Model 2

Yarn Evenness
Overview
Yarn evenness is a measure of the level of variation in yarn linear density or mass per unit length of yarn. In other words, it refers to the variation in yarn count along its length. It is the evenness of staple spun yarn that is of concern here. Continuously filament yarns have virtually no variation in linear density so evenness is not an issue for those yarns. A yarn with poor evenness will have thick and thin places along yarn length, while an even yarn will have little variation in mass or thickness along length. While a yarn may vary in many properties, evenness is the most important quality aspect of a yarn, because variations in other yarn properties are often a direct result of yarn count irregularity. We already know that twist tends to accumulate in the thin places in yarn, so irregularity in yarn linear density will cause variations in twist along yarn length. This preferential concentration of twist in thin places along a yarn also exacerbates the variations in yarn diameter or thickness, which often adversely affects the appearance of the resultant fabrics. An irregular yarn will also vary in strength along the yarn. The weakest link theory says a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. Similarly a yarn is only as strong as its weakest spot. When there are large variations in yarn linear density, there will be many thin spots in the yarn, which are often the weak spots (despite its relatively high twist concentration). This brief overview highlights the importance of yarn evenness. But what makes an even yarn then? Can we make a spun yarn as even as a continuously filament yarn? If not, how do we measure and control yarn evenness? These questions will be answered in this module. The first topic addresses the theoretical aspects of evenness. This is followed by the 2nd topic discussing the measurement of evenness.

Topic 1

Theoretical aspects of evenness

Introduction
The foundations for the study of yarn evenness were laid in a 1945 classical paper by Martindale, entitled "a new method of measuring the irregularity of yarns with some observations on the origin of irregularities in worsted slivers and yarns" (Martindale 1945). For this reason, the evenness theory has often been refereed to as the Martindale theory. This topic introduces the basic concepts of evenness, the theoretical limit of evenness of a fibre assembly, and the different ways of describing evenness.

Objectives
At the end of this topic you should be able to: Understand the statistical limit of evenness (limiting irregularity) Appreciate the effect of fibre fineness on yarn evenness Know the evenness-related calculations Understand the effect of fibre processing on sliver and yarn evenness

Perfectly even yarn

For a spun yarn (or any other fibre assembly) to be perfect even, we need two conditions: (1) (2) The constituent fibres are uniform in thickness The yarn has the same number of fibres in all cross sections along its length

Figure 1.1 depicts such an ideal fibre assembly with perfect evenness.

Fig. 1.1: A perfectly even fibre assembly with uniform fibres and butted fibre ends

While the first condition may be achievable with manufactured staple fibres, natural fibres such as cotton and wool always exhibit variations in thickness along fibre length. To satisfy condition (2) would mean that the fibre ends are butted together (Figure 1.1). In other words, as one fibre terminates, another must be introduced to take its place. This would require control and manipulation of each fibre in the fibre assembly by the processing machinery. This is not possible with current processing technology. Because of the variable nature of fibres, particularly natural fibres, and the difficulty with individual fibre placement in the fibre assembly using current technology, a perfectly even yarn is unattainable in practice. Therefore, a real yarn (or any other fibre assembly) would always have some irregularity in linear density, because the way fibres are arranged deviates from whats required to make a perfectly even yarn. The question then is how does the current fibre processing machinery arrange fibres? Without this knowledge, we can not possibly know what would be the likely irregularity for such an arrangement. To answer this question, we need to look at the whole fibre to yarn processes and examine what each process does to the fibres. In the Introduction to Fibre Science and Textile Technology unit, we have discussed, separately, the processes involved in manufacturing cotton and worsted yarns. Let us now briefly recap the key processes, from the perspective of fibre arrangement, before we move onto the theoretical aspects of evenness.

Fibre arrangements during fibre to yarn processing

Fibres arrive at textile mills in large bales. It is a statement of fact that fibres vary in properties, both within a bale and between different bales. We can certainly not persuade a sheep to produce identical wool or make a cotton plant to grow identical cotton. In addition, wool and cotton grown in different regions exhibit considerable variations in properties. To produce a large quantity of uniform yarns from variable fibres, blending and mixing is essential. There are two fundamental requirements of the blended product: The blend is homogenous, and The blend is intimate

These two requirements have different but complementary connotations. A homogenous blend means that the blend components are in the right proportion, while an intimate blend means the blend components lie side by side without regions of concentration of just one component. If a blend satisfy these requirements, then fibres in the blend are thoroughly mixed up, in the right proportions throughout the bulk (the whole lot or population). In other words, within such an ideal blend, all different fibres are arranged in a completely random way, and all the fibres have the same chance of being found at any selected place in the bulk. Achieving this task is a major objective in fibre to yarn conversion. But it is not an easy task, and has to be carried out
3

gradually. In the initial blending of fibres from bales, small tufts of fibres are picked up and combined to make a homogenous blend first. For intimate blend, the fibre tufts need to be opened out into individual fibres, in the carding process that follows. A key objective of carding is fibre opening. Only when fibres are opened out into individual fibres can different fibres lie side by side to achieve an intimate blend. After blending and carding, fibres are more or less randomized. Preserving this randomness is a key objective of the subsequent drawing process. During gilling of wool or drawing of cotton, several slivers are doubled together first and drafted to reduce its thickness. Doubling is a random operation because no deliberate attempt is made to compensate for thick places by doubling them against selected thin places. If the fibre ends in the individual slivers are randomly distributed, they will still be randomly distributed after doubling. If drafting is done properly, this randomness will persist into the drafted sliver. One problem with maintaining the random fibre ends distribution is the fibre length variation. If fibre length is very variable or if there are many short fibres in the slivers before drafting, the short fibres tend to be drafted in tufts rather than individually, and a drafting wave appears in the drafted sliver. Since a drafting wave is a practically periodic variation in the number of fibres in the cross sections along the sliver, it defeats the randomness of fibre ends distribution. For this reason, some fibre control devices, such as pressure bars in drawing and faller bars in gilling, are often used to minimize the drafting waves and improve the random distribution of fibre ends. Similarly, in the roving process and during the drafting stage of spinning, fibres are also controlled during drafting. From this brief discussion of the fibre to yarn conversion, we can see that throughout the different processes involved, random fibre distribution is a key objective. If all processes perform perfectly, we will end up with a completely random distribution of fibre ends in the resultant yarn. We call this yarn an ideal yarn, and the irregularity of this yarn the limiting irregularity.. Limiting irregularity is therefore the minimum irregularity that we must expect from any real yarn or other fibre assemblies. A thorough understanding of the concept of limiting irregularity is essential for the understanding of yarn evenness in particular, and yarn quality in general.

