"

      %&'  (           

                        
          
                     )

                     

       '         '  
     )*      & '
 +           
 +      +   +          
          )   
     &               
        &           )
!       '$   ),             '
        '$ 
   !       
$    )

 
 
 
 
  

)
 
  

))  ! 
 -..-), 
/  *   ! #
$ 

0    +!1&
-..2),       
      ),   
       3 )

!"#$%$&'!$(#")%$#

 
 
  

     
   !    "  #
$


 
 
 
 
       !  "
#


 
 
 
 

    

   !  "#
$  $%   
      !  "
#

&'&
()
 '

% *% + , - * . /

 
       
       

     
      
    
    
  
    !    
"   

    #         $   !%
 !      & $ 
 '        
'     ( $        '     # %  %
) 
 %* 
 %'    
$ 
'   
 
  +   " %


  &
  '   ! # 

  
       $,  
 (   $    
- $$$  
. /"/"#
012" 
)*3- +)
* !
4!& 5!6%55787& % 

2  9:;567<=8>!<7>%2  ?9:;567<=8>!<7>;
0 @!
 
* 
  
A
    &  B
 012345467148329543
% + :;. /

   
  C    
    2   

  

 
      
       
      !  
"C  
   
     
   
(    %
    
 
   
  
 
 
2 
 
%
%
% 
%


     $     
 $
 
   $C  

     
 
 C      
 
   
  
   

 
CC
-  $$$  

 /"/"#
012" 
)*3- +)
* !
4!& 5!6%55787& %) C
 9:;567<=8>!<7>%D?9:;567<=8>!<7>;
0 @!
 
  E & "
  E + CA

 B
 012345467148329543
-CF8>78C /"/"#
012" 
)*3- +)
 


"

  & 8>78

KNITTING OF SINGLE JERSEY FABRIC AS AFFECTED BY

YARN SINGEING AND WAXING.

BY

Muhammad Qamar Tusief

Dr. Nabeel Amin
Waqar Iqbal

Chapter No. 1

INTRODUCTION
Yarn singeing process (known as gassing) is one of the latest methods to remove the
hairiness from the yarn surface so that a more smooth surface of yarn could be available for
the fabrication causing less fabric hairiness and ultimately affecting positively the fabric
properties especially the pilling. The singeing of yarn is accomplished by passing it over a
gas flame at a speed sufficient to burn away the protruding material without scorching or
burning the yarn. (Anonymous, 2009).
Ring spun yarn is one of the most widely applied yarns in textile industry. However,
microscopy analysis had shown that some fibres protrude from the stem of the yarn and these
fibres, so-called hairiness, make no contribution to the yarn strength (Cheng and Yu, 2003).
Hairiness is an undesirable property of yarn; it may lead to surface friction and
geometric roughness, uneven dyeing and color effect, inter locking of warp yarns during
sizing and weaving, and a higher propensity to pill formation in the finished fabric. Evidently
occurring during spinning process, hairiness affects the appearance of staple yarns and
fabrics. It also affects the efficiency of conversion from staple yarns to fabrics. Hairiness
cannot be totally eliminated but can be reduced by optimizing the fibre parameters, yarn
producing processes. Among the aforementioned factors, the controlling of processing
variables in the yarn forming process is the crucial and effective way to improve staple yarn
quality (Jeon, 2000 & Wang and Chang, 1999).
A modified yarn path has been introduced to reduce yarn hairiness in worsted ring
spinning and in some cases have also used air-jet and air-suction nozzles to reduce hairiness
and thus to improve the yarn quality. However, cop hairiness will increase more than twice
during the normal winding process. Thus, singeing treatment of yarn is widely applied in the
winding process (Kalyanaraman, 1992 & Wang and Chang, 2003).
Singeing treatment removes a large amount of hairiness from the yarn, which may
affect different properties of the yarn, such as appearance, fineness, evenness and tensile
properties. Singeing is the burning of loose fibres sticking out of textile goods. It is a part of
the pretreatment processes carried out in textile processing, and is usually the first step
carried out after weaving. Singeing is often carried out on cotton fabrics, or fabrics with
cotton blends and results in increased wettability (better dyeing characteristics, improved
UHIOHFWLRQQRIURVW\DSSHDUDQFHDVPRRWKHUVXUIDFHEHWWHUFODUity in printing), improved
visibility of the fabric structure, less pilling. Singeing usually involves passing/exposing one
or both sides of a fabric over a gas flame to burn of the protruding fibres. Other methods of
5

singeing include infra-red singeing and heat singeing for thermoplastic fibres. Singeing of
\DUQV LV FDOOHG JDVVLQJ &HOOXORVH ILEUHV VXFK DV FRWWRQ DUH HDVLO\ VLQJHG EHFDXVH WKH
protruding fibres burn to a light trace ash which is easily removed (Anonymous, 2010).
Yarn singeing machine consists of yarn singeing burner which includes a gas
distributing channel adjacent the outside of the housing wall and the flame of the burning air
and gas mixture pass into the gas distributing chamber and acts on the yarn to be singed
(Mettler and Hermann, 1976).
Friction control is one of the most important factors in the textile process, in order to
obtain high-quality knitted products and control of processing faults. Lint contamination is
one of the problems related to friction that needs to be controlled to reduce processing faults
and to increase production efficiency in the knitting industry. As the production speed of
knitting machinery increases, lint contamination causes more serious problems in the process.
The coefficient of friction is a tool to measure yarn friction and defined as the ratio between
the force required to produce sliding of one surface on another (the tangential force) and the
force holding the surfaces together (the normal force). The coefficient of friction as defined
above really includes three different quantities the static, kinetic and viscous frictions. In
static friction the sliding force required to start the motion is measured but the speed is not
included. Kinetic friction depends on the speed once the motion has started. Viscous friction
is most common in fluids. All three types of friction might be present together in the textile
process, so that the problem of measuring them is very complex. During knitting, the
coefficient of friction influenced the process when yarn slipped from the hook as well as
when it was wrapped around the stem of the needles or forming loops (Koo, 2008).
The coefficient of friction of the yam should be low in order to produce good quality
knitted fabrics and safe processing. The waxing frequency did not seem to have made a big
difference to the coefficient of friction, as was the case with results from the tension test. The
waxing effects did not significantly depend on the frequency of waxing. This could be
explained by the fact that waxing reduced the frictional forces between yarn and needle
slightly so the yarn tension decreased accordingly. However, there was a limit to the amount
of waxing that decreased the frictional forces and the tension (Koo, 2008).
Increasing the tightness factor increased the amount of liberated fly. This was because
an increase in the tightness factor resulted in greater frictional rubbing between the yarn and
the knitting elements and between the yarns themselves. The latter was more important at
high tightness factor values and, from the results, would seem to have the larger effect on fly
generation. A high percentage of cotton in a cotton / polyester blend, high input tension, high
6

knitting speed, and increased tightness factor all significantly increased the amount of fly
generated (Lawrence and Mohamed, 1996).
Knitting can be stated as a complex dynamic technological process. During the
knitting process, yarn is exposed to tension, therefore the fabric is in a deformed state. The
relaxation process starts after taking the fabric from the machine, which causes a change in
the dimensions of knitted fabrics. Dimensional changes in knitted fabrics occur during the
actual knitting process as well as in the process of dry and wet relaxation (Emirhanova and
Kavusturan 2008).
Singeing treatment removes a large amount of hairiness from the yarn, which may
affect different properties of the yarn, such as appearance, fineness, evenness and tensile
properties. Singeing is often carried out on cotton fabrics, or fabrics with cotton blends and
results in increased wettability, a smoother surface (better clarity in printing), improved
visibility of the fabric structure, less pilling. The present research study was planned to
evaluate the effect of winding speed (S), gas pressure (G), air pressure (A) of the yarn
singeing machine on the yarn and fabric with tightness factor (F) to choose the best
combination and achieve excellent manufacture results. Keeping in view the new technology
of yarn singeing, the present study entiWOHG (IIHFW RI \DUQ VLQJHLQJ DQG ZD[LQJ XSRQ WKH
NQLWWLQJSHUIRUPDQFHRIVLQJOHMHUVH\IDEULFKDVEHHQSODQQHG

Chapter No. 2

REVIEW OF LITERATURE
7KH LPSRUWDQFH RI 5HYLHZ RI OLWHUDWXUH OLHV LQ WKH IDFW WKDW LW KLJKOLJKWV WKH
background knowledge about the problem to be solved. It provides further orientation to the
problem and eliminates the possibility of un-necessary duplication of efforts. A lot of multi
directional researches have been conducted almost all in the foreign countries on the quality
RI WKH NQLWWHG IDEULFV %XW D FRPSUHKHQVLYH DQG FRPSRVLWH VWXG\ HQWLWOHG Effect of yarn
singeing and waxing upon the knitting performance of single jersey fabricKDVQRW\HWEHHQ
undertaken systematically specially in Pakistan. A brief review of the pertinent literature in
the direction of the present investigation is being reviewed and presented here under.
2.1 Yarn Characteristics
2.1.1 Yarn Lea Strength
Pillay (1971) concluded that increases in temperature of the spinning room reduce
yarn strength, while increases in relative humidity increase it. Maximum yarn strength in the
spinning room is obtained when yarns are spun at the highest relative humidity and lowest
temperature; but the maximum strength under standard conditions is obtained from those
spun at the highest relative humidity and highest temperature and Ravindranathan and N.
Balasubramaman (1978) concluded that 100% polyester material has higher lea and single
thread strength than all-cotton and blend yarns at all stages. The relative strengths of cotton
and drawframe blend material, however, depend upon the stage at which testing is done. The
blend is found to be superior to cotton in single yarn as well as in doubled yarn, but the
difference is more marked in the doubled yarn. The fall in strength with increase of specimen
length was also more marked in blend material than in cotton, which is indicative of higher
variability in the former material. Strength improvements in doubling arise from the effective
support received by one thread from the adjoining thread, and with more variable products,
the strength improvements from doubling are likely to be more prominent. This is confirmed
by the higher strength improvements obtained from doubling with blend as compared to
cotton.
Sharma et al. (1987) stated that the skein strength of yarn also increased with
increasing twist because of increased interfiber friction within the yarn. Sheikh (1991)
declared that fibre properties such as length, uniformity of length, micronaire, fibre strength
and elongation along with spinning conditions contributed to yarn strength. Haider (2000)
concluded that with the increased twist multiplier, the average value of lea strength was also
8

increased. Gill (2000) demonstrated that fine count yarns had less yarn lea strength than
coarser count yarns and vice versa. Mahmood et al. (2004) stated that as the twist factor
increased, the yarn lea strength also increase but after a certain optimum level the further
increase in twist will cause fibre rupture and strength of yarn suddenly decreased.
2.1.2 Yarn Count Lea Strength Product (CLSP)
Booth (1983) reported that the count lea strength product value was used to derive an
index by which the spinning quality of cotton or spinning quality/efficiency of particular
system judged and also noted that as count of yarn becomes finer the count strength product
value fell and further stated that the count lea strength product value changed significantly
when twist factor was changed. Sharma et al. (1987) observed that the actual yarn count
increased with increasing twist. The reduction in yarn diameter with increasing twist showed
that a lower value of twist produced yarn with a larger diameter (bulky) because of the
loosely twisted and unoriented fibers. Frydrych (1992) stated that count lea strength product
value of the yarn mainly depended upon the physical properties of cotton viz., fibre length,
strength, fineness and maturity. Ashraf (1995) demonstrated that count lea strength product
(CLSP) was the essential quality trait for the production of stronger and smother yarn and
might vary during mechanical processing and also depended upon the variety used.
Gill (2000) concluded that fine count yarn had less count lea strength product value
than coarse count yarn. Nikolic et al. (2003) observed that breaking force of the compact yarn
spun on a Zinser ring spinning machine was 18.32% higher than the conventional ring spun
yarn produced on the same machine but without the condenser unit. Saleem (2003) stated that
CLSP value increased with the increase in twist. Also the twist multiplier had a significant
effect on CLSP value. Majumdar et al. (2004) mentioned that for individual yarn properties,
the mean error ranges from 3.82% to 7.52%. The strength parameters (CSP and tenacity) of
yarn, which received the greatest attention from the spinner, show a nominal mean error of
5% or less. Moreover, there were one and zero cases with more than 10% error in the cases of
CLSP and tenacity respectively. Ghosh et al. (2004) concluded that the end breaks were very
sensitive to the mean yarn strength, yarn strength variation, mean value of the peak spinning
tensions and the variation in irregularity of mass per unit length of yarn. Some practical
aspects had been considered to tackle the problem of when the breakage rate suddenly
shooted up.

2.1.3 Yarn Single yarn strength (SES)

Sharma et al. (1987) reported that single yarn breaking strength and elongation
increased with twist level. The CV% of single yarn strength and elongation decreased with
increased twist factor, showing that yarn evenness increased with twist. Lei (2003)
investigated that the tenacity of each spun-like filament yarn increased with the twist
multiplier when it did not exceed the optimum twist multiplier. The optimum twist multiplier
was between, 6.5 and 7, and the yarn properties were going down as the twist mu tiplier
exceeded 7. Ghosh (2004) et al. concluded that the end breaks were very sensitive to the
mean yarn strength, yarn strength variation, mean value of the peak spinning tensions and the
variation in irregularity of mass per unit length of yarn.
Palaniswamy and Mohamed (2005) expressed that as the twist level increased, the
yarn strength also increased upto a certain level, beyond which the increase in twist actually
decreased the strength of staple yarn. Yang et al. (2007) stated that Low twist singles ring
yarns were desirable for their low residual torque, high bulk and softness, as well as high
spinning productivity. However, conventional low twist ring yarns had very low strength and,
thus, could not be used.
2.1.4 Yarn Breaking length (RKM)
Sasser et al. (1991) concluded that the average single fibre breaking strength set an
upper limit for the fibre bundle strength. The correlations between fibre strength and yarn
strength were improved by the average single fibre strength rather than the HVI or stalometer
bundle strength. Faqir (1995) concluded that moderate spindle speed (12700 rpm) produced
better spinning performance as compared with other spindle speeds. The study also revealed
that an increase in spindle speed, yarn tension also increased which caused excessive end
breakage and deterioration in yarn quality. Prendzova (2000) concluded that only the yarn
linear density, among all yarn properties, showed significant correlation with yarn end
breakage that point out that the thin places of the yarn were inclined to breaking about 80%
of all yarn end breakage was occurred in places with fineness lower than average cross
section of the yarn. Yarn linear density in the place of break showed great effect on yarn end
breakage. So, yarn end breakage was due to a fault in the yarn structure.
Ghosh et al. (2004) stated that the mechanism of end breakage in ring spinning was a
complex phenomenon, and was entirely different from the yarn failure mechanism during a
tensile test. The important factors in governing end breaks were the mean yarn strength, yarn
strength variation, mean value of the peak spinning tensions and the variation of yarn mass
irregularity. Ozguney et al. (2008) resulted that as the twist multipliers of the yarn increase, U
10

%, CV %, neps, count variation and hairiness values decreased, whereas breaking force,
elongation at break (%) and breaking resistance values increased. Trajkovic (2008)
mentioned that the compact yarns have a higher relative breaking force by 15 to 20 % than
the conventional yarns, nearly the same breaking elongation, and by 10 to 15% higher
breaking work.
2.1.5 Yarn Elongation
Simpson and Fiori (1975) expressed that yarn uniformity decreased (coefficients of
variation increased) and imperfections increased as twist increased. The decrease in
uniformity, however, was not evident for 100% polyester yarns (not shown) or for the
35c/65p blend. Evidently, the influence of twist on the yam profile decreased as the yam
became more uniform. Saleem (2003) concluded that by increasing the twist multiplier yarn
elongation also increased, i.e. twist factor affected the yarn elongation. Ureyen and Kadoglu
(2006) resulted that the breaking elongation was highly influenced by yarn count, twist and
roving count (i.e. draft ratio on the ring spinning machine). The elongation increased with
higher twist and decreased with finer rovings. Coarser yarns had more elongation than finer
yarns. Among fiber properties fiber elongation and fiber fineness had more influence on the
yarn elongation and both parameters had a negative effect. Other important fiber parameters
were reflectance, fiber strength, short fiber index and length, respectively.
2.1.6 Yarn Imperfections (Thin, Thick places and Neps/ Km)
Simpson and Fiori (1975) confirmed that when the twist was low, the thick places of
the yam after leaving the front roller nip might get themselves slightly extended because of
spinning tension. When the twist was high, it flowed to the nip of the front roller at a quicker
rate and the tendency for the thick places to get extended would be less and as such, the %U
of the yarn might be expected to be slightly greater at higher twist multipliers and further
reported that yarn uniformity decreased (coefficients of variation increased) and
imperfections increased as twist increased. Harrison and Bargeron (1986) concluded that neps
were important in determining the final product of cotton fabric. Fiber characteristics and
processing conditions were two factors that affected nep formation. Ginning conditions such
as overdrying and overcleaning, card settings, and card production rate affected nep potential.
The card was the primary machine that removed neps in the yarn manufacturing process.
Padmanabhan and Balasubramanian (1990) concluded that more than 75% of the
imperfections were due to the presence of fiber clusters and fiber clusters with foreign matter.
But in combed yams, both fiber clusters and fiber clusters with fly seem to contribute to more
than 85% of the thick places. With regard to neps, on average, immature ovules and foreign
11

matter contributed to more than 75% of the total number in carded yams. There was a slightly
different pattern in combed yams, where neps due to foreign matter were reduced by 20%,
but neps due to immature ovules and fiber clusters remained almost unaffected. Sheikh
(1994) concluded that yarn irregularity was a measure of cross sectional variation in yarn and
closely associated with imperfections in the yarn.
Barella and Manich (1997) reported that yam hairiness decreased with an increase in
twist. It was shown that the development of new hairiness testers based on principles that
considered only certain aspects of hairiness could lead to contradictory results. Amjad (1999)
reported that thin places per unit length were considered as -50 percent of yarn thickness.
Prendzova (2000) found that the yarn with lower linear density and average number of twists
showed maximum end breakage, while the yarn with higher linear density and lower number
of twists showed minimum end breakage. Regarding to mutuality effect of yarn physical and
mechanical properties on the end breakage, the lowest yarn end breakage was achieved for
the yarn with higher tensile strength and lower irregularity.
Gill (2000) observed that thin, thick places and neps increased for fine counts and
decreased for coarse counts. Kretzschmar et al. (2007) discussed that as the yarn count
increased, U%, CV%, thin and thick places, and neps values increased, whereas count
variation, breaking force and elongation at break (%) values decreased. The slight differences
in the number of thin and thick places were found to be statistically important for fine yarns
because the fiber count in the cross-section of fine yarns was less in comparison with coarse
yarns. Hence, as the yarn count increases, yarn unevenness and faults will be more apparent.
Ozguney et al. (2008) stated that as the twist multipliers of the yarns increased, U%, CV%,
neps, count variation and hairiness values decreased, whereas breaking force, elongation at
break (%) and breaking resistance values increased. Basu et al. (2009) concluded that the
high-speed winding caused some deterioration in yarn properties such as imperfections and
hairiness. For number of thick places the deterioration in mean values ranged between 6
percent and 24 percent for different yarn counts and for neps and hairiness it ranged from 13
percent to 29 percent.
Xia et al. (2009) concluded that after singeing treatment compact yarn showed higher
hairiness eliminating percentage for short hairs, higher tex values and lower weight loss than
combed yarns under the same counts. Further the thin place kept stable after singeing
treatment for all of the yarn, while thick place increased greatly. Neps of yarns decreased
dramatically at the same time. However, CV of yarns increased slightly after singeing
treatment.
12

