Clean It Up

UK Floor Cleaning Forum => Carpet Cleaning Forum => Topic started by: CRAIG LIND on March 17, 2005, 10:39:52 pm

Title: microsplitting
Post by: CRAIG LIND on March 17, 2005, 10:39:52 pm

excuse my ignorance, but can anyone tell me how microsplitting actually works? and is it better than your standard detergents.
Would i benefit from using this, as the majority of my work is domestic or is texatherm better still. ???

Title: Re: microsplitting
Post by: strakercleaning on March 17, 2005, 11:01:12 pm

Search 'microsplitters' then sit down for weekend and wade through it  :o

Title: Re: microsplitting
Post by: ABLECLEAN on April 12, 2005, 11:35:07 pm

Contact Nick at Solution UK Ltd.

on 01726 852880 He will clue you up and is very helpful.

Title: Re: microsplitting
Post by: paul@ctcs on April 13, 2005, 09:53:45 am

Inside out Cleaning,
 
Where a conventional detergent bonds to soiling a microsplitter disperses (shatters) soiling  making it easily extracted or removed. One major benefit of this is non resoiling, any detergent residue will inevitably cause resoiling ( see thread running on this subject ) this is not the case with microsplitters. Another bonus is not needing to neutralise alkaline pre sprays due to microsplitters self neutralising, this does away with using an acidic rince (in 99% of cases) thus saving money  :)
As well as great results MS are safe to use where some detergents are not so confidence enspiring :P
The above benefits explained in laymans terms to customers is also a great sales pitch which has won me a great deal of work.

Regards

Paul

Title: !!
Post by: Mike Halliday on April 13, 2005, 12:27:48 pm

 'One major benefit of this is non resoiling, any detergent residue will inevitably cause resoiling'

where do people get this crap from!  I'd like to see scientific proof this statement is true.

its getting to a piont where I feel if enough people said ' detergents cause your skin to turn blue' everyone  would start believing it ::)

Don't people realise that the sellers of Microsplitters are perpetuating this myth to aid the sales of thier chemicals.

are we all parrots!!

detergents cause resoiling
detergents cause resoiling
detergents cause resoiling
detergents cause resoiling
detergents cause resoiling
detergents cause resoiling
detergents cause resoiling
detergents cause resoiling
detergents cause resoiling
detergents cause resoiling
detergents cause resoiling

Title: Re: microsplitting
Post by: paul@ctcs on April 13, 2005, 12:37:42 pm

Mike,

If your read what I said you will see the words " Detergent RESIDUE will cause resoiling"

Now that is a fact!!

Squark!!

Paul

Title: Re: microsplitting
Post by: ian richards on April 13, 2005, 01:05:48 pm

ORDER!!!! ORDER!!!!

Title: Re: microsplitting
Post by: nick.solution on April 13, 2005, 01:10:03 pm

Hi

For clarification, if a detergent based chemical is used correctly and followed with a acid rinse the risk of a detegent residue is reduced to a minimal level, However if a non detergent based chemical is used then there is no residue to cause re-soiling therefore the re-soil process is slower.

Best regards Nick

Title: Re: microsplitting
Post by: strakercleaning on April 13, 2005, 01:31:51 pm

Simple........if my kids wash hands with soap and dont rinse off.
I SEND THEM BACK TO RINSE PROPERLY................ not becauase i have been brainwashed by the manufacturers of microsplitters.  ???
But because common sense tells anyone that it will go sticky.

Moving on now, to Rocket science................................

Title: Re: microsplitting
Post by: Mike Halliday on April 13, 2005, 02:18:54 pm

Paul says its a fact, so it must be true ::) ::)

Paul, at which university did you study chemical analysis? I know what you said because I cut & pasted it, so let me ask the question again ' where is the scientific proof that detergent residue causes resoiling'

Chris with all due respect your kid washing their hand & carpet cleaning is a completely different comparrison. Soap is designed to be rinsed off, detergents are designed to be safe when left in the carpet.

