Abstract:
A blended cotton or natural fiber mop yarn having wetting agents or detergents that aid in the removal or suspension of natural and synthetic waxes and oils to the finished mop yarn or mop. The addition of these wetting agents increases the initial absorption performance of the mop and decreases the initial break-in time required of cotton-blended mops.

Description:
FIELD OF THE INVENTION  
         [0001]    The present invention generally relates to the manufacture of mop yarns, and more particularly to the manufacture of finished mop yarns with improved absorption properties.  
         BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION  
         [0002]    Historically, wet and dust mops have been made of yarns with a high concentration of cotton fibers. These mops or yarn bundles integrate multiple strands of yarn connected together at a designed spot where the bundle can be attached to a handle. The normal requirements of a wet mop are the ability to absorb water or liquids from a surface or the retention of a solution for the purpose of cleaning a surface. The duties of a dust mop are to readily absorb solutions or waxes that will attract and hold dust particles to the yarn bundle as it is passed across a surface. The industry standard economical dust and wet mop yarns generally are manufactured from a textile mill rework or waste blend that incorporates a high majority of short cotton fibers. This recycled fiber mass by nature has a high percentage of immature short fibers containing a high level of natural oils, stalk, and boil trash from the cotton plant, which fibers normally have not undergone a scouring process to remove such natural oils, fats, and waxes that act as natural water repellants.  
           [0003]    Once these natural finishes are removed from the cotton fibers, their abrasion and absorption properties generally are then favorable to wet and dust mop applications. Without this prior removal of the natural oils, however, the cotton fibers typically have little or no initial absorption properties. Therefore, the yarns of a cotton mop typically require agitation and manual submersion in water to initiate the removal of the oils and for the fibers to begin the absorption process. This “initial break-in” time can take an average of ten to fifteen minutes with aggressive agitation or longer in other applications such as home use. Needless to say, most conventional, economical cotton mops generally do not perform adequately in absorbing moisture directly in an initial, “out-of-the-bag” dry state.  
           [0004]    To combat this break-in time of most conventional cotton mops, synthetic fibers having good absorption or moisture wicking properties have been incorporated within the yarn bundle. These fibers are intermingled with the cotton fibers as an intimate blend in the blending process to produce a homogenous mass. The percentage of synthetic fibers within the yarn bundle is variable and can be formulated based upon the requirements or demands of the finished product. By calculating the absorption, wicking properties, and the percentages of synthetic fibers in the blend, the break-in time required for the mop bundle to reach optimum performance can be increased. The ability of the synthetic fibers to absorb or wick moisture quickly, thereby keeping moisture directly in contact with the surface of the intermingled cotton fibers, further helps in removing the molecular bonds of the waxes and natural oils of the cellulose cotton fibers. The synthetic fibers normally incorporated as a blend with cotton for mops include rayon, acetate, polyester, acrylic, and polypropylene, however any synthetic fibers with good absorption or wicking properties can be substituted. Regardless of the percentage or the type of synthetic fibers used, however, the addition of these synthetic fibers brings to the mop bundle a significant increase in raw material costs to the manufacturer, and accordingly increased prices to the consumer, who conversely generally wants a very economically priced mop they can easily dispose of when it is too dirty to use.  
           [0005]    It also has been known in the industry that before garments, yarns, fibers, or fabrics are dyed or bleached they are subjected to a scouring operation. The term scouring applies to the removal of the natural oils and adventitious dirt, typically by use of a soap or wetting agent. Such soaps generally include a metallic salt of a saturated or an unsaturated higher fatty acid, lead, calcium, magnesium, or other metallic soaps, and more commonly include wetting agents or detergents containing sodium or potassium. These soaps reduce the surface tension between the natural oils and water, and allow the oil to form a comparable stable emulsion in water for the removal of the natural oils and waxes by scouring.  
           [0006]    When a fabric, fiber, or yarn is scoured, the textile mass generally is completely submerged in a water bath, usually enclosed in a tank or kier that is designed for intense pressures, or in open tanks. In a kier bath, positive pressure is applied within the tank so as to push the liquid containing the scouring detergents into the fibrous bundle or cloth. When the textile material has undergone sufficient wet processing, the excess water generally is removed by centrifugal force or vacuum, but since this does not remove all the moisture from the fibers, the textile mass further has to be heat or ultrasonically dried, which is a slow and costly operation.  
