Water Repellent Finishes of Polyester Fiber Using Glow Discharge

글로우방전을 이용한 폴리에스테르섬유의 발수가공

  • Mo, Sang Young (Department of Textile Eng., College of Eng., Chungnam National Univ., Daejeon 301- 764, Korea) ;
  • Kim, Gi Lyong (Department of Textile Eng., College of Eng., Chungnam National Univ., Daejeon 301- 764, Korea) ;
  • Kim, Tae Nyun (Department of Textiles and Clothings, Chunjoo Woosuk College, Chun joo 565-800, Korea) ;
  • Chun, Tae Il (Department of Textiles and Clothings, Dongeui Univ., Pusan 614-714, Korea)
  • Published : 1993.12.01


In order to surface Hydrophobilization of Poly(ethylene terephthalate) (PET) fiber samples were treated in the atmosphere of CF$_{4}$ or $C_{2}$F$_{6}$glow discharge. The sample used in this study was PET film which is 75$\mu$m thick made by Teijin, O-Type(Japan). The cleaned samples were placed in plasma reactor made of pyrex glass cylinder, and plasma processing was carried out by glow discharge of CF$_{4}$ or $C_{2}$F$_{6}$ gas, being continuously fed by gas flow and continuously pumped out by a vacuum system. Electric power source for generate plasma state was sustained alternating current(60Hz) and voltage was sustained 600 volt. The duration of plasma treatment varied from 15 to 120 seconds except special case, the monomer gase pressure varied from 0.02 to 0.3 Torr and power range was 10 to 90 watts. The hydrophobic features of changed PET surface were evaluated by contact angle measurement and surface chemical characteristics were analyzed by ESCA. Results can be summerized as follows. 1. The most favorable setting position of substrate was the center area between the two electrodes. 2. $C_{2}$F$_{6}$ discharge current was lower than that of CF$_{4}$ when same voltage was sustained. Treated efficiency between CF$_{4}$ and $C_{2}$F$_{6}$ did not revealed significant differences under same electric power(wattage). 3. When monomer pressure is very low below 0.02 torr, as though substrate is exposed to CF$_{4}$ or $C_{2}$F$_{6}$ plasma, it tend to be hydrophilic through a little of fluorine bond and a great deal of oxidizing reaction. 4. There brought good hydrophobilization when monomer pressure was more 0.1 torr and duration of glow discharge treatment was over 45 seconds. When monomer pressure was too high, discharge current became low. Although prolong the duration, there was no more high hydrophobilization. 5. According to ESCA analysis, there were a little CF bond and a prevailing CF$_{2}$ bond in CF$_{4}$-treated substrate. There were CF$_{3}$, a little CF and a prevailing CF$_{2}$ bond in $C_{2}$F$_{6}$-treated substrate.d substrate.