EFFECT OF WEFT CONSTRUCTION FACTORS ON WOVEN FABRICS DESIGN M.M.

AMER
Dr. prof . Textile Design Faculty of Applied Arts. Helwan University - Cairo - Egypt

ABSTRACT This paper includes firstly a theoretical study of the combined effect of dimensionless fabrics construction factors such as thread diameter, thread, spacing, thread displacement from fabric center, degree of thread flattening and float ratio on crimp interchange between warp and weft threads. The obtained relations determines the mathematical relations between number of weft, warp per inch and fabrics cover factors, add mathematical relations between Fabric structure and fabrics cover factors The study included secondly an experimental work follow up: sample, type of weaving machine sulzer PU projectile, number of heald Produce 4 shafts 4, with use the same warp specification .we divided the sample two section . Part (1). Plain weave 1/1. Part (2). Satin weave 4. With change the specification weft at which change counts and colors add change arrangements the picks to have a new various functional and aesthetically value to do the link between mathematics and physical and aesthetic properties design The results showed a very good encouraging agreement between experimental and theoretical results
INTODUCTION

In a piece of woven fabric which has been allowed to relax, and which is not under the influence of external forces ,the will be a certain balance between the warp and weft crimp . If the cloth is approximately square (I.e n1=n2 and N1=N2), the warp and weft crimps.(4) Although we assume no external forces to be acting on the fabric, there will be internal forces within and between the yarns unparticular, the end and picks will exert pressure on each other at the intersection, as indicated by the small arrows (1). There are at least two ways of approaching such a classification, the simplest is in terms of warp and weft cover factors. (a)Approximately square cloths, in which the warp and weft counts, the ends (a) picks per inch, and therefore the warp and weft cover factors are approximately equal , so that warp and weft are equally prominent , or nearly so , on both sides of the cloth . The crimps are also usually approximately equal. This group includes cloths having a very wide range of weights and textures. (b) Warp faced cloths in which the weft cover factor substantially exceeds that of the weft .The variety of weights and textures is fairly wide, but less than that encountered (a)

*corresponding author: M.M.Amer Address: Faculty of Applied Arts, Helwan University , Cairo , Egypt E-mail address: mohamed_mitwally@yahoo.com dr.mmitwally@yahoo.com

(c) Weft faced cloths in which the weft cover factor substantially exceeds that of the weft. The weft crimp is greater than that of the warp , and the weft is usually coarser and softer spun . The variety in this group is limited.(4,6,7) Another method of classification, more logical in some respects, distinguishes between balanced and unbalanced structures: (1) Balanced cloths in which the warp and weft counts are similar, and likewise the ends and picks per inch. In other words, these are square cloths. as defined in (a) above (2) Unbalanced cloths include all those, which do not conform to the requirements of (1). They are grouped under three headings: (a) The ends and picks per inch are similar (i.e. square sett ) , but the warp and weft counts are different , so the warp and weft cover factors are also different (b) The warp and weft counts are similar, but the ends and picks per inch are different, so again the warp and weft cover factors are different. (c) The ends and picks per inch are different and so are the warp and weft counts. The warp and weft cover factors will usually be different, but in a special case they may be similar It is necessary to note that the terin balanced is sometimes used in a different sense. We might, for instance construct a cloth as 36s * 16s cotton; 78 * 52. In this case. K1 = 78 / 36 = 13, K2 = 52 / 16 = 13 The warp and weft cover factors are the same , so the cloth is balanced according to the preceding interpretation . In a strictly square plain cloth n1= n2 , N1 = N2 , and c1 = c2 . In such cloth , the sections through the warp and weft are identical(2). (4,6,7) We are designing fabrics very important to describe and illustrate the difference between functional and aesthetic and analyses the role of design in meeting the functional and aesthetic requirements of fabrics products add evaluate a range of fabric items to determine appropriate design features. (8,9,10) Experimental work Produce 4 sample ,type of weaving machine sulzer PU projectile, number of heald shafts 4 ,with use the same warp specification .we divided the sample two section . Part (1). Plain weave 1/1 . Part (2). Satin weave 4. With change the specification weft at which change counts and colors add change arrangements the picks to have a new various functional and aesthetically value to do the link between mathematics and physical and aesthetic properties design fabric. The experiments done follow up: Specification the yarn sample 2-1 We had been used count 20/1 s cotton open end as a warp and weft. test result level 25% as the follow up: Table 1: the result of the count 20/1 s cotton open end PROPERTY AVERGE COUNT C.V % TOLERANCE COUNT% TEST RESULT USTER LEVEL 25% 19.7 2.1 1.5 USTER LEVEL 25% 1.1

