## 3 Results and Discussion
### Statistical Evaluation of the Test Series with Regard to the Applied Squeezing Force  
Table 10 analyses the samples in relation to the spring force applied by the pressing springs. Two samples per factor level were tested with water. The parameters are as follows:  
* Immersion frequency;
* Squeezing force (spring length);
* Immersion time. The evaluation was carried out by determining the load of the textile samples. The mass \(\Delta\)m of the water in the textile is related to the mass of the dry textile. The data are averaged in Table 11 and then analysed with regard to the effect and interactions of the factors (compare Table 3). The effects of the three parameters, immersion frequency, spring length and the total duration of the process, were calculated according to Equation (1). The effects of the factors are listed in Table 12. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline
**Trial** & **m\({}_{0}\) [g]** & **m\({}_{1}\) [g]** & **\(\Delta\)m [g]** & **Load [g/g]** \\ \hline
1 & 340/338 & 422/428 & 82/90 & 0.24/0.27 \\
2 & 328/328 & 410/408 & 82/80 & 0.25/0.24 \\
3 & 342/340 & 426/432 & 84/92 & 0.25/0.27 \\
4 & 342/338 & 446/434 & 104/96 & 0.3/0.28 \\
5 & 346/346 & 438/432 & 92/88 & 0.27/0.25 \\
6 & 338/338 & 424/436 & 86/98 & 0.25/0.29 \\
7 & 342/338 & 444/428 & 102/90 & 0.3/0.27 \\
8 & 328/328 & 412/414 & 84/86 & 0.26/0.26 \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 10: Evaluation of the test series regarding the squeezing force. Figure 5: Flame mark on “KlevoGlass 550” finished with flame retardant agent, without any perforation. From the evaluation of the effects, it can be seen that none of the factors set in the tests has a significant influence on the impregnation of the textile. In the next step, possible interactions between the factors are analysed according to Equation (3). The interactions between take-off speed (A), spring length (B*) and the total duration of the process (C) are analysed in Table 13.  
It can be seen that there are no significant interactions between the factors (all values are almost 0). During the tests, it can be seen that a greater spring force leads to the textile being pulled through the padder much better. If the spring force is too low, the fabric is not pulled through the padder in a controlled manner. The pressure on the take-off roller is not high enough to guide the textile through the process. The frictional force between the textile and the driven squeezing roller is also greater due to the greater spring force. As a result, the textile is guided through the process with minimal disruption. It is, therefore, beneficial for the stability of the process control to realise the highest possible squeezing force. Table 14 summarises the subjective evaluation of the process stability with different settings of the squeezing force. Statistical Evaluation of the Final Test Series with Regard to the Loading of Flame Retardants Functionalized with Bifunctional Peptides  
Table 15 analyses the loading of the textiles with flame retardants functionalized with bifunctional peptides (CgDef-MH). It can be seen that the basis weight of the textiles is not significantly affected by varying the time and the concentration of flame retardant in the finish. Therefore, the concentration of the flame retardant and the process time are chosen to be low in order to keep the costs of the process low. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline Factors & AB & AC & BC & ABC \\ \hline Interactions & 0 & \(-2.5\times 10^{-3}\) & \(-2.5\times 10^{-3}\) & \(-2.5\times 10^{-3}\) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 13: Interactions of immersion frequency, spring length and the total duration of the process.