Scribd
Upload
174 views

Discussion Abstract

The document discusses challenges with existing chewing gum removal machines (CGRMs) that use heat-based methods, which can damage floors. It introduces a new CGRM called GumGone that uses a non-toxic chemical spray to break gum down into a dry powder residue before vacuuming. Testing found GumGone removed a high percentage of gum from carpeted and other floor surfaces without damage, outperforming existing CGRMs especially on carpet where it removed 79% of gum from a 400 square meter area. The combination of chemical treatment and immediate vacuuming by GumGone results in negligible staining compared to existing CGRMs.

Uploaded by

perlishell74
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
174 views

Discussion Abstract

The document discusses challenges with existing chewing gum removal machines (CGRMs) that use heat-based methods, which can damage floors. It introduces a new CGRM called GumGone that uses a non-toxic chemical spray to break gum down into a dry powder residue before vacuuming. Testing found GumGone removed a high percentage of gum from carpeted and other floor surfaces without damage, outperforming existing CGRMs especially on carpet where it removed 79% of gum from a 400 square meter area. The combination of chemical treatment and immediate vacuuming by GumGone results in negligible staining compared to existing CGRMs.

Uploaded by

perlishell74
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

Discussion Gum removal technology has traditionally faced the problem of achieving effective gum removal with minimal

damage to floor surfaces. Existing CGRMs such as Gumsucker and Vacu-Gum use steam heat and steam injection respectively to remove gum and although both are fairly effective, the resulting staining and damage to floor surfaces, particularly carpeted floors, is often significant. In this study the design and manufacture of a novel CGRM, GumGone, is presented. GumGone reduces the gum to a dry powder using a non-toxic chemical spray and then vacuums the residue, leaving virtually no stain. In trials, GumGone removed a high percentage of gum from all floor surfaces without causing floor damage. The floor surfaces tested included carpeted floors, suggesting that this technology is likely to have considerable commercial use. Percentage removal levels achieved using GumGone were consistently higher than for existing CGRMs on all types of floor surface. This was particularly noticeable in the case of carpeted floor, where 79% of gum was removed from a 400 m area, as opposed to a maximum of 56% with existing machines. This represents a dramatic increase in the percentage amount of gum removed. Our results confirm the theory of Gumbo et al. that chemicals can be used to dissolve gum into dry powder and make it suitable for vacuuming. The greatest advantage over existing CGRMs, however, lies in the combination of the two technologies in a single machine. By reducing the delay period between gum treatment and gum removal, the GumGone system resulted in negligible staining of floor surfaces. Th is represents a new approach which removes the need for stain treatment or surface repair following gum removal. As noted earlier, only one wattage level (400 watts of vacuum suction power) was available in the GumGone prototype. Further work is needed to determine the power level at which gum removal is maximised and floor damage remains negligible.

Abstract The fats and resins in chewing gum contribute to elasticity, bulk and texture but also increase staining. The aim of this study was to design a gum removal machine able to remove gum chemically with no stain residue. A machine, GumGone, was designed and constructed, which injected non-ionic detergent into gum deposits using a power spray and then immediately vacuumed the resulting powder. It was found that 1 l of detergent achieved effective, stain-free removal over a 300 m area. Performance was superior to existing systems and suggests that the delay between treatment and removal is a significant factor in staining.

You might also like