TURNS/INCH TURNS/INCH C.V% TWIST FACTOR 6.25 ELONGATION 7 7 TENSILE STR .GM 309 TENSILE STR .GM 11.6 7.6 C.V% R . K . M. 10.3 13.2 REGULARITY(1000) 15.7 14 MT C.V % THIN PLACES 17 5 THICK PLACES 106 45 NEPS 41 15 APPERANCE INDEX And we had been the count 40/1 cotton Giza 85 combed yearn as a weft only. Test result level 5% as the follow up : Table 2: the result of the count 40/1 cotton Giza 85 combed yearn PROPERTY AVERGE COUNT C.V% TOLERANCE COUNT% TURNS/INCH TURNS/INCH C.V% TWIST FACTOR ELONGATION TENSILE STR .GM TENSILE STR .GM C.V% R . K . M. REGULARITY(1000) MT C.V% THIN PLACES THICK PLACES NEPS APPERANCE INDEX TEST RESULT USTER LEVEL 25% 40.9 2.1 2.3 28 6.2 4.4 5.8 241 8.6 16.7 14.1 3 91 212 6.1 USTER LEVEL 25% 1.2

2.8 6.4 6.4 23 45.8 9 200 300 4.2

2-2 Specification fabric:

2-2-1 SECTION (1): Sample -1- 2-2-1-1 20s * 30s (20s+40s) / 48 * 64 Structure: plain weave 1/1 Picks: one 40s : one 20s Picks; two 40s : two 20s

2-2-1-2 Sample -220s * 30s (20s+40s) / 48 * 64. Structure : plain weave 1/1 picks ; two 40s : two 20s k1(WARP) = T/ N = 48/ 20 =10.74 K2(WEFT) = T/ N = 64/ (40+20) = 11.68 COVER FACTORE = K1 +K2 = 10.74 + 11.68 = 22.42 K1((WARP) = 28 N R / R + I = 28 * 4.47 * 2 / 2+1 = 83 NUMBER PICKS PER INCH = 28 N R / R + I = 28 *5.48 * 2/3 = 102 NUMBER THREAD PER SQURE INCH = 83 + 102 =185 ACTUAL THERDS OF SAMLE SECTION (1) = 112 ACTUAL PERCINTAGE % = 112/185 = 60% M = Ni / Nr = 2/2 = 1 Ni =2 & Nr =2

SECTION (2)
2-2-2-1 Sample -32-2-2-2 sample -4The same specification section (1) with changed of fabric structure to become stain 4 K1 = 28 * n * 4 / 2+2 = 28 * 4.47 * 4 / 4 = 125 K2 = 28 * n * 4 / 2+2 = 28 * 5.48 * 4 / 4 = 15 NUMBER THREAD PER SQURE INCH = k1 + k2 = 125 + 153 = 278 ACTUAL THERDS OF SAMLE SECTION (1) = 112 ACTUAL PERCINTAGE % = 112/278 = 40% M = Ni / Nr = 2/4 = 0.5 Ni =2 & Nr = 4

Sample-1- 2-2-1-1 Scale 1 : 20

2-2-1-2 Sample -2scale 1 : 15

The interlacing diagram weft 20/1 scale 1:15

The interlacing diagram weft 40/1 scale 1:15

Fig 1:the diagram one repeat of the plain samples construction

2-2-2-1 Sample -3scale 1 : 10

2-2-2-2 sample -4scale 1 : 10

The interlacing diagram weft 20/1 scale 1:15

The interlacing diagram weft 40/1 scale 1:15

Fig 1: the diagram one repeat of the satin samples construction 2-2-1-1 Sample -1-