Limiting irregularity (CVlim)

A common method of expressing the irregularity of a yarn is to use the statistical term CV or coefficient of variation. Obviously the higher the CV value, the more irregular the yarn is. The traditional way of obtaining the CV value is to dissect a length of yarn into many short sections of equal length, say 1 cm, and then weigh each of the short sections. Assuming we have dissected a yarn into n short sections, and the weights of these sections are: x1, x2, x3 ..... xn respectively. From these readings we can easily calculate the following statistics regarding the yarn:

The mean or average:

___

x1 + x 2 + x3 + ....... + x n x i = n n

(1.1) The standard deviation:

s=

( x1 x) + ( x 2 x) + ..... + ( x n x)
2 2

__

__

__

n 1

( x x)
i

__

n 1

(1.2) The coefficient of variation:

CV =

s
__

100%

x
The percentage mean deviation (known as the U% value in textiles)

(1.3)

U=

| x x|
i

__

__

100%

(1.3a)

The CV thus calculated will be the measured CV, or effective CV. It is the actual CV of the yarn concerned. The U% value is listed here for completeness. Increasingly, it is the CV or CV% value that gets used for this purpose. For a fault-free yarn with random variations in thickness or linear density, the following relationship exists between the U value and the CV value.
C = .2 U V 1 5

(1.3b) Modern instrument, such as the Uster Evenness Tester, can measure the U and CV values of a fibre assembly at a high speed. More on evenness measurement will be discussed later. Coming back to the concept of limiting irregularity, we have said before this is the minimum irregularity that must be expected from even an ideal yarn with random fibre ends distribution. The limiting irregularity is also expressed as a CV value, denoted as CVlim here. Early works in this area have derived the

following very important expressions for the limiting irregularity of various yarns with random fibre ends distribution. (1) Limiting irregularity of an ideal yarn without fibre variability:
100 C lim = V n

(1.4) where n is the average number of fibres in yarn cross section. (2) Limiting irregularity for an ideal yarn with fibre variability:
CV lim = 100 1 + 0.0001 CV A n
2

(1.5)

where CVA is the coefficient of variation of fibre cross sectional area. These expressions indicate that the number of fibres in yarn cross section is overwhelmingly the most important factor that determines the irregularity of a yarn. Irregularity increases with a reduction in the number of fibres in yarn cross section. The fibre variability also has some effect on the irregularity value. But different fibre types vary considerably in terms of fibre variability. Cotton and synthetics (staple fibre) Synthetic staple fibres have very little fibre variability, and cotton fibres have some small fibre variability. For these fibres, the number of fibres in yarn cross section can be worked as below:
N of fibres in yarn cross sec tion = o Yarn linear density (tex ) Fibre linear density (tex )

(1.6) The fibre variability of synthetic staples may be ignored and we can simply use equation (1.4) to calculate the limiting irregularity of a assembly of synthetic staple fibres.
CV lim ( synthetic staple ) = 100 n

(1.6a)

Because of the small fibre variability in cotton, we can not simply use equation (1.4) to work out the limiting iregularity. Instead, the following equation is used to calculate the limiting irregularity of cotton fibre assemblies.
106 C lim = V n

(1.6b)

Worked example:

A cotton yarn of 25s English cotton count (Ne) consists of cotton with a micronaire value of 4.1 ( yarn? Firstly we need to work out the number of fibres in yarn cross section using formula (1.6). To do that we need to use the same count unit, tex, for both fibres and yarns. From the first module, we already know the conversion between English cotton and tex count systems ( tex =
590 .5 =23 .62 tex . 25
590 .5 ). Therefore, the yarn count in tex is N e

inch

). What is the limiting irregularity of this cotton

The following shows how fibre fineness is converted into tex:

4.1 g 4.1 6 g 10 10 6 g 10 6 g 10 6 g g = = .61 1 = .61 1 = .61 1 =0.161 =0.1 2 5 inch 2.54 cm cm 1000 m 10 m 10 1000 m

Using equation (1.6), the average number of fibres in yarn cross section is:
2 .6 te 3 2 x n= = 4 .7 16 0.1 1 te 6 x

Applying equation (1.6b), we get the limiting irregularity for this yarn:
106 106 CV lim = = =8.75 (% ) n 146 .7

This would be the minimum irregularity that must be expected of this yarn. The actual measured irregularity of the yarn would be slightly higher than this ideal figure. Wool fibres For wool fibre, it is the fibre diameter and diameter CV that get measured, not the fibre cross section area and its CV. In addition, the average number of fibres in yarn cross section is not as easy to get as the yarn count. The following equation has been derived to calculate the average number of fibres in the cross section of worsted yarns consisting of 100% wool fibres, assuming a fibre density of 1.31 g/cm3.

