Textile Structure
how cloth is put together
Concept

Cover factor — where it appears

Threads per unit width times their diameter: the fraction of a surface one system of threads hides, and the trade's scale for how closely a cloth is set. It is a ratio of two lengths, so wetting a cloth multiplies it by exactly the swelling ratio and leaves every comparison between cloths untouched.

Named by 35 essays across 8 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

The same thread count, twice. Two cloths with identical thread counts and different yarn. The count is the same number in both; the fraction of the surface the threads actually occupy is not, and that fraction is what thread count is usually taken to mean.

Thread count is not quality

It counts threads. It says nothing about how much of the cloth they cover, it can be inflated by counting plies, and it ranks fabrics in nearly the wrong order. The quantity it is mistaken for is cover factor, and that one is computable.

setting · Cover The hole between four threads. Three millimetres of a woven filter cloth in plan, with one clear opening dimensioned and a grain of the soil it must retain drawn at the same scale. Every hole in the repeat is this size — a woven cloth's pore distribution is a single value, which is why it is specified by an opening size while a nonwoven needs a curve.

The hole between four threads

A woven cloth's holes are all the same size. That is not an approximation — it is what a repeat means — and it is the whole reason a woven filter is specified by one number while a nonwoven needs a curve. The number is the spacing less the diameter, which this site has been computing since its first questions about setting.

applied · Cover Every cloth at 150 grams. The counts and setts that all weigh 150 g/m² at a crimp of 7 per cent and a balance of 1. Hollow marks are past the jam — arithmetic rather than cloth. Among the 10 that can be woven the cover factor runs from 0.28 to 0.77, a factor of 2.77, and every one of them is the fabric the specification asked for.

What a fabric weighs

Every fabric is sold by its weight in grams per square metre, and the number is a sum of four products in which no term appears alone. One equation, four unknowns: a hundred and fifty grams describes an open coarse cloth and a close fine one, and the cover factors differ by a factor of nearly three.

setting · Weight A cotton fibre dry and wet. One cotton fibre in its dry state and saturated with water, both drawn at the same scale in both directions. It is 20% wider and 1.2% longer, so its cross-sectional area rises by 44% if the section stays similar to itself. The length difference is drawn and is nearly invisible, which is the point: a swelling that were the same in both directions would make a cloth bigger and change nothing about its structure, and this one changes every ratio of a diameter to a spacing in the cloth. What the drawing cannot show is the section: a cotton fibre is not a cylinder, and the directly measured area swelling of 40% to 42% does not agree with the square of the width change, which is a fact about the fibre.

What water does to a thread

A cotton fibre in water is a fifth wider and a hundredth longer. If it grew equally in both directions a wet cloth would simply be a bigger cloth and nothing structural would follow; because it does not, every ratio of a diameter to a spacing in a cloth moves, and they all move the same way.

cloth · Water Mock leno, 3 threads to a bundle. Threads that interlace identically have no weft passing between them, so nothing holds them apart and they lie touching. The reed still sets the average spacing, so the space they leave collects at the bundle's edge — a hole 0.60 by 0.60 mm, made without one thread crossing another. Drawn to scale on a fixed 9 mm square of cloth at 20 threads per centimetre and a 0.3 mm yarn.

A hole with nothing crossing

A real leno holds its holes open by crossing one thread over another, which is a topological arrangement and cannot come undone. A mock leno makes the same holes by grouping threads that nothing separates, and everything about it is friction.

weaves · Texture weaves A loop's cell, dry and wetted. One stitch of a 20 tex cotton jersey at a 3.50 mm loop, drawn inside the rectangle of one wale by one course that its own dimensions give. The thread is drawn at its own width, and it already fills 1.129 of the cell dry — more than the whole of it, which is what an opaque jersey looks like from above. Wetting takes it to 1.355. So the reason a knit does not build a swelling pressure is not that it has room; it is that its dimensions are a loop length times a constant with no yarn diameter in them, so there is no closure condition to fail. What the drawing cannot show is the third dimension: the legs lie over one another rather than overlapping in the plane, which is exactly why an occupancy above one is possible.

