“…Liquid repellency in textile products can range from an optional "nice-to-have" property in leisure jeans to an essential protection needed in occupational protective clothing 38 . The textile sector often refers to these chemistries as durable water repellents (DWRs), but the leading market technology repels more than just water.…”
Section: Durable Water and Stain Repellency In Textilesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A variety of new non-fluorinated DWR alternatives has been developed to create repellent textile surfaces, with a variety of polymer architectures, including linear polyurethanes, hyper-branched polymers and nanoparticles 38 . The functional moieties in terms of liquid repellency consist of either saturated alkyl chains (i.e.…”
Section: Durable Water and Stain Repellency In Textilesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…hydrocarbons) or polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) chemistry (i.e. silicone polymers) 38 . Although hazards associated with non-fluorinated DWRs…”
Section: Durable Water and Stain Repellency In Textilesmentioning
Because of the extreme persistence of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) and their
associated risks, the Madrid Statement argues for stopping their use where they are deemed
not essential or when safer alternatives exist. To determine when uses of PFASs have an
essential function in modern society, and when they do not, is not an easy task. Here, we: 1)
develop the concept of “essential use” based on an existing approach described in the Montreal
Protocol, 2) apply the concept to various uses of PFASs to determine the feasibility of
elimination or substitution of PFASs in each use category, and 3) outline the challenges for
phasing out uses of PFASs in society. In brief, we developed three distinct categories to
describe the different levels of essentiality of individual uses. A phase-out of many uses of
PFASs can be implemented because they are not necessary for the betterment of society in
terms of health and safety, or because functional alternatives are currently available that can
be substituted into these products or applications. Some specific uses of PFASs would be
considered essential because they provide for vital functions and are currently without
established alternatives. However, this essentiality should not be considered as permanent;
rather, constant efforts are needed to search for alternatives. We provide a detailed description
of several ongoing uses of PFASs and discuss whether these uses are essential or nonessential according to the three essentiality categories. We suggest applying this concept of
essential uses to all uses of PFASs, and considering its use also for other chemicals of concern.
“…Liquid repellency in textile products can range from an optional "nice-to-have" property in leisure jeans to an essential protection needed in occupational protective clothing 38 . The textile sector often refers to these chemistries as durable water repellents (DWRs), but the leading market technology repels more than just water.…”
Section: Durable Water and Stain Repellency In Textilesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A variety of new non-fluorinated DWR alternatives has been developed to create repellent textile surfaces, with a variety of polymer architectures, including linear polyurethanes, hyper-branched polymers and nanoparticles 38 . The functional moieties in terms of liquid repellency consist of either saturated alkyl chains (i.e.…”
Section: Durable Water and Stain Repellency In Textilesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…hydrocarbons) or polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) chemistry (i.e. silicone polymers) 38 . Although hazards associated with non-fluorinated DWRs…”
Section: Durable Water and Stain Repellency In Textilesmentioning
Because of the extreme persistence of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) and their
associated risks, the Madrid Statement argues for stopping their use where they are deemed
not essential or when safer alternatives exist. To determine when uses of PFASs have an
essential function in modern society, and when they do not, is not an easy task. Here, we: 1)
develop the concept of “essential use” based on an existing approach described in the Montreal
Protocol, 2) apply the concept to various uses of PFASs to determine the feasibility of
elimination or substitution of PFASs in each use category, and 3) outline the challenges for
phasing out uses of PFASs in society. In brief, we developed three distinct categories to
describe the different levels of essentiality of individual uses. A phase-out of many uses of
PFASs can be implemented because they are not necessary for the betterment of society in
terms of health and safety, or because functional alternatives are currently available that can
be substituted into these products or applications. Some specific uses of PFASs would be
considered essential because they provide for vital functions and are currently without
established alternatives. However, this essentiality should not be considered as permanent;
rather, constant efforts are needed to search for alternatives. We provide a detailed description
of several ongoing uses of PFASs and discuss whether these uses are essential or nonessential according to the three essentiality categories. We suggest applying this concept of
essential uses to all uses of PFASs, and considering its use also for other chemicals of concern.
“…As a result, a number of studies have been dedicated to the development of novel nonfluoro‐based antifouling repelling agents such as long chain hydrophobic silanes, including hexadecyltrimethoxy silane, octadecyl trichlorosilane, and glycidoxypropyltrimethoxysilane, that similarly lower the surface energy. Other options available on the market include polydimethylsiloxane, paraffin, stearic acid‐melamine, dendrimer, and nanomaterial‐based repellent coatings . More specifically for nonporous substrates, Lei et al .…”
“…These water-repellent agents could be in the forms of single molecules, oligomers or polymers. Among known chemical methods, fluorine is the best element to be used to lower the surface free energy and make fabric hydrophobic [5,6]. Fluorine has a small radius and a high electronegativity, thus the covalent bond between fluorine and carbon is extremely stable.…”
A two-step chemical treatment of cotton fabric was performed with the attachment of fluorine moieties on hydroxyl group sites. The hydroxyl groups of cotton were initially acrylated by 2-isocyanaethyl methacrylate. Acrylic monomers, containing four to twelve fluorine atoms, had been used to build polymeric chain directly on the surface of cotton by means of radical polymerization. Fabrics became 10-20% stiffer and microscopy showed a clear change of the cotton surface after the treatment. Coated samples of cotton had shown hydrophobic property with a highest contact angle of 128 degrees. It was found that the increase of molecular weight of fluorinated polyacrylate on the cotton surface lowered contact angle value. The best results in hydrophobicity had been obtained at the molar stoichiometric ratio between the number of hydroxyl groups of cotton and the amount of fluorinated monomer added. This developed method allowed for the direct radical polymerization on cotton fabric, providing good hydrophobic properties with the formation of fluorinated polyacrylate of different molecular weights.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.