           [0007]    It is also known within the textile industry that cotton has an eleven percent regain or a natural tendency to retain eleven percent moisture. Textile companies previously have tried to add excessive moisture to their finished yarn in the quest to sell cheaper bulk yarns at the cost of a finished product. The problem with this is that the yarns typically are wrapped or packed tightly for shipping and also are wrapped tightly around themselves on a yarn carrier. In both instances, air does not have full contact with the yarn bundles so as to enable the yarns to dry quickly. The presence of moisture retained within the yarns allows the cellulose cotton to become a natural breeding environment for bacteria and mildew, which bacteria will attack and/or digest the cellulose molecules, causing unwanted foul odors and a darkened appearance to the yarn bundle, as well as weakening the yarn bundle and can cause the resulting yarn to be unusable.  
         SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION  
         [0008]    Briefly described, the present invention generally relates to improved yarns or yarn bundles, primarily for use in mop yarns which have improved wicking or moisture absorption properties “out-of-the-bag.” The yarns typically will be conventional low-cost mop yarns including a series of cotton fibers and which are treated with a wetting agent and possibly an additional anti-microbial or bacteriostatic agent. The wetting agent generally is a soap, detergent or similar cleaning agent typically with a relatively neutral pH and low foaming action and is applied to the yarns as a spray or moisture add-on solution. The wetting agent is applied in solution to the yarns at or immediately prior to a final winding or take-up operation. The wetting agent solution, which can further include an anti-microbial compound, penetrates the yarn fibers and promotes the breakdown of natural and added oils, fats, and other contaminates that tend to deter or resist the absorption of water and other liquids by the mop yarns, and thus require extended break-in time for the mop. The addition of the anti-microbial solution or compounds further helps prevent the development of microbially caused odors and/or the growth of bacteria that could degrade or otherwise damage the mop yarn.  
           [0009]    The application of the wetting agent solution further is done while the yarns are in a finished or dry state, preferably being added to the yarns in a range of about 3-15% by weight. The wetting agent solution is sprayed or otherwise applied to the yarns in a manner so as to cause the solution to substantially penetrate the yarn fibers, without unduly soaking the yarns and without the necessity of applying the wetting agent solution during the blending stage of the yarns, which would accordingly require a subsequent drying process in order to finish the processing of the yarns for carding, windup, and packaging. Thereafter, the yarns can be wound or otherwise taken up for packaging or forming into mops.  
           [0010]    Various objects, features and advantages of the present invention will become apparent to those skilled in the art upon reading the following detailed description when taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings. 
       
    
    
     BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS  
       [0011]    [0011]FIG. 1 is a schematic illustration of a first embodiment of a process for application of the wetting agent solution to the yarns according to the present invention.  
         [0012]    [0012]FIG. 2 is a schematic illustration of an additional example embodiment of the present invention, illustrating a further method of applying the wetting agent solution to the yarns. 
     
    
     DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION  
       [0013]    The present invention generally relates to an improved mop yarn that has been pre-treated with a wetting agent, such as a soap or detergent material in solution to shorten the initial time required for the fibers in the yarn bundle to absorb water or other liquids and a process for applying such wetting agents or treatments. The most popular consumer and industrial wet mops generally are composed of blended yarns predominately made of cotton fibers. These yarns usually range from an 8/1 cotton count to a 0.3/1 cotton count in single and in plied form. The plied yarns can range from a two-ply bundle to over 20 yarns bundled together and twisted to make a yarn strand. These yarns are then laid in a horizontal path with each yarn being parallel and of equal lengths to one another. The yarns are bundled to a specific weight with a fabric, metal, or plastic strip attached to the yarns to keep the strands together and to provide a place for a handle to be attached. The mass volume, industry standard cotton yarn used in wet and dust mops further is a 0.6 cotton count or 0.5 cotton count yarn twisted into a three or four ply bundle. However, the present invention will work on larger and smaller sizes yarns, as well as yarns of various single and multiple plies and spun by any type of spinning operation. These yarns further generally are manufactured from a recycled cotton waste derived from textile operations requiring higher fiber quality for their end product.  