2.1.7 Yarn Hairiness

Mettler and Hermann (1976) found that the yarn singeing machine provided an
absolutely uniform influence of the heat on the yarn to be singed and to concentrate the
flames to the yarn surface without causing their penetration to the core of the yarn.
Furthermore by the increased heat capacity, the burner made it possible to increase the
singeing speed. Anonymous (1994) stated that the greater the speed of transit of the yarn
through the machine, the smaller the quantity of hairs and lumps removed will be, and hence
smaller the singeing index. If the speed of transit is lower, the singeing index rises in a corelated manner. It was further discussed that the quantity of gas/air fed to the burner of
singeing machine also directly influences the singeing index. Elsevier (1999) observed that
the thermal behavior of different kinds of fibres were different and singeing at higher
temperature was naturally associated with great hazards on excessive contact period and
caused thermal degradation of the fibre. Vegetable and regenerated fibres could be singed
very strongly with maximum burner intensity to obtain good results.
Saville (1999) narrated that the number of hair exceeding 3mm in length as a
percentage of the total number of hairs was found to be linearly related to the count of the
yarn, i.e. there were more hairs in a fine yarn than there were in a coarser one of the same
type. Karmakar (1999) noted that spinning process produced hairiness of the yarn and lower
the yarn counts (Ne 26/1-36/1) greater was the degree of hairiness. Lawrence (2003) stated
that the singed (or gassed) yarn had a approximately 10% reduction in hairiness. This order of
reduction was moderate; therefore, it was of interest to identify the spinning parameters as
well as fibre properties that influenced yarn hairiness. Wang and Chang (1999) observed that
if there were no reversing of leading hairs at all by any rubbing surface on the hairiness
meter, the hairiness might actually increased as the test speed increased.
Wang et al. (1999) narrated that the hairiness index readings obtained in a single
measurement followed a lognormal distribution rather than a normal distribution. The yams
of three twist levels used in this study were affected by test speed in a similar way. The
hairiness index at 400 m/min was significantly higher than that at 25 and 100 m/min, while
the difference in hairiness index at 25 and 100 m/min, respectively, was not statistically
significant at the 5% level. The effect of test speed on yam hairiness appeared to be
independent of yam twist level for the three yarns tested. Usta and Canoglu (2002) observed
that yarn hairiness was increased with an increase in spindle speed.
Wang and Chang (2003) resulted that the right diagonal yarn pathlead to reduced yam
hairiness, while yam evenness and tenacity were not as sensitive to the modified yam path.
13

The reduced yam hairiness might be due to the increased pre-twisting of fibers on the righthand side of the spinning triangle when the right diagonal yam path was used. The pretwisting effectively bound the fibers into the bulk of the yam structure, thus reducing yam
hairiness. One drawback of this right diagonal yam arrangement was the increased spinning
ends down, particularly at higher spindle speeds. Chang et al. (2003) concluded that reducing
yam hairiness would help reduce the power consumption in ring spinning.
Lei (2003) investigated that the tenacity of each spun-like filament yarn increased
with the twist multiplier when it did not exceed the optimum twist multiplier. In theory, the
RSWLPXPWZLVWPXOWLSOLHUZDVEHWZHHQDQGDQGWKH\DUQSURSHUWLHVZHUHJRLQJGRZQ
as the twist multiplier exceeded 7. However, the tenacity of the spun-lilo filament yam
increased slightly. The tenacity of these three twist multipliers of spun-like filament yarns,
also varied with the processing conditions. The tenacity under processing conditions was
higher than that under other conditions, as the speed varied. The tenacity of these spunlike
filament yarns, with three different specifications, increased with yam count. Kadoglu et al.
(2004) concluded that Hairiness was dependent on the number of fibres present in the cross
section of the yarn. For this reason coarse yarns exhibited more hairiness compared to fine
yarns. The yarn twist was another major factor and higher twists lead to less hairiness up to a
certain extent. This was the main reason while hosiery yarns normally had high hairiness
compared to warp yarns. However in a mill condition, the fibre parameters and yarn
parameters could be adjusted. Hence the next topic, process parameters, assumed very high
significance, as this was the only available option at the mill level to reduce the hairiness.
Lang et al. (2004) concluded that the effects of winding on yarn hairiness were
determined by yarn structural characteristics such as the twist factor Ty and the embedded
fiber length S, and the winding conditions including the pressure W, exerted on the yarn and
the winding tension T. Second, for a given set of the other three parameters above, there was
an optimal Ty level at which the yarn gripping force on the fibers reached a maximum, just
like yarn strength, making it most difficult for fibers, to be pulled out. Tang et al. (2006)
resulted that the effect of yarn hairiness on skin friction coefficient on the surface of a
rotating yarn package was inversely proportional to spindle speed; specifically, for the cotton
yarn package, the skin friction coefficient increased from about 16% at a spindle speed of 16
000 rpm to about 98% at a spindle speed of 2000 rpm. The air drag on a ballooning yarn and
the average air drag on the surface of a rotating yarn package both increased with an increase
in yarn hairiness. Basal and Oxenham (2006) found that the effect of interaction of twist and
spinning system was significant for only the hairiness and tenacity values. The difference
between the hairiness values of compact and conventional yarns decreased as twist increased.
14

The same tendency was present for the tenacity values of these yarns up to twist multiple 4.0,
where the difference was almost zero, but then it became larger. Kretzschmar et al. (2007)
observed that As the twist multiple of the yarn increased, U%, CV%, neps, count variation
and hairiness values decreased, whereas breaking force, elongation at break (%) and breaking
resistance values increased. The coefficients of yarn-needle and yarnyarn friction values of
ring yarns were found to be higher in comparison with the values of compact yarns. When the
yarn count and the twist multiple of the yarn was increased, the coefficients of yarnneedle
and yarnyarn friction values also increased.
Beltran et al. (2007) postulated that a greater reduction in pilling using the Jet Wind
method was attributed to the wrapping and incorporation of hair fibers within the yarn.
Relatively large reductions in hairiness were necessitated to achieve significant
improvements in pilling performance, and the number of hairs (S3) was not the only
important hairiness aspect that affected fabric pilling. Ahmed (2007) stated that reduced yarn
hairiness and improved tensile properties were the key benefit of the compact yarn. Both the
characteristics are critical for yarn performance in downstream manufacturing processes.
Compact spinning technology had potential for improving both the quality and profitability.
Haghighat et al. (2008) concluded that Yarn linear density (count) had a significant
influence on yarn hairiness. Generally, as yarn linear density (tex) decreased, hairiness was
also decreased. Ozguney et al. (2008) stated that as the twist multipliers of the yarns
increased, U%, CV%, neps, count variation and hairiness values decreased, whereas breaking
force, elongation at break (%) and breaking resistance values increased. Basu et al. (2009)
concluded that the hairiness value given by Uster Evenness Tester decreased with increase in
\DUQILQHQHVV7KHPHDQ+YDOXHZDVIRUV&:\DUQDQGIRUV&:\DUQV
Xia et al. (2009) concluded that after singeing treatment compact yarn showed higher
hairiness eliminating percentage for short hairs, higher tex values and lower weight loss than
combed yarns under the same counts. Further the thin place kept stable after singeing
treatment for all of the yarn, while thick place increased greatly. Neps of yarns decreased
dramatically at the same time. However, CV of yarns increased slightly after singeing
treatment.

15

2.2 Fabric Characteristics

2.2.1 Fabric Abrasion Resistance
Barella and Manich (1984) discussed that abrasion resistance increased with yarn
twist, first slowly and then rapidly, and from a certain twist multiplier onwards, the increase
in abrasion resistance slowed down. Cotton yarn showed a better abrasion resistance than
polyester yarns, probably due to cuticle components on the fibre acting as lubricating agents
during the friction when the yarn surface is sufficiently compact because of the amount of
twist accumulated. Sharma et al. (1987) narrated that as the stitch length increased (tightness
of the fabric decreased), the abrasion resistance of the fabric decreased, in both course and
wale directions. This might be explained by the fact that as the tightness factor decreased, the
number of loops per square centimeter of fabric decreased, and fewer numbers of courses or
wales were required to rupture in a fabric strip 2.5 cms wide. Abrasion resistance decreased
further for finished relaxed fabrics, probably because of the loss in strength of yarn from the
chemical cross linking of resin. Parveen (1989) concluded that weight loss and decreased in
thickness showed somewhat similar trend in all fabrics. Progressive loss in weight and
thickness occurred under increased loads and abrasion cycles.
Ozcan and Candan (2005) demonstrated that a close examination of the abrasion
behavior of the fabrics showed that the effect of relaxation was much more significant than
the course length ranges selected for the samples, such that for each group, fully relaxed
fabric samples had lower weight loss percentages. When the resistance of the fabrics to
pilling was graded, it was the second group that showed the highest resistance, followed by
the third and first groups. Nergis and Candan (2006) concluded that Abrasion on the actual
faces of both single jersey and rib fabrics was higher, provided that the boucl yarns from
Nm 15 high bulk acrylic material were used for fabric production. Abrasion on the actual
backs of the structures was higher, provided that the boucl yarns from plied material, namely
Nm 15/2 high bulk acrylic, were used for fabric production. Single jersey fabrics were less
resistant to abrasion than the rib structures and further explained that the weight loss due to
abrasion on the actual face and back of both single jersey and rib fabrics was influenced by
the type of the yarn material employed. The actual face and back of single jersey fabrics are
less resistant to abrasion than the rib structures.
Oglakcioglu and Marmarali (2007) concluded that because of their structural
properties, single jersey fabrics had remarkably lower thermal conductivity and thermal
resistance values as well as higher relative water vapour permeability values than 11 rib and
interlock fabrics. Different knitting structures had different comfort properties. Therefore, in
16

order to achieve the ideal clothing comfort, it was necessary to consider the end use of the
garment while selecting the fabrics. Kane et al. (2007) observed that the abrasive wear of a
material depended on the construction of the yarn and the structure of the fabric. When
compared the fabrics from compact yarn showed higher abrasion resistance or less weight
loss percentage due to abrasion than the fabrics from ring yarn. This was due to the fact that
surface fibers were more strongly bound to the yarn body. Therefore, the fiber loss during
abrasion was less for all the derivatives. The abrasion was less for higher density fabrics. This
was because of the fact that, when the density was more, more loops contributed to the wear
and so its abrasion resistance increased. The single jersey fabric showed higher abrasion loss
percentage due to its soft nature on the surface and it was reduced for honeycomb, single
pique and double pique, respectively. The plain stitch fabrics were soft in nature so the
weight loss due to abrasion was more. However, those fabrics from tuck-knit combination
stitches showed low weight loss i.e. higher abrasion resistance.
Kretzschmar et al. (2007) observed that the production process (compact or
conventional ring) and twist multiple of yarn did not have a significant effect on the abrasion
resistance values of knitted fabrics. As yarn get thinner, the abrasion resistance values of
knitted fabrics decreased and breaking occurred after a smaller number of cycles. It could be
seen that the knitting structure had an important effect on the abrasion resistance values of
knitted fabrics. The average abrasion resistance values of interlock knitted fabrics were
higher than those of rib and single jersey fabrics. Ozguney et al. (2008) stated that knitting
structure had an important effect on the abrasion resistance values of knitted fabrics. The
average abrasion resistance values of interlock knitted fabrics were higher than those of rib
and single jersey fabrics. finishing processes had a significant effect on abrasion values of
knitted fabrics. It was seen that knitted fabrics subjected to bleaching and enzymatic process
had higher abrasion resistance with regard to grey knitted fabrics.
Beceren and Nergis (2008) observed that the weight loss of fabrics from plied yarns at
the end of the abrasion cycle was generally higher than that of fabrics from single yarn and
DEUDVLRQ UHVLVWDQFH WHQGHG WR GHFUHDVH ZLWK WKH LQFUHDVH LQ KDLULQHVV $V FRPSDFW \DUQV
hairiness was lower, abrasion resistance of fabrics from this yarn was expected to be better
than that of the ring spun yarn fabrics. Statistical analysis showed that the effect of fabric
tightness on weight loss of fabrics after abrasion was significant statistically. The tightness of
fabrics influenced their abrasion properties and tighter fabric structures showed higher
resistance to abrasive forces. Arif (2008) reported that spirality, WPI, CPI, GSM, stitch
density, shrinkage, pilling quality and abrasion resistance was increased by increasing twist
factor. Akaydin (2009) The compact yarn fabrics have higher abrasion resistance and
17

lower pilling tendency. This may be due to the less hairiness, stronger structure and higher
elongation of compact yarns because of the participation of all fibres out of spinning triangle
in compact spinning system.
2.2.2 Fabric Bursting Strength
Black (1975) observed that the burst strength of the OE fabric was lower than the ring
fabric; however, in the case of double-knit constructions, high burst strength values were
recorded for both OE and ring. Sharma et al. (1987) stated that as the stitch length increased
(i.e., the tightness factor decreased), the bursting strength of the fabric also decreased for both
states of fabric relaxation, i.e., full and finished relaxation. This might be explained in light of
the stitch density. At a lower stitch length, the number of loops in a unit was greater and
consequently more strength would be required to burst all the loops. Stumf et al. (1999)
observed that the rupture load of the fabric per areal mass decreases with the increasing loop
density. Ertrugral and Ucar (2000) reported that fabric weight, yarn breaking strength and
yarn elongation were the major parameters that affect the bursting strength of knitted fabric.
Kretzschmar et al. (2007) stated that Yarn type (compact or conventional ring) had a
significant effect on bursting strength. The bursting strength values of knitted fabrics
produced with compact yarns were found to be higher in comparison with fabrics knitted with
ring yarns. As yarn count increased, the bursting strength of the knitted fabrics decreased,
which meant that the bursting strength values of knitted fabrics produced with 40/1 Ne yarns
were lower than fabrics knitted with 30/1 Ne yarns. The twist multiple of yarns did not affect
the bursting strength of the knitted fabrics. Knitting structure had an important effect on
bursting strength, and the average bursting strength values decreased, respectively, in
interlock, single jersey and rib structures. Kane et al. (2007) stated that the single jersey
fabric showed higher bursting strength values than the other structures, due to its high
elongation nature. Reduced values were noted for honeycomb, single pique and double pique,
respectively. When the SCSL increased, the bursting strength decreased for all the four
structures. This was due to the fact that when the SCSL was less, numbers of loops per square
inch were more. Therefore, the resistance towards the force was more in the case of lesser
SCSL fabric.
Emirhanova and Kavusturan (2008) observed that the effect of knit structure was
highly significant in washed fabrics. Moss stitch and half cardigan fabrics had weaker
bursting strength performance. Half Milano, links-links and plain fabrics had the strongest
bursting strength performance. Beceren and Nergis (2008) observed that the strength
properties of the yarns influence the bursting strength of the fabrics. Accordingly, the effect
18

