In 1993, a carpet mill was concerned about bonnet cleaning and how it compared to HWE methods regarding residue. A technical lab person called me to ask about it, pronounced it "Bonay" and asked if it was a French cleaning process. Not knowing if the question was tongue-in-cheek and before offering an opinion, I paid an independent laboratory $1,000.00 for the results of a test they had done on the extraction method compared to the bonnet cleaning method. Following are excerpts from the report they sent me:
"Tests were done using routine techniques. Each carpet was soiled and cleaned twelve times. The results: Appearance change was virtually the same for fibers cleaned by either method. Microphotography showed the fibers cleaned with extraction contained very few solid soil particles. The fibers cleaned by the bonnet method had substantially more solid soil particles. A 2" x 3" specimen was cut from "extraction" and "bonnet" specimens and placed in jars of distilled deionized water. When the two jars were agitated, the "bonnet" water appeared cloudy. The "extraction" water appeared virtually clean."
I could have told them that from my own experience but after all an independent laboratory must be good, mustn't it? At least that impresses the folks in Dalton. And speaking of wasted money, that same lab charges exorbitant fees to test carpet cleaning equipment for the CRI. By the way, they find that a cheap little rental machine cleans carpet as good or better than truck-mounted equipment. As the old accountant says, "Go figure!"
©Bane-Clene® Corporation 2009 Reprinting or electronically publishing this article is strictly prohibited without permission from Bane-Clene Corp.
