Talk:Rayon/Archive 1

Archive 1

Changes made

We completely changed the Rayon page to reflect what we learned in our textiles class, textbook, and research. Please note that Rayon is NOT a synthetic fiber but a MANUFACTURED REGENERATED CELLULOSIC fiber which means it is produced from naturally occuring polymers. See our references if you have any questions about this.

Well done, this article was really in need of some attention. I'm going to update the references paragraph to the wiki format, however references 9 and 10 seem to be missing. Could you please supply them? Thank you. Berserker79 09:04, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Rayon fabric weave photos

I added three photos of fabric that I took, in hopes that this would help with the lack of pix. They're a bit blurry, but I'm not a professional. --Digitalgadget 18:19, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Also for Item 13 in production Steps

In the viscose plant at Mobile Alabama USA Courtalds LTD would spin the viscose into a sulfuric acid bath containing soluble zinc. This presumably enhanced yarn surface characteristics. A consquence of this was a rather high zinc content in the treated wastewater discharged to the head of Mobile Bay where oysters were known to accumulate zinc. Untreated wastewater also contained traces of carbon disulfide which were presumably stripped off during trhe treatment process. Even though this problem was remediated, it is possible that new Asian producers are generating the same environmental problems.

--Charlie Caban 19:31, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

That's interesting. I searched for info on this and found some, and added it to the section on health hazards. Thank you! HLHJ (talk) 19:45, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Missing Information

According to the Greater Parkersburg Chamber of Commerce, in Parkersburg, West Virginia, "Parkersburg also had the world's first and largest rayon mill, American Viscose, and one of two plants in the world to manufacture Vitolite."

URL: http://www.greaterparkersburg.com/area/fast_facts

Having gone to school just a few blocks from Rayon Drive, I have seen unwoven rayon fibers that were donated for art supplies, back in the mid 1960s. They can be quite lustrous. However the woven rayon fabric usually is matte, although it sometimes is shiny. This I know first hand from having sewn a lot of rayon fabric. It also is sometimes blended wool, polyester, cotton, linen or silk.

Educatedwv (talk) 14:52, 21 July 2008 (UTC)educatedwv

Missing information

Material disadvantages. (shrinks a bit more then ...list..., etc.)

REFERENCES!!!!

Rayon yarn suppliers

these two companies sell rayon yarn, maybe that should be mentioned

http://www.rayonyarn.com/ http://www.troy-corp.com/

Not synthetic ?

Rayon is produced from naturally occurring polymers and therefore it is not a truly synthetic fiber, nor is it a natural fiber.

I am confused. If rayon is produced chemically and does not exist in nature, it is obviously truly synthetic. Just like petroleum is truly natural. Don't you think?

--Nickele (talk) 07:32, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't know if synthetic vs natural is the best terminology, but the point is that in the case of rayon one takes a natural polymer and modifies it. This is very different from most other "synthetic" polymers, which are made by taking a monomer and polymerizing it. --Itub (talk) 09:12, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

I know this is a subtile difference. Whatever the terminology that is chosen, it has to be consistent with the one on Synthetic fiber.--Nickele (talk) 19:55, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Well this is a controversial topic and rayon is like 50-50 natural : synthetic, available from natural polymers but processed with chemicals etc., its officially considered as a Synthetic Fiber in general but its neither... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.93.82.219 (talk) 09:10, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

The proper term is semi-synthetic. See for example this book: [1] --Itub (talk) 12:13, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Edible?

Can rayon be digested for nutritive value? --75.63.48.119 (talk) 04:18, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

I have an opinion on this, but if you want to know, I suggest you do your own research, and here tell us what you find, quoting your source of information. P0mbal (talk)

Hi, 75.63.48.119. You can ask the wp:Reference desk, but since rayon is fairly pure cellulose, in this case you can read the cellulase article. HLHJ (talk) 19:53, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Date correct? Or even the fact itself?