All I want is an independant study ( not someone with a vested interest in selling non-detergent chemical s) to say 'when used correctly detergent residue will cause resoiling'

Mike

Title: Re: microsplitting
Post by: strakercleaning on April 13, 2005, 02:49:00 pm

Mike......... with even more respect.
Detergents may be made to be safe when left in the carpets but safe is not unsticky. Soap is, as you say meant to be rinsed, but I was under the impression that detergents should be rinsed from carpets also. Is this not the sole purpose of Fibre Rinse type products, meant to be free rinsing and to neutralise the high ph of detergent pre-treatments.
Mike, you ask the question " where is the scientific proof that detergent residue causes resoiling"
Tip a small amount on any flat surface, porous or not and watch what sticks to it over a period of time. If this is then wiped off, invariably, it will takes 2 or 3 passes to fully remove. Translate this to carpet and vacuum passes and (even) you must admit that the sticky patch will become darker as the vacuum continually fails to lift the soil that is stuck.
I used detergents for 20 years before getting onto microsplitters and know that they can be rinsed out leaving a non resoiling carpet. What i, and most others ,are trying to emphasise is that the use of ms makes the rinsing process less drastic/harsh and takes away the risk/guesswork when it comes to resoiling.

ps........... off to pick up my kids now and see if they understand that explanation ::)

Title: Re: microsplitting
Post by: Doug Holloway on April 13, 2005, 02:52:51 pm

Hi Guys,

Mick I think you are making a very valid point and have thought for some time that the NCCA could run independant comparative tests on subjects like resoiling.

It would be useful to test different chemical types and also different methods.

Different manufacturers will obviously make different claims and they are hardly likely to say that their products cause faster resoiling.

One reason I stayed out of the main stream CC community for all these years was that after having attended a cleaning course in 1982 , I left feeling there was an awful lot of psuedo bull poop and very little science.

Bearing in mind that I was working as a chemist then I suppose my expectations may have been higher than was realistic.

Protector products have been damaged by the claims made which were just not achievable

Another industry which is even worse is beauty products , it costs me a fortune indirectly.
How many 60 year olds do you see who look 30? Answer =None

Just becuse a salesman tells you somrthing 20 times dosen't make it any truer.

Remember 'weapons of mass destruction' ;)

Cheers,

Doug

Title: Re: microsplitting
Post by: Dynafoam on April 13, 2005, 04:02:50 pm

Mike,

Much as I would like to argue with you (just for the fun of it  ;D), your point has some validity.

I have amassed enough observational evidence to be convinced that:

1) Different detergent formulations have differing re-soil characteristics.

2) All detergents, by their very nature, have the potential to contribute toward accelerated re-soiling.

3) The quantity of detergent residue will clearly have an effect.

Experience also tell me that a well-formulated detergent-based product, used at the correct dilution rate and with the minimum left in the carpet will not accelerate the re soiling to a noticeable degree. This I have tested in public buildings by clear-rinsing test strips across traffic lanes and observing the results before the next clean. Too rough-and-ready to be scientific, but good enough for real-world testing.

I do feel however that a product that has no re-soil characteristics can make a significant difference in instances where the cleaner fails to remove sufficient product from the carpet .

Title: Re: microsplitting
Post by: strakercleaning on April 13, 2005, 04:09:34 pm

Doug. I see that you say that Mick has a valid point. Why am i not surprised that you would only see his side of the discussion. You are, blatantly, not a fan of ms or the suppliers.
Any chemical left on a carpet, other than a rinsing agent, is a bad thing. FACT
Soapy residue is sticky. FACT
I am no manufacturer, supplier or chemist BUT i have 22 years top end carpet cleaning experience and a sound mind.
I used detergents successfully and would probably still be doing so, had i not used ms.
I seek a chemical that will get me the results i know to be the highest without all the heavy work and expense of chemically rinsing detergents.
My customer base is big and goes back a long way so all my customers have not seen the difference since using ms but those that have have commented on "how i managed to do the job so efficiently", " how quick it has dried" and "how much longer it took to look or feel dirty again"
Testaments from customers who are Lawyers, Doctors, Company Directors, Actors, Politicians and Arch Bishops etc. Surely they are not as brainwashed or naive as you seem to think us mere mortal non chemist CCs are.