Pick 20/1 Grey : pick 40/1 blue

Pick 20/1 red : pick 40/1 blue

Pick 20/1 Grey : pick 40/1 move -1-

Pick 20/1 yellow : pick 40/1 D yellow

Fig 2: some pattern 2-2-1-1 Sample

2-2-1-2 Sample -2-

2 pick 20/1 yellow : 2 pick 40/1 D yellow

2 pick 20/1 Grey : 2 pick 40/1 blue

2 pick 20/1 Grey : 2 pick 40/1 move -2-

Fig 3: some pattern 2-2-1-2 Sample 2-2-2-1 Sample -32-2-2-2 sample -4-

Pick 20/1 Grey : Pick 20/1 yellow : 2 pick 20/1 yellow 2 pick 20/1 Grey : pick 40/1 move pick 40/1 D yellow 2 pick 40/1 yellow 2 pick 40/1 blue Sample -3sample -4Fig 4: some pattern 2-2-2-1 Sample -32-2-2-2 sample -4-

TESTS Given below are the several tests , which were carried out in order to evaluate the produced fabrics: *-Fabric tensile strength was carried out according to the ASTM-D(3) *-Fabric elongation %was carried out according to the ASTM-D(3) *-Air permeability was carried out according to the B.S.2925: 88S(5) *-Fabric stiffness was carried out according to the ASTM-D1388(2) *-fabrics weight was carried out according to the ASTM-D 3776-79 standard test method for weight(1)

RESULTS & DISCUSSION

Results of experimental examination on the produced samples are presented in the following table and diagrams. Results were statically analyzed for data listed. Table 3: summarizes the results of the tests applied to all samples used in this research
SAMPLES NUMBER TENSILE STRENGTH K/G WA WEF RP T 32 37 28 35 28 34 31 35
relation SAMLE 1 , 2

ELONGATION % WARP 6 11 10 10
TENSILE STRENGT H K/G WEFT

AIR PERMEABILITY CM3 / CM 2 / S

STIFFNESS WAR P 54 53 57 50
S A M P L E

WEIGH T G/M2

WEFT 11 10 6 5

AVG 135 136 221 233

C.V% 5 5.4 2.1 6.6

1 2 3 4

WEF T 61 56 49 44
3 ,4

130 127 129 126

T E N S IL E S T R E N G T H K /G W E F T T E N S IL E S T R E N G T H K /G W A R P L in e a r (T E N S IL E S T R E N G T H K /G W E F T ) L in e a r (T E N S IL E S T R E N G T H K /G W A R P )

R E L A T IO N

45 40
TENSILE STRENGTH

4 5 4 0 3 5
TENSILE STRENGTH

y R
2

= =

9 .6 8 x -7 5 .8 8

35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 1
SAMPLE 1 PLAIN WEAVE

TENSILE STRENGT H K/G WARP Linear (TENSILE STRENGT H K/G WEFT) Linear (TENSILE STRENGT H K/G WARP)

y R
2

3 0 2 5 2 0 1 5 1 0 5 0

= 8 .3 2 x = -2 .2 0 8 9

2
S T A IN

3
S A M L P E

y= R
2

21.4 151.1

y= R
2

17.6 =31.4

=-

Fig 5:the tensile strength comparison between samples NO 1 and NO 2

RELATION SAMLPE 1 , 2

Fig 6:the tensile strength comparison between samples NO 3 and NO 4

RELATION SAMPLE 3 ,4

14

ELONGA TION % WEFT ELONGA TION % WARP Linear (ELONG ATION % WEFT) Linear (ELONG ATION % WARP)

12

ELONGATI ON % WEFT

12
10 ELONGATI ON % WARP 8
ELONGATION%

10

8
ELONGATION%

Linear (ELONGATI ON % WEFT) Linear (ELONGATI ON % WARP)