         [0014]    The present invention includes the treatment of such mop yarns with a solution treatment of moisture containing wetting agents, detergents, anti-microbial chemicals, and/or similar treatment materials, having the ability to breakdown or remove oils, fats, waxes and other natural liquid repellant materials and contaminants that deter or retard moisture absorption from the yarns, which treatment generally is applied to the yarns with the yarns in a finished or dry state, such as at a final winding or take-up operation in the yarn processing flow. The wetting agent is mixed with water to form a wetting agent solution applied to the yarns. Typically, the wetting agent or detergent material used includes a low foaming alkaline cleansing or soap derived agent having demulsifying properties and a relatively neutral pH. For example, the wetting agents can include an ethoxyrated fatty alcohol blend such as Sandopan NF, which exhibits low foaming properties and is non-toxic, containing natural and biodegradable solvents. Other similar non-toxic, low foaming, demulsifying agents also can be used. In addition, a low foaming wetting agent typically is used so as to not add undue residues, bubbles, or cloudiness in the retained water. Several wetting agents also have distinctive aromas and can be incorporated within the solution. It has been derived that a preferred range of concentrations of the wetting agent solution to be applied is normally about a 3% to 20% concentration of a soap derived wetting agent in water applied at approximately a 3% to 15% add-on to the yarn, and preferably at about 5% to 10% by weight, although greater or lesser concentrations of the wetting agent and/or application rates therefor also can be used as desired or necessary.  
         [0015]    The present invention also contemplates adding an anti-microbial to the wetting agent solution. For example, a 2% to 15% addition of a concentrated topical anti-microbial such as a Clariant Sanitized 96-21, a halogenated phenoxy compound, or a similar baceriostatic compound that is non-toxic and does not contain compounds that can cause skin irritations on contact, and which does not have compounds such as silicones or oils that can cause spotting on floors or that can react adversely with the wetting agent and/or cleaning solutions, can be added to the wetting agent solution. The anti-microbial agent generally is mixed in solution with the wetting agent, or a topical anti-microbial, such as UltraFresh, can be applied directly to the yarns to help deter the growth of bacteria within the yarns and any mop formed therefrom. Unlike other applications where wetting agents are used, the present invention does not, however, require a process for drying the yarns after the wetting agent solution is added. Since the cotton fibers of the yarns generally are comprised of recycled content and are subject to a higher degree of trash, natural oils, and waxes, the addition of any moisture could propagate the growth and colonization of bacteria colonies, however, the addition of the anti-microbial compounds to the wetting agent solution generally reduces this problem.  
         [0016]    The ideal location to apply a liquid over spray in the manufacture of a textile yarns is during the opening and blending stage. At this point in the manufacturing process, the fiber mass generally is substantially opened up and is in a loose state, and thus an evenly applied spray can be applied to the fibrous yarns or mat for achieving good uniformity. However, if detergents/soaps, wetting agents, or anti-microbial chemicals were applied at this stage of manufacture without a drying process, it could cause severe problems in the subsequent manufacturing processes because the amount of moisture/liquid required to be applied to be effective at such a stage n the manufacturing process would cause the fibers to become extremely wet and would deter their processability throughout the continuing textile cleaning and carding operations. Without a costly heat set process on the fibers, the wetting agent and/or anti-microbial molecules also would have a tendency to be removed from the surface of the fibers by the beating and cleaning actions of continuing carding and spinning processes.  
         [0017]    The present invention contemplates the addition of the wetting agent or detergent solution to the mop yarns by the application of an over spray or mist in the later stages of the manufacture of the mop yarns with the yarns being in a finished, dry state. This could be accomplished as the mop is assembled and before it is placed in a plastic bag or other packaging, but preferably will be applied at the yarn manufacturing location wherein the yarn is in its final stage of processing, prior to assembly of the mop, and is traveling at preset speeds and conditions where all aspects of moisture and percentage of solution add-on generally can be continually adjusted and monitored for proper application. Other application methods, such as dipping, passing the yarns through a bath or the use of an applicator roll(s) also can be used as discussed below.  
         [0018]    Various processes for applying the wetting agent and/or anti-microbial agent solutions to the yarns are illustrated in FIGS. 1 and 2. In a first embodiment of the method of the present invention illustrated in FIG. 1, the dry, spun yarns  10  are fed through a guide  11  in a series of eyelets or guide openings  12  and are fed into a spraying enclosure  13 , passing through additional sets of guides  14  and with the yarns generally spaced about ⅛″-½″ apart, preferably ¼″, although greater or lesser spacings also can be used as desired. The guides serve to separate and guide the yarns through the spray housing as the wetting agent solution W applied thereto. As the yarns are passed through the spray housing, a liquid spray containing the wetting agent solution W is applied in an overspray type process against the yarns. The wetting agent and anti-microbial chemical agents generally are mixed with cold tap water to the desired percentages in a pressurized holding tank  16  to form the wetting agent solution W, with the solution generally subjected to agitation, such as by an impeller  17 , the use of air in the tank, or by operation of a recirculating pump, to ensure that the chemicals are mixed thoroughly and stay in solution. The interior of the tank  16  generally is pressurized, typically to about 25-30 lbs. of pressure, by compressed air introduced into the tank. This positive pressure tends to push the wetting agent solution through conduits or spray lines  18  to one or more spray bulkheads  19  positioned at various points along the path of travel of the yarns (indicated by arrow  21 ) through the housing  13 , along with a bleed-off of air.  