A loop has no closure condition

A woven cloth can run out of room: its two systems must supply its whole thickness between them, and past a certain swelling they cannot. A knit has no such equation, so no critical swelling and no pressure. The obvious explanation — that a knit is open and has somewhere to put the swelling — is false, and the arithmetic refuses it.

knits · Knit The interchange budget against cover, at three yarn counts. The extension a plain cloth can reach with no thread stretching, plotted against its warp cover factor, for 10, 20, 40 tex yarn. The three curves coincide, because every length in Peirce's geometry is a multiple of the yarn diameter and a spacing measured in diameters is a cover factor — so the count divides out exactly and the maximum is at 0.407782 for all of them, at a budget of 7.2857%. That the curve has a maximum at all is the finding: crimp is what a cloth spends, so more of it should be better, and past this cover the weft has nowhere to put what the warp gives up. What the plot cannot show is the balance, which moves the height of the maximum a long way and its position hardly at all.

The most a cloth can give back

The extension a cloth can find without stretching a thread comes from crimp, so setting a cloth closer ought to give it more. It does, up to a point, and then takes it away again — and the point is a cover factor of 0.4078 at a budget of 7.2857 per cent, identical to six figures for every yarn count from five tex to a hundred.

cloth · Memory The channel through a muslin in plain. A cut across a muslin woven plain, at 373 µm per hundred pixels, showing one hole between two warp ends. The ends sit at the same level here, so the clear width between them is 250 µm at the waist against 250 µm straight through. The profile on the right is that width at every height in the 334 µm the threads occupy: the passage is an hourglass, its narrowest section is 250 µm across, and the band that every level contains — what a straight line of sight can use — is 250 µm. The two differ by 0.0 per cent, and the difference is the weave and nothing else.

A hole is a channel, not an opening

Every hole drawn so far has been drawn from above, and the sentence underneath every one of them says the same thing: the hole between four threads is the spacing less the diameter, and every hole is the same size. That is a picture of a cloth's shadow. A cloth has a thickness, so its hole has a length, and the narrowest place along it is not the place a person looking through can see.

cloth · Openings A muslin's warp, drawn at the diameters it actually has. 18 ends of a muslin's warp yarn, drawn at a seeded sample of their own diameters — mean 167 µm, coefficient of variation 15% — and spaced exactly, because the reed does not vary. The threads look even enough. The gaps do not: the widest here is 280 µm and the narrowest 229 µm, against a mean of 250 µm, and their coefficient of variation is 7% — larger than the yarn's, by the ratio of the diameter to the gap. That amplification is the whole reason a close cloth's holes are so much less uniform than its threads, and it gets worse as the cloth is set closer, because the gap in the denominator is the thing being shrunk.

A cloth is a population, not a thread

Every number in this collection was computed from a diameter, and no yarn has one. Putting the distribution back changes some answers by nothing at all, some by a few per cent, and some by a factor — and which of the three happens is decided by one derivative.

cloth · Variation A crossing before and after it is pressed. One warp end of a sheeting riding over three picks, drawn twice to the same scale. Unpressed, both sections are circles and the cloth is 0.388 mm thick. At 0.42 N per crossing the sections flatten to aspect ratios of 1.79 and 1.88, the cloth thins to 0.260 mm, and the warp runs flat for 0.113 mm over each pick before it begins to curve. What the drawing cannot show is why the cloth does not do this by itself: flattening shrinks the arc radius as well as the crimp height, so it costs bending energy, and a relaxed cloth keeps its threads round.