RIWKHVWUHQJWKSURSHUWLHVRIWKH\DUQVRQIDEULFVEXUVWLQJVWUHQJWKFRXOGEHFOHDUO\REVHUYHG
and the bursting strength of fabrics from plied ring yarns was generally higher than that of
fabrics produced from single and plied compact yarns, as might well be expected since they
had higher strength. The effect of fabric tightness was found to be significant statistically and
loose knit fabrics revealed the lowest bursting strength values when compared with tight and
medium-tight knit ones.
Ozguney et al. (2008) observed that as yarn count increased, bursting strength of
knitted fabrics decreased, this meant bursting strength values of knitted fabrics produced with
Ne 40/1 yarns were lower than fabrics knitted with Ne 30/1 yarns. No effect of twist
multiplier of the yarn was established on bursting strength of knitted fabrics. It was
determined that knitting structure had an important effect on bursting strength and average
bursting strength values decreased, respectively, in interlock, single jersey and rib structures.
Emirhanova and Kavusturan (2008) concluded that the effect of knit structure and relaxation
processes on the dimensional properties of fabric was highly significant. Knit structure had
the greatest effect. The effect of knit structure on bursting strength, air permeability, bending
rigidity was highly significant in washed fabrics. Akaydin (2009) concluded that knitting
structure affected the burst strength, similar to yarn characteristics. Interlock fabrics having a
tighter and closer structure were found to have highest burst strength.
2.2.3 Fabric Length-Wise Shrinkage
Knapton and Fong (1970) concluded that the relaxation behavior of the two elemental
structural units of weft-knit structures-the plain and rib loops were strikingly dissimilar.
During relaxation, plain-knit structures generally exhibited isotropic dimensional changes
such that length and width shrinkages were nearly always observed, while on the other hand
rib structures exhibited anistropic behavior such that shrinkage in length and expansion in
width occur and further explained that The plain-knit loop, on the other hand, lay essentially
in the fabric plane only in the dry-relaxed state. On relaxation, it took up a three-dimensional
form shrinking in length and width, and increasing in thickness. Yarn forces must be higher
then in rib structures since there existed no portion capable of bending out of the fabric plane.
Sharma et al. (1985) observed that fabric area shrinkage increased with the tightness
factor, possibly because of the structure itself, where at a lower tightness factor, the fabric
would be slack in nature and very late recovery might occur after the removal of the fabric
from the machine. Hence slacker fabrics showed lower shrinkage after wet or full relaxation.
With the increase in count and gauge, the shrinkage increased for same tightness factor and
reduced with the increasing twist factor. Sharma et al. (1987) narrated that fabric area
19

shrinkage increased with the tightness factor upon relaxation, perhaps because with the lower
tightness factor, very late recovery might occurs after removing the fabric from the machine,
causing less shrinkage. Maximum shrinkage occured upon wet relaxation, and with further
relaxation much less area shrinkage occurred. With a decrease in the twist factor, area
shrinkage decreased. With higher twist and tightness factors, shrinkage increased from wet
relaxation to full relaxation, but at lower tightness factors the trend was reversed in spite of
higher linear changes in dimensions.
Jamal (1998) reported that stitch length affected the dimensions of cotton knitted
fabrics. Gill (2000) concluded that the length-wise and width-wise shrinkage of knitted
fabrics increased for finer count yarns. Candan and Onal (2003) concluded that for each
fabric type of given stitch length, as the relaxation process progressed, the course density
increased, whereas there was very little change in the wale density. Loop distortions resulting
from yam spirality might also influence the relaxation behavior of the samples in the
widthwise direction. Furthermore, with an increased number of laundering cycles, the stitch
density increased for each fabric type, and at the end of the first washing and tumbling
treatment, stitch density reached its maximum. The skewness values achieved by these
fabrics might also imply excessive loop distortions, probably arising from a high degree of
yam twist liveliness.
Rehman (2006) concluded that shrinkage decreased with the increase of stitch length
while spirality of knitted fabric increased with the increase of stitch length. And lengthwise
shrinkage was less for compact fabric than did of ring fabric. Arif (2008) reported that
spirality, WPI, CPI, GSM, stitch density, shrinkage, pilling quality and abrasion resistance
was increased by increasing twist factor.
2.2.4 Fabric Width-Wise Shrinkage
Sharma et al. (1985) narrated that areal density increased with in all states of
relaxation; however, weight/unit area increased after full relaxation. Fabric area shrinkage
was lower with a lower tightness factor and increased with the twist factor of the yarn and the
yam number. Fabric bulk was proportional to loop length in all relaxed conditions. After full
relaxation there was an inversely proportional linear relation between fabric bulk and the
tightness factor for all sets of relaxed plain knitted fabrics. Sharma et al. (1987) stated that
shrinkage from washing has always been considered a serious problem for knitted cotton
fabrics; it had become even more critical in recent years with the demand for such cotton
products as knitted dress shirts, sports slacks, and dresses. Twist affected the properties of
knitted fabrics to a significant level. Resin add-on was higher for fabrics prepared from
20

loosely twisted yarn, and for this reason dimensional changes were fewer for fabrics from
these yarns.
Gill (2000) observed that the lengthwise and widthwise shrinkage for finer count
increased. Shahid (2001) elaborated that fabric type, count, stitch length and twist factor
exerted a highly significant effect on lengthwise shrinkage. Candan and Onal (2003)
concluded that Loop distortions resulting from yam spirality might also influence the
relaxation behavior of the samples in the widthwise direction. Furthermore, with an increased
number of laundering cycles, the stitch density increased for each fabric type, and at the end
of the first washing and tumbling treatment, stitch density reached its maximum. The
skewness values achieved by these fabrics might also imply excessive loop distortions,
probably arising from a high degree of yam twist liveliness. Rehman (2006) concluded that
shrinkage decreased with the increase of stitch length while spirality of knitted fabric
increased with the increase of stitch length. And widthwise shrinkage was less for compact
fabric than that did of ring fabric. Arif (2008) reported that spirality, WPI, CPI, GSM, stitch
density, shrinkage, pilling quality and abrasion resistance was increased by increasing twist
factor.
2.2.5 Fabric Pilling
0LNXLRQLHQVWDWHGWKDWSropensity to pilling of weft knitted fabric increased
by increasing of yarn linear density and by decreasing of fabric density. zdil et al. (2005)
demonstrated that Fabric samples out of compact yarns displayed better pilling behaviours at
each production stage (i.e. grey, repetitive washed and enzymatic treated). Candan and nal
(2002) showed that fabrics knitted from open-end and blend spun yarns had a lower
propensity to pill. Beceren and Nergis (2008) observed that fabrics consisted of compact
yarns exhibited better pilling performance when compared to the fabrics produced from
conventional ring spun yarns.
Can (2008) obtained that abrasion resistance and pilling performance in fabrics made
from OE rotor spun yarns had a maximum value. However, the abrasion resistance and
pilling performance of fabrics made from ring carded spun yarns had a minimum value. He
also concluded that yarn tenacity and yarn evenness did not affect fabric abrasion resistance
and pilling. An increase in yarn hairiness reduced fabric abrasion resistance and pilling
performance. Li et al. (2009) reported that the yarn breaking elongation had little effect on
the pilling rates of cashmere knitted fabric. Beceren et al. (2010) stated that plain jersey
fabrics from siro spun yarns had a slightly higher resistance to pilling than those from ring

21

yarns. Balasubramanian (2010) noted that pilling tendency would be more with higher
hairiness. Pilling was a major problem with knitted fabrics.

22

Chapter No. 3

MATERIALS AND METHODS

7KH SUHVHQW UHVHDUFK ZRUN HQWLWOHG Effect of yarn singeing and waxing upon the
knitting performance of single jersey fabric ZDV LQLWLDWHG LQ WKH 'HSDUWPHQW RI )LEUH
Technology, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad. The yarn preparation was conducted in
the Koh-e-Noor Spinning Mills Chakwal and knitting was conducted in the Three Star
Hosiery Mills (PVT) Ltd. during the year 2010. The detail of materials and methods used to
achieve data for various quality characters are briefly described here under.
The research is completed in two Phases.

Phase I
3.1 Yarn Singeing
The samples of 20s combed hoseiry yarn were collected from the running stock of the
mills and further processed on the yarn singeing machine with following variable.
Winding speed (S)

Gas Pressure (G)

Air Pressure (A)

S1=400m/min

G1=12mbar

A1=8mbar

S2=500m/min

G2=14mbar

A2=9mbar

S3=600m/min

G3=16mbar

A3=10mbar

3.2 Yarn Characteristics

After making the singed yarn samples according to the above cited machine setting
they were tested for the following respective characteristics. The following yarn
characteristics were tested by adopting ASTM standards (2008).
3.2.1 Yarn Count
Yarn count was determined by "skein method" with the help of Uster Auto Sorter-III,
which is a direct reading instrument. A programmed of count determination for 120 yards lea
was fed to the computer for the English count system (Ne), the yarn number was noted from
its automatic digital display.

23

3.2.2 Yarn Lea Strength (lbs)

A pendulum type lea strength-testing machine was used to test the strength of the
yarn. This machine gives the direct reading for lea strength.
3.2.3 Count Lea Strength Product (CLSP) (hanks)
Count lea strength product value was determined by multiplying actual count value
with the respective lea strength value of yarn according to British Standards (1985).
CLSP= Yarn count Lea strength
3.2.4 Single Yarn Strength (grams)
6LQJOH \DUQ VWUHQJWK ZDV PHDVXUHG ZLWK WKH KHOS RI 8VWHU 7HQVRUDSLG ,,, 7KH
procedure was adopted as laid in its operation manual.
3.2.5 Tensile Properties of Yarn
Tensile properties i.e. single yarn strength, elongation and rupture per kilometer were
observed with Uster Tensorapid-3 which works on the principle of constant rate of extension
(CRE). The principle describes the fact that the moving clamps are displaced at constant
velocity as a result of which the specimen, caught in between the stationary and moving
clamps, extended by a constant rate. The breaking tenacity was measured from the maximum
force which was applied anywhere between the beginning of the test and the final rupture of
the specimen. The breaking elongation of yarn was measured from the clamp displacement at
the point of peak force.
3.2.6 Yarn Evenness, Imperfections and Hairiness
Yarn Unevenness (U%) was determined by measuring the variation in capacity
occurring as the yarn passes through the condenser and recorded in term of mean linear
irregularity (U%) and the coefficient of variation in yarn mass (CV%). Equipment employed
was Uster Evenness Tester (UT-4), which simultaneously measures imperfections viz., thin
places, thick places and neps per 1000 meter of yarn. The sensitivity setting for the
determination of imperfections were - 50 % for thin place, + 50 % for thick place and + 200
% for neps. Yarn hairiness was also evaluated by Uster Evenness Tester 4.

24

Phase II
3.3 Knitting process.
Circular knitting machines were engaged to fabricate knitted sample from the singed
yarn samples specially spun for this research project at different singeing machine settings.
Circular knitting machine of the following specification was engaged for the
preparation of single jersey fabric.
Brand

= Mayer and Cei

Gauge

= 22"

Stitch length

= 0.30"

No. of feeders

= 76

No. of needles

= 1700

Machine speed

= 22 rpm

25

The samples of fabric were constructed for the following variables.

Yarn types
Y1= Normal

Y2= Waxed

Y3= Combed

Y4=Singed
(combination
1)=S1G1A1
Y5=Singed
(combination
2)=S1G1A2
Y6=Singed
(combination
3)=S1G1A3
Y7=Singed
(combination
4)=S1G2A1
Y8=Singed
(combination
5)=S1G2A2
Y9=Singed
(combination
6)=S1G2A3
Y10= Singed
(combination
7)=S1G3A1

Tightness factor

Y11=Singed
(combination
8)=S1G3A2

Y20=Singed
(combination
17)=S2G3A2

F1= 11

Y12=Singed
(combination
9)=S1G3A3

Y21=Singed
(combination
18)=S2G3A3

F2= 12

Y13=Singed
(combination
10)=S2G1A1

Y22=Singed
(combination
19)=S3G1A1

F3= 13

Y14=Singed
(combination
11)=S2G1A2

Y23=Singed
(combination
20)=S3G1A2

F4= 14

Y15=Singed
(combination
12)=S2G1A3

Y24=Singed
(combination
21)=S3G1A3

Y16=Singed
(combination
13)=S2G2A1

Y25=Singed
(combination
22)=S3G2A1

Y17=Singed
(combination
14)=S2G2A2

Y26=Singed
(combination
23)=S3G2A2

Y18=Singed
(combination
15)=S2G2A3

Y27=Singed
(combination
24)=S3G2A3

Y19=Singed
(combination
16)=S2G3A1

Y28=Singed
(combination
25)=S3G3A1
Y29=Singed
(combination
26)=S3G3A1
Y30=Singed
(combination
27)=S3G3A3

26

3.3.1 Testing of knitted fabric characteristics

The knitted fabric samples made from different yarn types as given in the above table
were placed on flat surface for 24 hours at 652% relative humidity and 222% temperature
for conditioning purpose. Then the following characteristics of the samples were observed
and evaluated adopting standard test methods for each property.
3.3.2 Abrasion resistance %
Abrasion resistance is the resistance of the fabric to wearing and flexing when a
specimen of fabric is subjected to unidirectional reciprocal folding and rubbing over a bar
having a specified characteristics under known conditions of tension and pressure. It is
measured in weight loss percentage. The instrument used was Accelerator fitted with abrasive
liner over foam rubber cushion and with 114 mm S-shape rotor. Cut specimens of fabrics
were bound to hit the chamber wall or abradent liner and a strip of adhesive was applied to
each cut and after letting it to dry weight loss was calculated in percentage according to
ASTM (2008b).
3.3.3 Bursting Strength (PSI)
Bursting strength is the force in pounds per square inch which is used to burst the
fabric, and was determined according to the ASTM (2008a) method. Mullen Burst Strength
Testor was used for measuring bursting strength.
3.3.4 Shrinkage %
Shrinkage LV WKH GHFUHDVH LQ OHQJWK DUHD RU YROXPH 7KH VSHFLPHQV ZHUH
preconditioned by exposure to moving air for four hours in the standard atmosphere, then
condition the specimen and mark representative distances in both length and width directions.
Mark specimen by laying out without tension on a flat, polished surface, taking care that the
fabric is free from wrinkles or creases. Marked with indelible ink and a fine point pen. A
template of 1010 was used for marking the specimen. Then after laundering and tumbled
drawing as suggested by AATCC (2008) method.
No of washes

=3

Water in washing machine = 18 galons

Final washing time = 35 min
Spin speed = 64515 rpm
Tumble temperature = 70C
Tumble time = 45 min
Condition the specimen in a standard atmosphere before testing for at least four hours. Lay
each specimen without tension on a flat polished surface and measure the distance between
27

the marks. Then calculate the dimension change in each direction using the following
formula.
Shrinkage % = A B / A 100
Where
A = Original length of sample
B = Final length of sample
3.3.5 Pilling %
Pilling and other changes in surface appearance, such as fuzzing, that occur in normal
wear are simulated on a laboratory testing machine. Pills are caused to form on fabric by a
random rubbing action produced by tumbling specimens in a cylindrical test chamber lined
with a mildly abrasive material. The degree of fabric pilling is evaluated by comparison of
the tested specimens with visual standards that may be actual fabrics.
Samples may be washed or dry cleaned before cutting the test specimens, using conditions
appropriate for the fabric end use or conditions agreed upon by all interested parties. Cut
specimens in squares 105 mm (4.13 in.) on the bias at an approximate 0.78 rad (45) angle to
the warp (wale) and filling (course) directions. It was calculated in percentage according to
ASTM (2008b).
Grading
5 - no pilling
4 - slight pilling
3 - moderate pilling
2 - severe pilling
1 - very severe pilling
3.4 Analysis of Data
Factorial Design was applied in the analysis of variance of data for testing the
differences among various quality characteristics as suggested by Montgomery (2009) using
Statistical Program for Social Sciences (SPSS) microcomputer statistical program.

28

Chapter
No.4

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

7KHUHVXOWVSHUWDLQLQJWRWKHSUHVHQWUHVHDUFKSURMHFWHQWLWOHGEffect of yarn singeing
and waxing upon the knitting performance of single jersey fabric DUH SUHVHQWHG DQG
discussed along with their statistical manipulation here under. The study was initiated in the
Department of Fibre Technology, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad. The yarn preparation
was conducted in the Koh-e-Noor Spinning Mills. Unit-3, Chakwal and knitting was
conducted in the Three Star Hosiery Mills (PVT) Ltd. during the year 2010. The results of the
present research work are given in the tables and discussed character wise below;

4.1 YARN PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS

4.1.1 Before Singeing
The values of different yarn characteristics measured before singeing by adopting the
ASTM standard methods (2008) are given below in table 1.
TABLE-1. YARN CHARACTERISTICS



Yarn

Values

Lea Strength (lbs)

108

CLSP (hanks)

2160

SES (grams)

435

Elongation %

5.78

RKM (g/tex)

14.7





Thin Places/km

Thick Places/km

12

Neps/km

Hairiness

6.5





29

4.1.2 After Singeing

4.1.2.1 Yarn Lea Strength (lbs).
The analysis of variance of the data regarding lea strength is given in Table 2. Highly
significant effects of the winding speed (S), gas pressure (G), air pressure (A) were found on
yarn lea strength, while the effect of all possible interactions remained non-significant.
The statistical comparison of individual treatment means with regards to yarn lea
VWUHQJWK LV SUHVHQWHG LQ 7DEOH D 'XQFDQV PXOWLSOH UDQJH WHVW IRU WKH FRPSDULVRQ RI
individual treatment means of winding speed showed that the maximum lea strength was
recorded for S3 (Winding Speed) with the mean value 102.56 lbs followed by S2 and S1 with
their mean values as 98.44 and 95.11 lbs, respectively. These results showed that with the
increase of the winding speed on the yarn singeing machine, the lea strength of the yarn was
increased. These findings correlate with the observation of praisal (1982) concluded that yarn
tension and winding speed influenced the quality of cross-wound package. Similiarly Rasool
(2000) concluded that with the increase of winding speed, yarn lea strength increased.
DXQFDQV PXOWLSOH UDQJH WHVW DQG WKH FRPSDULVRQ RI LQGLYLGXDO WUHDWPHQW PHDQV
regarding gas pressure under investigation showed that the maximum lea strength was
recorded for G1 (gas pressure) with the mean value 99.57 lbs followed by G2 and G3 with
their mean values as 98.89 and 97.67 lbs, respectively. The results showed that with the
increase of the gas pressure of the yarn singeing machine, the lea strength of the yarn
decreased. The study was elaborated in the manner that with the increase of gas pressure, the
heat intensity of the yarn singeing machine was increased that put a negative influence on the
strength of the yarn. These results get support from the findings of Pillay (1971) noted that
the increase in temperature of the spinning room reduced yarn strength, while increase in
relative humidity increased it.