Title: Re: microsplitting
Post by: paul@ctcs on April 13, 2005, 04:22:35 pm

Mike,

I did get an A in chemistry ;)

As you know detergents have water attracting molecular chains and water repelling components. The water attracting molecule means that one end of the molecule bonds with water, while the other side is bonds to soiling. The  flushing action of the extraction process will carry the detergent which in turn  pulls the grime away from the carpet fibres.
It is unlikely with even the most powerful extraction equipment that 100% of the detergent will be removed from the carpet, therefore causing a degree of resoiling however minimal. I imagine this would become more evident with “ In Tank” detergents.

Regards

Paul

P.S. What do you mean with this comment??

"not someone with a vested interest in selling non-detergent chemical s"

A vested interest lol!! I dont benefit from Nicks sales whatsoever but I wished I did ;D

Title: Re: microsplitting
Post by: Doug Holloway on April 13, 2005, 04:26:56 pm

Chris,

I said it would be good to get independant tests carried out by a neutral body on the resoiling of different chemicals / methods.

I think this puts me in the middle  and I certainly use both MS and detergents and will almost certainly continue to do so.

I am trying to be objective and agree that the extra effort required in the MS process does give a good impression and oozes professionalism.

As to your point on brainwashing then Archbishops , lawyers and politicans would be candidates!

Cheers,

Doug

p.s

It would be intersting to see the MK dons reception after a month or two ,with all the different methods employed there.

Title: Re: microsplitting
Post by: Dennis on April 13, 2005, 04:34:53 pm

The only "scientific" discussion I have seen is in Eric Brown's Fundamentals of Carpet Maintenance.(p50)

 The worst resoiler was...........
plain tap water!

Woolsafe do test but whether the results are freely available I don't know.

CCP 9

    * Determination of the resoiling propensity of carpet maintenance products (BS 4088: Section 1.1)
    * Specimens of carpet are pre-cleaned with the cleaning product and soiled according to CCP 17; the soiling level of the cleaned and soiled product is compared with that of the original, not cleaned, carpet.

Title: Re: microsplitting
Post by: nick.solution on April 13, 2005, 04:42:53 pm

Hi Guys

An intersting debate, the over-riding factor is "if used correctly"

Most products will achieve the result they were designed to achieve, as someone with a vested interest, their are more reasons to use M/S than just there cleaning capabilities, how many detergent based products contain or are said to contain harmfull components and carcinagens, isn't this more imprtant we as carpet cleaners are closer to the chemicals than any-one.

Best regards Nick

Title: Re: microsplitting
Post by: Matt Read on April 13, 2005, 05:36:36 pm

Just wondered if an ms convert could explain this....lifted from a another thread :

'I have been using MS for 6 months now and am v.happy, but have noticed alot of dare i say residue around the bottle tops which is white and crusty, any ideas? Hope this doesnt mean im leaving a residue allbeit small in the carpet after cleaning. :-\'

Thanks

Title: Re: microsplitting
Post by: Len Gribble on April 13, 2005, 07:12:00 pm

Matt

I’m no techno would have thought self explanatory it’s in it undiluted form, the same thing happens with the other agents I use think it called crystallisation and yes one can leave cleaning agent residue in the carpet, it called bad wand technique :(, even if you are rinsing with h2o.

Len

Title: Re: microsplitting
Post by: strakercleaning on April 13, 2005, 07:21:48 pm

Matt . I suppose it 's possible if customer leaves carpet in the van overnight.  ;D
I think it forms from spills that freeze overnight but i only seen it a few times over winter.
I make sure that during the cold nights i wipe my rim properly :o

Title: Re: microsplitting
Post by: dave401uk on April 13, 2005, 07:31:34 pm

well we seem to be heading in the direction of rocket sience, but warp speed isnt being reached, is it chaps ;D ;D
Do a very simple test(you know you dont need to,we all come across it every day)

Drop some 1001/vanish on your carpet,in a few weeks you will have a black mark,as you know this is caused by dust ect sticking to the residue from the detergant.