Peirce and Kemp are one cloth at two moments

This site has run two thread sections side by side since the setting field was built — a circle and a flattened racetrack — and said honestly that they disagree and that the disagreement is the point. They are not rival descriptions of the same fabric. They are descriptions of the same fabric before and after something pressed it, and the difference between them is a pressure that can now be named.

setting · Sett Two layers of one cloth, against how they happen to lie. Two identical muslins laid over one another and slid across each other by one thread spacing. In register the pair passes 37.9 per cent — as much as one cloth, because every hole is over a hole — and it falls linearly to 12.5 per cent before rising again at the next thread. The rule everybody uses is that two layers pass the product of their open areas, which is 14.3 per cent. That number is the average of this curve over all offsets, exactly — an identity, not a fit — and it is the answer at two points on it and nowhere else. Nothing about a real pair of layers is at its average, and the openness varying from place to place across a folded cloth is what a moiré is.

Two layers are the product on average and nowhere

Everybody knows what two layers of a cloth pass: the product of their open areas. That figure is exactly right — it is the mean of the true answer over every way the two layers can lie — and it is the answer at two registrations out of a continuum. In register a doubled cloth is as open as a single one; half a thread out it can be shut completely. The variation across a folded curtain is what a moiré is.

pattern · Opacity From a calender's line load to a force at one crossing. A sheeting through a nip loaded at 30 N per millimetre of bowl width, with the cloth in contact over 5.0 mm. The pressure is the first divided by the second, 6.00 N/mm², and the force at one crossing is that pressure times the area a crossing owns — the product of the two thread spacings, 0.1374 mm². So the crossing carries 0.824 N, the sections flatten to 2.42 and 2.63, and the cloth thins from 0.388 mm to 0.218 mm. What the drawing cannot show is that two cloths through the same nip are not given the same treatment: the area a crossing owns varies fivefold across this site's table, and it is a factor in the force.

A calender spends the compression for good

Calendering was described on this site as moving a cloth from one thread-section model to another, which was right and had no number in it because the amount of the move was a free parameter. It is a pressure now — and the same nip setting turns out to give two cloths quite different treatments, because the force at a crossing is the pressure times the area a crossing owns.

finishing · Lustre finish How open a batiste is, against where the light is. One minus the cover is a cloth's openness to a light directly behind it, and for this batiste it is 40.1 per cent. Move off the normal and a line of sight has to clear the hole at the top of the cloth and the same hole one thickness below, so what it can use falls as t·tan α is taken off each side — reaching nothing at 39.0° across the ends. Averaged over the whole sky with Lambert's cosine weighting, the cloth is 6.42 per cent open — 6.3 times less than the covering rule says, and the whole of the difference is the thickness. One minus the cover is the openness of a cloth with no thickness, and no cloth has none.

Opacity is not cover

The covering rule counts a thread as a bar that stops everything, and a single fine cotton thread held to a window plainly does not. What a cloth transmits is the open area plus whatever comes through the threads, so the covered fraction is a lever rather than a barrier — and the lever is longest exactly where the rule says the cloth is most closed. Nothing here computes a thread's transmittance, and saying why is the useful half.

pattern · Opacity The crimp ratios a dense shirting can have. Poplins in 15 tex warp and 20 tex weft at 22 picks, from 32 ends per centimetre to 52. Each bar is the interval of warp-to-weft crimp ratios the construction admits at all: the warp must supply at least the thickness the weft cannot reach, and at most what it can reach itself. The rule at one is this site's standing default. It sits inside the interval up to 44.18 ends per centimetre and outside it beyond — so for a dense shirting an equal division of the crimp is not merely the wrong assumption but a geometric impossibility. The 44-end poplin this site's own cloth table called impossible for a long time sits a fifth of an end below that limit, which is why the solver failed on it: its feasible interval was real and narrow, and a bisection on the whole range walked away from it.