D (1 + 0.0001 CV D ) (1.7)
2

n=

972 tex
2

where:

tex = yarn count in tex D = mean fibre diameter of wool (in micron)

CVD = coefficient of variation of fibre diameter Since the bulk of the merino wool fibres has a CVD of about 24.5%, the above equation is often simplified to:
n= 917 tex D2

(1.7a) It should be noted though this simplified equation is based on the assumption that CVD = 24.5%. If we put equation (1.7) into equation (1.5) and note that CV A 2CV D for wool, we have the following expression for the limiting irregularity of wool assemblies:
CV lim ( wool ) = 3.2 D 1 + 0.0005 CV D tex
2

(1.8) This equation has the following important implications: For a given yarn count (tex), the finer the fibre in the yarn, the less the yarn irregularity. This is the main reason why fine fibres are more expensive than coarse fibres. For fibres of a given fineness (D), the finer the yarn, the more irregular it is. This explains why for a given fibre fineness, there is a limit on the finest yarn count. It is worth noting that the concept of irregularity applies to not just yarns, but fibre assemblies in general. Therefore, for a given fibre fineness, the irregularity of sliver will be less than that of roving, and rovings irregularity will be less than yarn irregularity. This can also be explained by considering the different number of fibres in those fibre assemblies. If you reduce the CV of fibre diameter, the irregularity of the yarn decreases. Put differently, if you reduce the fibre diameter CV by 5, you may increase the fibre diameter by 1 micron without significantly affecting the yarn irregularity. This is the so-called 5-to-1 rule of thumb.

The equations for wool appear rather complex. A simpler equation for wool is given below:
112 CV lim ( wool ) = n

(1.8a) However, this equation should be used with caution, because it is based on assumption that the CV of fibre diameter is 25%. If the diameter CV deviates significantly from 25%, the above formula will lead to error.

Fibre blends Blends of different fibres are common and their popularity is increasing. How do we work out the limiting irregularity of blend yarns then? This can be tackled by considering the blend yarn as a ply yarn consisting of two or more single yarns, each having one fibre component. If fibres in the blend yarn are randomly distributed, it is reasonable to assume the fibres in each component are also random. Therefore, we can treat each single yarn the same as we have treated the 100 cotton or 100% wool yarns. Given the count of the blend yarn Tb, and the blend ratio of fibre component Pi, the count of each component Ti can be worked out according to the formula below:
T P b i T = i 10 0

(1.9) Once we know the count of each component yarn, the limiting irregularity of the blend yarn of n fibre components is given as follows,
CV lim (blend ) = (CV 1 lim T 1) 2 + (CV 2 lim T 2) 2 +..... + (CVn lim Tn ) 2 Tb

(1.10) The following example brings what we have discussed together.

Worked Example:

A wool/polyester blend yarn is manufactured on the worsted processing system. The yarn has a count of 30 tex and contains 45% wool and 55% polyester. The fibre fineness for the polyester staple is 2.5 dtex. The mean diameter of the wool fibres is 22 micron, with a CV of 25%. What is the limiting irregularity of this blend yarn? Solution Assuming the blend yarn is a ply of two single yarns, or 100 wool and 100% polyester respectively, we can work out the count of the wool component (Tw) and the polyester component (Tp) according to equation (1.9):
T P b w 3 4 0 5 T = w = = 3 .5 (tex ) 1 10 0 10 0 T P b p 30 55 T = p = = .5 (tex ) 16 100 100

Using equation (1.6), the average number of fibres in the polyester component (np) can be worked out as:

1 .5 te 6 x 15 d x 6 te np = = =6 6 2.5 d x te 2 .5 d x te

Since polyester staple has little variability in fineness, we can then use equation (2.4) to work out the limiting irregularity of the polyester component:
100 100 CV p lim = = =12 .3 (%) n 66

For the wool component, we can use equation (2.8),

CV w lim = 3.2 D 1 +0.0005 CV D tex
2

3.2 22 1 +0.0005 25 2 13 .5

=21 .95 (% )

Finally, we can use equation (2.10) to work out the limiting irregularity of the blend yarn,
CV lim (blend ) = (CV w lim Tw ) 2 +(CV Tb
p lim

Tp ) 2

(21 .95 13 .5) 2 +(12 .3 16 .5) 2 30

=12 (% )

So, the blend yarn has a limiting irregularity of 12%. Finally, since some textile mills still use the U% value discussed earlier, the limiting U value can be worked using the simple equation below:
U lim = CV lim 1.25

(1.11)

Index of Irregularity (I)

After the proceeding discussions on limiting irregularity, we should be very clear in our minds that the number of fibres in yarn cross section has a decisive effect on yarn evenness. Because of this, a coarse yarn would always be more even than a thinner yarn made from similar fibres and under similar processing conditions. Does this mean the coarse yarn is intrinsically better, in evenness, than the finer yarn then? The answer is no. The limiting irregularity provides a reference point. But this reference point is not fixed, it changes with yarn count. A fair comparison of yarn quality in terms of evenness between similar yarns of different counts is to see how close the actual CV of each yarn is to its respective limit (the limiting irregularity). This would be a measure of the degree to which the mass variations of a yarn deviates from the ideal yarn with random fibre ends distribution. The index of irregularity provides such a measure. It is defined as the ratio between the actual (measured, effective) irregularity and the limiting irregularity for the yarn (or other fibre assemblies).
I= CV
eff

CV lim

(2.12)

