Textile Structure
how cloth is put together
Concept

Fault — where it appears

A place where the cloth is not the cloth that was designed: a thread missing, a pick in the wrong shed, an intersection reversed. Each is an operation on the matrix, so each can be applied to every draft there is and its consequences counted rather than described.

Named by 7 essays across 3 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

Three places a mistake can be made, and three shapes it leaves. A loom holds a design in three separate objects, and a single mistake in each of them produces a fault of a completely different size — not because the mistakes differ, but because of how many intersections each object controls. On a 50 m piece of muslin 1500 mm wide, holding 396,000,000 intersections: one end drawn on the wrong shaft is wrong at every pick for the whole length, 110,000 of them; one pick made in the wrong shed is wrong across the whole width once, 3,600; and one shaft tied wrongly to one treadle is wrong wherever that shaft's ends meet that treadle's picks, which is everywhere — 6,187,500, or 1.6% of the cloth. The ratio between the extremes is 1719 to one, and the largest of the three is the one nobody sees happen, because every thread is exactly where it should be.

Three mistakes and the shape each one leaves

A loom holds a design in three separate objects, and one error in each of them is the same size of error. What they cost differs by a factor of seventeen hundred — and the largest of the three is the one nobody can see happening, because every thread is exactly where it should be.

fancy · Shafts A plain weave with one end missing. A plain weave on the left and the same cloth with one end broken and not pieced up on the right, drawn over 2 repeats so that the fault can be seen as the cloth has it: absent from every repeat, for the whole length of the piece. The picks that were held by the missing end are now held by whatever is on either side of it, so the longest float across the ends goes from 1 to 3 end widths — measured in the width the cloth had rather than in the narrower repeat, because the place the end used to occupy is still there. Every pick still changes side somewhere, so the cloth holds together — which is what happens in 55% of all the ways a four-by-four draft can lose an end.

What a missing end does to the weave

Every four-by-four draft there is, with each of its four ends taken away in turn: ninety-one thousand cloths, and not one of them falls into layers. What happens instead is worse, and the criterion has never had to report it before.

weaves · Integrity One pick of a 2/2 twill made in the wrong shed. Pick 2 of a 2/2 twill laid in the shed belonging to another pick. The thread is there, it is beaten up in its place, and it is simply not the pick the design asked for — so the fault is a bar the whole width of the cloth and one pick deep. This one leaves the cloth sound, with its longest float at 3. Across every four-by-four draft and every possible wrong shed — 1,372,440 substitutions — 63.2% leave a cloth that still hangs together, 36.6% leave a thread loose, and 0.25% split the cloth. The same wrong shed is harmless in one draft and destroys another, so nothing about the size of the mistake predicts the size of the fault.

A mispick is one row in the wrong place

Every four-by-four draft, with each of its picks replaced by every shed the loom could have made instead: a million and a third substitutions. Two thirds leave a cloth that still hangs together, a third leave a thread held by nothing, and the same wrong shed is harmless in one draft and fatal in another.

weaves · Derivation The same fault in the warp and in the weft. A 50 m piece 1500 mm wide, with a 3-thread fault in each direction. The width is drawn 9.3 times over scale so that the piece is a rectangle rather than a line, and the two faults are drawn as marks rather than at their own widths, which at this scale are a fifth of a pixel. They have the same cause size — 3 threads — and they condemn 0.063 m² and 0.0020 m² respectively, a ratio of 31 to one, because a warp fault runs the length of the piece and a weft fault runs its width. That ratio is the aspect ratio of the piece and nothing else, so it is a property of how cloth is made rather than of what went wrong. It is why a broken end stops the loom and a mispick often does not, and why the two faults are priced by every grading scheme as though they were different kinds of thing.

A missing end is a fault the length of the piece

A broken end and a mispick are the same size of accident — one thread — and they condemn areas that differ by a factor of thirty. The ratio is the aspect ratio of the piece and nothing else, which makes it a fact about how cloth is made rather than about what went wrong.

applied · Faults The float a point fault gives a weave, over every draft there is. Every four-by-four draft that describes one cloth — 22,730 of them — laid out as 8 ends by 8 picks, with each intersection of its repeat reversed in turn and the longest float that produces kept. There are two answers and no others. 90 drafts hold the fault to a float of 3; 22,640 — 99.6% of every weave there is — hand it a float of 7. The mechanism behind the second number is that a reversal at a binding point joins the two floats on either side of it, so a weave with runs separated by single binding intersections gives a single mistake the sum of two of its own floats. The 90 that escape are the drafts whose floats are short and evenly spaced — the plain weave and the ribs — which is not the class of weave the trade recommends for hiding a fault.

Which weave hides a fault

The trade says a busy weave hides a mistake. Every four-by-four draft there is was laid out as cloth and given every wrong lift it could have, and ninety-nine in a hundred hand that single mistake a float of seven — because a reversal does not lengthen a float, it joins two.

weaves · Float What the four-point system charges for a fault, and what the cutting room pays. For a single warp fault of each length: the points the four-point system scores it — one up to three inches, two to six, three to nine and four beyond — and the number of 900-millimetre panels it condemns. Below a panel's length every fault condemns exactly one panel while its points run from one to four, so the scheme charges four times as much for a fault that costs the same. Above a panel's length the panels grow without bound and the points stay at four, so the scheme stops charging exactly where the cost starts rising. A ten-metre fault scores 4 and condemns 12 panels. What the chart cannot show is the marker, which decides the panel size and therefore the whole of the second curve.

A grade charges by the length and a cutter pays by the panel

The four-point system scores a fault by how far it runs — one point to three inches, four beyond nine — and caps a linear metre at four points however many faults it holds. A cutting room pays by how many panels the fault lands in. Below a panel's length every fault costs exactly one panel while its score runs from one to four; above it the panels grow without bound and the score does not move at all. Two fifty-metre pieces built to the same 267 points a hundred square metres lose 33 per cent of their panels and 92.

applied · Faults The first 12 metres of a bolt, cut three ways. A bolt of 50 metres carrying 40 faults, with its first 12 metres drawn: the fault positions above, and below them the 900-millimetre panels a cutter gets cut blind, cut with the same rigid tiling slid to its best offset, and cut around the faults with the map in hand. Over the whole bolt the three yield 28, 30 and 40 sound panels of 55. Sliding the tiling buys 2; breaking it buys 12, which is 43 per cent more cloth from the same roll. What the strip cannot show is the width, across which the same argument runs again with a different panel dimension.

A fault map is worth most where the grade is worst

A cutter who knows where the faults are can slide the marker or break it, and only one of those is worth anything: sliding a rigid tiling to its best offset recovers two panels of fifty-five, and letting the tiling break recovers twelve — two panels in five more cloth from the same roll. The gain has a maximum in the middle of the range, because there is nothing to recover on a clean bolt and nothing to be done on a ruined one. And the prediction the grading essay made, that a map is worth most on a bolt whose faults are bunched, is false: bunching leaves clear runs for the blind cutter too.

applied · Faults

Named alongside it

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

Condemned areaBroken endEnumerationFloat lengthMarker efficiencyMeasurementSpecificationWeave matrixCloth integrityCriterionLoose endPoisson field

All concepts