The cloth that was called impossible

This site's own table of fabrics carries a note saying a real 44-end poplin has no solution in its geometry at all, and that the poplin row was therefore set at 32 ends. The cloth solves. What had no solution was the search — a bisection that treated a state it could not reach as evidence of having gone too far, and walked away from the answer every time.

setting · Crimp The two diameters of a 20 tex yarn. The pressure inside a twisted yarn is zero at its surface, so the outermost fibres are held by nothing but their own buried ends and some of them stand off as loops and ends. A yarn therefore has two diameters: a mass diameter of 167.1 µm, which is a volume divided by a length and is the one every other calculation on this site uses, and a contact diameter of 217.1 µm, which is what a neighbouring thread, a finger or an air stream meets. The gap is a hair layer of 25.0 µm on each side and it is measured, not computed — nothing here predicts hairiness. What is computed is the consequence, and it is 29.9% of the diameter every cover factor on this site was built from.

The hairs are what touch

The pressure inside a twisted yarn falls to exactly zero at its surface, so the outermost fibres are held by nothing and some of them stand off. A yarn therefore has two diameters — the one its mass gives and the one a neighbour meets — and only the first is in the arithmetic.

cloth · Hairiness What holds a pick in. The holding force on one weft, as a multiple of the tension applied to its free end. For a plain weave it is the capstan on twice the weave angle, which Peirce's geometry gives at each sett and which falls towards nothing as the cloth opens out. For a leno it is the capstan on a half-turn, which the sett does not enter at all.

A leno's hole cannot drift

A filter cloth is rated by its largest hole, and the largest hole grows one micrometre for every micrometre an end moves sideways. What holds an end in place in an ordinary weave is friction at its crossings, and that friction falls smoothly to nothing as a cloth opens — with no threshold to warn anybody. A leno's crossing does not: its ends are wrapped through half a turn by construction, so the grip has no sett in it, and at an open cloth it holds eighteen times what a plain weave manages.

fancy · Leno Cover, dry and wetted. Warp cover for every cloth in the table when its threads swell by 20% and its spacings are held, with the dry value and the sett at which the swollen threads touch beside each bar. Cover is a diameter over a spacing and only the diameter moves, so every cover is multiplied by exactly 1.20 and every jamming sett divided by it — an identity rather than a result, and the one statement in this ladder a reader can check by hand. No cloth here reaches a cover of one, so none of them jams laterally on wetting; the closest is the sheeting at 0.628. What the bars cannot show is the through-thickness condition, which the sheeting fails at a swelling of half this one.

A wet cloth is set closer than it was woven

Cover is a diameter over a spacing. Wetting moves the diameter and does not move the spacing, so every cover factor on this site is multiplied by exactly the swelling ratio and every jamming sett divided by it — which is an identity, and the one statement in this ladder a reader can check by hand.

setting · Sett Shrinkage from wetting, cloth by cloth. The change in each cloth's relaxed construction when its threads swell by 20% across and 1.2% along. Both states are least-energy states of their own constant-thread-length locus, which is the only comparison the locus admits: its minimum is a state at its own sett, so it may be compared with another minimum and not with a quoted construction. Positive is smaller. Every cloth that has a wet state closes up except the cheesecloth, which opens by half a per cent because the fibre's extra hundredth of length outruns the extra crimp a thicker partner costs. What the bars cannot show is the three cloths that are missing, which have no wet state at all.

Wetting moves a cloth to another locus

A cloth's constant-thread-length locus is built at a fixed thickness. Swelling changes the thickness, so a wetted cloth is not somewhere else on its own locus — it is on a different one, and the distance between the two least-energy states is the shrinkage. Five of the eight cloths here have a wet state, and one of them gets bigger.

setting · Crimp What a muslin passes, against how closely it is set. A muslin's air permeability at 100 Pa as the sett is closed from 6.9 to 34.2 threads per centimetre, with the two paths separated. The channels between the threads carry 8285 mm/s at the open end and 1330 at the close one, and they go to zero when the cloth jams. The threads themselves carry 1.7 to 6.4 mm/s and never go to zero at all, because a thread is sixty per cent fibre whatever the sett is. Extended to a cloth with no channel left, that path is 8.1 mm/s — a floor set by the yarn rather than by the construction, and a specification asking for less has asked for a fabric that cannot be woven from this yarn at any sett.