And i do find it a little dissapionting that certain people seem so consumed with knocking suppliers of M/S or any other form of gear,

We all go to work to make a profit, we all belive that what we have/do is the mutts nuts, and that is great, but i think M/S is the dogs do dars in a bottle, and if my supplier keeps me happy with service and good chemicals, i should and so should anyone else be able to shout about it,
We expect our custoumers to shout our praises, dont we? ::)

Dave,

No i am not sleeping with Nick ;) ;)

Title: Re: microsplitting
Post by: strakercleaning on April 13, 2005, 09:18:50 pm

Dave.........I should hope your'e not sleeping with Nick  ::)

He offered me 1st refusal  :o

Title: Re: microsplitting
Post by: Dynafoam on April 13, 2005, 10:31:17 pm

Matt,

Len is correct - slight leakage past the cap - water content evaporate - solids crystallise.

As Len has pointed out we are talking about the concentrate, not RTU Solution.

If you are concerned about un-rinsed residue try this:

Dilute the product 1:16 and lightly spray onto a clean window and allow to dry.

Repeat the above with a detergent-based pre-spray at the recommended dilution rate.

When dry, examine both areas both visibly and by lightly passing a soft dry cloth over the areas - you will both see and feel the difference.

Title: Re: microsplitting
Post by: Matt Read on April 13, 2005, 10:40:35 pm

Thanks john,len and chris,,i'm about to try ms...wasn't criticzing just interested in the on going debate. Can currently see merit in both sides of the arguement.

Title: Re: microsplitting
Post by: Shaun_Ashmore on April 13, 2005, 10:46:46 pm

Chris i like that one

Quote

I am no manufacturer, supplier or chemist BUT i have 22 years top end carpet cleaning experience and a sound mind.

Lol

Shaun

Ps isn't it all in the rinse?

Title: Re: microsplitting
Post by: strakercleaning on April 13, 2005, 10:52:10 pm

Shaun, I cannot claim to fully understand how all our chemicals are made up but i do know how they work and interact with other chemicals and cleaning methods.
I hate the condescending tone used by people who assume that my opinion counts for nothing because i dont make, sell it or know its chemical formula.
I can remember every job i have done and can read............ ENOUGH SAID
ps. as i said, i used normal detergents and rinse without hassle but the ms just make it easier ;D

Title: Re: microsplitting
Post by: Shaun_Ashmore on April 13, 2005, 10:53:54 pm

Chris I was thinking of the 'sound mind' bit, you big girls blouse ;D

Shaun

Title: Re: microsplitting
Post by: Dave Parry on April 14, 2005, 07:19:17 pm

Wish I could remember every job done, sometimes struggle remembering yesterdays jobs. Remember enough to collect cash and if nessasary invoice them though.

Title: Re: microsplitting
Post by: stu_thomson on April 14, 2005, 10:04:30 pm

It was i that matt-nch was quoting about residue around bottletops. I have 3 different makes of ms in van, 1 in orignal bottle no crusty bits, 1 in orignal bottle but with pump dispenser on top with not a brilliant seal - crusty bits, and 1 in spray master inline sprayer again prob not a brilliant seal, again this one has crusty bits around bottle top.
 conclusion, crystallation as said, another thing learnt!
 Cleaned a particulary dirty carpet to day which is a regular, last time cleaned with detergent pre-spray and very hot rinse, and struggled!!Cleaned today with ms and alot better result with less work, and this time with luke warm water through my new cfr.
  Who needs dertergents and hot water....not me anymore :)

Regards stu

Title: Re: microsplitting
Post by: Matt Read on April 15, 2005, 05:13:07 pm

Sorry if u took offence to that stu ....

i'm about to try for myself so maybe another convert on the way.

Am i right in saying that if ms work well on the majority of jobs and not much water is needed,, powerful machines with high pressure pumps heat/steam exchangers will not be required ?....other than set up times maybe a  truckmount wouldn't actually be of the same benefit anymore as they seem to be sold on power and heat .

Title: Re: microsplitting
Post by: Dynafoam on April 15, 2005, 05:22:28 pm

Matt,

I use MS on most jobs, but use the same amount of water, at the same temperatures as I would with detergent products............. They are efficient, but not magic  ;)

Hence whatever benefits may be gained by the use of TM's remain the same.

Title: Re: microsplitting
Post by: Dennis on April 15, 2005, 05:31:58 pm

Matt/Stu

Are you coming to the training day at Hugh Crane on May 4th with Derek Bolton/Steve Carpenter?
One Step microsplitting technology is on the agenda.