10

where I = Index of irregulaity CVeff = Effective (actual, measured) irregularity CVlim = Limiting irregularity The index of irregularity is a dimensionless parameter. In the ideal case, I = 1. Since the actual CV of a yarn is almost always higher than its limiting CV, the I value is usually greater than 1. The higher the I, the worse the yarn is in evenness, regardless of the yarn count. Of course, as for limiting irregularity, the index of irregularity also applies to fibre assemblies other than yarns. Figure 1.2 shows changes in CV and I of the fibre assemblies at different stages of the fibre to yarn conversion. It is worth noting that the trends for CV and I are quite different. The index of irregularity (I) gradually decreases with further processing. This indicates that the fibre assembly is increasingly approaching an ideal one. In other words, with further processing, the fibre ends distribution is getting more and more random. As mentioned early, promoting random fibre ends distribution is a key objective of fibre to yarn processing. At the yarn stage, the index of irregularity is approaching one, suggesting that the yarn is approaching an ideal yarn. On the other hand, there is a general trend for the effective (or actual) CV of the fibre assemblies to increase during fibre to yarn processing, with the CV of the resultant yarn higher than the rovings and the slivers. This is a reflection of the decreasing thickness of the fibre assemblies, and reducing number of fibres in the cross section of the fibre assemblies. At the yarn stage, the number of fibres in the cross section is the lowest, hence the CV of the yarn is the highest. This example again demonstrates the difference between the CV value and the I value. The I value provides a good indication of how close a fibre assembly is to an idea one with random fibre ends distribution. Because of this, the I value is often used as a quality control parameter for assessing the performance of drawing and spinning. For instance, if the I value is obtained at every processing stage, and an increase in I value is found after the 2nd drawing as indicated by the broken line in Figure 1.2, that immediately tells us that the 2nd drawing is a defective one and should be fixed. If all processing stages are under control, the I values should progressively decrease from start to the end of the processing as indicated by the solid line for I values in Figure 1.2.

CVeff

Defective passage

CVeff

I 1 Carded sliver Combed Drawn slivers sliver 1st & 2nd Roving Yarn
11

Fig. 1.2: Changes in CV and I values in a combed cotton yarn production Unlike the CV% and U% values, the index of irregularity (I) is independent of the count of the fibre assembly. This makes it an ideal tool for use in the control chart. For instance, if the I value is obtained at the roving stage for every processing lot and plotted on a control chart, abnormalities may be easily identified before the final spinning stage.

Reduction and addition of irregularities

Figure 1.2 shows that the measured CV (CVeff) of the cotton sliver gradually reduces from carding to 2nd drawing, and then the CV increases again after the roving and spinning stages. Why is this the case then? What is causing the increase and decrease in yarn irregularity. To answer this question, we need to learn the law of doubling and addition of irregularity. Law of doubling During drawing, many slivers are combined (doubled) on the input side to feed the drawframe. The law of doubling says that if you combine (double) n slivers together, the overall irregularity of the combined (doubled) sliver will reduce according to the following law:

CV I =
(1.13) where:

CV
n

______

CVI = CV of all n slivers at the input to the drawframe

slivers

CV

____

= Mean value of the CV values of all the single (

CV1 + CV 2 .... +CV n CV = n

___
n = number of doubled slivers.

Therefore, doubling always reduces the overall irregularity. This is not difficult to comprehend if you consider the large increase in the number of fibres in the cross section of the doubled material. The doubled material is then subject to drafting, which reduces its thickness. As long as the drawframe is functioning properly, and the output sliver is thicker than, or as think as, the average thickness of the input slivers, the CV of the output sliver will be lower than the
12

average CV of the input slivers. This explains the decrease in measured CV from carding to drawing in Figure 1.2. Addition of irregularity At the roving and spinning stage, there is no doubling. A sliver is drafted into a thinner roving, and a roving is drafted to yarn thickness during spinning. The net result is a reduction in the number of fibres in yarn cross section. In addition, the process itself may introduce additional irregularities to the drafted material. Mathematically, if a fibre assembly enters a drafting process (roving, spinning) with an irregularity of CVin, and emerges from that process with an irregularity of CVout, then the additional irregularity due to the process itself (CVadd) can be worked out using the following formula:

C V 2 out = C V 2 in + CV 2 add

or

C Vadd = CV 2 out CV 2 in

(1.14)

The added irregularity comes from two sources reduction in the number of fibres in cross section and imperfect drafting. The following example will help understand the concepts here. Worked example Eight slivers, with an average irregularity CV of 4%, were fed to a drawframe. The drawn sliver has a CV value of 3%. What is the total irregularity introduced during the drawing process? Solution The above problem can be graphically represented as:

Sliver 1

CVadd = ? CVout = 3%

Sliver 8 CVave = 4%

First of all, we need to know the CV of the input material (CVin). According to the law of doubling (equation 1.13), this can be easily calculated:

13

4 CVin = CV = = 1.4 (%) n 8

Now that we know CVin and CVout is already given as 3%, we can calculate the CV introduced during drawing (CVadd) using equation 1.14.

___

CVadd = CV 2 out CV 2 in = 3 2 1.4 2 = 2.65 (%)

As mentioned before, this added CV is due to two factors reduction in the number of fibres in cross section and imperfect drafting caused by material and/or machine related reasons. The reading material, 'Making yarn random-wise' by Noguera gives a brief but excellent account of what we have discussed so far. Review questions 1. In the calculation of limiting irregularity, information on fibre length is not used. This implies that fibre length has noting to do with the theoretical yarn evenness. Yet in practice, fibres with shorter length and higher length variations usually make less even yarns, other things being equal. How do you explain this 'discrepancy'?
2.

A yarn is composed of 40/60 wool/cotton blend and has a linear density of 20 Nec (cotton count). The cotton has a fineness of 3.8 micronaire ( g / inch ) and the wool has an average diameter of 19 m (1 m = 10-6 m) and a diameter CV of 25%. What is the limiting irregularity of this wool/cotton yarn? If the blend ratio is changed to 20/80 wool/cotton, is the yarn evenness likely to improve or deteriorate, compared with the 40/60 wool/cotton blend ratio? (you need to show your workings).

3. In his classical book "Studies of quality in cotton", published by Macmillan and Co., Limited in 1928, W. Lawrence Balls described such a paradox - the weaker the fibre, the stronger the yarn! Please explain this paradox, using the information provided in this topic.