'XQFDQV multiple range test and the comparison of individual treatment means

regarding air pressure under investigation showed that the maximum lea strength was
recorded for A1 (air pressure) with the mean value of 99.67 lbs followed by A2 and A3 with
their mean values as 98.56 and 97.89 lbs, respectively.

30

Table-2. Analysis of variance for Yarn Lea Strength.

S.O.V

D.F.

S.S.

M.S.

F. Value

Prob.

250.296

125.148

1351.60

0.0000**

16.519

8.259

89.20

0.0000**

14.519

7.259

78.40

0.0000**

SxG

0.815

0.204

2.20

N.S

SxA

0.781

0.195

2.10

N.S

GxA

0.593

0.148

1.60

N.S

SxGxA

1.416

0.177

1.90

N.S

Error

81

7.533

0.093

Total

107

292.472

** = Highly significant

N.S= Non-significant

CV% = 0.42

Table-2a. Comparison of individual mean values for Yarn Lea Strength (lbs).
Winding Speed

Gas Pressure

Air Pressure

S1=95.11c

G1=99.56a

A1=99.67a

S2=98.44b

G2=98.89b

A2=98.56b

S3=102.56a

G3=97.67c

A3=97.89c

Mean values having different letters, differ significantly at 0.05 level of probability.

31

Yarn Lea Strength(lbs)

S2

S3

G2
Gas Pressure

G3

Singeing Variables

G1

A1

Air Pressure

A2

A3

Fig.1 Graphical representation of individual mean values of Yarn Lea Strength

104.00
102.00
100.00
98.00
96.00
94.00
92.00
90.00
S1

Winding Speed

32

The results showed that with the increase of the air pressure of the yarn singeing machine, the
lea strength of the yarn was decreased. The study was elaborated in the manner that with the
increase of air pressure, the heat intensity of the yarn singeing machine was increased that put a
negative influence on the strength of yarn. The study gets support from the findings of Pillay
(1971) concluded that increase in temperature of the spinning room reduced yarn strength, while
increase in relative humidity increased it.
4.1.2.2 Count lea strength product (CLSP) (hanks).
The analysis of variance of the data regarding CLSP is given in Table 3. Highly
significant effects of the winding speed (S), gas pressure (G), air pressure (A) were found on
yarn CLSP, while the effect of all possible interactions remained non-significant.
The statistical comparison of individual treatment means with regards to yarn CLSP is
SUHVHQWHGLQWDEOHD'XQFDQVPXOWLSOHUDQJHWHVWIRUWKHFRPSDULVRQRILQGLYLGXDOWUHDWPHQW
means of winding speed showed that the maximum CLSP was recorded for S3 (Winding
Speed) with the mean value 2051.1 hanks followed by S2 and S1 with their mean values as
1968.9 and 1902.2 hanks, respectively. The results showed that with the increase of the
winding speed on the yarn singeing machine, the CLSP of the yarn was also increased. The
study gets support from the findings of Saeed (1993) narrated that yarn CLSP value increased
with application of waxes and winding speed. In the same line Rasool (2000) also noted that
with the increase of winding speed, the yarn CLSP increased.
'XQFDQV PXOWLSOH UDQJH WHVW DQG WKH FRPSDULVRQ RI LQGLYLGXDO WUHDWPHQW PHDQV
regarding gas pressure under investigation showed that the maximum CLSP was recorded for
G1 (gas pressure) with the mean value 1991.1 hanks followed by G2 and G3 with their mean
values as 1977.8 and 1953.3 hanks, respectively. The results showed that with the increase of
the gas pressure of the yarn singeing machine, the CLSP of the yarn decreased. These
findings correlate with the observation of Pillay (1971) concluded that the increase in
temperature of the spinning room reduced yarn strength, while increase in relative humidity
increased it.
'XQFDQV PXOWLSOH UDQJH WHVW and the comparison of individual treatment means
regarding air pressure under investigation showed that the maximum CLSP was recorded for
A1 (air pressure) with the mean value of 1993.3 hanks followed by A2 and A3 with their mean
values as 1971.1 and 1957.8 hanks, respectively. The results showed that with the increase of
the air pressure of the yarn singeing machine, the CLSP of the yarn was decreased. These
findings correlate with the observation of Pillay (1971) depicted that the increase in

33

temperature of the spinning room reduced yarn strength, while increase in relative humidity
increased it.
Table-3. Analysis of Variance Table for CLSP.
S.O.V

D.F.

S.S.

M.S.

F. Value

Prob.

100119

50059.3

1351.60

0.0000**

6607

3303.7

89.20

0.0000**

5807

2903.7

78.40

0.0000**

SxG

326

81.5

2.20

N.S

SxA

297

74.37

2.01

N.S

GxA

237

59.3

1.60

N.S

SxGxA

299

37.4

1.01

N.S

Error

81

2997

37.0

Total

107

116689

**= Highly significant

N.S= Non-significant

CV%= 0.31

Table-3a. Comparison of individual mean values for CLSP (Hanks).

Winding Speed

Gas Pressure

Air Pressure

S1=1902.2c

G1=1991.1a

A1=1993.3a

S2=1968.9b

G2=1977.8b

A2=1971.1b

S3=2051.1a

G3=1953.3c

A3=1957.8c

Mean values having different letters, differ significantly at 0.05 level of probability.

34

CLSP (hanks)

2100.00

2050.00

2000.00

1950.00

1900.00

1850.00

1800.00
S2

S3

G2
Gas Pressure

G3

Singeing Variables

G1

A1

Air Pressure

A2

Fig.2 Graphical representation of individual mean values of CLSP

S1

Winding Speed

A3

35

4.1.2.3 Yarn Single end strength (SES) (grams).

The analysis of variance of the data regarding SES is given in Table 4. Highly
significant effects of the winding speed (S), gas pressure (G), air pressure (A) were found on
SES, while the effect of all possible interactions remained non-significant.
The statistical comparison of individual treatment means with regards to yarn SES is
SUHVHQWHGLQWDEOHD'XQFDQVPXOWLSOHUDQJHWHVWIRUWKHFRPSDULVRQRILQGLYLGXDOWUHDWPHQW
means of winding speed showed that the maximum SES was recorded for S3 (Winding
Speed) with the mean value 425.50 grams followed by S2 and S1 with their mean values as
420.72 and 417.88 grams, respectively. The results showed that with the increase of the
winding speed on the yarn singeing machine, the SES of the yarn was also increased. The
study gets support from the findings of Rasool (2000) narrated that with the increase of
winding speed, the yarn SES increased.
'XQFDQVPXOWLSOHUDQJHWHVWDQGWKHFRPSDULVRQRILQGLYLGXDl treatment means regarding gas
pressure under investigation showed that the maximum SES was recorded for G1 (gas
pressure) with the mean value 424.64 grams followed by G2 and G3 with their mean values as
421.48 and 417.98 grams, respectively. The results showed that with the increase of the gas
pressure of the yarn singeing machine, the SES of the yarn decreased. These findings
correlate with the observation of Sardag (2007) concluded that the increase of temperature
from 90C to 110C caused a decrease in the strength values of the yarns. For this reason,
heat-setting at 90C could be considered to be sufficient to enhance the strength properties of
PES/viscose yarnsconsisting of 67% PES and 33% viscose.
'XQFDQV PXOWLSOH UDQJH WHVW DQG WKH FRPSDULVRQ RI LQGLYLGXDO WUHDWPHQW PHDQV
regarding air pressure under investigation showed that the maximum SES was recorded for
A1 (air pressure) with the mean value of 422.40 grams followed by A2 and A3 with their mean
values as 421.36 and 420.34 grams, respectively. The results showed that with the increase of
the air pressure of the yarn singeing machine, the SES of the yarn was decreased. The study
gets support from the findings of Sardag (2007) concluded that the increase of temperature
from 90C to 110C caused a decrease in the strength values of the yarns. For this reason,
heat-setting at 90C could be considered to be sufficient to enhance the strength properties of
PES/viscose yarnsconsisting of 67% PES and 33% viscose.

36

Table-4. Analysis of Variance Table for SES.

S.O.V

D.F.

S.S.

M.S.

F. Value

Prob.

267.049

133.524

5400.99

0.0000**

200.167

100.083

4048.31

0.0000**

19.016

9.508

384.58

0.0000**

SxG

0.218

0.054

2.16

N.S

SxA

0.202

0.051

2.04

N.S

GxA

0.071

0.018

0.72

N.S

SxGxA

0.075

0.009

0.36

N.S

Error

81

0.198

0.025

Total

107

486.996

** = Highly significant

N.S= Non-significant

CV% = 0.04

Table-4a. Comparison of individual mean values for SES (grams).

Winding Speed

Gas Pressure

Air Pressure

S1=417.88c

G1=424.64a

A1=422.40a

S2=420.72b

G2=421.48b

A2=421.36b

S3=425.50a

G3=417.98c

A3=420.34c

Mean values having different letters, differ significantly at 0.05 level of probability.

37

SES

426.00

424.00

422.00

420.00

418.00

416.00

414.00
S2

S3

G2
Gas Pressure

G3

Singeing Variables

G1

A1

Air Pressure

A2

Fig.3 Graphical representation of individual mean values of SES

S1

Winding Speed

A3

38

4.1.2.4 Yarn Elongation %.

The analysis of variance of the data regarding elongation is given in Table 5. Highly
significant effects of the winding speed (S) and significant effect of gas pressure (G), air
pressure (A) were found on elongation, while the effect of all possible interactions remained
non-significant.
The statistical comparison of individual treatment means with regards to elongation is
SUHVHQWHGLQWDEOHD'XQFDQVPXOWLSOHUDQJHWHVWIRr the comparison of individual treatment
means of winding speed showed that the maximum elongation was recorded for S3 (Winding
Speed) with the mean value 5.6744 % followed by S2 and S1 with their mean values as
5.6100 and 5.5733 %, respectively. The results showed that with the increase of the winding
speed on the yarn singeing machine, the elongation of the yarn was also increased. The study
gets support from the findings of Saeed (1993) depicted that with the increase of winding
speed and with the application of wax, the yarn elongation was increased.
'XQFDQV PXOWLSOH UDQJH WHVW DQG WKH FRPSDULVRQ RI LQGLYLGXDO WUHDWPHQW PHDQV
regarding gas pressure under investigation showed that the maximum elongation was
recorded for G1 (gas pressure) with the mean value 5.6633 % followed by G2 and G3 with
their mean values as 5.6211 and 5.5733 %, respectively. The results showed that with the
increase of the gas pressure on the yarn singeing machine, the elongation of the yarn was
decreased. These results correlate with the findings of Xia et al. (2009) concluded that after
singeing treatment, the elongation was decreased.
'XQFDQV PXOWLSOH UDQJH WHVW DQG WKH FRPSDULVRQ RI LQGLYLGXDO WUHDWPHQW PHDQV
regarding air pressure under investigation showed that the maximum elongation was recorded
for A1 (gas pressure) with the mean value 5.6333 % followed by A2 and A3 with their mean
values as 5.6189 and 5.6056 %, respectively. The results showed that with the increase of the
air pressure on the yarn singeing machine, the elongation of the yarn was decreased. These
results are in line with the findings of Xia et al. (2009) concluded that after singeing
treatment, the elongation was decreased.

39

Table-5. Analysis of Variance Table for Elongation (%).

S.O.V

D.F.

S.S.

M.S.

F. Value

Prob.

0.04716

0.02358

1157.64

0.0000**

0.03650

0.01825

895.82

0.0000**

0.00347

0.00174

85.27

0.0000**

SxG

0.00092

4.624E-05

2.27

N.S

SxA

0.00001

3.704E-06

0.18

N.S

GxA

0.00008

2.037E-05

1.00

N.S

SxGxA

0.00006

7.332E-06

0.36

N.S

Error

81

0.00165

2.037E-05

Total

107

0.08985

** = Highly significant

N.S= Non-significant

CV% = 0.08

Table-5a. Comparison of individual mean values for Elongation (%).

Winding Speed

Gas Pressure

Air Pressure

S1=5.5733c

G1=5.6633a

A1=5.6333a

S2=5.6100b

G2=5.6211b

A2=5.6189b

S3=5.6744a

G3=5.5733c

A3=5.6056c

Mean values having different letters, differ significantly at 0.05 level of probability.

40

Yarn Elongation (%)

S2

S3

G2
Gas Pressure

G3

Singeing Variables

G1

A1

Air Pressure

A2

A3

Fig.4 Graphical representation of individual mean values of Yarn Elongation

5.68
5.66
5.64
5.62
5.60
5.58
5.56
5.54
5.52
S1

Winding Speed

41

4.1.2.5 Yarn Rupture per kilometer (RKM) (g/tex).

The analysis of variance of the data regarding RKM is given in Table 6. Highly
significant effects of the winding speed (S) and significant effect of gas pressure (G), air
pressure (A) were found on RKM, while the effect of all possible interactions remained nonsignificant.
The statistical comparison of individual treatment means with regards to yarn RKM is
SUHVHQWHGLQWDEOHD'XQFDQVPXOWLSOHUDQJHWHVWIRUWKHFRPSDULVRQRILQGLYLGXDOWUHDWPHQW
means of winding speed showed that the maximum RKM was recorded for S3 (Winding
Speed) with the mean value 14.412 (g/tex) followed by S2 and S1 with their mean values as
14.250 and 14.153 (g/tex), respectively. The results showed that with the increase of the
winding speed on the yarn singeing machine, the RKM of the yarn was also increased. The
study gets support from the findings of Azam (2001) narrated that with the increase of
winding speed, the yarn RKM increased.
'XQFDQV PXOWLSOH UDQJH WHVW DQG WKH FRPSDULVRQ RI LQGLYLGXDO WUHDWPHQW PHDQV
regarding gas pressure under investigation showed that the maximum RKM was recorded for
G1 (gas pressure) with the mean value 14.383 (g/tex) followed by G2 and G3 with their mean
values as 14.275 and 14.157 (g/tex), respectively. The results showed that with the increase
of the gas pressure of the yarn singeing machine, the RKM of the yarn decreased. These
results correlate with the findings of Xia et al. (2009) concluded that tenacity of the yarn
decreased after singeing treatment.
'XQFDQV PXOWLSOH UDQJH WHVW DQG WKH FRPSDULVRQ RI LQGLYLGXDO WUHDWPHQW PHDQV
regarding air pressure under investigation showed that the maximum RKM was recorded for
A1 (air pressure) with the mean value 14.307 (g/tex) followed by A2 and A3 with their mean
values as 14.271 and 14.237 (g/tex), respectively. The results showed that with the increase
of the air pressure of the yarn singeing machine, the RKM of the yarn decreased. These
results are in line with the findings of Xia et al. (2009) who concluded that tenacity of the
yarn decreased after singeing treatment.

42

Table-6. Analysis of variance for yarn RKM.

S.O.V

D.F.

S.S.

M.S.

F. Value

Prob.

0.30634

0.15317

5401.02

0.0000**

0.22962

0.11481

4048.34

0.0000**

0.02181

0.01091

384.59

0.0000**

SxG

0.00021

0.00005

2.36

N.S

SxA

0.00020

0.00005

2.04

N.S

GxA

0.00008

0.00002

0.72

N.S

SxGxA

0.00032

0.00004

1.82

N.S

Error

81

0.00023

0.00002

Total

107

0.55881

**= Highly significant

N.S= Non-significant

CV%= 0.04

Table-6a. Comparison of individual mean values for yarn RKM (g/tex).

Winding Speed
Gas Pressure
Air Pressure
S1=14.153c

G1=14.383a

A1=14.307a

S2=14.250b

G2=14.275b

A2=14.271b

S3=14.412a

G3=14.157c

A3=14.237c

Mean values having different letters, differ significantly at 0.05 level of probability.

43

RKM

14.45
14.40
14.35
14.30
14.25
14.20
14.15
14.10
14.05
14.00
S2

S3

G2
Gas Pressure

G3

Singeing Variables

G1

A1

Air Pressure

A2

Fig.5 Graphical representation of individual mean values of RKM

S1

Winding Speed

A3

44

4.1.2.6 Yarn Thin Places per kilometer.

The analysis of variance of the data regarding thin places is given in Table 7. Nonsignificant effects of the winding speed (S), gas pressure (G) , air pressure (A) were found on
thin places, while the effect of all possible interactions remained non-significant.
The statistical comparison of individual treatment means with regards to thin places is
SUHVHQWHGLQWDEOHD'XQFDQVPXOWLSOHUDQJHWHVWIRUWKHFRPSDULVRQRILQGLYLGXDOWUHDWPHQW
means of winding speed showed that the maximum thin places was recorded for S3 (Winding
Speed) with the mean value 0.4444/km followed by S2 and S1 with their mean values as
0.3333 and 0.222/km, respectively. It was statistically non-significant.
'XQFDQV PXOWLSOH UDQJH WHVW DQG WKH FRPSDULVRQ RI LQGLYLGXDO WUHDWPHQW Peans
regarding gas pressure under investigation showed that the three variables G1, G2, and G3 had
the same value for thin places and was 0.3333/km. It was statistically non-significant.
'XQFDQV PXOWLSOH UDQJH WHVW DQG WKH FRPSDULVRQ RI LQGLYLGXDO treatment means
regarding air pressure under investigation showed that the maximum thin places was recorded
for A2 (air pressure) with the mean value of 0.6667/km followed by A1 and A3 with their
mean values as 0.2222 and 0.1111/km, respectively. There was no significant difference
between A1 and A3 but there was slight difference between A2 and A1, A3.

45

Table-7. Analysis of variance for Thin Places.

S.O.V

D.F.

S.S.

M.S.

F. Value

Prob.

