Successful stain removal depends largely on the drycleaner’s skill and knowledge. There are three basic steps to effective stain removal.
•Identify the stain.
•Test the reagents needed.
•Use the correct tools and techniques to remove the stain.
The Guild uses the acronym FOCAL to remind its members that they can work out the possible cause of a stain from its feel, odour, colour, appearance and location. Stains can be classified by type:
Protein – from animal or human body fluids
Vegetable dye – from something which grew in the ground
Dryside – from solvent-based paints, inks or glues
Compound – a stain with more than one type of component.
Cream, meaty gravy and blood are examples of stains that need an alkaline protein remover. Red wine, tea and coffee need an acidic tannin remover because they all contain vegetable dyes.
Gloss paint and glue need a dryside, solvent-based remover.
To test if a using a particular reagent carries a risk of colour damage, put one tiny droplet onto a hidden seam, leave it for 10 minutes, or as long as it would require to remove the mark, flush and feather dry and then examine the area for signs of colour loss. If there are none then it should be safe to proceed.
Red wine ruins wool skirt
Fault: A cleaner was asked if anything could be done about a red wine spill on a favourite wool skirt. He applied pre-treatment detergent before drycleaning the skirt but the mark turned darker and looked much worse.
Cause: The tannin in red wine dyes natural fibres such as cotton and wool. Neither pre-treatment detergent nor perc solvent will remove or decolour the tannin.?
The machine’s drying stage has caramelised the sugars in the red wine, making it darker than before.
Responsibility: The cleaner knew the stain was caused by red wine but did not treat it correctly so he is to blame for darkening the mark.
Rectification: Tannin dye cannot be removed but it can be bleached to make it colourless using the peroxide in a tannin reagent. This can take several minutes because the reagent’s bleaching power is necessarily weak to protect the dyes used for the cloth.
The first step in treatment might have been to remove the sugars from the stain using a water flush or steam gun so that the tannin reagent could reach the tannin dye. The same technique can be used for post-spotting red wine but much more time and patience is needed.
Cleaning reveals brown mark
Fault: This wedding dress seemed to be unmarked when it was put into the drycleaning machine but came out with a brown mark that had darkened before the presser saw it.
Cause: This fault can be caused by the caramelisation of sugars from white wine or lemonade or by the proteins in milk, cream, or meat fat oxidising. Treating with water warmed with a steam gun did not reduce the marking, so the cleaner realised it was not a sugar stain. The mark did respond gradually to a protein remover so it could have been caused by meat juices.
Responsibility: The wearer was responsible for marking the garment. As the mark was invisible before cleaning, the drycleaner cannot be blamed for failing to pre-treat it. The cleaner should take responsibility for post-treatment if that is possible.
Rectification: Re-cleaning is a waste of time. Post-treatment of oxidised proteins requires patience and the right reagent. Test first, then if there are no problems, apply the protein remover, tamp and leave for a few minutes, before flushing. Repeat either until there is no further improvement or until there is a strong risk of colour damage.
No-one noticed the ink spot
Fault: Neither the owner nor the cleaner noticed the ink mark on this suede coat before it was cleaned and this led to an argument about responsibility for the spoilt appearance.
Cause: This mark was originally tiny, which was why it was not seen at the counter. The solvent wash with perc has partially lifted the stain, making it larger without removing it entirely. It is unlikely that a ball pen on the counter caused the mark as this would usually produce a pale line, not a blob.
Responsibility: The owner is most likely to be responsible for the mark for the reason given. Even if a tiny ink mark is seen on a suede during pre-cleaning inspection, it is probably best left so the cleaner should not be taking responsibility here for failing to pre-treat it.
Rectification: An ink mark that has been lifted and has then re-dyed a larger area of leather will usually be well-bonded to the fibrous structure. Treating the mark with a special ink remover is more likely to result in a patch of colour loss than to reduce the mark. The stain is best left untreated.