14

Topic 2

Measurement and benchmarking of yarn evenness

Introduction
The following quote highlights the importance of measurement: I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about and express it in numbers, you know something about it. But when you cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind; it may be the beginning of knowledge, but you have scarcely in your thoughts advanced to the stage of science, whatever that matter may be - attributed to Lord Kelvin, 1883 Up till now we have used the term effective CV, actual or measured CV of yarns. But how do we measure the CV of a yarn or a fibre assembly and what do we do with the measured results? This topic discusses evenness measurement and making use of the measured results.

Objectives
At the end of this topic you should be able to: Understand the principle of evenness testing Appreciate the importance of spectrograms as a diagnostic tool Know the difference between Uster Statistics and Yarnspec

Principle of evenness testing

As mentioned before, the traditional way of evenness testing is to dissect the fibre assembly into many short sections and weigh each section, and then calculate the CV of the fibre assembly from the weights of the individual sections. This is still a reference method, by which the accuracy of other methods is judged. Such cutting and weighing method is a very tedious process as you can imagine, considering that a sufficiently long length of yarn should be measured to get a CV value representative of the bulk material. Zellweger Uster AG, a textile instrument manufacturer based in Switzerland, has produced generations of evenness testing instrument for rapid

15

measurement of the evenness of various fibre assemblies. The latest is the Uster Evenness Tester 4, although its predecessor (Uster Evenness Tester 3) is still widely used. A photo of the Uster tester 3 is given in Figure 2.1.

Fig. 2.1: A photo of Uster evenness tester 3 (Zellweger Uster AG) The Uster Evenness Tester measures mass variations along the length of a fibre assembly. It is based on the capacitance principle as depicted in Figure 2.2. The two capacitors detect the mass variations or weight per unit length variations of the fibre assembly running between them. These variations are transformed into a proportional electrical signal. The signal processing unit will process this signal, and work out the U% and CV% value, as well as other useful information concerning the mass variations. All the details can be displayed or printed out.

16

Fibre assembly

Capacitor Electronic signal Processing Display

Printing

Fig. 2.2: Principle of Uster Evenness Tester It is worth noting that the accuracy of this method, and other evenness measuring methods, is usually evaluated against results obtained traditionally, i.e. by cutting and weighing.

Evenness test results

The Uster evenness tester provides a considerable amount of information on the evenness of a fibre assembly, including: Single overall results Diagram Spectrogram

Single overall results These include the U% and CV% values, the index of irregularity (I), as well as the number of imperfections (thin place, thick place, and neps). All those parameters are expressed as single numbers, which are easy to use, particularly in a mill situation. These single values provide an overall picture of yarn evenness. However, if the results are bad, the causes of the poor results can not be identified from these single values. The following print-out is an example of the single overall results for a 100% cotton yarn, tested 10 times at 400 m/min for 5 minutes. The meanings of different single value results are explained in the following page.

17

Fig. 2.3: The single overall results for a 100% cotton yarn (Uster News Bulletin No 35, October 1988, p14).

18

Um

Irregularity U of the mass with a cut length of approximately 1 cm (measuring field length). In other words, this is the U value you would have got from cutting the yarn into approximately 1 cm sections and weighing those short sections.

CVm Coefficient of variation of mass with a cut length of approximately 1 cm. This is the CV most often quoted in yarn specification and commercial transactions. It is the effective CV used for calculating the index of irregularity. CVm(1m) Coefficient of variation of mass with a cut length of 1 m, simulating the CV you would have got from cutting the yarn into 1 m sections and weighing those sections. The same applies to CVm(10m) and CVm(100m). It should be noted that as the cut length increases, the irregularity reduces.

Index The index of irregularity (I) value, which is always greater than one as indicated in the print-out. Thin places (-50%) Number of places that have mass reductions of 50% or more with respect to the mean value. Note that (-50%) is the standard sensitivity level used in the test. If a different sensitivity level (40%, -40%, -60%) is used, the result would have been different. The number of thin places has a significant impact on yarn strength. Thick palces (+50%) Number of places that have mass increases of 50% or more with respect to the mean value. Note that (+50%) is the standard sensitivity level used in the test. If a different sensitivity level (+35%, +70%, +100%) is used, the result would have been different. The number of thin places has a significant impact on yarn strength. Neps (+280%) Number of places that have mass increases of +280% or more with respect to the mean value and a reference length of 1mm. Note that +200% is the sensitivity level normally used in the test. The results would have been dThese short thick places in a yarn are often the results of vegetable matter or entangled fibres. S Q95% Standard deviation of results 95% confidence interval of the mean value

Please note that the thin places, thick places, and neps are called the imperfections.

19

Diagram A diagram is simply a trace of mass (linear density) variation along a fibre assembly. For instance, if you dissect a long length of yarn into many very short sections and then weigh each section, you will get many mass readings (xi) as shown in Figure 2.4.
Mass xi (individual mass readings)

Mean mass

Length

Fig. 2.4: A manually constructed diagram of mass variation From this diagram, many useful statistics (mean, CV etc) can be obtained as shown in the Limiting Irregularity section. A diagram obtained from the Uster evenness tester is given in Figure 2.5. The dip in the middle of this diagram was actually caused by a missing sliver, of about 120 m, in the input material for a drawframe. This example demonstrates the usefulness of diagrams in identifying certain faults in the fibre assembly. Basically, the diagrams can help identify extreme thin and thick places, slow changes in the mean mass value, step changes in the mean value, periodic mass variations of long wave length etc.

