Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
23 November 2021 | Story Leonie Bolleurs | Photo Tania Allen
Dr Jana Vermaas and Ketshepileone Matlhoko are working on research that leaves your washing clean and fresh without the use of any detergents, which is also beneficial to the environment.

Cold water or hot water? Omo or Skip? Laundry blues is a reality in most households and when you add stains to the equation, then what was supposed to be part of your weekly household routine, becomes frustrating and time consuming. 

Researchers at the University of the Free State (UFS) are conducting research that is putting a whole new environmentally friendly spin on laundry day.

Sustainability and environmental conservation

Dr Jana Vermaas, Lecturer in the Department of Sustainable Food Systems and Development at the UFS, is passionate about textiles and sustainability – almost a decade ago, she conducted a study on the efficacy of anolyte as a disinfectant for textiles.

She describes the process: “During electrochemical activation, a dilute solution of natrium chloride/salt passes through a cylindrical electrolytic cell where the anodic and cathodic chambers are separated. Two separate streams of electrochemically activated water are produced. Anolyte as water was produced at the positive electrode and has a low pH, high oxidation-reduction potential and contains dissolved chloride, oxygen, and hydroxyl radical. It also has an antimicrobial effect.”

The benefits of this process are in line with her enthusiasm for environmental conservation. 

According to Dr Vermaas, the amount of water and chemicals used to clean textile articles is massive. “Chemicals used to disinfect, for example, hospital laundry, are hazardous. Not all laundries in the industry have a closed loop system or try to remove the chemicals before the wastewater is discarded.”

“Different amounts of detergents have various effects on our fauna and flora. Due to their low biodegradability, toxicity, and high absorbance of particles, detergents can reduce the natural water quality, cause pH changes in soil and water, lead to eutrophication (too many nutrients), reduce light transmission, and increase salinity in water sources.”

“But with the catholyte and anolyte process, water returns to its original status, which means that the water solution becomes inactive again after production where it existed in a metastable state while containing many free radicals and a variety of molecules for 48 hours. Thus, no chemicals are left in the wastewater. The water can therefore be recycled, not as potable water but, for example, to flush toilets or to water plants.

“We should do what we can to save water,” she says. 

Should you, like Dr Vermaas, also feel strongly about protecting the environment and want to obtain one of these machines that leaves your washing clean and fresh without the use of any detergents, you will be able to find such an appliance in South Arica. However, it does not come cheap. “It is a bit costly for residential use, but might be more accessible in the future,” states Dr Vermaas, who is of the opinion that it is a more sustainable option for commercial laundries.

Detergency properties and colourfastness 

Recently, more research has been conducted on this topic, but with a focus on the detergency properties of the catholyte to clean different textile fibres (natural and synthetic). Catholyte, she explains, is water produced at the negative electrode with a high pH, low oxidation-reduction potential, containing alkaline minerals. It also has surface active agents that increase the wetting properties, and it is an antioxidant. 

“A master’s student in the department, Ketshepileone Matlhoko, will be submitting her dissertation at the end of November on the possibility of using the catholyte as a scouring agent to clean raw wool,” says Dr Vermaas. 

The department is also conducting studies to investigate the influence of both catholyte and anolyte on colourfastness.

*Graphic: Production of electrolysed water (Nakae and Indaba, 2000). Diagram: Supplied



News Archive

UFS study shows playing time in Super Rugby matches decreasing
2016-12-19

Description: Super Rugby playing time Tags: Super Rugby playing time 

The study by Riaan Schoeman, (left), Prof Robert Schall,
and Prof Derik Coetzee from the University of the Free State
on variables in Super Rugby can provide coaches with
insight on how to approach the game.
Photo: Anja Aucamp

It is better for Super Rugby teams not to have the ball, which also leads to reduced overall playing time in matches.

This observation is from a study by the University of the Free State on the difference between winning and losing teams. Statistics between 2011 and 2015 show that Super Rugby winning teams kick more and their defence is better.

These statistics were applied by Riaan Schoeman, lecturer in Exercise and Sport Sciences, Prof Derik Coetzee, Head of Department: Exercise and Sport Sciences, and Prof Robert Schall, Department of Mathematics and Actuarial Sciences. The purpose of the study, Changes in match variables for winning and losing teams in Super Rugby from 2011 to 2015, was to observe changes. Data on 30 games (four from each team) per season, supplied by the Cheetahs via Verusco TryMaker Pro, were used.

About two minutes less action
“We found that the playing time has decreased. This is the time the ball is in play during 80 minutes,” says Schoeman. In 2011, the average playing time was 34.12 minutes and in 2015 it was 31.95.

“The winning team has less possession of the ball and doesn’t want it. They play more conservatively. They dominate with kicks and then they play,” says Prof Coetzee, who was the conditioning coach for the Springboks in 2007 when they won the World Cup.

Lineouts also more about kicking
As a result, the number of line-outs also increased (from 0.31 per minute in 2011 to 0.34 in 2015) and the winning teams are better in this regard.

“The winning team has less possession of the ball
and doesn’t want it. They play a more conservative
game. They dominate with kicks and then they play.”

Schoeman believes that rule changes could also have contributed to reduced playing time, since something like scrum work nowadays causes more problems. “When a scrum falls, the time thereafter is not playing time.”

According to Prof Coetzee, rucks and mauls have also increased, (rucks from 2.08 per minute in 2011 to 2.16 in 2015 and mauls from 0.07 per minute in 2011 to 0.10 in 2015). “The teams that win, dominate these areas,” he says.

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept