% -8% 7% 20% 29% 38% 48% 55%

8 0% -5% 16% 30% 40% 50% 60% 66%

9 0% -6% 19% 37% 51% 61% 71% 73%

10 0% 13% 48% 60% 67% 75% 79% 80%

11 0% -4% 12% 23% 31% 39% 48% 55%

12 0% 1 1% 49% 69% 76% 81% 84% 85%

13 0% -16% 3% 20% 37% 55% 69% 77%

14 0% -3% 9% 20% 28% 37% 48% 55%

15 0% -19% -5% 6% 21% 28% 39% 46%

16 0% -6% 29% 53% 63% 71% 77% 79%

17 0% 17% 55% 66% 69% 73% 78% 80%

18 0% -9% 0% 9% 14% 22% 31% 36%

19 0% 15% 36% 45% 56% 61% 67% 74%

20 0% -5% 3% 14% 21% 30% 35% 41%

21 0% 17% 39% 49% 58% 64% 72% 74%

From Figure 1 , it can be seen that some commercial cleaning formulations actually make the carpet look dirtier (negative percent change in Δ E) before making it look cleaner (positive percent change in Δ E). After seven passes of the wand cleaning head, there is a large difference in caφet cleaning level (62% change in Δ E) between the commercially available cleaners. The commercial cleaners (Samples Nos. 5 and 12) which had good cleaning rates (positive percent changes in Δ E of at least 10% after 1 wand pass), and the best cleaning ceiling

(largest positive percent changes in Δ H after 20 wand passes) were used as controls in the following Examples.

EXAMPLE 1

This Example illustrates the criticality of the particular nonionic surfactant used in the cleaning formulations of this invention. Four different nonionic surfactants were tested in similar cleaning compositions. The four nonionic surfactants were "Mcrpol" Sli (1 11.13=10.5), "Mcrpol" SH (HLBX2.8), "Merpoi" LFH (HLB=10). and "Mcrpol" I ICS (HLB=15.3). The Cleaning Efficiency of the different formulations was measured on a soiled nylon 6 carpet composed of nylon 6 fibers having trilobal cross-sections per the Test Methods described above.

TABLE 11 C LEANING EFFICIENCY

(Percent Change In Δ E Measured For 0 TO 5 Wand Passes)

CLEANING FORMULATION NO. OF WAND PASSES

STPP* Nonionic gms/gal nonionic 0 1 3 5 gms/gal Surfactant Surfactant

10 "Mcrpol" SH 5 0 -12% 36% 53%

10 "Mcrpol" SH 10 0 14% 53% 63%

10 "Mcrpol" LFH 10 0 4% 42% 55%

10 "Merpoi" HCS 1 0 6% 49% 60%

0** "Merpoi" SH 10 0 -13% 17% 34%

The first four cleaning formulations contained 0.5 grams/gallon of sodium sesquicarbonate builder.

STPP = sodium tripolyphosphate.

This cleaning formulation did not contain any STPP or sodium sesquicarbonate builder. Instead, this cleaning formulation contained 5 grams of "Zonyl" 7950 fluorosurfactant per gallon of formulation.

TABLE III RESOILING PERFORMANCE OF CLEANING FORMULATIONS

(Concentration of Ingredient in Grams Per Gallon of Cleaning Formulation)

STPP Merpoi Merpoi Merpoi Merpoi Fluoro- Fluoro- Resoiling

SE SH LFH HCS Surfactant Chemical Performance

** *** (ΔE) NONE * 8.4

0 5 0 0 0 0 0 7.1

10 0 10 0 0 0 0 7.1

10 0 0 10 0 0 0 8.7

10 0 0 0 7.7 0 0 9.9

10 0 5 0 0 5 0 6.9

10 0 9.5 0 0 5 246 4.0

0 0 10.5 0 0 5 0 7.3

* This control caφet was not washed; rather, it was tested in its original clean condition. ** Fluorosurfactant is "Zonyl" 7950 *** Fluorochemical is "Zonyl" 5180

The caφet used for measuring the resoiling performance was a new, clean nylon 6,6 caφet composed of nylon 6,6 fibers having voids in their cross-sections as described in U.S. Patent 3,745,061. The caφet was topically treated with a fluorochemical soil-resist agent by the caφet manufacturer. The new caφet was washed with the specified cleaning formulation, dried at room temperature, and then tested for resoiling performance per the drum method described under the above Test Methods. In the above Table III, a lower Δ E value means the caφet resisted resoiling better than a caφet with a higher Δ E value. While each of the cleaning formulations which contain STPP along with "Meφol" SE, "Meφol" SH, or "Meφol" HCS provide good cleaning efficiency (see Table II), those cleaning formulations which contain STPP, "Meφol" SH, fluorosurfactant, and fluorochemical provide the caφet with the best resoiling performance as shown in above Table III.