0.22222

0.11111

0.50

N.S

7.704E-32

3.852E-32

0.00

N.S

0.66666

0.33333

1.50

N.S

SxG

1.11111

0.27778

1.25

N.S

SxA

0.88889

0.22222

1.00

N.S

GxA

0.44444

0.11111

0.50

N.S

SxGxA

2.18665

0.27333

1.23

N.S

Error

81

17.99982

0.22222

Total

107

23.51979

N.S= Non-significant

CV% = 141.42

Table-7a. Comparison of individual mean values for Thin Places/km.

Winding Speed

Gas Pressure

Air Pressure

S1= 0.2222a

G1=0.3333a

A1=0.2222b

S2= 0.3333a

G2=0.3333a

A2=0.6667a

S3= 0.4444a

G3=0.3333a

A3=0.1111b

Mean values having different letters, differ significantly at 0.05 level of probability.

46

Thin Places per Kilomemer

0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
S2

S3

G1

G3

Singeing Variables

Gas Pressure

G2

A1

Air Pressure

A2

Fig.6 Graphical representation of individual mean values of Thin Places

S1

Winding Speed

A3

47

4.1.2.7 Yarn Thick places per kilometer.

The analysis of variance of the data regarding thick places is given in Table 8. Highly
significant effects of the winding speed (S), gas pressure (G) and significant effect of air
pressure (A) were found on thick places, while the effect of all possible interactions remained
non-significant.
The statistical comparison of individual treatment means with regards to yarn thick
SODFHVLVSUHVHQWHGLQWDEOHD'XQFDQVPXOWLSOHUDQJHWHVWIRUWKHFRPSDULVRQRILQGLYLGXDO
treatment means of winding speed showed that the maximum thick places was recorded for
S1 (Winding Speed) with the mean value 19.667/km followed by S2 and S3 with their mean
values as 15.333 and 13.667/km, respectively. The results showed that with the increase of
the winding speed on the yarn singeing machine, the thick places of the yarn was decreased.
These results get support from the findings of Hammad (2005) concluded that yarn thick
places decreased at higher winding speeds.
'XQFDQV PXOWLSOH UDQJH WHVW DQG WKH FRPSDULVRQ RI LQGLYLGXDO WUHDWPHQW PHDQV
regarding gas pressure under investigation showed that the maximum thick places was
recorded for G3 (gas pressure) with the mean value 18.333/km followed by G2 and G1 with
their mean values as 17.000 and 13.333/km , respectively. The results showed that with the
increase of the gas pressure of the yarn singeing machine, the thick places of the yarn
increased. The study gets support from the findings of Xia et al. (2009) depicted that after
singeing treatment yarn thick places increased.
'XQFDQV PXOWLSOH UDQJH WHVW DQG WKH Fomparison of individual treatment means
regarding air pressure under investigation showed that the maximum thick places was
recorded for A3 (air pressure) with the mean value of 17.000/km followed by A2 and A1 with
their mean values as 16.667 and 15.000/km, respectively. The results showed that with the
increase of the air pressure of the yarn singeing machine, the thick places of the yarn was
increased. These findings correlate with the observation of Xia et al. (2009) concluded that
after singeing treatment yarn thick places increased.

48

Table-8. Analysis of variance for Thick Places.

S.O.V

D.F.

S.S.

M.S.

F. Value

Prob.

172.667

86.3333

64.75

0.0000**

120.667

60.3333

45.25

0.0000**

20.667

10.3333

7.75

0.0134*

SxG

10.186

2.5465

1.91

N.S

SxA

9.333

2.3333

1.75

N.S

GxA

13.333

3.3333

2.50

N.S

SxGxA

11.731

1.4665

1.10

N.S

Error

81

10.667

1.3333

Total

107

369.251

** = Highly significant

*= significant

N.S= Non-significant

CV% = 7.12

Table-8a. Comparison of individual mean values for Thick Places/km.

Winding Speed

Gas Pressure

Air Pressure

S1= 19.667a

G1=13.333c

A1=15.000c

S2= 15.333b

G2=17.000b

A2=16.667b

S3= 13.667c

G3=18.333a

A3=17.000a

Mean values having different letters, differ significantly at 0.05 level of probability.

49

Thick Places per Kilometer

20.00
18.00
16.00
14.00
12.00
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
S2

S3

G1

G3

Singeing Variables

Gas Pressure

G2

A1

Air Pressure

A2

Fig.7 Graphical representation of individual mean values of Thick Places

S1

Winding Speed

A3

50

4.1.2.8 Yarn Neps per kilometer.

The analysis of variance of the data regarding neps is given in Table 9. Highly
significant effects of the winding speed (S) and significant effect of gas pressure (G), air
pressure (A) were found on yarn neps, while the effect of all possible interactions remained
non-significant.
The statistical comparison of individual treatment means with regards to yarn neps is
SUHVHQWHGLQWDEOHD'XQFDQVPXOWLSOHUDQJHWHVWIRUWKHFRPSDULVRQRILQGLYLGXDOWUHDWPHQW
means of winding speed showed that the maximum neps was recorded for S3 (Winding
Speed) with the mean value 6.2222/km followed by S2 and S1 with their mean values as
5.3333and 3.4444/km, respectively. The results showed that with the increase of the winding
speed on the yarn singeing machine, the neps of the yarn was also increased. The study gets
support from the findings of Saeed (1993) concluded that with the increase of winding speed
yarn neps were increased.
'XQFDQV PXOWLSOH UDQJH WHVW DQG WKH FRPSDULVRQ RI LQGLYLGXDO WUHDWPHQW PHDQV
regarding gas pressure under investigation showed that the maximum neps was recorded for
G1 (gas pressure) with the mean value 6.1111/km followed by G2 and G3 with their mean
values as 5.0000 and 3.8889/km, respectively. The results showed that with the increase of
the gas pressure of the yarn singeing machine, the neps of the yarn decreased. These findings
are in line with the observation of Xia et al. (2009) disclosed that after singeing treatment
neps of yarn decreased. However, CV% of yarns increased slightly after singeing treatment.
'XQFDQV PXOWLSOH UDQJH WHVW DQG WKH FRPSDULVRQ RI LQGLYLGXDO WUHDWPHQW PHDQV
regarding air pressure under investigation showed that the maximum neps was recorded for
A1 (air pressure) with the mean value of 5.8889/km followed by A2 and A3 with their mean
values as 4.8889 and 4.2222/km, respectively. The results showed that with the increase of
the air pressure of the yarn singeing machine, the neps of the yarn was decreased. Having the
similar observations Xia et al. (2009) disclosed that the neps in yarn decreased and CV%
increased slightly after singeing process.

51

Table-9. Analysis of variance for Neps.

S.O.V

D.F.

S.S.

M.S.

F. Value

Prob.

36.2222

18.1111

46.57

0.0000**

22.2222

11.1111

28.57

0.0002*

12.6667

6.3333

16.29

0.0015*

SxG

0.8889

0.2222

0.57

N.S

SxA

1.1111

0.2778

0.71

N.S

GxA

1.7778

0.4444

1.14

N.S

SxGxA

5.8179

0.7272

1.87

N.S

Error

81

31.5009

0.3889

Total

107

112.2077

** = Highly significant

*= significant

N.S= Non-significant

CV% = 10.47

Table-9a. Comparison of individual mean values for Neps/km.

Winding Speed

Gas Pressure

Air Pressure

S1=3.4444c

G1=6.1111a

A1=5.8889a

S2=5.3333b

G2=5.0000b

A2=4.8889b

S3=6.2222a

G3=3.8889c

A3=4.2222c

Mean values having different letters, differ significantly at 0.05 level of probability.

52

Neps per KIlometer

7.00
6.00
5.00
4.00
3.00
2.00
1.00
0.00
S2

S3

G1

G3

Singeing Variables

Gas Pressure

G2

A1

Air Pressure

A2

Fig.8 Graphical representation of individual mean values of Neps

S1

Winding Speed

A3

53

4.1.2.9 Yarn Hairiness.

The analysis of variance of the data regarding hairinesss given in Table 10. Highly
significant effects of the winding speed (S), gas pressure (G), air pressure (A) were found on
hairiness, while the effect of all possible interactions remained non-significant.
The statistical comparison of individual treatment means with regards to yarn
KDLULQHVV LV SUHVHQWHG LQ WDEOH D 'XQFDQV PXOWLSOH UDQJH WHVW IRU WKH FRPSDULVRQ RI
individual treatment means of winding speed showed that the maximum hairiness was
recorded for S3 (Winding Speed) with the mean value 4.7433 followed by S2 and S1 with
their mean values as 4.6233 and 4.4689, respectively. The results showed that with the
increase of the winding speed on the yarn singeing machine, the hairiness of the yarn was
also increased. The study correlated with the findings of Saeed (1993) depicted that yarn
hairiness increased after winding process. In the same way Rust and Peykanian (1992) stated
that there increased wild hairs on yarn surface after winding, also that increased speed and
winding tension increased hairiness.
'XQFDQV PXOWLSle range test and the comparison of individual treatment means
regarding gas pressure under investigation showed that the maximum hairiness was recorded
for G1 (gas pressure) with the mean value 4.8056 followed by G2 and G3 with their mean
values as 4.6578 and 4.3722, respectively. The results showed that with the increase of the
gas pressure of the yarn singeing machine, the hairiness of the yarn decreased. The study gets
support from the findings of Xia et al. (2009) noted that after singeing treatment compact
yarn showed higher hairiness eliminating percentage for short hairs, higher tex values and
lower weight loss than combed yarns under the same counts.
'XQFDQV multiple range test and the comparison of individual treatment means
regarding air pressure under investigation showed that the maximum hairiness was recorded
for A1 (air pressure) with the mean value of 4.7422 followed by A2 and A3 with their mean
values as 4.5944 and 4.4989, respectively. The results showed that with the increase of the air
pressure of the yarn singeing machine, the hairiness of the yarn was decreased. Similarly Xia
et al. (2009) depicted that yarn hairiness decreased after singeing treatment at different air
pressures.

54

Table-10. Analysis of variance for Hairiness.

S.O.V

D.F.

S.S.

M.S.

F. Value

Prob.

0.34072

0.17036

69.12

0.0000**

0.87347

0.43674

177.19

0.0000**

0.27054

0.13527

54.88

0.0000**

SxG

0.02608

0.00652

2.65

N.S

SxA

0.01255

0.00314

1.27

N.S

GxA

0.02362

0.00590

2.40

N.S

SxGxA

0.04939

0.00617

2.51

N.S

Error

81

0.19926

0.00246

Total

107

1.7956

**= Highly significant

N.S= Non-significant

CV% = 1.08

Table-10a. Comparison of individual mean values for Hairiness (index).

Winding Speed

Gas Pressure

Air Pressure

S1=4.4689c

G1=4.8056a

A1=4.7422a

S2=4.6233b

G2=4.6578b

A2=4.5944b

S3=4.7433a

G3=4.3722c

A3=4.4989c

Mean values having different letters, differ significantly at 0.05 level of probability.

55

Hairiness (%)

4.90
4.80
4.70
4.60
4.50
4.40
4.30
4.20
4.10
S2

S3

G1

G3

Singeing Variables

Gas Pressure

G2

A1

Air Pressure

A2

A3

Fig.9 Graphical representation of individual mean values of Yarn Hairiness

S1

Winding Speed

56

4.2. FABRIC PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS

4.2.1 Abrasion Resistance (%).
The rating for abrasion resistance is shown in the table 11. The rating of Y1 was
observed good (3) for F1, good to very good (3-4), good to very good (3-4) and good to very
good (3-4) for F2, F3 and F4, respectively.. The rating of Y2 was excellent (5) for F1, very
good to excellent (4-5), very good to excellent (4-5) and excellent (5) for F2, F3 and F4,
respectively. The rating of Y3 was good (3) for F1, good (3), good to very good (3-4) and
good (3) for F2, F3 and F4, respectively. The rating of Y4 was good (3) for F1, very good (4),
very good (4) and very good (4) for F2, F3 and F4, respectively. The rating of Y5 was good (3)
for F1, good (3), very good (4) and very good to excellent (4-5) for F2, F3 and F4,
respectively. The rating of Y6 was very good (4) for F1, very good (4), very good (4) and
excellent (5) for F2, F3 and F4, respectively. The rating of Y7 was very good (4) for F1, very
good to excellent (4-5), very good to excellent (4-5) and very good to excellent (4-5) for F2,
F3 and F4, respectively. The rating of Y8 was very good (4) for F1, very good to excellent (45), very good to excellent (4-5) and very good to excellent (4-5) for F2, F3 and F4,
respectively. The rating of Y9 was very good to excellent (4-5) for F1, very good to excellent
(4-5), excellent (5) and excellent (5) for F2, F3 and F4, respectively. The rating of Y10 was
very good to excellent (4-5) for F1, very good to excellent (4-5), very good to excellent (4-5)
and excellent (5) for F2, F3 and F4, respectively. The rating of Y11 was very good to excellent
(4-5) for F1, very good to excellent (4-5), excellent (5) and excellent (5) for F2, F3 and F4,
respectively. The rating of Y12 was excellent (5) for F1, excellent (5), excellent (5) and
excellent (5) for F2, F3 and F4, respectively. The rating of Y13 was good to very good (3-4) for
F1, good to very good (3-4), very good (4) and very good to excellent (4-5) for F2, F3 and F4,
respectively. The rating of Y14 was very good (4) for F1, good to very good (3-4), very good
(4) and very good (4) for F2, F3 and F4, respectively. The rating of Y15 was very good to
excellent (4-5) for F1, good to very good (3-4), very good (4) and very good to excellent (4-5)
for F2, F3 and F4, respectively. The rating of Y16 was good to very good (3-4) for F1, good to
very good (3-4), very good (4) and very good (4) for F2, F3 and F4, respectively. The rating of
Y17 was good to very good (3-4) for F1, very good (4), very good (4) and very good (4) for
F2, F3 and F4, respectively. The rating of Y18 was good to very good (3-4) for F1, very good
(4), very good to excellent (4-5) and very good to excellent (4-5) for F2, F3 and F4,
respectively. The rating of Y19 was good to very good (3-4) for F1, good to very good (3-4),
very good (4) and very good to excellent (4-5) for F2, F3 and F4, respectively. The rating of
Y20 was good to very good (3-4) for F1, very good (4), very good (4) and very good to
excellent (4-5) for F2, F3 and F4, respectively.
57

The rating of Y21 was good to very good (3-4) for F1, very good (4), very good (4) and
very good to excellent (4-5) for F2, F3 and F4, respectively. The rating of Y22 was good (3) for
F1, good to very good (3-4), good to very good (3-4) and very good (4) for F2, F3 and F4,
respectively. The rating of Y23 was good (3) for F1, good to very good (3-4), good to very
good (3-4) and very good (4) for F2, F3 and F4, respectively. The rating of Y24 was good to
very good (3-4) for F1, very good (4), very good (4) and very good (4) for F2, F3 and F4,
respectively. The rating of Y25 was good to very good (3-4) for F1, good to very good (3-4),
good to very good (3-4) and very good (4) for F2, F3 and F4, respectively. The rating of Y26
was good to very good (3-4) for F1, good to very good (3-4), good to very good (3-4) and
very good (4) for F2, F3 and F4, respectively.
The rating of Y27 was good to very good (3-4) for F1, good (3), very good (4) and very
good (4) for F2, F3 and F4, respectively. The rating of Y28 was good to very good (3-4) for F1,
good to very good (3-4), very good (4) and very good (4) for F2, F3 and F4, respectively. The
rating of Y29 was good to very good (3-4) for F1, good to very good (3-4), good to very good
(3-4) and very good (4) for F2, F3 and F4, respectively. The rating of Y30 was very good (4)
for F1, very good (4), very good (4) and very good to excellent (4-5) for F2, F3 and F4,
respectively.

58

Table. 11. Fabric Abrasion Resistance (%).

Yarn Type
(Y)
Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
Y5
Y6
Y7
Y8
Y9
Y10
Y11
Y12
Y13
Y14
Y15
Y16
Y17
Y18
Y19
Y20
Y21
Y22
Y23
Y24
Y25
Y26
Y27
Y28
Y29
Y30

F1
3
5
3
3
3
4
4
4
4-5
4-5
4-5
5
3-4
4
4-5
3-4
3-4
3-4
3-4
3-4
3-4
3
3
3-4
3-4
3-4
3-4
3-4
3-4
4

Abrasion Resistance
Tightness Factor
F2
F3
3-4
3-4
4-5
4-5
3
3-4
4
4
3
4
4
4
4-5
4-5
4-5
4-5
4-5
5
4-5
4-5
4-5
5
5
5
3-4
4
3-4
4
3-4
4
3-4
4
4
4
4
4-5
3-4
4
4
4
4
4
3-4
3-4
3-4
3-4
4
4
3-4
3-4
3-4
3-4
3
4
3-4
4
3-4
3-4
4
4

F4
3-4
5
3
4
4-5
5
4-5
4-5
5
5
5
5
4-5
4
4-5
4
4
4-5
4-5
4-5
4-5
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4-5

1= Poor, 2= Ordinary, 3= Good, 4= Very Good, 5= Excellent

59

4.2.2 Fabric Bursting Strength (PSI).

The analysis of variance of the data regarding bursting strength is given in Table 12.
Highly significant effects of the yarn type (Y) and tightness factor (F) were found on fabric
bursting strength, while the effect of possible interaction remained non-significant.
'XQFDQV PXOWLSOH UDQJH WHVW DQG WKH FRPSDULVRQ RI LQGLYLGXDO WUHDWPHQW PHDQV IRU
different yarn types presented in Table 12(a) showed that the mean values of bursting
strength for Y1, Y2, Y3 , Y4, Y5, Y6, Y7, Y8, Y9, Y10, Y11, Y12, Y13, Y14, Y15, Y16, Y17, Y18,
Y19, Y20, Y21 , Y22, Y23, Y24, Y25, Y26, Y27, Y28, Y29 and Y30 were, 61.050, 62.000, 61.575,
53.375, 53.050, 53.375, 52.825, 51.950, 51.050, 50.275, 49.800, 49.175, 56.225, 55.575,
55.620, 55.750, 55.325, 54.850, 54.700, 54.150, 53.500, 59.150, 58.275, 56.500, 58.250,
57.225, 55.700, 58.200, 56.400 and 54.800 psi, respectively. The results showed that bursting
strength for different yarn types were significantly different from each other. The range of
bursting strength for the selected yarn types was found between 49.175 to 62.000 psi. The
highest value was recorded for Y2, Y3, Y1, Y22, Y23, Y25, Y28, Y26, Y13, Y24, Y29, Y14, Y15,
Y16, Y27, Y17, Y18, Y19, Y30, Y20, Y4, Y6, Y21, Y5, Y7, Y8, Y9, Y10, Y11 and Y12 respectively.
These results get support from the research study of Bayley (1955) stated that waxes were
used under conditions which excluded any appreciable degree of light screening, the breaking
strength of the waxed samples were found to be substantially greater than those of the
unwaxed sample.
'XQFDQV PXOWLSOH UDQJH WHVW DQG WKH FRPSDULVRQ RI LQGLYLGXDO WUHDWPHQW PHDQV
regarding tightness factor under investigation showed that the maximum bursting strength
was recorded for F4 with the mean value of 55.623 psi followed by F3, F2 and F1 with their
value of 55.410, 55.213 and 55.047 psi, respectively. The results showed that as the tightness
factor increased, the bursting strength was also increased. These results are in line with the
findings of Tezel and Kavusturan (2008) concluded that the tightness factor of cotton yarn
had significant influence on bursting strength.