A cloth stops having holes before it stops passing air

Close a woven cloth up and the channels between its threads shut. What passes through it does not go to zero, because a thread is sixty per cent fibre and forty per cent air and stays that way whatever is done to the construction. So a fabric's permeability has a floor, the floor belongs to the yarn rather than to the weaver, and no sett on any loom reaches it.

applied · Permeability Four ways of closing a muslin, and the floor under all of them. The same muslin at four states: as woven, calendered to 3:1, wetted so its fibres swell by 20 per cent, and with the channel between its threads gone altogether. Air permeability at 100 Pa falls from 3505 mm/s to 8.1 — a factor of 434 — and stops there. The last figure is not a cloth with no holes in it: it is a cloth whose only remaining path is through the threads, which are sixty per cent fibre whatever is done to the construction. That number is the floor, it is a property of the yarn, and no sett reaches it. Note that the two middle routes are not in a fixed order: a 3:1 calender closes more than this swelling and a 2:1 calender closes less, so which is the stronger depends on how far each is taken.

A windproof cloth is at its yarn's limit

Windproof is a threshold on air permeability, and it is the only fabric specification on this site that the construction cannot settle. No weavable sett of an ordinary shirting yarn gets within two hundred times of it, layering the cloth barely helps because the resistance is inertial rather than viscous, and the floor set by the yarn's own porosity lands on the same order as the threshold with a fivefold bracket around it.

applied · Permeability Where Poiseuille's rule starts being true of a cloth. Every account of a fabric's air permeability quotes the fourth power: flow down a channel goes as the fourth power of its width, so a small change of sett is a large change of flow. That is Poiseuille's result and it is about the viscous drop. A channel through a cloth is about as long as it is wide and the air in it is moving fast, so most of the pressure goes on giving that air its kinetic energy instead — and the inertial term does not depend on the hole's size at all. Plotted against cover, the viscous share of the drop runs from 1.0 per cent in an open muslin to 61.6 in a close one, passing half at a cover of 0.571. Quoting the fourth power alone below that is wrong by a factor rather than by a correction: at the open end it overstates the flow 98-fold.

The fourth power is a close cloth's rule

Every account of a fabric's air permeability quotes the same thing: flow down a channel goes as the fourth power of its width, so a small change of sett is a large change of flow. That is Poiseuille's result, it is about the viscous drop, and in an open cloth the viscous drop is two per cent of the pressure. The rule becomes true as the cloth closes, and where it starts being true is a number.

setting · Permeability A yarn's diameter is a contour, not a length. The fraction of the space beside a 20 tex cotton yarn that is occupied by hair, against height, grossed up from the modelled population by the measured split between the long and short populations. At the yarn's own surface it is 8.9% — the layer is almost entirely gap — and it falls away exponentially from there. Every instrument that reports a yarn diameter is picking a contour of this curve, and the contours are far apart: a threshold that needs half the space filled is never met at all, one that needs a twentieth is met at 355 µm, and a hair counter triggers out at 2353 µm. The earlier model gave the layer a single thickness of 25 µm, which is a fair description of where most of the material is and wrong about its extent by more than a decade. What the curve cannot say is which contour any particular instrument uses, which is a fact about the instrument.

A cloth is more opaque than it is closed

Opacity is not cover — this collection established that already and left the discrepancy attributed to the thickness of the threads. Part of it is not in the threads at all. A hair standing in a hole blocks light exactly as well as a thread does and costs nothing in air.

pattern · Opacity How open a muslin is, against where the light is. One minus the cover is a cloth's openness to a light directly behind it, and for this muslin it is 37.9 per cent. Move off the normal and a line of sight has to clear the hole at the top of the cloth and the same hole one thickness below, so what it can use falls as t·tan α is taken off each side — reaching nothing at 36.1° across the ends. Averaged over the whole sky with Lambert's cosine weighting, the cloth is 5.36 per cent open — 7.1 times less than the covering rule says, and the whole of the difference is the thickness. One minus the cover is the openness of a cloth with no thickness, and no cloth has none.

