大麻/黄麻交织物的焦磷酸钠与复合酶联合处理工艺

doi:10.13475/j.fzxb.20210310207

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

针对当前大麻/黄麻交织物粗糙刚硬,刺痒感明显及碱煮氯漂过程污染环境等问题,采用焦磷酸钠和复合酶(漆酶/酸性木聚糖酶复配)联合工艺对大麻/黄麻交织物进行处理,以织物质量减少率、织物断裂强力(经向)、弯曲长度、芯吸高度为指标进行单因子和正交优化试验,并进行了方差分析。得出最佳处理工艺方案:焦磷酸钠质量浓度为9 g/L,处理时间为90 min,处理温度为80 ℃,漆酶质量浓度为7.5 g/L,酸性木聚糖酶质量浓度为6.0 g/L,处理时间90 min,处理液pH值5.0。此时织物质量减少率为18.26%,织物断裂强力(经向)为780 N,织物弯曲长度较未经处理下降了24.82%,芯吸高度提高了46.4%,该工艺可达到碱煮氯漂(或碱氧一浴)效果,生态环保。

关键词: 大麻, 焦磷酸钠, 黄麻, 漆酶, 硬挺度, 质量减少率

Abstract:

The hemp/jute interlaced fabric is stiff in handle and polluted in alkali boiling chlorine bleaching. It is proposed to combined process with the sodium pyrophosphate and composite enzyme (laccase/acidic xylanase), taking the fabric weight loss ratio, fabric tensile strength(warp direction), bending length and wicking height as evaluation index, the single factor experiments and orthogonal test.Under the above optimal scheme,carried out the infrared spectrum test and performance comparison of the fabrics treated.The optimal process scheme was obtained as follows: the mass concentration of sodium pyrophosphate was 9 g/L, the treatment time was 90 min, the treatment temperature was 80 ℃, the mass concentration of laccase was 7.5 g/L, the mass concentration of acid xylanase was 6.0 g/L, the treatment time was 90 min, and the pH value was 5.0. The results showed that under the optimum solution, the fabric weight loss ratio was 18.26%, fabric tensile strength(warp direction) was 780 N,bending length reduced 24.82%, capillary effect increased 46.4%; the process can achieve the effect of alkali boiling chlorine bleaching (or alkali oxygen one bath), ecological and environmental protection,which has the potential of market development.

Key words: hemp, sodium pyrophosphate, jute, laccase, stiffness, weight loss ratio

中图分类号:

TS102

张毅, 高金霞, 郁崇文. 大麻/黄麻交织物的焦磷酸钠与复合酶联合处理工艺[J]. 纺织学报, 2022, 43(06): 121-126.

ZHANG Yi, GAO Jinxia, YU Chongwen. Research on treatment of hemp/jute interlaced fabric with sodium pyrophosphate and compound enzyme[J]. Journal of Textile Research, 2022, 43(06): 121-126.

图/表 11

表1

表2

表3

表4

表5

复合酶处理的正交试验设计表与结果分析"

试验号		A	B	C	D	质量减少率/ %	断裂强力 (经向)/ N	弯曲长度/ cm	芯吸高度/ mm
1		1	1	1	1	6.83	730	3.53	105.8
2		1	2	2	2	7.78	710	3.46	109.3
3		1	3	3	3	9.02	670	3.33	112.1
4		2	1	2	3	8.37	640	3.30	112.9
5		2	2	3	1	10.14	610	3.16	117.6
6		2	3	1	2	11.36	580	3.10	115.6
7		3	1	3	2	12.25	570	3.03	121.0
8		3	2	1	3	13.54	530	3.01	123.8
9		3	3	2	1	14.38	500	3.06	128.7
质量减少率	$K ¯ 1$	7.87	9.15	10.57	10.45
	$K ¯ 2$	9.95	10.48	10.17	10.46
	$K ¯ 3$	13.39	11.58	10.47	10.31
	R	5.52	2.43	0.40	0.15
断裂强力 (经向)	$K ¯ 1$	703	647	613	613
	$K ¯ 2$	610	617	617	620
	$K ¯ 3$	533	583	617	613
	R	170	63	3	7
弯曲长度	$K ¯ 1$	3.44	3.29	3.21	3.25
	$K ¯ 2$	3.19	3.21	3.27	3.20
	$K ¯ 3$	3.03	3.17	3.16	3.21
	R	0.41	0.12	0.11	0.05
芯吸高度	$K ¯ 1$	109.0	113.2	115.0	117.3
	$K ¯ 2$	115.3	116.9	116.9	115.3
	$K ¯ 3$	124.5	118.8	116.8	116.2
	R	15.5	5.7	1.9	2.0