         [0019]    The spray bulkheads  19  generally include precision spray nozzles such as model JAUPMCO SU13ADF-SSBR Spraying Systems Co. nozzles, which nozzles generally are mounted to a plenum or spray bar and are positioned in spaced series, each oriented perpendicular to the yarn path  21 . The spacing of the nozzles along the spray bar generally is selected so that the spray for each parallel nozzle does not substantially overlap the spray from an adjacent nozzle. Preferably a flat spray pattern will be applied via the nozzles, with the spray further generally being assisted by an air stream released by the spray nozzles along with the wetting agent solution spray. The spacing or distance of the nozzles from the yarn path also can be varied as desired, but typically a spacing or distance of approximately 8-9 inches has been found to be effective. It will, however, be understood by those skilled in the art that other spacings can be utilized as desired, depending upon coverage desired and/or sizes or types of yarn being treated. In addition, as illustrated in FIG. 1, two rows or more of nozzles typically will be used, with each row of nozzles being oriented so as to apply the wetting agent solution to a different side of the yarns. These spray streams generally are stopped and started in conjunction with intermittent yarn flows, with a calculated speed of the yarn mass being maintained to achieve the desired percent of add-on of the wetting agent solution, which percentage can also be adjusted to accommodate or account for the distance of the nozzles to the yarn or the amount of pressure behind the application of the liquid wetting agent solution.  
         [0020]    As indicated in FIG. 1, the spray bulkheads thus apply an overspray of the liquid wetting agent solution upstream from the final winding or takeup of the yarns into a ball or similar windup as indicated by  22 . The wetting agent solution W further is applied in substantially even spray for enhanced uniformity of application and penetration of the wetting agent solution into the yarns. Excess spray or mist is drawn from the housing  13  via an exhaust duct  23  and exhaust fan or vacuum assembly  24  to avoid leakage of the wetting agent solution sprays outside of the housing  13 . In addition, excess liquid from the spray(s) can be collected at the bottom of the housing for collection and recirculation back to the tank  16  by a conduit  26  and/or for proper disposal.  
         [0021]    In an alternative embodiment, the yarns  10  are fed from their guide  11  through an additional upstream guide  31  to an applicator station  32  that generally includes a bath or trough  33  containing a liquid bath of the wetting agent solution W and a “kiss roll” or applicator roll  34 . The applicator roll is revolved within the trough  33  and picks up a coating of the wetting agent solution W from the bath and trough  33 . As indicated in FIG. 2, the yarns  10  are passed over the applicator roll  34  as it is rotated through the bath of wetting agent solution W and are subsequently passed through a downstream guide  36 . As a result, the yarns engage and at least partially wrap around the applicator roll, engaging the roll at an angle of deflection D so that the yarns remain in contact with the applicator roll for a sufficient time to enable the yarns to be infused with the wetting agent solution on the applicator roll  34 . Thereafter, the yarns are wound or collected in a ball warp or similar winding at the final winding station  19  prior to formation into finished mops and/or for packaging. In addition, a level sensor  37  typically is mounted to the trough or bath  33  so as to monitor the level of a liquid wetting agent solution. The level sensor communicates with a regulator assembly  38 , which causes a fresh supply of the wetting agent solution to be supplied to the trough  33  from a pressurized storage tank  39  as the level of the bath of wetting agent solution within the trough  33  drops below a desired or preset level so as to maintain a substantially full bath of the wetting agent solution within the trough.  
         [0022]    The present invention also has another advantage of generally integrating the wetting agent into the molecular structure of the fibers incorporating the outside sheath of the yarn first as the wetting agent solution is applied. These are the first fibers to come in contact with any liquids in the initial use of a mop. This ensures these fibers have reduced levels of natural oil and natural waxes so as to promote a speedy performance “break-in” of the entire mop bundle.  
         [0023]    Mop Yarn Evaluation Testing  
         [0024]    Test results of six different formulations of wetting agents alone and with different percentages of an added anti-microbial material are shown below. All samples were placed in a basin of room temperature tap water for 1 minute and followed the following test method:  
         [0025]    Water Absorption Testing  
         [0026]    1. Using an industry standard skein winder, a 12-yard skein was wound.  