Current text: "Max Fremery and Johann Urban developed a method to produce carbon fibers for use in light bulbs in 1614." 1614? Really? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.159.203.244 (talk) 22:32, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

More to the point, did they produce carbon fibre or carbon filaments? Not the same thing and carbon fibre dates to the late 1950s, with no reference in the linked articles to an earlier development. (I changed the link from carbon fibre as a composite material to carbon (fibre). 99.245.248.91 (talk) 19:46, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

merging Rayon article with Modal article

The previous post in this section was misplaced. User talk:67.167.185.133 was suggesting that Modal and Rayon are not the same and should NOT be merged. 24.130.136.98 (talk) 02:19, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

argue against merge

In my search for modal, I appreciate that it is under its own heading. That's not the reason I'm arguing against it, though-- it should be kept separate from rayon because: while methods of manufacture may be similar, the item itself is completely different from rayon. Using similar arguments, one could say that it should be merged with "cotton", as it is a natural fiber used to make garments with properties similar to natural cotton. I believe this item, short as it is, belongs in its own article. Laurel 17:29, 3 March 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Laurel (talk • contribs)

Due to the fact that Modal is still a completely natural fiber, and not a synthetic polymer, I would argue that the articles modal and rayon NOT be merged. Although the two fabrics are similar to the touch (by hand), the differences in manufacturing the spinning/weaving/cutting processes are different enough for each to warrant individual articles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.167.185.133 (talk) 05:22, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

I was checking on what modal was, as there was modal (and cotton) in sheets we purchased. It was useful to me to find the discussion under a separate heading so we could evaluate whether we wanted to keep the sheets. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Taxman9x (talk • contribs) 23:25, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Readers are best served by giving modal its own article (IMO). It allows them to find the entry easily and quickly determine what sort of product it is. The modal article is currently short, but that is acceptable, and it encourages addition of modal-specific detail. It seems having a separate article is parallel to the reasonable treatment given to Lyocell. --R. S. Shaw (talk) 16:03, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

I also believe modal should have its own page. I was looking at some clothes online and modal listed separately, in addition to, say, cotton. It has become pretty popular with lots of brands. With regard to fire concerns, yes, that is something that should be added when the information is found. Lmlmss44 (talk) 06:20, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

regarding the suggestion to merge Modal (textile) page within the Rayon page

i suggest that a MANUFACTURED REGENERATED CELLULOSIC FIBERS page is created. this new page would present all the details for Modal, Tencel, Bamboo and potential other ones that i'm not aware of.

so, under TEXTILE, one could find 3 major sections: 1- natural fibers: vegetal and animal 2- manufactured regenerated cellulosic fibers 3- synthetic fibers

here i should mention that i'm not a chemist and i can't take part into the production of these pages. But as a reader, the above would make sense to me.

dany —Preceding unsigned comment added by 154.20.45.148 (talk) 02:12, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Isaac Mizrahi link

Is there some reason why Mizrahi's name is not linked to the Wikipedia article about designer Isaac Mizrahi in the Alternative to Cotton section of the article?

71.20.125.46 (talk) 22:57, 31 March 2011 (UTC)Ken Bloomer

Possibly a good idea and it only took a moment to find a good reference that mentions Mizrahi among others:

WSJ: The Touch, the Feel—Of Rayon?

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052748703730704576066291209981236 Jmonti824 (talk) 05:53, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

References

deadly flammable

this article needs to say a lot more about how dangerously flammable rayon is and whether or not that aspect of it has been improved through the research that has been done. I personally know a woman who was wearing a rayon blouse (I was there when this happened) there was a candle behind her, she backed up and briefly touched the flame. if she had been wearing cotton, it would have charred first and then burned, but with the rayon blouse it literally exploded into flame, she might as well have been wearing congealed gasoline. her skin was burnt black and the molten remnants of the blouse was stuck to it. she spent a lot time in the hospital recovering from 3rd degree burns. I have seen many very beautiful rayon shirts, another thing the article does not specifically say is that rayon works very well with silk-screened images, much more so than with cotton, the artwork glows due to the nature of the rayon fibers, I would love to wear some of these, but I will never ever buy rayon clothing, unless I need strips of it for use in making a torch or starting a fire. I would love to hear about anything that has been done to make it safer, that incident with the exploding blouse was about 20 years ago. But until I see an official label that says "flame retardant" I certainly will not be buying any... all it takes is one careless cigarette and you too can be a human torch. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.35.127.215 (talk) 21:45, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Please see producers section which already mentions:

"Visil rayon is a flame retardant form of viscose which has silica embedded in the fiber during manufacturing."

Jmonti824 (talk) 05:53, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Rayon. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.afma.org/f-tutor/rayon.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 13:32, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

ytfytfjkjl uyv da — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.246.61.194 (talk) 13:21, 25 August 2016 (UTC)