60

Table 12. Analysis of Variance Table for Fabric Bursting Strength.

Source
DF
Y
29
F
3
YxF
87
Error
228
Total
347
** = Highly significant

SS
MS
1248.51
43.0522
5.58
1.8616
4.26
0.0489
10.94
0.0480
1269.29
N.S= Non-significant

F
897.06
38.79
1.02

P
0.0000**
0.0000**
N.S

CV% = 0.40

Table-12a. Comparison of individual mean values for Fabric Bursting Strength (PSI).
Yarn Type
(Y)
Y1=61.050 c
Y2=62.000 a
Y3=61.575 b
Y4=53.375 l
Y5=53.050 m
Y6=53.375 l
Y7=52.825 m
Y8=51.950 n
Y9=51.050 o
Y10=50.275 p
Y11=49.800 q
Y12=49.175 r
Y13=56.225 g
Y14=55.575 h
Y15=55.62 h
Y16=55.750 h
Y17=55.325 i
Y18=54.850 j
Y19=54.700 j
Y20=54.150 k
Y21=53.500 l
Y22=59.150 d
Y23=58.275 e
Y24=56.500 g
Y25=58.250 e
Y26=57.225 f
Y27=55.700 h
Y28=58.200 e
Y29=56.400 g
Y30=54.800 j

Tightness Fator
(F)
F1=55.047 d
F2=55.213 c
F3=55.410 b
F4=55.623 a

Mean values having different letters, differ significantly at 0.05 level of probability.

61

70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

Singeing Variables

Yarn Type

Tightness
Factor

Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
Y5
Y6
Y7
Y8
Y9
Y10
Y11
Y12
Y13
Y14
Y15
Y16
Y17
Y18
Y19
Y20
Y21
Y22
Y23
Y24
Y25
Y26
Y27
Y28
Y29
Y30
F1
F2
F3
F4

Fig 4.10 Graphical representation of individual mean values of Bursting Strength

Bursting Strength(psi)

62

4.2.3 Fabric Length Wise shrinkage (%).

The analysis of variance of the data regarding fabric length wise shrinkage is given in
Table 13. Highly significant effects of the yarn type (Y) and tightness factor (F) were found
on fabric length wise shrinkage, while the effect of possible interaction remained nonsignificant.
'XQFDQV PXOWLSOH UDQJH WHVW DQG WKH FRPSDULVRQ RI LQGLYLGXDO WUHDWPHQW PHDQV IRU
different yarn types presented in Table 13(a) showed that the mean values of fabric length
wise shrinkage for Y1, Y2, Y3 , Y4, Y5, Y6, Y7, Y8, Y9, Y10, Y11, Y12, Y13, Y14, Y15, Y16, Y17,
Y18, Y19, Y20, Y21 , Y22, Y23, Y24, Y25, Y26, Y27, Y28, Y29 and Y30 were, 3.0000, 1.5000,
2.5000, 2.5000, 2.2500, 1.7500, 2.2500, 2.5000, 1.5000, 2.0000, 1.7500, 1.2500, 3.0000,
3.5000, 2.7500, 3.5000, 2.2500, 2.0000, 2.0000, 1.5000, 1.7500, 4.5000, 4.0000, 3.2500,
4.0000, 3.2500, 2.5000, 4.0000, 2.2500 and 1.2500 percent, respectively. The results showed
that fabric length wise shrinkage for different yarn types were significantly different from
each other. The range of fabric length wise shrinkage for the selected yarn types was found
between 1.2500 to 4.5000 percent. The highest value of recorded for Y22, Y23, Y25, Y28,
Y14, Y16, Y24, Y26, Y1, Y13, Y15, Y3, Y4, Y8, Y27, Y5, Y7, Y17, Y29, Y10, Y18, Y19, Y6, Y11, Y21,
Y2, Y9, Y20, Y12 and Y30, respectively.
'XQFDQV PXOWLSOH UDQJH WHVW DQG WKH FRPSDULVRQ RI LQGLYLGXDO WUHDWPHQW PHDQV
regarding tightness factor under investigation showed that the maximum fabric length wise
shrinkage was recorded for F1 with the mean value of 3.1333 percent followed by F2, F3 and
F4 with their value of 2.6667, 2.2667 and 2.0667 percent, respectively. The results showed
that as the tightness factor increased, the fabric length wise shrinkage was decreased. The
study gets support from the findings of Baired and Foulds (1968) depicted that by using a
factorial analysis of many combinations of factors that the most important variables
influencing the shrinkage rate of plain knit in washing was the cover or tightness factor.

63

Table 13. Analysis of Variance Table for Fabric Length Wise Shrinkage.
Source
Y
F
YxF
Error
Total

DF
29
3
87
228
347

** = Highly significant

SS
92.867
20.000
22.110
28.828
163.805

MS
3.20230
6.66667
0.25414
0.12644

N.S= Non-significant

F
25.33
52.73
2.01

P
0.0000**
0.0000**
N.S

CV% = 12.04

Table-13a. Comparison of individual mean values for Fabric Length Wise Shrinkage
(%).
Yarn Type
(Y)
Y1 =3.0000 e
Y2=1.5000 k
Y3=2.5000 g
Y4=2.5000 g
Y5=2.2500 h
Y6=1.7500 j
Y7=2.2500 h
Y8=2.5000 g
Y9=1.5000 k
y10=2.0000 i
Y11=1.7500 j
Y12=1.2500 l
Y13=3.0000 e
Y14=3.5000 c
Y15=2.7500 f
Y16=3.5000 c
Y17=2.2500 h
Y18=2.0000 i
Y19=2.0000 i
Y20=1.5000 k
Y21=1.7500 j
Y22= 4.5000 a
Y23=4.0000 b
Y24=3.2500 d
Y25=4.0000 b
Y26=3.2500 d
Y27=2.5000 g
Y28=4.0000 b
Y29=2.2500 h
Y30=1.2500 l

F1=3.1333
F2=2.6667
F3=2.2667
F4=2.0667

Tightness Factor
(F)
a
b
c
d

Mean values having different letters, differ significantly at 0.05 level of probability.

64

Shrinkage(%)

Fig 4.11 Graphical representation of individual mean values of Length Wise Shrinkage
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

Singeing Variables

Yarn Type

Tightness
Factor

Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
Y5
Y6
Y7
Y8
Y9
Y10
Y11
Y12
Y13
Y14
Y15
Y16
Y17
Y18
Y19
Y20
Y21
Y22
Y23
Y24
Y25
Y26
Y27
Y28
Y29
Y30
F1
F2
F3
F4

65

4.2.4 Fabric Width Wise shrinkage (%).

The analysis of variance of the data regarding width wise shrinkage is given in Table
14. Highly significant effects of the yarn type (Y) and tightness factor (F) were found on
fabric width wise shrinkage, while the effect of possible interaction remained non-significant.
'XQFDQV PXOWLSOH UDQJH WHVW DQG WKH FRPSDULVRQ RI LQGLYLGXDO WUHDWPHQW PHDQV IRU
different yarn types presented in Table 14(a) showed that the mean values of fabric width
wise shrinkage for Y1, Y2, Y3 , Y4, Y5, Y6, Y7, Y8, Y9, Y10, Y11, Y12, Y13, Y14, Y15, Y16, Y17,
Y18, Y19, Y20, Y21 , Y22, Y23, Y24, Y25, Y26, Y27, Y28, Y29 and Y30 were, 4.2500, 2.0000,
3.0000, 4.5000, 3.5000, 4.7500, 3.2500, 3.7500, 4.5000, 3.5000, 3.0000, 2.7500, 5.0000,
4.2500, 4.7500, 4.2500, 3.7500, 4.0000, 3.7500, 3.7500, 3.5000, 6.2500, 5.2500, 5.0000,
5.2500, 6.0000, 4.5000, 5.2500, 4.0000 and 3.50000 percent, respectively. The results
showed that fabric width wise shrinkage for different yarn types are significantly different
from each other. The range of fabric width wise shrinkage for the selected yarn types was
found between 2.0000 to 6.2500 percent. The highest value of recorded for Y22, Y26, Y23,
Y25, Y28, Y13, Y24, Y6, Y15, Y4, Y9, Y27, Y1, Y14, Y16, Y18, Y29, Y8, Y17, Y19, Y20, Y5, Y10, Y21,
Y30, Y7, Y3, Y11, Y12 and Y2, respectively.
'XQFDQV PXOWLSOH UDQJH WHVW DQG WKH FRPSDULVRQ RI LQGLYLGXDO WUHDWPHQW PHDQV
regarding tightness factor under investigation showed that the maximum fabric width wise
shrinkage was recorded for F1 with the mean value of 4.8333 percent followed by F2, F3 and
F4 with their value of 4.2667, 3.9667 and 3.5667 percent, respectively. The results showed
that as the tightness factor increased, the fabric width wise shrinkage was decreased. These
findings correlate with the observation of Baird and Foulds (1968) depicted that by using a
factorial analysis of many combinations of factors that the most important variable
influencing the shrinkage rate of plain knit in washing was the cover or tightness factor.

66

Table 14. Analysis of Variance Table for Fabric Width Wise Shrinkage.
Source
Y
F
YxF
Error
Total

DF
29
3
87
228
347

** = Highly significant

SS
105.742
25.625
22.083
38.327
191.777

MS
3.64626
8.54167
0.25383
0.16810

N.S= Non-significant

F
21.69
50.81
1.51

P
0.0000**
0.0000**
N.S

CV% = 9.86

Table-14a. Comparison of individual mean values for Fabric Width Wise Shrinkage
(%).
Yarn Type
(Y)
Y1=4.2500 f
Y2=2.0000 m
Y3=3.0000 k
Y4=4.5000 e
Y5=3.5000 i
Y6=4.7500 d
Y7=3.2500 j
Y8=3.7500 h
Y9=4.5000 e
Y10=3.5000 i
Y11=3.0000 k
Y12=2.7500 l
Y13=5.0000 c
Y14=4.2500 f
Y15=4.7500 d
Y16=4.2500 f
Y17=3.7500 h
Y18=4.0000 g
Y19=3.7500 h
Y20=3.7500 h
Y21=3.5000 i
Y22=6.2500 a
Y23=5.2500 b
Y24=5.0000 c
Y25=5.2500 b
Y26=6.0000 a
Y27=4.5000 e
Y28=5.2500 b
Y29=4.0000 g
Y30=3.5000 i

F1=4.8333
F2=4.2667
F3=3.9667
F4=3.5667

Tightness Fator
(F)
a
b
c
d

Mean values having different letters, differ significantly at 0.05 level of probability.

67

Shrinkage (%)

Fig 4.12 Graphical representation of individual mean values of Width Wise Shrinkage
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

Singeing Variables

Yarn Type

Tightness
Factor

Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
Y5
Y6
Y7
Y8
Y9
Y10
Y11
Y12
Y13
Y14
Y15
Y16
Y17
Y18
Y19
Y20
Y21
Y22
Y23
Y24
Y25
Y26
Y27
Y28
Y29
Y30
F1
F2
F3
F4

68

4.2.4 Fabric Pilling (%).

The rating for pilling is shown in the table 15. The rating of Y1 was severe (2) for F1,
severe to moderate (2-3), severe to moderate (2-3) and severe to moderate (2-3) for F2, F3 and
F4, respectively. The rating of Y2 was slight (4) for F1, slight to no pilling (4-5), slight to no
pilling (4-5) and no pilling (5) for F2, F3 and F4, respectively. The rating of Y3 was moderate
(3) for F1, moderate to slight (3-4), moderate (3) and moderate (3) for F2, F3 and F4,
respectively. The rating of Y4 was slight (4) for F1, slight (4), moderate (3) and moderate (3)
for F2, F3 and F4, respectively. The rating of Y5 was slight (4) for F1, slight (4), moderate to
slight (3-4) and moderate (3) for F2, F3 and F4, respectively. The rating of Y6 was moderate to
slight (3-4) for F1, moderate to slight (3-4), moderate (3) and moderate (3) for F2, F3 and F4,
respectively. The rating of Y7 was slight (4) for F1, slight (4), moderate to slight (3-4) and
moderate to slight (3-4) for F2, F3 and F4, respectively. The rating of Y8 was moderate to
slight (3-4) for F1, slight (4), moderate to slight (3-4) and moderate (3) for F2, F3 and F4,
respectively. The rating of Y9 was moderate to slight (3-4) for F1, moderate to slight (3-4),
moderate (3) and moderate (3) for F2, F3 and F4, respectively. The rating of Y10 was moderate
to slight (3-4) for F1, moderate (3), moderate (3) and severe to moderate (2-3) for F2, F3 and
F4, respectively. The study gets close to the findings of Beceren et al. (2010) stated that plain
jersey fabrics from siro spun yarns had a slightly higher resistance to pilling than those from
ring yarns.
The rating of Y11 was moderate (3) for F1, moderate (3), moderate (3) and severe to
moderate (2-3) for F2, F3 and F4, respectively. The rating of Y12 was moderate (3) for F1,
moderate (3), severe to moderate (2-3) and severe to moderate (2-3) for F2, F3 and F4,
respectively. The rating of Y13 was, no pilling (5) for F1, slight to no pilling (4-5), slight (4)
and slight (4) for F2, F3 and F4, respectively. The rating of Y14 was slight to no pilling (4-5)
for F1, moderate to slight (3-4), slight (4) and slight (4) for F2, F3 and F4, respectively.
The rating of Y15 was slight to no pilling (4-5) for F1, moderate to slight (3-4), slight
(4) and slight (4) for F2, F3 and F4, respectively. The rating of Y16 was slight to no pilling (45) for F1, slight (4), slight (4) and moderate to slight (3-4) for F2, F3 and F4, respectively. The
rating of Y17 was slight to no pilling (4-5) for F1, slight (4), slight (4) and moderate to slight
(3-4) for F2, F3 and F4, respectively. The rating of Y18 was slight (4) for F1, moderate to slight
(3-4), moderate to slight (3-4) and moderate to slight (3-4) for F2, F3 and F4, respectively. The
rating of Y19 was slight to no pilling (4-5) for F1, slight to no pilling (4-5), slight (4) and
moderate to slight (3-4) for F2, F3 and F4, respectively. The rating of Y20 was slight (4) for F1,
slight (4), moderate to slight (3-4) and moderate to slight (3-4) for F2, F3 and F4, respectively.
69

The rating of Y21 was slight (4) for F1, slight (4), moderate to slight (3-4) and
moderate to slight (3-4) for F2, F3 and F4, respectively. The rating of Y22 was no pilling (5)
for F1, moderate to slight (3-4), moderate to slight (3-4) and moderate (3) for F2, F3 and F4,
respectively. The rating of Y23 was no pilling (5) for F1, moderate to slight (3-4), moderate to
slight (3-4) and moderate (3) for F2, F3 and F4, respectively. The rating of Y24 was no pilling
(5) for F1, moderate to slight (3-4), moderate to slight (3-4) and moderate (3) for F2, F3 and
F4, respectively. The rating of Y25 was slight to no pilling (4-5) for F1, moderate to slight (34), moderate to slight (3-4) and moderate (3) for F2, F3 and F4, respectively. The rating of Y26
was slight to no pilling (4-5) for F1, moderate to slight (3-4), moderate to slight (3-4) and
moderate (3) for F2, F3 and F4, respectively. The rating of Y27 was slight (4) for F1, moderate
to slight (3-4), moderate to slight (3-4) and moderate (3) for F2, F3 and F4, respectively. The
rating of Y28 was slight to no pilling (4-5) for F1, moderate to slight (3-4), moderate to slight
(3-4) and slight (4) for F2, F3 and F4, respectively. The rating of Y29 was slight (4) for F1,
moderate to slight (3-4), moderate to slight (3-4) and moderate to slight (3-4) for F2, F3 and
F4, respectively. The rating of Y30 was slight (4) for F1, slight (4), slight (4) and moderate to
slight (3-4) for F2, F3 and F4, respectively. Similarly, Balasubramanian (2010) noted that
pilling tendency would be more with higher hairiness. Pilling was a major problem with
knitted fabrics.

70

Table.15. Fabric Pilling (%).