表5

表6

表7

图1

图2

表8

表9

参考文献 14

[1]	周步光, 王平, 王强, 等. 辣根过氧化物酶在纤维材料生物整理中的应用研究进展[J]. 纺织学报, 2019, 40(4):170-176.
	ZHOU Buguang, WANG Ping, WANG Qiang, et al. Research progress of horseradish peroxidase in bio-finishing of fiber materials[J]. Journal of Textile Research, 2019, 40(4):170-176.
[2]	SUBHAM Agarwal, SANTONAB Chakraborty, SHANKAR Chakraborty. ADEMATEL-MABAC-based approach for grading and evaluation of jute fibers[J]. Research Journal of Textile and Apparel, 2020, 24(4):554-555.
[3]	窦艳丽, 李雪菲, 张天琪, 等. β-环糊精-聚磷酸铵对黄麻/聚丙烯复合材料阻燃性能的影响[J]. 复合材料学报, 2019, 36(11):2568-2569.
	DOU Yanli, LI Xuefei, ZHANG Tianqi, et al. Effect of β-cyclodextrin and ammonium poly-phosphate on flame retardancy of jute/polypropylene composites[J]. Acta Materiae Compositae Sinica, 2019, 36(11):2568-2569.
[4]	胡晓兰, 兰茜, 代少伟, 等. 黄麻纤维/聚酯纤维复合材料的阻燃改性[J]. 复合材料学报, 2017, 34(4):694-695.
	HU Xiaolan, LAN Xi, DAI Shaowei, et al. Flame retarded modification on jute fiber/polyester fiber composites[J]. Acta Materiae Compositae Sinica, 2017, 34(4): 694-695.
[5]	PRATHIBA Devi R, RATHINAMOORTHY R, JEYAKODI Moses. Analysis on moisture management characteristics of enzyme and amino silicone treated jute/cotton union fabric[J]. Fibers and Polymers, 2020, 21(10): 2253-2262. doi: 10.1007/s12221-020-1072-5
[6]	张莹琨, 郑振荣, 张富勇, 等. 汉麻麻皮脱胶工艺与果胶提取[J]. 上海纺织科技, 2019, 47(12):39-42.
	ZHANG Yingkun, ZHENG Zhenrong, ZHANG Fuyong, et al. Green degumming process and pectin extraction of hemp[J]. Shanghai Textile Science & Technology, 2019, 47(12):39-42.
[7]	郑振荣, 智伟, 邢江元, 等. 大麻纤维草酸铵-酶联合脱胶工艺[J]. 纺织学报, 2019, 40(11):88-93.
	ZHENG Zhenrong, ZHI Wei, XING Jiangyuan, et al. Ammonium oxalate-enzyme combining degumming process of hemp fiber[J]. Journal of Textile Research, 2019, 40(11):88-93. doi: 10.1177/004051757004000113
[8]	李成红, 陈英, 高艺. 汉麻纤维的微生物-化学联合脱胶[J]. 印染, 2020, 46(10):13-16.
	LI Chenghong, CHEN Ying, GAO Yi. Degumming of hemp fiber with combination of microbes and chemi-cals[J]. China Dying & Fishing, 2020, 46(10):13-16.
[9]	王维明, 蒋杭平. 黄麻纤维低温轧堆法精细化工艺初探[J]. 绍兴文理学院学报, 2015, 35(9):10-12.
	WANG Weiming, JIANG Hangping. On the refining process of jute fiber with low temperature pad-bath method[J]. Journal of Shaoxing University, 2015, 35(9):10-12.
[10]	许艳萍, 吕品, 张庆滢, 等. 不同工业大麻品种对田间5种重金属吸收积累特性的比较[J]. 农业资源与环境学报, 2020, 37(1):106-114.
	XU Yanping, LÜ Pin, ZHANG Qingying, et al. Comparison of the absorption and accumulation characteristics of five heavy metals among different industrial hemp varieties[J]. Journal of Agricultural Resources and Environment, 2020, 37(1):106-114.
[11]	张雷, 徐硕. 焦磷酸钠/二价铁络合物催化臭氧降解化纤污水[J]. 精细石油化工, 2020, 37(2):15.
	ZHANG Lei, XU Shuo. Ozonation degradation of fiber waste-water catalyzed by Fe²⁺ Pyrophosphate sodium complex[J]. Speciality Petrochemicals, 2020, 37(2): 15.
[12]	朱显锋, 丁涛. 常见金属离子对漆酶酶活的影响[J]. 化学研究, 2003(3):51-54.
	ZHU Xianfeng, DING Tao. Effect of metal ions on activity of two laccases[J]. Chemical Researches, 2003(3):51-54.
[13]	马艳柳, 王云仪. 织物刺痒感的形成与作用机制的研究进展[J]. 毛纺科技, 2020, 48(12):78-81.
	MA Yanliu, WANG Yunyi. Research progress on the formation and mechanism of fabric prickle[J]. Wool Textile Journal, 2020, 48(12):78-81.
[14]	程浩南, 蒋丽萍, 张鹏飞. 低温柔化处理后苎麻面料刺痒感的研究[J]. 毛纺科技, 2017, 45(6):45-51.
	CHENG Haonan, JIANG Liping, ZHANG Pengfei. Research on the prickle sensation of ramie fabric based on low temperature softening[J]. Wool Textile Journal, 2017, 45(6):45-51.