2
2

y= R
2

1.52 =5.48

0 1
PLAIN SAMPLE

2
1 , 2

y= R 0
2

2.8 = #N/A

y= R
2

6. 2 =56 .6

x R

y=
2

5. 6 0. 984

2
SATIN SAMLE

3
3,4

Fig 7:the elongation % comparison between samples NO 1 and NO 2

relation sample 1 ,2

Fig 8:the elongation %comparison between samples NO 3 and NO 4

relation sample 3 ,4
AIRPERMITY CM^/ CM^/S C.V% AIRPERMITY CM^/ CM^/S AVG Linear (AIRPERMITY CM^/ CM^/S C.V%) Linear (AIRPERMITY

180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 R

y = 81.4 x 2 = - 7181.4

AIRPERMI TY CM^/ CM^/S C.V%

300
airpermity
AIRPERMI TY CM^/ CM^/S AVG Linear (AIRPERM ITY CM^/ CM^/S AVG) Linear (AIRPERM ITY CM^/

y = 1.308x R 2 = 0.4866 y = 63.8x R 2 = -18.014 1 2 3 4

aorpermity

200 100 0
satin sample 3,4

y= R 1
plain sample
2

3.16 x = - 51.9 2
1 ,2

Fig 9:the air permeability comparison

Fig 10:the air permeability comparison

between samples NO 1 and NO 2

relation sample 1 ,2 STAFNES WEFT STAFNES WARP Linear (STAFNES WEFT) Linear (STAFNES WARP)

between samples NO 3 and NO 4

relation samle 3 ,4 80 stafnes 60 40 20 0 1 2 3 4 y = 14.84x satin sample 3 ,4 R2 = -8.9331 Linear (STAFNES WEFT) Linear (STAFNES WARP) y = 12.92x R2 = -12.107 STAFNES WEFT STAFNES WARP

80 60 40 20 0

y = 34.6x R2 = -68.696

stafnes

y = 32x R2 = -1209

plain sample 1 ,2

Fig 11:the stiffness comparison between samples NO 1 and NO 2

Chart Title 200 wight g/m^ 150 100 50 0 wight g/m^ WIGHT G/M^ Linear (WIGHT G/M^)

Fig 12:the stiffness comparison between samples NO 3 and NO 4

Chart Title
150 100 50 0

y = 35.64x R2 = -168.28

WIGHT G/M^ Linear (WIGHT G/M^)

4

plain sample 1 ,2

y = 76.8x R2 = -785.18

2 3 satin sample 3 ,4

Fig 13:the weight g/m2 comparison between samples NO 1 and NO 2

relation sample 1 , 3 tensile strength k/g 60 40 20 0 1 2 3 Linear (WEFT) Linear (WARP)

Fig 14:the weight g/m2 comparison between samples NO 3 and NO 4

relation sample2 ,4 tensile strength k/g

y = 13.9x R2 = -130.76

WEFT

60 40 20 0 1 2

y = 10.5x R2 = #N/A

WEFT

WARP

WARP 3 4 Linear (WEFT) Linear (WARP)

y = 11.6x plain sample 1 satin sample 3 R2 = -56.8

plain sample2 satin sample4 y = 9x R2 = -26.778

Fig 15:the tensile strength comparison between samples NO 1 and NO 3

eelation sample 12 10 elongation % 8 6 4 2 0 1 plain sample 2 1 satin 3 3 y = 3.6 x R 2 = 0.2 y = 2.9 x R 2 = - 4.832 1 ,3 ELONGATION % WEFT

Fig 16:the tensile strength comparison between samples NO 2 and NO 4

relation sample2 ,4 15 elongation% y = 2x R2 = -2.6 WEFT WARP Linear (WEFT) Linear (WARP)

ELONGATION % WARP Linear (ELONGATION % WEFT) Linear (ELONGATION % WARP)

10 5 0

1 2 3 4 y = 3.1x plain sample2 sayin sample4 R2 = -56.6

Fig 17:the elongation % comparison between samples NO 1 and NO 2

Fig 18:theelongation % comparison samples NO 2 and NO 4

relation 1 , 3 300 250 airpermity 200 150 100 50 0 y = 1.13 x R 2 = - 2.9574 1 2 3 plain sample 1 satin sample 3 y = 79.8 x R 2 = 0.0845

