纺织学报 ›› 2019, Vol. 40 ›› Issue (03): 32-38.doi: 10.13475/j.fzxb.20180202207

• 纤维材料 • 上一篇    下一篇

鲜茧与干茧生丝的结构与性能比较及其鉴别方法

李冰1(), 盖国平1, 郭蔚1, 董永春2, 陈兴灿1   

  1. 1.广西出入境检验检疫局 检验检疫技术中心, 广西 南宁 530021
    2.天津工业大学 纺织科学与工程学院, 天津 300387
  • 收稿日期:2018-02-06 修回日期:2018-08-17 出版日期:2019-03-15 发布日期:2019-03-15
  • 作者简介:李冰(1987—),女,工程师,博士。主要研究方向为生丝及纺织品检测学。E-mail: bingli1010@126.com

Comparison between structure and performance of fresh cocoon raw silk and dry cocoon raw silk and identification method thereof

LI Bing1(), GE Guoping1, GUO Wei1, DONG Yongchun2, CHEN Xingcan1   

  1. 1. Inspection and Quarantine Technology Center, Guangxi Entry-Exit Inspection and Quarantine Bureau,Nanning, Guangxi 530021, China
    2. School of Textile Science and Engineering,Tianjin Polytechnic University, Tianjin 300387, China
  • Received:2018-02-06 Revised:2018-08-17 Online:2019-03-15 Published:2019-03-15

摘要:

为有效鉴别鲜茧生丝和干茧生丝,借助电子显微镜、傅里叶红外光谱、X射线衍射仪、热重分析仪和表面接触角测试等分析手段对鲜茧生丝和干茧生丝的表面形貌和结构、性能进行表征和分析,并基于它们结构与性能的差异建立了较为准确和简单易行的生丝鉴别方法。结果表明:2种生丝的化学组成相似,其大分子二级构象均主要为β折叠构象,且热分解曲线也基本一致;但与干茧生丝相比,鲜茧生丝的表面较为粗糙,茧丝之间空隙较大,结晶度略低且亲水性好。使用测定生丝束在十二烷基苯磺酸钠水溶液中沉降时间的方法能够有效地鉴别2种生丝,其中鉴别鲜茧生丝的准确率达到100%,而鉴别干茧生丝的准确率接近80%。

关键词: 生丝, 鲜茧, 干茧, 表面结构, 亲水性, 鉴别

Abstract:

In order to identify fresh cocoon raw silk and dry cocoon raw silk, the surface morphology and structure properties of the two kinds of raw silk were characterized and compared by using electron microscopy, Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy, X-ray diffraction, and thermal gravimetric analysis and contact angle test, respectively, and then on the basis of the difference between their surface properties, an relatively simple and accuracy identification method for the two kinds of raw silk was established. The results indicated that the two kind of raw silk have the similar chemical composition, p-sheet conformation and thermal decomposition curves. However, compared with dry cocoon raw silk, fresh cocoon raw silk has a more uneven surface and a bigger gap between single fibers. Additionally, it showed less crystallinity and better hydrophilicity than dry cocoon raw silk. The two kinds of raw silk were efficiently identified using a method based on determination of their settling times in sodium dodecyl benzene sulfonate aqueous solution. The accurate rates of this method are as high as 100% for fresh cocoon raw silk and near 80% for dry cocoon raw silk, respectively.

Key words: cocoon raw silk, fresh cocoon, dry cocoon, surface structure, hydrophilicity, identification

中图分类号: 

  • TS143.2

图1

干茧生丝和鲜茧生丝的扫描电镜照片"

图2

鲜茧生丝和干茧生丝的红外光谱图"

图3

鲜茧生丝和干茧生丝的XRD谱图"

图4

鲜茧生丝和干茧生丝的热分析曲线"

图5

鲜茧生丝和干茧生丝的水接触角比较"

表1

2种生丝纤维的水接触角比较"

样品编号 接触角 样品编号 接触角
鲜茧生丝a 38.4 干茧生丝e 50.5
鲜茧生丝b 31.9 干茧生丝f 49.8
鲜茧生丝c 32.5 干茧生丝g 53.0
鲜茧生丝d 37.9 干茧生丝h 48.7

表2

2种生丝束样品在不同浓度SDBS溶液中的沉降时间"