Title: Re: microsplitting
Post by: richie on April 15, 2005, 05:54:06 pm

Forget One-Step   Call nick along for the day, he will solve your problems with SOLUTIONS.

Richie.

Title: Re: microsplitting
Post by: Matt Read on April 15, 2005, 06:10:39 pm

I've had an account with Cranes for about 5 years dennis and not once have i been invited to an open day, machine demo or training day....maybe i don't buy enough from them ! But it does sound interesting i'll see if i can wangle an invite.Or is this a "pay for" training day ?

Title: Re: microsplitting
Post by: Dennis on April 15, 2005, 06:40:26 pm

I did not get an invite, it's £40 + vat. I saw it on the Cleantalk board.

ADVANCED CARPET & UPHOLSTERY CARE SEMINAR
VENUE: HUGH CRANE, South Walsham Road, Acle,
Norwich, Norfolk, NR13 3ES.

DATE: 4th May 2005

AGENDA

08.30 – 08.45 Registration & Coffee
08.45 – 09.00 Introduction from instructors (Derek Bolton & Steve Carpenter)
09.00 – 10.00 Carpets & fibres – construction, identification and testing
10.00 – 10.30 One-Step Microsplitting Cleaning technology
10.30 – 11.00 Carpet Cleaning systems
11.00 – 11.15 “Coffee Break”
11.15 – 12.30 Spotting – fabrics, fibres, procedures and problem solvers
12.30 – 13.15 Lunch – “buffet style”
13.15 – 14.15 Fabrics, fibre contraction, identification and testing
14.15 – 15.00 Upholstery cleaning techniques
15.00 – 15.15 “Afternoon Tea”
15.15 – 15.45 Oriental rug cleaning
15.45 – 16.15 Carpet & fabric protection treatments

The seminar is an intensive look at carpet and upholstery cleaning covering the cleaning of carpets, fine fabrics, curtains and rugs. Practical demonstrations during the day will enable the professional cleaner to see the latest cleaning techniques, so that they can provide their customers with the best possible results, and possibly add additional cleaning services such as curtain or oriental rug cleaning.

The seminar fee is £40.00+VAT and includes a certificate of attendance. Payment is required in advance, by credit card or cheque made payable to Hugh Crane (CE) Ltd.
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
How to make a Reservation
You may reserve your place either by calling Michelle on: 01493 750072 or alternatively, please complete the tear-off section and post to the above address.

NAME AND ADDRESS OF ORGANISATION
………………………………………………………………………………………………..
……………………………………………………………………………………………….

TELEPHONE: ………………………………………

NO. OF ATTENDIES: ……………………………..

(Hugh Crane – Advanced C & U Care Seminar)

I hope I have not broken any rules posting this.

Title: Re: microsplitting
Post by: Matt Read on April 15, 2005, 06:47:19 pm

Thanks dennis,

I wouldn't think uve broken any rules its a local seminar and not product selling.

Title: Re: microsplitting
Post by: stu_thomson on April 15, 2005, 08:11:09 pm

im going, should be ok and only £40, not bad for a days training, pity not on a saturday though as busy at mo and could not do with a day off.
 

 see you there!
 stu

Title: Re: microsplitting
Post by: gwrightson on April 15, 2005, 08:37:09 pm

i was on the course last year , along with a number of very knowledgable
c.c. and experienced c.c. , and a few newbies,
 and judging from the response of those who attended , it was excellent value , and a lot of useful info acuired" including Dericks curtain cleaning techniques"
 which I believe a number of people have shown interest on here!!!!
   Well worth the effort and time to attend.
    as for breaking rules :o :o   how on earth are you breaking any rules when clearly   more blatant advertising is going on these posts :-X :-X
    Richie i would love to know the reasons for your comments "forget one step"
   Why?  whats wrong with it?  or is it another case of suttle advertising?
 Geoff
 

Title: Re: microsplitting
Post by: Shaun_Ashmore on April 15, 2005, 09:42:28 pm

Geoff please read a dictionary, you'll find loads of well spelt words in it!

but there's not much of a story line ;D

Shaun