         [0027]    2. The two ends of the yarn skein were tied together and removed from the skein winder.  
         [0028]    3. The skein was then supported by one end and, using yarn from the same test yarn cone, a yarn strand was wrapped around the entire diameter of the yarn skein and tied to hold the yarn skein together during testing.  
         [0029]    4. The tied yarn mass was then weighed and the measured dry weight was recorded.  
         [0030]    5. The skein was then placed in a basin or pool of cold tap water, deep enough to submerge the yarn mass, with the yarn mass placed in the water pool without any agitation, and with the mass maintained out of contact with the sides of the basin or any other foreign object(s).  
         [0031]    6. An elapsed time of 60 seconds was measured. Immediately thereafter, the skein was picked up and allowed to drip for 10 seconds. The skein was then placed into a container and the soaked mass was weighed.  
         [0032]    7.  
         Calculate   :       weight                 of                 dry                 mass        -        weight                 of                 soaked                 mass       weight                 of                 soaked                 mass         =     %                 water                 pick        -        up                           
 
         [0033]    8. The skein of yarn was then removed and any pooled water within the container was poured out the skein was then doubled once again, with the moisture being removed from the yarn mass by squeezing and twisting, and any excess moisture by shaking.  
         [0034]    9. The skein was then placed into the container to be weighed again.  
         [0035]    10.  
         Calculate   :       weight                 of                 soaked                 mass        -        weight                 of                 squeezed                 mass       weight                 of                 soaked                 mass         =     Working                 Percentage                           
 
         [0036]    In the following test results, one will notice the samples representing a higher percentage of the wetting agents performed superior in absorption over the samples containing a lower percentage. However, this higher percentage added cost, water cloudiness, and extra foaming within the water bath.  
         [0037]    The test procedures required all the samples to be tested for absorption properties immediately upon applying the topical add-on, with identical samples being placed in a sealed plastic bag for 168 hours to check for bacteria growth and associated odors. These samples were then also tested for paralleling absorption properties compared to their initial counterparts. It was found that there were minimal differences in the yarn&#39;s absorption properties between testing immediately and after a 168-hour interlude.  
         [0038]    The analysis of this particular set of trials indicated a preferred ratio of ingredients and percentage of add-on agents was between the concentrations used in samples 4 and 5, so as to thus require approximately 5% to 10% wetting agent combined with 5% to 10% anti-microbial material in solution. These two samples used a 5% add on of water weight to the dry yarn state or 0.0625% add-on compared to the weight of a gallon of water. Surprisingly, this delivers a working percentage of moisture absorption of 276% to 424% within a minute of the mop&#39;s initial use. The instant invention does acknowledge the necessity for varying ratios between wetting agents, anti-microbials, and the add-on percentages of the treatment solutions depending upon different chemical manufacturers, concentrations, and types of topical applications involved.  
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           Test Results:                                Sample 1:   Approximately .125% add-on/1 gal. water            10%   Sanitized brand T 96-21       15%   Imerol LS liquid conc. (orange smell)       10%   Add on           let soak for 1 min.            weight dry: .1102 lb.   weight wet: .5050 lb.   weight squeezed: .2738 lb.       Water pick-up: 358%   Working Percentage: 45.7%            Observations:   Left a milky residue in water            SAMPLES TESTED 168 HOURS IN PLASTIC AFTER APPLICATION:            weight dry: .0938 lb.   weight wet: .3324 lb.   weight squeezed: .2100 lb.       Water pick-up: 254.37%   Working Percentage: 36.8%            Observations:   Smell: normal           Damp to the touch            Sample 2:   Approximately .125% wetting agent/1 gal. water            20%   Sanitized brand T 96-21       20%   antiMussol.       30%   Sandopan       10%   add on           let soak for 1 min.            weight dry: .1102 lb.   weight wet: .5280 lb.   weight squeezed: .3056 lb.       Water pick-up: 379%.   Working Percentage: 42.12%            Observations:   Left an extremely milky residue in water, NOT ACCEPTABLE.            