SDBS浓度/
(mmol·L-1)
纤维根数 沉降时间/s SDBS浓度/
(mmol·L-1)
纤维根数 沉降时间/s
鲜茧生丝 干茧生丝 鲜茧生丝 干茧生丝
0 4 >600 >600 2.5 4 45 >600
12 >600 >600 12 49 >600
20 >600 >600 20 19 >600
28 >600 >600 28 22 285
36 >600 >600 36 49 53
0.5 4 42 >600 3.5 4 46 >600
12 46 >600 12 35 >600
20 17 >600 20 22 352
28 13 >600 28 38 114
36 36 >600 36 43 51
1.0 4 41 >600 5.0 4 62 >600
12 45 >600 12 32 78
20 18 >600 20 27 67
28 16 >600 28 47 52
36 40 >600 36 27 50

表3

26种商品化生丝样品的沉降时间"

鲜茧
生丝编号
时间/
s
判定 准确
干茧
生丝编号
时间/
s
判定 准确
1 21 鲜茧 1 >600 干茧
2 46 鲜茧 2 >600 干茧
3 122 鲜茧 3 >600 干茧
4 68 鲜茧 4 215 鲜茧
5 146 鲜茧 5 >600 干茧
6 69 鲜茧 6 >600 干茧
7 43 鲜茧 7 >600 干茧
8 19 鲜茧 8 >600 干茧
9 46 鲜茧 9 187 鲜茧
10 72 鲜茧 10 >600 干茧
11 115 鲜茧 11 >600 干茧
12 132 鲜茧 12 226 鲜茧
13 154 鲜茧 13 >600 干茧
[1] 陈文兴, 傅雅琴. 蚕丝加工工程[M]. 北京: 中国纺织出版社, 2013: 22-23.
CHEN Wenxing, FU Yaqin. Silk Processing Engi-neering, [M]. Beijing: China Textile & Apparel Press, 2013: 22-23.
[2] 龙辉, 罗志祥, 谢钧, 等. 广西鲜茧缫丝现状分析[J]. 中国纤检, 2014(15):24-27.
LONG Hui, LUO Zhixiang, XIE Jun, et al. Analysis of Guangxi fresh cocoon silk reeling situation[J]. China Fiber Inspection, 2014(15):24-27.
[3] 黄继伟, 洪基武, 林海涛, 等. 鲜茧缫生丝与干茧缫生丝的性能对比[J]. 丝绸, 2013,50(11):28-32.
HUANG Jiwei, HONG Jiwu, LIN Haitao, et al. Contrast on properties of the fresh cocoon silk and the dried cocoon silk[J]. Journal of Silk, 2013,50(11):28-32.
[4] 章琪超, 江文斌, 傅雅琴. 鲜茧生丝与干茧生丝的结构性能差异研究[J]. 现代纺织技术, 2015,23(1):1-5.
ZHANG Qichao, JIANG Wenbin, FU Yaqin. Research on difference of fresh cocoon raw silk and dried cocoon raw silk in structure and performance[J]. Advanced Textile Technology, 2015,23(1):1-5.
[5] 乔铁军, 王仑, 张秀琍, 等. 干茧丝与鲜茧丝抱合指标的差异性实验与分析[J]. 丝绸, 2009(10):32-33.
QIAO Tiejun, WANG Lun, ZHANG Xiuli, et al. The cohesive force difference experiment and analysis between drying-cocoon silk and fresh-cocoon silk[J]. Journal of Silk, 2009(10):32-33.
[6] 王聪磊. 鲜茧生丝的微量组分及焙烘影响初探[D]. 杭州:浙江理工大学, 2017: 23-25.
WANG Conglei. Preliminary study on the compositions and effect of baking treatment on trace components of fresh reeling silk[D]. Hangzhou: Zhejiang Sci-Tech University, 2017: 23-25.
[7] FREDDI G, TSUKADA M, BERETTA S. Structure and physical properties of silk fibroin/polyacrylamide blend films[J]. Journal of Applied Polymer Science, 2015,71(10):1563-1571.
[8] LU Q, ZHANG B, LI M, et al. Degradation mechanism and control of silk fibroin[J]. Biomacromolecules, 2011,12(4):1080-1086.
pmid: 21361368
[9] 谢孟峡, 刘媛. 红外光谱酰胺Ⅲ带用于蛋白质二级结构的测定研究[J]. 高等学校化学学报, 2003,24(2):226-231.
XIE Mengxia, LIU Yuan. Studies on amide III infrared bands for the secondary structure determination of proteins[J]. Chemical Journal of Chinese Universities, 2003,24(2):226-231.
[10] HERMANS P H, WEIDINGER A. Quantitative investigation of the X-ray diffraction picture of some typical rayon specimens: part I[J]. Textile Research Journal, 1961,31(6):558-571.
[11] LING S, QI Z, KNIGHT D P, et al. Synchrotron FTIR microspectroscopy of single natural silk fibers[J]. Biomacromolecules, 2011,12(9):3344-3349.
doi: 10.1021/bm2006032 pmid: 21790142
[12] LOTZ B, COLONNA C F. The chemical structure and the crystalline structures of Bombyx mori silk fibroin[J]. Biochimie, 1979,61(2):205-14.
doi: 10.1016/s0300-9084(79)80067-x pmid: 465571
[13] KOMATSU K. Chemistry and structure of silk[J]. Japan Agricultural Research Quarterly, 1979,13:64-72.
[14] LU Q, HU X, WANG X, et al. Water-insoluble silk films with silk I structure[J]. Acta-biomaterialia, 2010,6(4):1380-1387.
doi: 10.1016/j.actbio.2009.10.041 pmid: 19874919
[15] RUSA C C, BRIDGES C, HA S W, et al. Conformational changes induced in bombyx mori silk fibroin by cyclodextrin inclusion complexation[J]. Macromolecules, 2005,38(13):5640-5646.
[16] FREDDI G, TSUKADA M, BERETTA S. Structure and physical properties of silk fibroin/polyacrylamide blend films[J]. Journal of Applied Polymer Science, 2015,71(10):1563-1571.
[1] 闫晶, 张寻, 雷光振, 范雪荣. 用超高效液相色谱-二极管阵列检测-串联质谱法分析畲族服饰中蓝色染料[J]. 纺织学报, 2019, 40(09): 128-135.
[2] 魏子涵, 李文霞, 杜宇君, 马静雯, 郑佳辉. 织物傅里叶变换衰减全反射红外光谱库的建立及应用[J]. 纺织学报, 2019, 40(08): 64-68.
[3] 孙卫红, 阮棉奖, 邵铁锋, 梁曼. 基于机器视觉的生丝抱合性能检测方法[J]. 纺织学报, 2019, 40(08): 164-168.
[4] 张欢, 闫俊, 王晓武, 焦安东, 李红, 郑来久, 何婷婷. 低温等离子体在涤纶表面改性中的应用[J]. 纺织学报, 2019, 40(07): 103-107.
[5] 林永佳, 杨董超, 张佩华, 顾岩. 再生丝素蛋白/脱细胞真皮基质共混纳米纤维膜的制备及其性能[J]. 纺织学报, 2019, 40(07): 13-18.
[6] 张腾飞, 石禄丹, 胡红梅, 王宇, 王学利, 俞建勇. 生物基聚酰胺56低聚物改性聚酯的合成及其表征[J]. 纺织学报, 2019, 40(06): 1-7.
[7] 邢文宇, 邓娜, 辛斌杰, 于晨. 基于多特征融合图像分析技术的羊毛与羊绒鉴别[J]. 纺织学报, 2019, 40(03): 146-152.
[8] 贾慧莹, 蒋志青, 马建伟, 江亮, 陈韶娟. 多巴胺氧化自聚改性聚四氟乙烯纤维制备及其性能[J]. 纺织学报, 2019, 40(01): 14-18.
[9] 金肖克 田伟 朱炜婧 蒋晶晶 祝成炎. 基于高光谱成像系统的纺织品成分定性鉴别[J]. 纺织学报, 2018, 39(10): 50-57.
[10] 孙卫红 陈宇 邵铁锋 梁曼 马冠宇. 混合式生丝断丝检测传感器设计[J]. 纺织学报, 2018, 39(09): 134-138.
[11] 王嘉欣 田秀枝 蒋学 王鸿博 高卫东. 二醛 β-环糊精/壳聚糖改性对涤纶织物亲水性能的影响[J]. 纺织学报, 2018, 39(07): 82-88.
[12] 韦树琛 丁欣 李文霞 王华平 张朔. 废旧聚酯纤维制品近红外定量分析模型的建立及验证[J]. 纺织学报, 2018, 39(07): 63-68.
[13] 王飞 靳向煜. 应用卷积网络及深度学习理论的羊绒与羊毛鉴别[J]. 纺织学报, 2017, 38(12): 150-156.
[14] 朱俊平 路凯 柴新玉 钟跃崎 . 羊绒与羊毛直径的水平集中轴线法测量[J]. 纺织学报, 2017, 38(09): 14-18.
[15] 吴惠英. 脱胶工艺对蚕丝溶解及再生丝素蛋白纤维性能的影响[J]. 纺织学报, 2017, 38(08): 75-80.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!