相关文章 15

[1]	刘锁, 王雅倩, 魏安方, 赵磊, 凤权. 功能化水刺粘胶纤维膜的制备及其在漆酶固定化中的应用[J]. 纺织学报, 2022, 43(05): 124-129.
[2]	崔启璐, 李佳蔚, 潘柳桂, 杨飞, 郁崇文. 黄麻纤维中黄酮类化合物提取工艺优化及表征[J]. 纺织学报, 2021, 42(08): 90-95.
[3]	汪泽幸, 吴波, 李帅, 何斌. 循环应力松弛下黄麻织物/聚乙烯复合材料能量耗散演化规律[J]. 纺织学报, 2020, 41(10): 74-80.
[4]	郑振荣, 智伟, 邢江元, 杜换福, 徐子健. 大麻纤维草酸铵-酶联合脱胶工艺[J]. 纺织学报, 2019, 40(11): 88-93.
[5]	周步光, 王平, 王强, 范雪荣, 袁久刚. 辣根过氧化物酶在纤维材料生物整理中的应用研究进展[J]. 纺织学报, 2019, 40(04): 170-176.
[6]	晏江邱华. 环锭旋流喷嘴纺麻混纺纱的性能[J]. 纺织学报, 2017, 38(10): 19-24.
[7]	王迎雷红娜解梓畅季英超. 等离子体氧化在大麻纤维脱胶中的应用[J]. 纺织学报, 2017, 38(07): 75-79.
[8]	刘笑莹方斌朱守艾程隆棣张瑞云俞建勇. 棉/大麻纤维混纺低损耗工艺优化[J]. 纺织学报, 2017, 38(01): 35-39.
[9]	张毅徐亚军郁崇文. 湿纺亚麻纱的生化联合处理工艺[J]. 纺织学报, 2016, 37(3): 31-34.
[10]	钟智丽朱敏张宏杰翁琦. 大麻纤维在氯化锂/N,N-二甲基乙酰胺溶解体系中的溶解特性[J]. 纺织学报, 2016, 37(11): 92-97.
[11]	陈美玉来侃孙润军陈立成王玉. 大麻/聚乳酸复合发泡材料的力学性能[J]. 纺织学报, 2016, 37(01): 28-34.
[12]	郑丹丹周建凤张光先张凤秀. 无甲醛衬布胶水的制备及其应用[J]. 纺织学报, 2016, 37(01): 81-84.
[13]	王春红赵玲. 黄麻伴生物含量及其对理化性能的影响[J]. 纺织学报, 2015, 36(07): 17-21.
[14]	杨菲徐山青. 黄麻/豆腐渣/淀粉复合材料的制备及其性能[J]. 纺织学报, 2014, 35(8): 44-0.
[15]	包肖婧曲丽君郭肖青田明伟. 微波辐照大麻脱胶中的非热效应[J]. 纺织学报, 2014, 35(1): 67-0.

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed

焦磷酸钠质量浓度/(g·L^-1)	织物质量减少率/%	织物断裂强力(经向)/N	弯曲长度/cm	芯吸高度/mm
7	8.35	930	4.14	87.8
8	10.29	870	3.88	95.7
9	11.57	790	3.58	106.9
10	11.63	700	3.55	108.2
11	11.69	610	3.54	108.8

处理时间/min	织物质量减少率/%	织物断裂强力(经向)/N	弯曲长度/cm	芯吸高度/mm
45	7.29	950	4.18	85.5
60	8.55	900	4.01	91.4
75	9.38	830	3.94	97.6
90	11.55	780	3.60	107.1
105	11.21	770	3.66	106.5

处理温度/℃	织物质量减少率/%	织物断裂强力(经向)/N	弯曲长度/cm	芯吸高度/mm
50	9.21	890	3.86	90.5
60	10.27	850	3.79	97.8
70	10.82	800	3.66	103.5
80	11.57	770	3.58	106.9
90	8.18	970	4.20	88.7

水平	A 漆酶质量浓度/(g·L^-1)	B 酸性木聚糖酶质量浓度/(g·L^-1)	C 处理时间/min	D 处理液 pH值
1	6.5	5.0	60	4.5
2	7.5	6.0	75	5.0
3	8.5	7.0	90	5.5

方差来源	偏差平方和	自由度	F值	F临界值	显著性
A	16.51	2	412.7	F_0.90(2,2) =9.00	显著
B	8.93	2	223.2		显著
C	0.26	2	6.50		不显著
D(误差)	0.04	2
A	444.53	2	32.7	F_0.90(2,2) =9.00	显著
B	139.26	2	10.3		显著
C(误差)	13.56	2
D	62.88	2	4.7		不显著
A	0.228	2	45.6	F_0.90(2,2) =9.00	显著
B	0.022	2	4.40		不显著
C	0.015	2	3.0		不显著
D(误差)	0.005	2
A	261.2	2	42.8	F_0.90(2,2) =9.00	显著
B	48.1	2	7.9		不显著
C	7.5	2	1.2		不显著
D(误差)	6.1	2