Yarn Type
(Y)
Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
Y5
Y6
Y7
Y8
Y9
Y10
Y11
Y12
Y13
Y14
Y15
Y16
Y17
Y18
Y19
Y20
Y21
Y22
Y23
Y24
Y25
Y26
Y27
Y28
Y29
Y30

F1
2
4
3
4
4
3-4
4
3-4
3-4
3-4
3
3
5
4-5
4-5
4-5
4-5
4
4-5
4
4
5
5
5
4-5
4-5
4
4-5
4
4

Pilling
Tightness Factor
F2
F3
2-3
2-3
4-5
4-5
3-4
3
4
3
4
3-4
3-4
3
4
3-4
4
3-4
3-4
3
3
3
3
3
3
2-3
4-5
4
3-4
4
3-4
4
4
4
4
4
3-4
3-4
4-5
4
4
3-4
4
3-4
3-4
3-4
3-4
3-4
3-4
3-4
3-4
3-4
3-4
3-4
3-4
3-4
3-4
3-4
3-4
3-4
4
4

F4
2-3
5
3
3
3
3
3-4
3
3
2-3
2-3
2-3
4
4
4
3-4
3-4
3-4
3-4
3-4
3-4
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
3-4
3-4

5= No Pilling, 4= Slight Pilling, 3= Moderate Pilling, 2= Severe Pilling,

1= Very Severe Pilling

71

Chapter No. 5

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

The results relating to yarn and fabric characteristics along with their statistical
manipulations are briefly summarized here under.
4.1 YARN PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS AFTER SINGEING
Highly significant differences were observed between different winding speed (S),
gas pressure (G) and air pressure (A) for yarn lea strength, count lea strength product (CLSP),
single end strength, elongation, yarn RKM, thin places, thick places, neps and hairiness.
The range of yarn lea strength for the different winding speeds was found between
95.11 to 102.56 pounds. The highest value of 102.56 pounds was recorded for S3 followed
by S2 and S1 with their mean values as 98.44 and 95.11 pounds, respectively.
The range of yarn lea strength for the different gas pressures was found between
97.67 to 99.56 pounds. The highest value of 99.56 pounds was recorded for G1 followed by
G2 and G3 with their mean values as 98.89 and 97.67 pounds, respectively.
The range of yarn lea strength for the different air pressures was found between 97.89
to 99.67 pounds. The highest value of 99.67 pounds was recorded for A1 followed by A2
and A3 with their mean values as 98.56 and 97.89 pounds, respectively.
The range of CLSP for the different winding speeds was found between 1902.2 to
2051.1 hanks. The highest value of 2051.1 hanks was recorded for S3 followed by S2 and
S1 with their mean values as 1968.9 and 1902.2 hanks, respectively.
The range of CLSP for the different gas pressures was found between 1953.3 to
1991.1 hanks. The highest value of 1991.1 hanks was recorded for G1 followed by G2 and
G3 with their mean values as 1977.8 and 1953.3 hanks, respectively.
The range of CLSP for the different air pressures was found between 1957.8 to 1993.3
hanks. The highest value of 1993.3 hanks was recorded for A1 followed by A2 and A3 with
their mean values as 1971.1 and 1957.8 hanks, respectively.
The range of SES for the different winding speeds was found between 417.88 to
425.50 grams. The highest value of 425.50 grams was recorded for S3 followed by S2 and
S1 with their mean values as 420.72 and 417.88 grams, respectively.
The range of SES for the different gas pressures was found between 417.98 to 424.64
grams. The highest value of 424.64 grams was recorded for G1 followed by G2 and G3
with their mean values as 421.48 and 417.98 grams, respectively.
72

The range of SES for the different air pressures was found between 420.34 to 422.40
grams. The highest value of 422.40 grams was recorded for A1 followed by A2 and A3
with their mean values as 421.36 and 420.34 grams, respectively.
The range of elongation % for the different winding speeds was found between
5.5733 to 5.6744 %. The highest value of 5.6744 % was recorded for S3 followed by S2
and S1 with their mean values as 5.6100 and 5.5733 %, respectively.
The range of elongation % for the different gas pressures was found between 5.5733
to 5.6633 %. The highest value of 5.6633 % was recorded for G1 followed by G2 and G3
with their mean values as 5.6211 and 5.5733 %, respectively.
The range of elongation % for the different air pressures was found between 5.6056 to
5.6333 %. The highest value of 5.6333 % was recorded for A1 followed by A2 and A3 with
their mean values as 5.6189 and 5.6056 %, respectively.
The range of RKM for the different winding speeds was found between 14.153 to
14.412 g/tex. The highest value of 14.412 g/tex was recorded for S3 followed by S2 and S1
with their mean values as 14.250 and 14.153 g/tex, respectively.
The range of RKM for the different gas pressures was found between 14.157 to
14.383 g/tex. The highest value of 14.383 g/tex was recorded for G1 followed by G2 and
G3 with their mean values as 14.275 and 14.157 g/tex, respectively.
The range of RKM for the different air pressures was found between 14.237 to 14.307
g/tex. The highest value of 14.307 g/tex was recorded for A1 followed by A2 and A3 with
their mean values as 14.271 and 14.237 g/tex, respectively.
The range of thin places for the different winding speeds was found between 0.2222
to 0.4444/km. The highest value of 0.4444/km was recorded for S3 followed by S2 and S1
with their mean values as 0.3333 and 0.2222 /km, respectively.
Thin places for the different gas pressures possessed the same value as 0.3333/km
The range of thin places for the different air pressures was found between 0.1111 to
0.6667/km. The highest value of 0.6667 /km was recorded for A2 followed by A1 and A3
with their mean values as 0.2222 and 0.1111 /km, respectively.
The range of thick places for the different winding speeds was found between 13.667
to 19.667/km. The highest value of 19.667 /km was recorded for S1 followed by S2 and S3
with their mean values as 15.333 and 13.667 /km, respectively.

73

The range of thick places for the different gas pressures was found between
13.333/km to 18.333/km. The highest value of 18.333/km was recorded for G3 followed by
G2 and G1 with their mean values as 17.000 and 13.333 /km, respectively.
The range of thick places for the different air pressures was found between 15.0000 to
17.000/km. The highest value of 17.000/km was recorded for A3 followed by A2 and A1
with their mean values as 16.667 and 15.000 /km, respectively.
The range of neps for the different winding speeds was found between 3.4444 to
6.2222/km. The highest value of 6.2222 /km was recorded for S3 followed by S2 and S1
with their mean values as 5.3333 and 3.4444 /km, respectively.
The range of neps for the different gas pressures was found between 3.8889/km to
6.1111/km. The highest value of 6.1111 /km was recorded for G1 followed by G2 and G3
with their mean values as 5.0000 and 3.8889 /km, respectively.
The range of neps for the different air pressures was found between 4.2222 to 5.8889/
km. The highest value of 5.8889/km was recorded for A1 followed by A2 and A3 with their
mean values as 4.8889 and 4.2222 /km, respectively.
The range of hairiness for the different winding speeds was found between 4.4689 to
4.7433. The highest value of 4.7433 was recorded for S3 followed by S2 and S1 with their
mean values as 4.6233 and 4.4689 respectively.
The range of hairiness for the different gas pressures was found between 4.3722 to
4.8056. The highest value of 4.8056 was recorded for G1 followed by G2 and G3 with their
mean values as 4.6578 and 4.3722 respectively.
The range of hairiness for the different air pressures was found between 4.4989 to
4.7422. The highest value of 4.7422 was recorded for A1 followed by A2 and A3 with their
mean values as 4.5944 and 4.4989, respectively.
5.2 KNITTED FABRIC PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS
Highly significant differences were observed between different winding speed
(S), gas pressure (G), air pressure (A) and tightness factor (F) for bursting strength,
length-wise shrinkage and width-wise shrinkage.
The range of bursting strength for the different yarn types was found between 49.175
to 62.000 psi. The highest value of 62.000 psi was recorded for Y2 (yarn type) with the mean
value of 62.000 psi followed by Y3 with the mean value of 61.575 psi, Y1 with mean value of
61.050 psi, Y22 with the mean value of 59.150 psi, Y23 with the mean value of 58.275 psi, Y25
with the mean value of 58.250 psi, Y28 with the mean value of 58.200 psi, Y26 with the mean
74

value of 57.225 psi, Y13 with the mean value of 56.225 psi, Y24 with the mean value of
56.500 psi, Y29 with the mean value of 56.400, Y14 with the mean value of 55.575 psi, Y15
with the mean value of 55.620 psi, Y16 with the mean value of 55.750 psi, Y27 with the mean
value of 55.700 psi, Y17 with the mean value of 55.325 psi, Y18 with the mean value of
54.850 psi, Y19 with the mean value of 54.700 psi, Y30 with the mean value of 54.800 psi, Y20
with the mean value of 54.150 psi, Y4, Y6 with the same mean value of 53.375 psi, Y21 with
the mean value of 53.500 psi, Y5 with the mean value of 53.050 psi, Y7 with the mean value
of 52.825 psi, Y8 with the mean value of 51.950 psi, Y9 with the mean value of 51.050 psi,
Y10 with the mean value of 50.275 psi, Y11 with the mean value of 49.800 psi and Y12 with
the mean value of 49.175 psi, respectively.
The range of bursting strength for the different tightness factors was found between
55.047 to 55.623 psi. The highest value of 55.623 was recorded for F4 followed by F3, F2
and F1 with their mean values as 55.410, 55.213 and 55.047 psi, respectively.
The range of length-wise shrinkage for the different yarn types was found between
1.2500 to 4.5000%. The highest value of 4.5000 was recorded for Y22 (yarn type) with the
mean value of 4.5000% followed by Y23, Y25 and Y28 with the same mean value of 4.0000%,
Y14, Y16 with the same mean value of 3.5000%, Y24, Y26 with the same mean value of 3.2500
psi, Y1, Y13 with the same mean value of 3.0000%, Y15 with the mean value of 2.7500%, Y3,
Y4, Y8 and Y27 with the same mean value of 2.5000%, Y5, Y7, Y17 and Y29 with the same
mean value of 2.2500%, Y10, Y18 and Y19 with the same mean value of 2.0000%, Y6, Y11 and
Y21 with the same mean value of 1.7500%, Y2, Y9 and Y20 with the same mean value of
1.5000%, Y12, Y30 with the same mean value of 1.2500%, respectively.
The range of length-wise shrinkage for the different tightness factors was found
between 2.0667 to 3.1333%. The highest value of 3.1333 was recorded for F1 followed by
F3, F2 and F4 with their mean values as 2.6667, 2.2667 and 2.0667%, respectively.
The range of width-wise shrinkage for the different yarn types was found between
2.0000 to 6.2500. The highest value of 6.2500 was recorded for Y22 (yarn type) with the
mean value of 6.2500% followed by Y26 with the mean value of 6.0000%, Y23, Y25 and Y28
with the same mean value of 5.2500%, Y13, Y24 with the same mean value of 5.0000%, Y6,
Y15 with the same mean value of 4.7500%, Y4, Y9 and Y27 with the same mean value of
4.5000%, Y1, Y14 and Y16 with the same mean value of 4.2500%, Y18, Y29 with the mean
value of 4.0000%, Y8, Y17, Y19 and Y20 with the same mean value of 3.7500%, Y5, Y10, Y21
and Y30 3.5000%, Y7 with the mean value of 3.2500%, Y3, Y11 with the mean value of

75

3.0000, Y12 with the mean value of 2.7500%, Y2 with the mean value of 2.0000%,
respectively.
The range of width-wise shrinkage for the different tightness factors was found
between 3.5667 to 4.8333%. The highest value of 4.8333 was recorded for F1 followed by
F2, F3 and F4 with their mean values as 4.2667, 3.9667 and 3.5667, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS
Following conclusions were drawn from the present research.
x

By increasing winding speed of yarn singeing machine lea strength, CLSP, SES,
elongation, RKM, neps and hairiness increased but thick places decreased. There was
no significant effect of winding speed on yarn thin places.

By increasing gas and air pressure of yarn singeing machine thick places increased
but lea strength, CLSP, SES, elongation, RKM, neps and hairiness decreased. There
was no significant effect of gas and air pressure on yarn thin places.

The fabric knitted from unsinged waxed yarn showed higher bursting strength and
abrasion resistance but less shrinkage and pilling than fabric from normal and combed
yarn.

The fabric knitted from singed yarn showed that by increasing tightness factor,
bursting strength and abrasion resistance increased but pilling and shrinkage
decreased.

From the overall results it is concluded that yarn singeing and waxing influnced
knitted fabric properties positively.

76

Chapter No. 6

LITERATURE CITED
Anonymous.

1994.

Method

for

singeing

yarns.

[Online].

Available

at:

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/EP1518953.html. Verified on, (12th January 2010).

Akaydin, M. 2009. Characteristics of fabrics knitted with basic knitting structures from
combed ring and compact yarns. Ind. J. of Fib & Text. Res. 34(3): 26-30.
Altas, S. H. Kadoglu. 2006. Determining fibre properties and linear density effect on cotton
yarn hairiness in ring spinning. Fib. & Text. East. Eur. 14. 3(57). 48-51.
Azam, M. 2001. Effect of air jet nozzle pressure and winding speed at autocone on hairiness
and other quality parameters of cotton yarn. M. Sc. Thesis. Dept. of Fib. Tech. Univ.
of Agri. Faisalabad: Page: 30-65.
Anonymous. 2002. Knit fabrics and the reduction of torque. Technical Bulletin. [online].
Available at http: //www.scribd.com/html. verified on (25th March, 2010).
Anonymous. 2009. Singeing or gassing. [Online]. Available at: http://www.google.com/
dyeingworld-singeing. Verified on (1st January, 2010).
Anonymous,

2010.

Textile

manufacturing.

[online]

Available

at

th

http://www.wikipedia.com/html. verified on (25 March, 2010).

Arif, M. 2008. Studies on knitting performance under the interaction of twist, twist type and
some technical variables of the knitting machine. M. Sc. Thesis. Dept. of Fib. Tech.
Univ. of Agri. Faisalabad: Page: 32-65.
Ashraf, M. 1995. Effects of ginning properties on fibre quality and its spun yarn. M.Sc.
Thesis Dept. of Fib. Tech. Univ. of Agri., Faisalabad: Page: 32-60.
ASTM Committee. 2008. Standard test method for measurement of yarn properties. ASTM
Designation D: 1907-97, D: 1578-93, D: 1425-96. Amer. Soc. for Testing and
Materials, Philadelphia, U.S.A.
ASTM Committee. 2008a. Standard test method for hydraulic bursting strength of textile
fabrics-diaphragm bursting strength tester and shrinkage method. ASTM Designation:
D-3786-01. Amer. Soc. For Test and Mater, Philadelphia, U.S.A.
ASTM Committee. 2008b. Standard test method for pilling resistance and other related
surface changes of textile fabrics: random tumble pilling tester. ASTM Designation:
D-3512-02. Amer. Soc. For Test and Mater, Philadelphia, U.S.A.
77

AATCC. 2008. Standard test method for dimensional stability. AATCC Designation. D: 135.
Baird, K. and R. A. Foulds. 1968. $QDSSURDFKWRWKHSUR.QLWV\VWHPDQGLWVYDOXHLQWKH
production of weft-knitted fabrics. Text. Res. J. 38(4): 743-753.
Barella, A and A. Manich. 1984. Relation between twist and abrasion resistance of rotor spun
yarns: Part II: polyester and blend yarns. Text. Res. J. 53(5): 314-317.
%DUHOOD $ DQG $ 0DQLFK  <DUQ KDLULQHVV XSGDWH >RQOLne]. Available at
http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t778164492 verified on (28th May,
2009).
Basal, G. and W. Oxenham. 2006. Comparison of properties and structures of compact and
conventional spun yarns. Text. Res. J. 76(7): 567-575.
Basu, A., R. Pasupathy and S. Kadirvel. 2009. Trends in the quality of cotton yarns [online].
Available at http: //www.fibre2fashion.com/industry-article/market-research-industryreports/

trends-in-the-quality-of-cotton-yarns/trends-in-the-qualityof-

cotton-

th

yarns1.asp. verified on (28 May, 2010).

Bayley.

1955.

Effect

of

wax

application

on

fabrics.

[online].

Available

at:

http://www.whereisdoc.com. verified on (29th May, 2010).

Beceren, Y. and B. U. Nergis. 2008. Comparison of the effects of cotton yarns produced by
new, modified and conventional spinning systems on yarn and knitted fabric
performance. Text. Res. J. 78(4): 297-303.
Beltran, R., L. Wang and X. Wang, 2007. A controlled experiment on yarn hairiness and
fabric pilling. Text. Res. J. 77(3): 179-183.
Black, D.H. 1975. knitting with cotton and cotton blend open-end spun yarns. Text. Res. J.
45(1): 48-53.
%RRWK-(3ULQFLSOHVRIWH[WLOHWHVWLQJDQGTXDOLW\FRQWURO1HZQHVV%XWWHUZRUWKV
Pub. Inc. USA 3rd ed: 456-527.
Beceren, Y. and B. U. Nergis. 2008. Comparison of the effects of cotton yarns produced by
new, modified and conventional spinning systems on yarn and knitted fabric
performance. Text. Res. J. 78(4): 297-303.
British Standards. 1985. Detercmination of count lea strength product of spun yarn. Methods
of testing for textiles. British Standards Hand book-II. British Standards Institute.
London. UK: 141-142.