AIRPERMITY CM^/ CM^/S C.V%

relation sample ,4 2 300 airpermity y = 60.2 x R2 = 0.9353

AIRPERMIT Y CM^/ CM^/S C.V%

AIRPERMITY CM^/ CM^/S AVG Linear (AIRPERMITY CM^/ CM^/S AVG) Linear (AIRPERMITY CM^/ CM^/S C.V%)

200 100 0 1 2 3 4

AIRPERMIT Y CM^/ CM^/S AVG

y = 1.86 x R2 = -3.9

plain2 satin4

Linear (AIRPERMIT Y CM^/

Fig 19:the air permeability comparison between samples NO 1 and NO 2

y = 20.8x R2 = -23.939 75 stafnes 50 25 0 1 2 3 y = 22.5x plain sample satin sample 1 3 R2 = -244 relation sample , 3 1 STAFNES WEFT STAFNES WARP Linear (STAFNES WEFT) Linear (STAFNES WARP)

Fig 20:the air permeability comparison between samples NO 2 and NO 4

y = 14.4x R2 = -11.844 80 stafnes 60 40 20 0 1 2 3 4 y = 15.3x plain sample 2 satin sample 4 R2 = -138.38 Linear (STAFNES WEFT) Linear (STAFNES WARP) relation sample 2 ,4 STAFNES WEFT STAFNES WARP

Fig 21:the stiffness comparison between samples NO 1 and NO 3

WEIGHT G/M^ SAMPLE,3 1 200 150 100 50 0 1
WEIGHT G/ M WEIGHT G/M

Fig 22:the stiffness comparison between samples NO 2 and NO 4

WEIGHT G/M^ SAMPLE,4 2 y = 38.1x R2 = #N/A

y = 51.7x R2 = -13623 WEIGHT G/M^ Linear (WEIGHT G/M^)

200 150 100 50 0 1

WEIGHT G/M^ Linear (WEIGHT G/M^)

PLAIN SAMPLE SATIN 1 SAMPLE3

PLAIN SAMPLE SATIN 1 SAMPLE4

Fig 23:the weight g/m2 comparison between samples NO 1 and NO 3

Fig 24:the weight g/m2 comparison between samples NO 2 and NO 4

CONCLUSION *-We can obtain the many of pattern through are changing the varieties of design. as arranging the weft diameters and arranging it . And change the structure fabric as plain weave 1/1 and satin4. *- Change the color weft give us many different pattern . *- Assurance the relatives the aesthetically and functional value. *-The research give us overview, how we can using the diameter weft and structure fabric to obtained a variety aesthetic and function value *- the research give us overview the comparison between the physical properties of the elements design which used in the research. *- describe and illustrate the difference between functional and aesthetic *- analyse the role of design in meeting the functional and aesthetic requirements of textile products. (8,9,10) *- evaluate a range of textile items to determine appropriate design features. (8,9,10)

Reference 1- ASTM-D 3376- 1979 Standard test method for weight (Mass per unit area) of textile materials 2-ASTM-D1388- Standard method of test for fabrics stiffness 3- ASTM-D 4595 Standard test method for measuring fabrics tensile strength and elongation. 4-A. T. C. ROBINSON, and R. MARKES, F.T.I; "Woven cloth construction" the textile institute, Manchester, 1973. 5-B.S 5636- 1978 British standard method of test for the determination of the Permeability of fabrics to air 6- El Deeb, A., and Shaheen, A.; Theoretical and experimental studies for thread floating in the fabric Reprinted From Mansoura Engineering Journal (MEJ) Faculty of Engineering , El Mansoura University, Vol. . 15, No. 2. December 1990. 7- J . E . BOOTH , B.SC. Tech., F.T.I., A.M.C.S.; Textile Mathematics VOL I- , -2, -3- the textile institute , Manchester , 1977. 8-Jacquie Wilson ;Handbook of Textile Design , Principles , Processes and Practice " the textile institute , woodhead publishing , LTD., 2001 9-Marypaul Yates;A Handbook for Designer" W.W. Norton &Company, Revised Edition, 1996 10-William Watson , F.T.I.; "Advanced Textile Design " Longmans 3 rd Edition, 2002