Fig. 2.5: A diagram showing an extreme thin place in the sliver (Furter 1982, p.12)

20

Spectrograms The single overall results are very useful in that they provide evenness information in concise single values. These single values are easy to use for comparison purpose in particular. For instance, the CV% or index of irregularity of one yarn is higher than another similar yarn, we can say one yarn is better than the other in terms of yarn evenness. But that is often not sufficient for quality control purpose. Suppose we now know from the single overall results (eg. CV, I) that a yarn is not good in evenness, and we want to find out what has caused the irregularity in the yarn. Once we know what has caused the irregularity, we can then try to rectify the problem. For this, we need the spectrograms. Before we discuss the spectrogram, it is necessary to say a few words about the nature of mass variations in a fibre assembly. We already know that random fibre arrangements lead to mass variation, and this variation can be precisely calculated as discussed in the limiting irregularity section. If that is all the variation we get, then we have nothing more to worry about, because that is exactly what we aim for in a yarn. Unfortunately we often get more than just the random variations, for two common reasons: Variability in fibre length and the presence of short fibres make fibre control during drafting difficult, this leads to non-random variations in a fibre assembly. Such non-random variation is called a drafting wave. It is called a drafting wave because the mass variation occurs in a more or less periodic manner in the drafted material, much like a wave of variations along the length of the fibre assembly. (b) There may be machine defects or mechanical faults in the drafting systems, which causes changes in drafting speed and the actual draft periodically, leading to rather strictly periodic mass variations in the drafted fibre assembly.
(a)

Here we need to reflect upon what has been discussed on Roller Drafting in the Introduction to Fibre Science and Textile Technology unit. For roller drafting, as depicted in Figure 2.6, the most important concept is the concept of perfect roller drafting.
Back rollers

Front rollers

Slower

Faster

Ratch setti ng

Fig. 2.6: A simple roller drafting system The concept of perfect roller drafting is: every fibre in the drafting zone should travel at the speed of back rollers until its leading end reaches the front roller

21

nip. Then the fibre gets instantly accelerated to the front roller speed. If this is what actually happens in roller drafting, we will get a drafted fibre assembly with random variation of fibre ends only. However, when there are many short fibres in the drafting zone, these short fibres will not move according to the requirements of roller drafting. They float and swim together in the drafting zone, the speed at which they travel depends on the speed of their neighbouring fibres. The end result is some practically (i.e. not strictly) periodic mass variation in the drafted material. Such practically periodic mass variation caused by floating short fibres is called a drafting wave, and its wave length is approximately 2.5 to 3 times the average fibre length of the fibre assembly. With good fibre control, using pressure bars (on cotton drawframe) and pinned faller basr (on worsted gillbox), drafting waves can be significantly reduced or eliminated. A common machine defect or mechanical fault of drafting elements is roller eccentricity, as indicated in Figure 2.7.

Eccentric front bottom roller

Drafted material

Speed varies with radius R Wave length (Roller circumference)

Eccentric back bottom roller

Drafted material

R r Wave length (Roller circumference x draft)

Fig. 2.7: Eccentric rollers cause periodic mass variations Because of roller eccentricity, the surface speed (v) of the eccentric roller varies 2 as the radius of rotation (r) varies ( v = r n, where n is the roller rpm). If the front bottom roller is eccentric, a larger radius of rotation (R) will lead to higher roller surface speed, which means increased drafting, resulting in over draft or a thin section in the drafted material. The opposite happens with the smaller radius of rotation, and this cycle repeats for every complete revolution of the eccentric roller. As a result the wave length of the periodic variation is exactly the same as the circumference of the offending roller. On the other hand, if the back bottom roller is eccentric and front rollers are fine, then at the larger radius of rotation R), the back roller surface speed will be faster, leading to a

22

reduction in draft and hence a thicker section in the drafted material. The opposite is the case at the smaller radius of rotation (r). Not only that, the periodic mass variation caused by the back eccentric roller will be lengthened by a factor of the draft used. In other words, the wave length of the periodic mass variation caused by a back eccentric roller will be equal to the roller circumference multiplied by a factor of draft, as indicated in Figure 2.7. Periodic mass variations in a yarn often result in unwanted patterning in fabrics made from such yarns. They also lead to increased ends down during spinning and subsequent processing. It is essential in yarn manufacture to prevent the occurrence of such mass variations in slivers, rovings or yarns. Furthermore, the presence of periodic or practically periodic mass variations in a fibre assembly does not necessarily result in significant increases in the CV% value or in the index of irregularity. So the CV% value or index of irregularity will not indicate the presence of those mass variations. But how do we know if a fibre assembly has a drafting wave or periodic mass variation then? This question leads us back to discussion on spectrograms. Hypothetically, if a yarn has mass variations that resemble a sinusoidal wave as shown in Figure 2.8(a), then a mathematical (Fourier) transformation of such a mass variation signal will reveal the frequency (f) of such variation as a sharp peak shown in Figure 2.8(b). For a signal that is not as simple as just a sinusoidal wave, it has been proven mathematically that it can be constructed by superimposing a series of sinusoidal waves of varying frequencies. Therefore, if the original mass variation in the yarn is of a more complex shape as shown in Figure 2.8(c), then the same mathematical transformation will reveal the frequency of each of its sinusoidal components as shown Figure 2.8(d). The different amplitude reflects the different share of the respective component in the original signal.
Amplitude (a)
Transformation

Amplitude (b)

Time (c)

f (d)

Frequency

Transformation

Time

f1

f2

f3 Frequency

Fig. 2.8: Transformation of time domain signal to frequency domain If the original mass variation is of a random nature, then after transformation, there will be many frequencies of similar amplitude. Further, if there is a periodic
23

mass variation in addition to the random variation, then the frequency of that periodic mass variation will show up as a sharp peak after the transformation. Put differently, if a mass variation signal is subjected to a transformation and a sharp peak (chimney) appears in the transformed signal, then we know there is a periodic mass variation in the fibre assembly. This is basically how spectrogram works. Since wave length is more useful than frequency for textile purposes, the spectrogram indicates the different wave lengths (on a logarithmic scale) versus their amplitude. Modern evenness testing instruments, such as the Uster Evenness Tester, provide diagrams as well as spectrograms for the fibre assembly tested. The diagram is a time domain mass variation signal, while the spectrogram represents the same mass variation in the frequency domain. Figure 2.9 shows the diagrams and spectrograms of 3 different yarns normal yarn with random variation only, faulty yarn with additional periodic mass variation, and faulty yarn with additional drafting wave.