One minus the cover is a cloth with no thickness

The covering rule says a cloth's openness is one minus its cover factor, and this collection derived it and has used it ever since. It is the answer for a light directly behind the cloth. Move the light and a line of sight has to clear the hole at the top of the fabric and the same hole one thickness below, so the openness falls, and it reaches nothing at thirty-six degrees. Averaged over the whole sky a muslin is a seventh as open as the rule says.

setting · Cover The two diameters of a 20 tex yarn. The pressure inside a twisted yarn is zero at its surface, so the outermost fibres are held by nothing but their own buried ends and some of them stand off as loops and ends. A yarn therefore has two diameters: a mass diameter of 167.1 µm, which is a volume divided by a length and is the one every other calculation on this site uses, and a contact diameter of 217.1 µm, which is what a neighbouring thread, a finger or an air stream meets. The gap is a hair layer of 25.0 µm on each side and it is measured, not computed — nothing here predicts hairiness. What is computed is the consequence, and it is 29.9% of the diameter every cover factor on this site was built from.

Singeing is the cheapest change to a surface

Pass a cloth through a flame fast enough and it loses under one per cent of its mass. What it loses is the part of itself that was doing most of the touching, and lustre, friction, printability, pilling and measured cover all move at once.

finishing · Hairiness A yarn's diameter is a contour, not a length. The fraction of the space beside a 20 tex cotton yarn that is occupied by hair, against height, grossed up from the modelled population by the measured split between the long and short populations. At the yarn's own surface it is 8.9% — the layer is almost entirely gap — and it falls away exponentially from there. Every instrument that reports a yarn diameter is picking a contour of this curve, and the contours are far apart: a threshold that needs half the space filled is never met at all, one that needs a twentieth is met at 355 µm, and a hair counter triggers out at 2353 µm. The earlier model gave the layer a single thickness of 25 µm, which is a fair description of where most of the material is and wrong about its extent by more than a decade. What the curve cannot say is which contour any particular instrument uses, which is a fact about the instrument.

A yarn has a diameter for every instrument

Conservation of volume gives a yarn one diameter and every other route gives a different one. The disagreement is not experimental scatter: a yarn's outside is a coverage that falls away exponentially, and each instrument stops at whatever contour of it will trigger the instrument.

cloth · Hair layer What it takes to bury a cloth's crowns. The film needed to fill a fabric's surface to a stated level, for plain, 2/2 twill, satin 8 in sheeting, at a film density of 1.2 g/cm³. Burying the crowns entirely takes 187 g/m² on the plain, 186 g/m² on the 2/2 twill, 183 g/m² on the satin 8 — and the ordering is not the ordering of roughness. A weave with plateaux presents a wide flat top that a thin film covers, and a weave with points presents crowns with valleys between them that the film has to fill before it is continuous anywhere. Every gram spent filling a valley is a gram that is not bridging a hole, which is where a coated cloth fails.

A coating fills the crowns before it bridges the holes

A film does not sit on a cloth, it fills it — and the volume it has to supply to reach a level is the integral of one minus the bearing area. Burying an ordinary sheeting's crowns takes 185 grams a square metre, which is more than the cloth weighs, and the whole of the weave's influence is spent in the first ten of them.

finishing · Coating Folding improves the evenness and not the yarn. Two independent singles of 15% give a fold of 10.61%, because independent errors add in quadrature: an improvement of exactly √2. The floor falls by exactly √2 as well, from 9.93 per cent to 7.02, because the fibre count is 2 times what it was. So the index of irregularity is unchanged — 1.511 before and 1.511 after, equal to twelve figures, not merely close. Folding does not make a better yarn; it makes a bigger one, and every part of the improvement is the part the count was going to give anyway. What folding does buy is elsewhere: the torque, the surface, and where the grip comes from.