78

Beceren, Y., C. Candan, S. Cimilli and K. lger. 2010. Properties of plain knits from sirospun viscose/spandex yarns. Fib. & Text. in East. Eur. 18(1):41-46.
Balasubramanian, N. 2010. Hairiness of yarns: Relative merits of various systems. [online].
Available at http://www.fibre2fashion.com. verified on (18th March, 2010).
Ceken, F. and O. Kayacan. 2007. The effects of some machine parameters on the spirality in
single jersey fabrics. Fib. & Poly. 8(1): 89-97.
Can, Y. 2008. Pilling performance and abrasion characteristics of plain-weave fabrics made
from open end and ring spun yarns. Fib. & Text. in East. Eur. 16(1):81-84.
Candan, C. and L. nal. 2002. Dimensional, pilling, and abrasion properties of weft knits
made from open-end and ring spun yarns. Text. Res. J. 72(2):164-169.
Celik. P. and H. Kadoglu. 2009. A research on yarn liveliness tendency of staple yarns.
Tekstil ve konfeksiyon. 3: 189-196.
Chang, L. and X. Wang. 2003. Comparing the hairiness of solospun and ring spun worsted
yarns. Text. Res. J. 73(7): 640-644.
Chang, L., Z. X. Tang and X. Wang. 2003. Effect of yarn hairiness on energy consumption in
rotating a ring-spun yarn package. Text. Res. J. 73(11): 949-954.
Chaudhuri, A. 2003. Effect of spindle speed on the properties of ring spun acrylic yarn
[online]. Available at http: //www.ieindia.org/publish/tx/0803/aug03tx3.pdf. verified
on (22nd April, 2010).
Chen, Q. H., K. F. Au, C. W. M. Yuen and K. W. Yeung. 2003. Effects of yarn and knitting
parameters on the spirality of plain knitted wool fabrics. Text. Res. J. 73(5): 421-426.
Cheng, K. P. S. and C. Yu. 2003. A study of compact yarns. Text. Res. J. 73(4): 345-349.
De Araujo, M. D. and G. W. Smith. 1989. Spirality of knitted fabrics: Part-I. The nature of
spirality. Text. Res. J. 59(5): 247-256.
Elsevier. 1999. chemical Technology in the pre-treatment processes of textiles. P, 56.
[Online]. available at: http://www.google.com/books/. Verified on (21st December,
2009).
Emirhanova, N. and Y. Kavusturan. 2008. Effects of knit structure on the dimensional and
physical properties of winter outerwear knitted fabrics. Fib. & Text. in East. Eur.
16(2): 67-74.

79

Ertugrul, S. and N. Ucar. 2000. Predicting bursting strength of cotton plane knitted fabrics
using intelligent techniques. Text. Res. J. 70(10): 845-851.
Faqir, H. 1995. Effect of different spinning variables upon the quality characteristics of
Russian cotton. M.Sc. Thesis Dept. of Fib. Tech. Univ. of Agri., Faisalabad: page:
106.
Frydrych, I. 1992. A new approach for predicting strength properties of yarn. Text. Res. J.
62(6): 340-348.
Ghosh, A., S. Ishtiaque, S. Rengasamy and A. Patnaik. 2004. The mechanism of end
breakage in ring spinning: a statistical model to predict the end break in ring spinning.
Autex Res. J. 4(1): 19-24.
Ghosh, A., S. Ishtiaque, S. Rengasamy, P. Mal and A. Patnaik. 2005. predictive models for
strength of spun yarns: an overview. Autex Res. J. 5(1): 20-29.
Gill, U. D. 2000. Influence of yarn count and some knitting variables upon the quality of
double knit fabrics. M.Sc. Thesis, Dept. of Fib. Tech., Univ. of Agri., Faisalabad:
Page: 37-86.
Haghighat, E. A. M. S. Johari and S. M. Etrati. 2008. A study of the hairiness of polyesterviscose blended yarns; Part 1. Drafting system parameters. Fib. & Text. East. Eur. 16,
2(67). 41-44.
Haider, M. N. 2000. Study of spindle speed and twist multiplier for different yarn counts with
special reference to end-breakage analysis. M.Sc. Thesis, Dept. of Fibre Tech., Univ.
of Agri., Faisalabad: Page: 37-85.
Harrison, R. E. and J. D. Bargeron. 1986. Comparison of several nep determination methods.
Text. Res. J. 56(2): 77-79.
Indianetzone,

Textiles.

2010.

Cotton

Singeing.

[Online].

Available

at:

st

http://www.google.com/cotton singeing. Verified on (1 January, 2010).

Jamal, A. 1998. Effect of some knitting variables on shrinkage of single jersey cotton fabric.
M.Sc. Thesis, Dept. of Fib. Tech. Univ. of Agri. Faisalabad: Page: 83-84.
Jeon, B. S. 2000. Effect of an air-suction nozzle on yarn hairiness and quality. Text. Res. J.
70(11): 1019-1024.

80

Kadoglu, H., M. E. Ureyen, P. Celik and D. Yildirim. 2004. Influence of spinning process
parameters and cotton fiber characteristics on hairiness of ring spun yarns [online].
Available

at

http:

//www.zweigle.com/Media/News/Download_

Documents/kadoglu_hairiness,_AUTEX_2004.pdf. verified on (16th May, 2010).

Kalyanaraman, A. R. 1992. A process to control hairiness in yarn. J. Text. Inst. 83(3): 407413.
Kane, C. D., U. J. Patil and P. Sudhakar. 2007. Studies on the influence of knit structure and
stitch length on ring and compact yarn single jersey fabric properties. Tex. Res. J.
77(8): 572-582.
Karmakar, S. R. 1999. chemical Technology in the pre-treatment processes of textiles. P, 55.
[Online]. Available at: http://www.google.com/books/. Verified on (21st December,
2009).
Knapton, J. J. F. and W. Fong. 1970. The dimensional properties of knitted wool fabrics. Part
IV: 1x1 rib and half cardigan structures in machine washing and tumble-drying. Text.
Res. J. 40(12): 1095-1106.
Kretzschmar, S. D., A. T. Ozguney, G. Ozelik and A. Ozerdem. 2007. The comparison of
cotton knitted fabric properties made of compact and conventional ring yarns before
and after the dyeing process. Text. Res. J. 77(4): 233-241.
Koo, Y. S. 2008. Waxing Effect on Lint Contamination in the Knitting Process. Text. Res. J.
78(2): 168173.
Lawrence, C. A. and S. A. Mohamed. 1996. Yarn and knitting parameters affecting fly during
weft knitting of staple yarns. Text. Res. J. 66(11): 694-704.
L. Onal and C. Candan. 2003. Contribution of fabric characteristics and laundering to
shrinkage of weft knitted fabrics. Text. Res. J. 73(3): 187-191.
Lang, J. S. Zhu and N. Pan. 2004. Changing yarn hairiness during winding analyzing the
trailing fiber ends. Text. Res. J. 74(10): 905-913.
Lawrence, C. A. 2003. fundamentals of spun yarn technology. P, 399.[Online]. Available at:
http://www.google.com/books/. Verified on (27th December, 2009).
Lei, C. H. 2003. Continuous spun-like textured yarn processed with various plied filaments
and different stages of emery wheels. Text. Res. J. 73(12): 1046-1051.
Li, L., G. Jia and W. Zhou. 2009. Effect of Yarn Properties on the Pilling of Cashmere
Knitted Fabric. Fib. & Text. in East. Eur. 17(6):76-79.
81

Mahmood, N., N. A Jamil, A. Haq and M. I. Javed. 2004. Effect of some mechanical
variables in condensed spinning of cotton yarn. Pak. Text. J. 53(5): 54-55.
Majumdar, A., P. K. Majumdar, and B. Sarkar. 2004. Selecting cotton bales by spinning
consistency index and micronaire using artificial neural networks. Autex Res. J. 4(1):
1-8.
Mettler and Herman, 1976. Yarn singeing burner construction. [Online]. Available at
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/3935623.html. Verified on (23rd December, 2009).
Mitsuishi. K. 1986. Effect of yarn twist on the mechanical properties of plied yarn fabrics. J.
of the Text. Mach. Soc. Jap. 32(2): 40-45.
Murrells, C. M., X. M. Tao, B. G. Xu and K. P. S. Cheng. 2009. An artificial neural network
model for the prediction of spirality of fully relaxed single jersey fabrics. Text. Res. J.
79(3): 227-234.
Montgomery, D. C. 2009. Design and Analysis of Experiments. Arizona State University
ISBN: 978-0-470-12866-4.
0LNXLRQLHQ '  7KH LQIOXHQFH RI VWUXFWXUH SDUDPHWHUV RI ZHIW NQLWWHG IDEULFV RQ
propensity to pilling. ISSN:13920DWHULDOV6FLHQFH0HGLDJRW\UD338.
Nergis, B. U. and C. Candan. 2006. Performance of Boucle Yarns in Various Knitted Fabric
Structures. Text. Res. J. 76(1): 49-56.
Nikolic, M., Z. Stjepanovic, F. Lesjak and A. Stritof. 2003. Compact spinning for improved
quality of ring-spun yarns. Fib. & Text. in East. Eur. 11(4)43: 30-35.
Nishimatsu, T. 1984. Applying factor analysis to the hand of terry fabrics. Text. Res. J.
54(11): 699-705.
g]GLO 1 ( g]GRDQ $ 'HPLUHO DQG 7 gNWHP  $ &RPSDUDWLYH 6WXG\ RI WKH
Characteristics of Compact Yarn-Based Knitted Fabrics. Fib. & Text. in East. Eur.
13(2):39-43.
Oglakcioglu, N. and A. Marmarali. 2007. Thermal comfort properties of some knitted
structures. Fib. & Text. East. Eur. 15(5-6): 94-95.
Onal, L and C. Candan. 2003. Contribution of fabric characteristics and laundering to
shrinkage of weft knitted fabrics. Text. Res. J. Text. Res. J. 73(3): 138-147.
Ozcan, G and C. Candan. 2005. Properties of three-thread fleece fabrics. Text. Res. J. 75(2):
129-133.
82

Ozguney, A. T., S. D. Kretzschmar, G. Ozcelik and A. Ozerdem. 2008. The comparison of

cotton knitted fabric properties made of compact and conventional ring yarns before
and after the printing process. Text. Res. J. 78(2): 138-147.
Padmanabhan, A. R and A. Balasubramanian. 1990. An Exploratory Study of Imperfections
in Cotton Yarns. Text. Res. J. 60(1): 17-22.
Palaniswammy, N. K., A. S. Mohamed and P. W. Robert. 2007. Balanced two- ply cotton
rotor yarn. Ind. J. of Fib. & Text. Res. 32: 169-172.
Palaniswamy. K. and P. Mohamed. 2005. Yarn twisting. Autex Res. J. 5(2): 87-90.
Parveen, S. 1989. A comparative study on abrasion resistance of some fabrics. M.sc. Thesis,
Dept. of Fibre Tech., Univ. of Agri. Faisalabad: Page: 100-101.
Pillay, K. P. R. 1971. Effect of ambient atmospheric conditions during spinning on yarn
properties and spinning efficiency: part ii: effect of ambient conditions on yarn
properties. Text. Res. J. 41(1): 16-21.
Praisal, V. 1982. Ways of improving the quality of cross-wound packages. World Text. Abs.
14(6): 187.
Prendzova, M. 2000. The effect of cotton yarn properties on yarn end breakage. Int. J. of
Polymeric. Mat. 47(4): 701-707.
Ravindranathan. A. V and N. Balasubramaman. 1978. Translation of strength from single
yarn to two-fold yarn and from multiple strands to fabric with polyester, cotton, and
polyester/cotton blends. Text. Res. J. 48(7): 389-394.
Rasool, R. S. F. 2000. Effect of wax deposition and winding speed on the quality of combed
cotton yarn. M.sc. Thesis, Dept. of Fibre Tech., Univ. of Agri. Faisalabad: Page: 6575.
Rehman, S. U. 2006. Impact of multi system yarns upon circular and flat knit fabric
parameters. M.sc. Thesis, Dept. of Fibre Tech., Univ. of Agri. Faisalabad: Page: 6689.
Rust and Peykaniam. 1992. Yarn hairiness and the process of winding. Text. Res. J. 62(11):
685-689.
Saeed, U. 1993. Variation in yarn characteristics due to some mechanical changes at autocone
with special reference to wax application. . M.Sc. Thesis Deptt. Of Fib. Tech. Univ.
of Agri., Faisalabad: Page: 30-75.

83

Saleem, M. S. 2003. A study of yarn quality parameters through improved modification of G33 to K-44 ring fram spinning. M.Sc. Thesis Dept. Of Fib. Tech. Univ. of Agri.,
Faisalabad: Page: 32-73.
Sanaullah, K. 2008. Comparative evaluation of conventional vs. organic cotton yarns spun at
ring and compact spinning systems under some mechanical changes. M.Sc. Thesis
Deptt. of Fib. Tech. Univ. of Agri., Faisalabad. page: 132.
6DUGDJ622]GHPUDQG ,.DUD7KH (IIHFWV RI+HDW-Setting on the Properties of
Polyester/Viscose Blended Yarns. Fib. & Text. in East. Eur. 15(4)63: 50-53.
Sasser, P. E., F. M. Shofner, Y. T. Chu, C. K. Shofner and M. G. Townes. 1991.
Interpretations of single fibre, bundle, and yarn tenacity data. Text. Res. J. 61(11):
681-690.
Saville, B. P. 1999. Physical testing of textiles.Woodhead publishing. Bocaraton, Bostan .
Newyork, Washington D.C. P, 104-106.
Sharma, I. C., N. K. Gupta, B. R. Agarwal and N. R. Patnaik. 1987. Effect of twist factor and
stitch length of open-end spun cotton yarn on properties of rib knitted fabrics. Text.
Res. J. 57(2): 73-78.
Sharma, I. C., S. Gosh and N. K. Gupta. 1985. Dimensional and physical characteristics of
singler jersey fabrics. Text. Res. J. 55(3): 149-152.
Simpson, J. and L. A. Fiori. 1975. How yarn twist affects the yarn uniformity and
imperfections. Text. Res. J. 45(2): 136.
Strumillo, L. J., D. Cyniak, J. Czekalski and T. Jackowski. 2007. Quality of cotton yarns spun
using ring, compact, and rotor spinning machines as a function of selected spinning
process parameters. Fib. & Text. in East. Eur. 15(1)60: 24-30.
Stumf, T., Lenze, K. Schulte and C. H. Andersson. 1999. The mechanical behaviour of
single-tricot wrap-knitted fabrics. Part I. An experimental investigation of knitted
fabrics of varying loop geometry under tensile stress with special attention given to
inter yarn friction. J. Text. Inst. 90(2): 209-224.
Tang. Z. X., X. Wang, L. Wang and W. B. Fraser. 2006. The effect of yarn hairiness on air
drag in ring spinning. Text. Res. J. 76(7): 559-566.
Tao, J., R. C. Dhingra, C. K. Chan and M. S. Abbas. 1997. Effects of yarn and fabric
construction on spirality of cotton single jersey fabrics. Text. Res. J. 67(1): 57-68.

84

Teli, M. D., A. R. Khare and R. Chakrabarti. 2008. Dependence of yarn and fabrics strength
on the structural parameters. Autex Res. J. 8(3): 63-67.
Tezel, S. and Y. Kavusturan. 2008. Experimental investigation of effects of spandex brand
and tightness factor on dimensional and physical properties of cotton/spandex single
jersey fabrics. Text. Res. J. 78(11): 966976.
Ureyen, M. E. and H. Kadoglu. 2006. Regressional estimation of ring cotton yarn properties
from HVI fiber properties. Text. Res. J. 76(5): 360366.
Waheed, M. 1999. Effect of linear density, twist factor of yarn and tightness factor on the
quality and dimension of interlock, rib and plain knitted fabric. M.Sc. Thesis, Dept. of
Fib. Tech., Univ. of Agri., Faisalabad: Page: 71-84.
Wang, S., H. Zhang and Y. Xue. 2006. Twisting characteristics of rotor-spun composite
yarns. Fib. & Text. in East. Eur. 14(2): 17-19.
Wang, X. and L. Chang. 1999. An experimental study of the effect of test speed on yarn
hairiness. Text. Res. J. 69(1): 25-29.
Wang, X. and L. Chang. 2003. Reducing yarn hairiness with a modified yarn path in worsted
spinning. Text. Res. J. 73(4): 327-332.
Wang, X., W. Huang and X. Huang. 1999. Effect of test speed and twist level on the hairiness
of worsted yarns. Text. Res. J. 69(12): 889892.
Wu, W. Y and J. Y. Lee. 1995. Twist in the Spinning of a Composite Yarn. Text. Res. J.
65(9): 522526.
Xia, Z. X. Wang, W. Ye, W. Xu, J. Zhang and H. Zhao. 2009. Experimental investigation on
the effect of singeing in cotton yarn properties. Text. Res. J. 79(17): 1610-1615.
Yang, K., X. M. Tao, B. G. Xu and J. Lam. 2007. Structure and properties of low twist shortstaple singles ring spun yarns. Text. Res. J. 77(9): 675685.
Yonghua, Li. and H. J. Yan. 1990. Measuring evenness and blend ratio of yarn with
microwave resonators. Text. Res. J. 60(1): 54-59.
Yousaf, K. 1998. Effect of different blends of P/C with various twist factors on the quality of
plain knitted fabrics. M.Sc. Thesis Dept. of Fibre. Tech., Univ. of Agri., Faisalabad:
Page: 35-75.

85

Buy your books fast and straightforward online - at one of worlds

fastest growing online book stores! Environmentally sound due to
Print-on-Demand technologies.

Buy your books online at

www.get-morebooks.com
Kaufen Sie Ihre Bcher schnell und unkompliziert online auf einer
der am schnellsten wachsenden Buchhandelsplattformen weltweit!
Dank Print-On-Demand umwelt- und ressourcenschonend produziert.

Bcher schneller online kaufen

www.morebooks.de
VDM Verlagsservicegesellschaft mbH
Heinrich-Bcking-Str. 6-8
D - 66121 Saarbrcken

Telefon: +49 681 3720 174

Telefax: +49 681 3720 1749

info@vdm-vsg.de
www.vdm-vsg.de