Fig.2.9: Diagrams (left) and spectrograms (right) of 3 yarns (Uster Spectrograph, Zelleger Uster, PE404) With respect to interpreting a spectrogram, the following simple rules can be used as a guide: (a) A fault-free fibre assembly will give a typical normal spectrogram (with neither chimnies nor humps) (b) A chimney on top of a normal spectrogram indicates the presence of a periodic mass variation in the fibre assembly. The wave length of this periodic mass variation can be read off the horizontal axis (noting the logarithmic scale) (c) A hump on top of a normal spectrogram indicates the presence of a drafting wave in the fibre assembly. The wave length of the drafting wave is equal to 2.5 to 3 times the mean fibre length. Once we get the wave length of a periodic mass variation from the spectrogram, and we know this wave length is related to the circumference of the offending roller, we can then identify the roller and replace it with a good one to solve the problem. For drafting waves, the use of more uniform fibres and proper fibre control during drafting will usually solve the problem. Spectrogram is therefore a very useful quality control tool in a spinning mill.

24

Benchmarking yarn evenness

In management jargon, benchmarking is a total quality management tool and denotes the procedure of identifying and quantifying topnotch or world-class performance (benchmarks) in a particular business or product category and comparing the data with the performance of the own company or product. Lets assume we have already produced some yarns and we have tested the yarns for evenness. Now we want to know how good our yarns are. In other words, we want to benchmark a product - our yarns. There are several ways of benchmarking yarn evenness, including: Index of irregularity Uster Statistics Yarnspec (for worsted yarn only)

Index of irregularity Table 2.1 shows a classification of worsted yarns based on the index of irregularity of the yarn. Table 2.1: Classification of worsted yarns based on the index of irregularity (Source: Textile Quality, M. Bona, p253, 1994) Index of irregularity (I) Bornet Classification Monfort Classification 1.1 Excellent Very even 1.2 1.3 Very good Even 1.4 Good 1.5 Mediocre Irregular quality 1.6 Poor 1.7 1.8 Very irregular Since processing technology is improving and so is yarn quality, the data in this table may not reflect the quality of worsted yarns in the future. Generally speaking, a good quality worsted yarn should not have an index of irregularity greater than 1.2 by todays standard. Uster statistics While the evenness index value is of use to the yarn manufacturers for internal quality control purpose, what matters to the users of yarn (i.e the weavers and knitters) is the actual irregularity in the yarn they are going to use. For this reason, the Uster Statistics is of great practical importance. So what is the Uster Statistics then? The following excerpts from the 1997 Uster Statistics Book (produced by Zellweger Uster) answer this question briefly: Almost half a century ago, in 1949, the first Uster Standards were presented to the textile public in numerical form. This started a new era in
25

the assessment of the technological and commercial value of spun yarns. Over the years, the Uster Standards have developed into the Uster Statistics, which have been regularly updated until today and additional quality parameters for sliver, roving, and yarns have been introduced progressively. Simultaneously, the methods and procedures applied to establish the Uster Statistics have been gradually enhanced. (Uster Statistics 1997, p2) Today, the Uster Statistics represent the only truly comprehensive survey of the quality of textile materials produced in the major textile hubs around the world and they constitute the mainstay of global market intelligence related to textile quality. (Uster Statistics 1997, p2) The Uster Statistics are first and foremost a practical guide to good textile practices in the field of yarn manufacturing. (Uster Statistics 1997, p3) The Uster Statistics just seem to have been made for quality benchmarking on the corporate level. (Uster Statistics 1997, p4) Uster Statistics 1997 provide data on the following major types of yarn: 100% CO, carded, ring spinning 100% carded cotton (ring spun) 100% CO, carded, rotor spinning 100% carded cotton (rotor spun) 100% CO, combed, ring spinning 100% combed cotton (ring spun) 100% CO, combed, rotor spinning 100% combed cotton (rotor spun) 100% CO, carded, rotor spinning 100$ carded cotton (rotor spun) 100% WO, worsted spinning 100% wool yarn (worsted ring spun)

Provisional data is also provided for the following types of yarn: 100% PES, ring spinning 100% polyester (ring spun) 100% CV, ring spinning - 100% Rayon (ring spun) 100% CV, rotor spinning 100% Rayon (rotor spun) 65/35, 67/33 PES/CO, combed, ring spinning 65% polyester/35% cotton blend, combed (ring spun) and 67% polyester/33% cotton blend, combed (ring spun) 65/35, 67/33 PES/CV, ring spinning 65% polyester/35% Rayon blend (ring spun) and 67% polyester/33% Rayon blend (ring spun) 50/50 PES/CO, rotor spinning 50% polyester/50% cotton blend (rotor spun) 50/50 PES/CO, air-jet spinning 50% polyester/50% cotton blend (air-jet spun) 65/35 PES/CO, air-jet spinning 65% polyester/35% cotton blend (air-jet spun) 55/45 PES/WO, worsted spinning 55% polyester/45% wool blend (worsted ring spun)

The key quality attributes listed for these yarns are:

26

Yarn count variation (between bobbins or packages) Mass variation (U% and CV%) Imperfections (thick and thin places, neps) Uster Hairiness Index Tensile properties (strength and elongation)

Figure 2.10 shows selected charts for mass variation and imperfections from the 1997 Uster statistics book. The nomograms or percentile lines refer to the total world production that equals or exceeds the measurement value given for a particular yarn description.