A two-fold yarn is not twice a single

Folding halves nothing. It improves a yarn's evenness by exactly √2 and lowers the floor that evenness is measured against by exactly √2, so the index of irregularity comes out identical — folding does not make a better yarn, it makes a bigger one.

setting · Ply One yarn, two packing factors. The same 20 tex cotton yarn — the same fibres, the same count, the same mass per metre — drawn at a packing factor of 0.45 and of 0.75. Its diameter is 192.9 µm in one and 149.5 µm in the other, a difference of 29.1%, because a diameter goes as the inverse square root of the packing. Every cover factor, every jammed sett and every hole in this collection went through that number, and the site's value of 0.6 was obtained by inverting a rule published for cotton yarns at one particular twist. Nothing here models how packing moves with twist; the figure is here to show the size of the thing that has been held constant.

The diameter was quoted at one twist

Every diameter in this collection came from a packing factor of 0.6, and that number was got by inverting a rule published for cotton yarns at one particular twist. Here is what moves if it is wrong by the width of the range real yarns occupy — and which single quantity does not move at all.

setting · Sett The sett sets the pitch of the relief and not its height. A 2/2 twill in sheeting set from 14 to 29 ends per centimetre. The spacing of the crowns falls from 714 µm to 345 µm — in exact proportion to the sett, because it is the sett — while the height the surface swings through moves from 381 µm to 381 µm, which is not at all. The reason is the closure condition: the two crimp heights must add to the sum of the two diameters whatever the spacing, so the amplitude of the surface is pinned by the yarn and only its wavelength is free. The third curve is the root-mean-square roughness measured off the sampled surface, which wanders by a few per cent because it depends on where the sample grid falls relative to the crowns — it is drawn to show that it has no trend, not to be read off. A closer sett therefore makes a finer-grained cloth and not a smoother one, and the two are confused in every description of fabric handle. At 32 ends per centimetre the geometry refuses altogether: the cloth is close enough that its crimp can no longer divide equally, which is the jam arriving as a loss of symmetry rather than as a loss of room.

The sett owns the pitch and the yarn owns the height

Set a cloth twice as close and its surface does not get smoother. The crowns come twice as often, because that is what a sett is, and they stand at very nearly the same height, because the closure condition pins the amplitude to the yarn — so a fine cloth is finer-grained rather than flatter, and the two are confused in every description of handle.

setting · Sett A loop is bent about as hard as its yarn allows. The tightest curvature anywhere on a relaxed loop, against the knitter's own tightness factor, in units of one over the yarn diameter — which is the curvature of a yarn wrapped hard round another of the same size, and the tightest bend any fabric asks for. Across the whole range a knitter can reach it stays between 0.73 and 1.27, crossing one at a tightness factor of about thirteen — which is where the trade's own usable band begins. Nothing arranged that. The only things imposed are the loop length, the yarn diameter and the two measured spacings, and the curvature is whatever the minimisation returns.

Two knits with one tightness factor are one knit

The loop model has exactly one dimensionless group in it — the yarn's diameter over the loop length — so two fabrics that share it have the same loop, to fifteen figures, whatever they are made of. That group is the knitter's own tightness factor, and it explains why an index quoted as empirical works as well as it does.

finishing · Knit geometry Seeing through a white voile, from the street and from the room. How much of a scene's contrast survives a white voile, whose open area is 49%, looked through from the street into the room and from the room out to the street, against how much brighter the street is than the room. The scene comes through the clear lines of sight and nothing else; everywhere else the viewer sees thread lit from the viewer's own side, which returns light with no image in it. On a bright day, a hundred times brighter outside, 0.5% of the room's contrast reaches the street and 65% of the street's reaches the room. At equal light both are 28% — the curves cross at a ratio of one whatever the cloth — and with the lamps on after dark the room is the side on show, at 63%. What the plot cannot show is the threads' own optics: their reflectance and transmittance are assumed values for a white sheer rather than measurements, and only the crossing point is independent of them.