SAMPLES TESTED 168 HOURS IN PLASTIC AFTER APPLICATION:            weight dry: .1124 lb.   weight wet: .8050 lb.   weight squeezed: .5472 lb.       Water pick-up: 616.1%   Working Percentage: 32.0%            Observations:   Smell: OK, dry to touch;           bubbled rapidly in water/left milky residue in water.            Sample 3:   Approximately .125% add-on/1 gal. water             5%   Sanitized brand T 96-21       10%   Sandopan LF liquid conc.       10%   Add on           let soak for 1 min.            weight dry: .1102 lb.   weight wet: .5420 lb.   weight squeezed: .3198 lb.       Water pick-up: 391.8%   Working Percentage: 40.99%            Observations:   Did not turn water cloudy, did leave a few bubbles on surface of           water.            SAMPLES TESTED 168 HOURS IN PLASTIC AFTER APPLICATION:            weight dry: .1132 lb.   weight wet: .7416 lb.   weight squeezed: .5266 lb.       Water pick-up: 555.1%   Working Percentage: 28.9%            Observations:   Smell: normal, damp to touch.           Good bubbling action, DID NOT OVERLY discolor water.            Sample 4:   Approximately .0625% add-on/1 gal. water             5%   Sanitized brand T 96-21       10%   Sandopan LF liquid conc.        5%   Add on           let soak for 1 min.            weight dry: .1102 lb.   weight wet: .4910 lb.   weight squeezed: .2546 lb.       Water pick-up: 345.5%   Working Percentage: 48.15%            Observations:   Did not turn water cloudy, left only a few bubbles on surface of           water.            SAMPLES TESTED 168 HOURS IN PLASTIC AFTER APPLICATION:            weight dry: .1040 lb.   weight wet: .4914 lb.   weight squeezed: .2852 lb.       Water pick-up: 424%   Working Percentage: 41.9%            Observations:   Smell: none, good bubbling action/sank fast.           DID NOT discolor water.            Sample 5:   Approximately .0625% add-on/1 gal. water            10%   Sanitized brand T 96-21       10%   Sandopan LF liquid conc.        5%   Add on           let soak for 1 min.            weight dry: .1140 lb.   weight wet: .5388 lb.   weight squeezed: .2728 lb.       Water pick-up: 372.6%   Working Percentage: 49.37%            Observations:   No residue or bubbles in water.            SAMPLES TESTED 168 HOURS IN PLASTIC AFTER APPLICATION:            weight dry: .1076 lb.   weight wet: .4046 lb.   weight squeezed: .2784 lb.       Water pick-up: 276%   Working Percentage: 31.2%            Observations:   Smell: none, dry to touch           Some bubbles, no water discoloration            30 second re-soak TEST:   weight wet: .4656 lb.   weight squeezed: .2366 lb.           Working Percentage: 49.1%            Observations:   Yarn completely working on second dip.            Sample 6:   Approximately .0625% add-on/1 gal. water             5%   Sanitized brand T 96-21        5%   Sandopan LF liquid conc.        5%   Add on           let soak for 1 min.            weight dry: .1146 lb.   weight wet: .4088 lb.   weight squeezed: .2504 lb.       Water pick-up: 256.7%   Working Percentage: 15.84%            Observations:   No residue or bubbles in water, yarn only slightly wet.            SAMPLES TESTED 168 HOURS IN PLASTIC AFTER APPLICATION:            weight dry: .1048 lb.   weight wet: .3514 lb.   weight squeezed: .2630 lb.       Water pick-up: 235%   Working Percentage: 25.2%            Observations:   Smell: normal, fair absorption No bubbles                weight wet: .4286 lb.   weight squeezed: .2708 lb.           Working Percentage: 36.8%            Observations:   Yarn completely working on second dip.                  
 
         [0039]    In calculating the cost of the present invention versus the added value of the process of the present invention, the cost of chemicals and the added processing costs for the use of the concentrated wetting agents and topical anti-microbial exceed the price of an economy cotton mop yarn. However, when diluted with water to the desired concentrations, the costs are well below that of a finished yarn. Also, all mop yarns have a final take-up operation where they are being put on some sort of yarn carrier for shipment or transfer. At this operation, the wetting agent/anti-microbial solution can be applied by either a kiss roll applicator or by an over spray, as discussed above, so no additional costs need to be incurred other than the installation of the applicator device. It has also been found that an economical cotton mop that is placed in a pail of water for 24 hours typically will have a water pick-up percentage of about 105%. The same economical cotton mop incorporating the present invention, however, can have a water pickup of as much as 424% in just one minute.  
         [0040]    While detailed embodiments of the present invention are disclosed herein, it is understood that the disclosed embodiments are merely exemplary of the invention, which may be embodied in various forms. Therefore, specific structural and functional details are not to be interpreted as limiting, but rather as a representative basis for teaching one skilled in the art to variously employ the principles of the present invention.