Wesley Clements, engineering director at Baldwin Technology discusses dispelling industry myths and the company’s non-contact finishing precision spray system. As seen in WTiN’s Zero Carbon Report.
In rivers, lakes and oceans around the world we can see the impact of hazardous chemical waste the textile industry contributes to. This is not new, surprising or hidden.
Why now?
Pollution has largely been ignored in the industry but it has now been called out so loudly that it can no longer go on unseen or be ignored. For conscious-savvy consumers, the enemy is now the textile industry and their branded products.
The promised land
So, what would consumers, brands and mills consider a win-win?
- Minimal environmental footprint on the planet
- Maintain or lower production costs
- Increase speed of production and/or get greater capacity from existing mills
- Increase brand reputation
Typically, points 1 and 2 are a trade off against each other, but this is an old-world way of viewing progress. We are in a new era of advancement in technology that places all of these upsides on the positive axis.
Myths busted
Like all new processes and technologies, there are the early adopters who see the benefits and break the inertia, followed by the fast followers who see the concept proved and finally, the laggards. We must break the myths to break the inertia.
Helping to dispel industry myths, TexCoatTM G4 is the first non-contact finishing precision spray system that revolutionises textile finishing. Distinct from rotary sprays, it is a completely different technology that precisely applies finishing exactly and only where it is needed in a closed loop waste free system.
Myth 1: This technology couldn’t penetrate or give as good coverage as foulard/pad methods
Tests and real deployments prove that non-contact precision spray drives chemistry as effectively or more effectively into the core of the yarn. And, as there are three overlapping sprays per nozzle, not only is the penetration and coverage equivalent or superior to traditional methods, but it is also more even and simultaneously less wasteful of chemicals.
Myth 2: Retrofitting the line will be too disruptive
Retrofits are done with minimal disruption to operations as testing can be performed onsite at the equipment manufacturer to exactly replicate chemical and textile finishing requirements.
Training in using the machinery is minimal as jobs can be pre-programmed and then accessed through a digital display.
The evidence
Mills and brands are motivated to transform their production in-line with changing regulations and global sustainability expectations, but they need evidence:
1. Chemical waste
For every application wet-on-wet or wet-on-dry, mills waste the remaining amount in the trough every time they need to change chemistry or go from a darker to a lighter shade, typically, depending on the volume of the trough, this could be from 50-150 litres. Usually, mills make about 10 pad renewals daily. Calculating an average of 100 litres/trough, every day mills waste around 1,000 litres of water. However, with Baldwin’s TexCoat there is zero wastewater.
2. Energy saving
Wet-on-wet applications
For practical purposes, the average drying capacity in a stenter is 80 kg of water/h/chamber, at 150°C. For an 8-chamber dryer, there is 18% less electricity consumption and 11% lower gas consumption. Plus, with a 12% dryer speed increase, more products can be produced in the same timeframe, with less mill capacity.
Wet-on-dry applications
For practical purposes the average drying capacity in a stenter is 80 kg of water/h/chamber, at 150°C. For an 8-chamber dryer, there is 43% less electricity consumption, 38% increase in dryer speed and 30% lower gas consumption.