A sheer hides whichever side is darker

A net curtain hides a room by day and shows it at night, and the cloth has nothing to do with which. What a viewer sees through a sheer is an image through its clear lines of sight against a veil of lit thread, and the only thing that decides their balance is how much brighter one side is than the other. At equal light the two views are identical for every cloth there is. And a black sheer of the same openness shows twelve times more of the room by day than a white one.

pattern · Opacity How much of a thread is spent going round the one it crosses. The share of a warp end's length that lies inside the wrap — the arc of radius half the combined diameter, which is as close as two centre lines can get — for every cloth in this collection's table, with a jersey at the foot for comparison. It runs from 7% on an open scrim to 54% on a sheeting, and what is left over is a straight run with no shape to solve. A knitted loop's figure is zero: its peak curvature never reaches the wrap's, so it touches at points and is free in between. That is the whole reason the same solver refuses a shirting and converges on a jersey, and it is a statement about the two fabrics rather than about the arithmetic.

A woven thread has no room to bend

Set an elastica solver on an ordinary shirting and it refuses the problem. The refusal is the finding: a woven thread's whole crimp is spent going round the thread it crosses, between a fourteenth and a half of its length lies inside that wrap, and what is left has no slack to take a shape with.

setting · Elastica The section the fabric asks for, beside the one the model drew. A 20 tex cotton yarn in cross-section, at 900 times life size. The circle is what every solve in this collection has assumed: a diameter of 0.167 mm from the count and the packing factor. The ellipse has the same area and a minor axis of 78% of it, which is the closest the fabric's own adjacent courses come to one another — 0.130 mm. Nothing about that number was fitted to a fabric. It falls out of a solve that knew nothing about flattening, and it lands inside the range the trade reports for yarn in cloth, which this collection has carried as a free parameter ever since it first put a number on a sett.

What a sett is when the yarn is not round

A jamming condition says how close threads can be set, and it says it in terms of a diameter. A thread in a cloth does not have one diameter: it has a wide one and a narrow one, and which of them a jam is about depends on which way the threads are jamming.

setting · Sett The section the fabric asks for, beside the one the model drew. A 20 tex cotton yarn in cross-section, at 900 times life size. The circle is what every solve in this collection has assumed: a diameter of 0.167 mm from the count and the packing factor. The ellipse has the same area and a minor axis of 78% of it, which is the closest the fabric's own adjacent courses come to one another — 0.130 mm. Nothing about that number was fitted to a fabric. It falls out of a solve that knew nothing about flattening, and it lands inside the range the trade reports for yarn in cloth, which this collection has carried as a free parameter ever since it first put a number on a sett.

What a flattened yarn does to its cover

A cover factor is a sett times a diameter, and it decides how much of a cloth is thread and how much is hole. A flattened yarn is a third wider than a round one of the same area, so a cloth of flattened yarn covers more at the same sett — and every opacity, permeability and shade computed from a round diameter is wrong in one direction.

setting · Cover What the count moves at 150 grams. Plain cotton cloths that all weigh 150 g/m², from 20 tex to 200 tex, with sett and crimp solved together. Thickness, which is two yarn diameters, rises 3.16 times across the line; the cover factor of each thread system falls 2.75 times; their product with one plus the crimp is the same number at every count, because the weight has fixed the volume of fibre and the count only decides whether it is laid out flat or stacked up.

A weight fixes the fibre and not the drape

Every plain cotton cloth of 150 grams a square metre contains the same fibre, and the count decides only how it is arranged. Across the counts that can make that weight, thickness rises threefold and cover falls in step, so their product holds still. The bending length does something stranger: at the bound a woven yarn actually sits near, it depends on neither the count nor the weight, only on the fibre.

setting · Weight

Named alongside it

The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.

SettJammingYarn diameterClear openingPacking factorSpecificationCrimpOpen areaOpacityPeirce's geometryAir permeabilityCloth thickness

All concepts