EXAMPLE 2

This example illustrates the superior cleaning efficiency properties of the cleaning formulations of this invention. These formulations are shown in Table IV below. The Cleaning Efficiency of the different formulations was measured on a soiled nylon 6 carpet composed of nylon 6 fibers having voids in their cross- sections as described in U.S. Patent 3,745,061 per the Test Methods described above.

TABLE IV CLEANING FORMULATIONS

(Concentration In Grams of Ingredient Per Gallon of Cleaning Formulation)

Formulation Builder Nonionic Fluoro¬ Fluoro¬ Stain No. A Surfactant surfactant chemical Resist

Control 5*

Control 12*

T-17B** 10 10 1 0 0

T-18A** 10 10 2 250 0

T-19** 15 15 5 245 250

The composition of commercially available controls 5 and 12 is unknown.

** Builder A is sodium tripolyphosphate Nonionic surfactant is "Meφol" SH Fluorosurfactant is "Zonyl" 7950 Fluorochemical is "Zonyl" 5180 Stain resist is "Zelan" 338

98/1

TABLE V CLEANING EFFICIENCY

(Percent Change Δ F Measured For 0 To 5 Wand Passes)

NO. OF WAND PASSES

CLEANING FORMULATION 0 1 3 5 1

Control 5 0% -9% 30% 47%

Control 12 0% -3% 35% 48%

T- 17B 0 35% 62% 70%

T- I 8Λ 0 9% 42% 53%

T- 19 0 26% 53% 60%

Clearly, the formulations of this invention (T-17B, T-18A, T-19) have a faster cleaning rate (percent change in Δ E after 1 wand pass) and a better cleaning ceiling (percent change in Δ F after 5 wand passes) than that of the best commercially available cleaners tested (Controls 5 and 12).

TABLE VI RESOILING PERFORMANCE

CLEANING FORM U LATION Δ E

None* 14.3

T- 17B 13. 1

T- 18A 1 1.9

T- 19 9.7

The carpet used for measuring the resoiling performance was a new, clean nylon 6,6 carpet composed of nylon 6,6 libers having voids in their cross-sections as described in U.S. Patent 3.745.061. The carpet was not topically treated with a fluorochemical soil-resist agent by the carpet manufacturer. The new carpet was washed with the specified cleaning formulation, dried at room temperature, and then tested for resoiling performance per the drum method described under the above Test Methods. In the above Table VI, a lower Δ E value means the caφet resisted resoiling better than a carpet with a higher Δ E value. Since cleaning

formulation T-17B contained fluorosurfactant, less soil stuck to the caφet which was cleaned with the T-17B formulation versus the new caφet which was not cleaned with any formulation. Cleaning formulation T-l 8 A was similar to T-17B except that it also contained a fluorochemical soil resist ("Zonyl" 5180). Thus, T-18A had better resoiling properties than T-17B. Lastly, formulation T-l 9 also contained a stain resist ("Zelan" 338) and it had still better resoiling properties than T-17B and T-18A.

* This control caφet was not washed; rather, it was tested in its original clean condition.

EXAMPLE 3

This example illustrates that the cleaning formulations of this invention work well on all types of carpet, regardless of caφet face fiber type, fiber cross- section and with or without pretreatment of the caφet with a fluorochemical prior to soiling. In most instances, the formulations of this invention (T-17B and T-l 8 A) have a better cleaning rate (percent change in Δ E after one wand pass) and better cleaning ceiling (percent change in Δ E after 5 wand passes) than the commercially available cleaning formulation, Control 5.

TABLE VII CLEANING EFFICIENCY

(Percent Change in ΔE Measured for 0 to 5 Wand Passes)

No. of Wand Passes

FORMULATION CARPET TYPE 0 1 3 5

Control 5 Nylon 6 trilobal 0% -9% 30% 47%

Nylon 6,6 trilobal 0% 17% 49% 60%

Nylon 6 trilobal & FC* 0% -3% 36% 51%

Nylon 6,6 trilobal & FC* 0% 19% 53% 62%

Nylon 6,6 Legacy** 0% 14% 51% 69%

T-17B Nylon 6 trilobal 0% 35% 62% 70%

Nylon 6,6 trilobal 0% 32% 57% 65%

Nylon 6 trilobal & FC 0% 47% 72% 76%

Nylon 6,6 trilobal & FC 0% 50% 70% 76%

Nylon 6,6 Legacy 0% 32% 62% 73%

T-18A Nylon 6 trilobal 0% 9% 42% 53%

Nylon 6,6 trilobal 0% 30% 49% 59%

Nylon 6 trilobal & FC 0% 43% 63% 68%

Nylon 6,6 trilobal & FC 0% 28% 49% 60%

Nylon 6,6 Legacy 0% 30% 56% 72%

* FC - treated with fluorochemical by caφet manufacturer.

** Legacy is caφet made from DuPont "Antron" Legacy nylon 6,6 fibers.