(a) Evenness and imperfection statistics for 100% cotton, carded rotor spoun yarns (b) Evenness and imperfection statistics for 100% cotton, combed ring spun yarns (c) Evenness and imperfection statistics for 100% wool, worsted ring spun yarns

Figure 2.10: Uster statistics for selected yarns - (a) Carded cotton yarn; (b) Combed cotton yarn; (c) Worsted wool yarns (Uster Statistics 1997, p. 118, p.120, p.74, p.168, p.170). Example: You have an 60 Ne (Nm 100, or 10 tex) 100% combed cotton yarn with a measured CV of 13.9+0.2%, and you want to know how good the yarn is in terms of its evenness. First of all, you need to find the statistics for the right type of yarn from the Uster Statistics book, then you need to identify from the x-axis the yarn count. In this example, a vertical line drawn from the x-axis at 60 Ne (Nm 100 or 10 tex) intersects with the two horizontal lines drawn from the y-axis at 13.7% and 14.1% CV (lower and upper confidence limits for this yarn) right at the 25% line. This means only 25% of all Ne60 combed cotton ring spun yarns produced worldwide have a CV of 13.9% or better. In other words, this particular yarn is better than 75% of the total world production of comparable Ne60 combed cotton yarns in terms of yarn evenness. Using a similar approach, we can interpret other Uster statistics.

27

For the Imperfections listed in Figure 2.10, it should be noted that the standard sensitivity levels (-50%, +50%, +200%) are indicated for the thin places, thick places, and neps respectively. If the yarn is not tested at these sensitivity levels on the Uster Evenness Tester, we can not use these Uster Statistics for comparison. Finally, it should be stressed that there are restrictions on the interpretation and application of Uster Statistics. These restrictions include: Uster Statistics do not provide direct access to information about the raw materials used in spinning. Good quality, more expensive fibres are usually spun into good quality yarns. Therefore, a yarn with a CV% below the 5% line on the Uster Statistics chart may be indicative of a high cost yarn. Similarly, a yarn with a CV% value above the 75% line may not be all that good in terms of evenness, but it may be indicative of a very attractive price and just the right quality for the target markets. The Uster Statistics is merely a global survey of yarn quality as produced in every part of the world. Whether or not these qualities are produced economically from adequate raw materials and offered at a legitimate price is beyond the scope of the Uster Statistics. Yarns intended for different end uses have different quality requirements. For example the requirements of weaving and knitting yarns are often different. Therefore, yarn quality should be judged in the context of its end use. The quality of yarns is a moving target. As technology improves quality standards also change. Figure 2.11 shows the improvement in yarn evenness (U%) over a period of almost 50 years.

Figure 2.11 Improvement in yarn evenness (U%) over a period of almost 50 years according to the 50% line of the Uster Statistics (Uster Statistics 1997, p. 3) Therefore, the validity of the information provided in the 1997 Uster Statistics is confined to the period of time covered by the data, although it can usually serve as a quality guide over an extended period of 5 years or more. The yarn quality data refer to ecru yarns. In the worsted industry, top dyeing is common to produce coloured yarns. In such case, the Uster Statistics should be used with caution.

Yarnspec (for worsted yarns) Yarnspec is a computer program developed by Scientists at CSIRO Textile and Fibre Technology in Geelong. Since the work was funded by Australian wool growers, the program has been specifically designed for the prediction of properties of worsted yarns and the performance of worsted spinning, based on the properties of worsted tops and the spinning conditions. The predicted results are what a worsted spinner can expect in terms of spinning performance and yarn quality if the operation follows best commercial practice. In other

28

words, Yarnspec can be used to benchmark the performance of worsted spinners. For single worsted yarns, the program requires the following details as the input: (a) Wool properties (from tops) Fibre diameter (micron) and diameter CV Hauteur length (mm), CV of Hauteur and Fibre bundle tenacity (cN/tex) (b) Processing details (spinning) Spinning draft Spindle speed (rpm) Ring size (mm) Traveller number (c) Yarn details Yarn count Yarn twist Dyed or undyed

The predicted outcome includes the following details: Yarn evenness (I, CV%, U%) Yarn Imperfections (Thin places/km, thick places/km, and neps/km) Yarn tenacity and breaking elongation% Spinning ends-down per 1,000 spindle hours For a worsted spinner, Yarnspec is a step ahead of Uster Statistics for performance benchmarking, because it takes into consideration of the fibre properties used in spinning the yarn. In addition, it provides information on yarn strength as well as on the critical spinning performance in terms of ends-down per 1,000 spindle hours. Yarnspec can also be used to predict the properties of two folded yarns. An example of the Yarnspec print-out is given in figure 2.12. Fig. 2.12: Yarnspec print-out (Lamb and Yang 1996) The reading material "choosing the right top for spinning" by Lamb and Yang gives more details on yarn performance prediction. Review questions 1. An ideal sliver of 70 mm mean fibre length is roller drafted with a draft of 10 under the following three conditions:

29

(a) Perfect roller drafting (b) Presence of a large number of uncontrolled short fibres (c) An eccentric back drafting roller with a diameter of 3 cm. Explain how drafting under each condition will affect the evenness of the drafted sliver, and sketch and label the spectrogram for each drafting condition. 2. A 50 tex worsted yarn of 100% wool is measured for its evenness on the Uster evenness tester. If the CV of this yarn is 15%, how good is this yarn in relation to world production of similar yarns? References Bona, M. 1994, Textile Quality, Texilia, Italy. Furter, R. 1982, Evenness Testing in Yarn Production: Part 1, The Textile Institute, Manchester. Lamb, P.R. and Yang, S. 1996, Choosing the Right Top for Spinning, TopTech'96, CSIRO, Geelong. Martindale, J.G. 1945, A new method of measuring the irregularity of yarns with some observations on the origin of irregularities in worsted slivers and yarns, Journal of the Textile Institute, 36, T35-47. Uster News Bulletin No 35, 1988, The Third generation of Evenness Testers, Zellweger Uster AG, Switzerland. Uster Spectrograph, PE404, Zellweger Uster AG, Switerland. Uster Statistics, 1997, Zellweger Uster AG, Switzerland.

30