Textile Structure
how cloth is put together
Concept

Jamming — where it appears

The condition where neighbouring threads touch and a cloth cannot be set closer, which bounds the cover, the sett and every optimum that runs towards fineness. It is exact and it has two forms — threads touching side by side, and threads unable to supply the cloth's thickness between them — which bind at different densities.

Named by 57 essays across 7 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

A fabric to fill and a fabric to load. Fill time against the sett of a woven reinforcement, with the two limits a part imposes. Stiffness wants fibre, which wants a close sett; the resin has to arrive before it gels, and the channels between the tows — which is what carries the flow — close as the sett rises. The interval between the two is where a fabric can exist, and it narrows with the size of the part.

A fabric to fill and a fabric to load

A reinforcement has to hold as much fibre as possible and still let a resin through it, and the two demands are the same decision pulling opposite ways. Both bounds are computable, the interval between them narrows as the square of the part, and past a certain size it is empty — which is the most useful thing the arithmetic says.

applied · Preform How far the bias goes, and where it stops. Extension along the bias against shear angle, with the angle at which the threads jam marked for three settings. The curve is geometry and so is the wall — a more closely set cloth reaches it sooner.

The locking angle

The bias runs out at an angle that yarn diameter and thread spacing decide between them. It is the number behind whether a cloth will go round a curve, and it has nothing to do with how strong the fabric is.

mechanics · Bias Two sections, one yarn. The same yarn given a circular cross-section and a racetrack one of equal area, both jammed. The spacing the two models allow is nearly the same; the cover and the cloth thickness they predict are not.

A tow is not a yarn

Every geometric model on this site assumes a thread with a diameter. A reinforcement tow has a width and a thickness instead, and the two are eight to one — which moves the jammed sett, the crimp, the cover and the cloth's thickness at once, in four different directions, from one change.

applied · Sett What an interlacing costs. Each weave's interlacing count beside the closest it can be set in the same yarn. The two run opposite ways, because a thread that changes face often has to bend often and a bend takes room.

How close can threads be set

There is a maximum. Push more threads into a cloth than the geometry allows and they simply will not go, and the limit depends on the weave as much as on the yarn.

setting · Sett What an interlacing costs. Each weave's interlacing count beside the closest it can be set in the same yarn. The two run opposite ways, because a thread that changes face often has to bend often and a bend takes room.

Interlacings and firmness

Every time a thread changes face it has to bend, and a bend takes room. That one sentence decides how densely a cloth can be set, how firm it feels, and why the two run in opposite directions.

weaves · Firmness Two sections, one yarn. The same yarn given a circular cross-section and a racetrack one of equal area, both jammed. The spacing the two models allow is nearly the same; the cover and the cloth thickness they predict are not.

Peirce against the racetrack, measured

Two models of a yarn's cross-section, given the same yarn and the same closure condition, agree on how densely the cloth can be set and disagree by nearly half on how thick it is. Which quantity is being asked about decides whether the choice of model matters at all.

setting · Sett 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 What an interlacing costs. Each weave's interlacing count beside the closest it can be set in the same yarn. The two run opposite ways, because a thread that changes face often has to bend often and a bend takes room.

The weave decides the sett, and two models disagree about it

Ashenhurst's rule and Peirce's geometry both answer how densely a cloth can be set, and for a plain weave they are fifteen per cent apart. Only one of them reaches the other weaves at all, and it is the cruder one.

setting · Sett Where the twenty-eight comes from. The setting a cotton cover factor of 28 prescribes, and the setting at which the threads would cover the surface geometrically, against yarn count. They are one curve: the trade's scale is Peirce's diameter with the units taken out. Below them is the sett at which each weave actually jams, which is a fixed fraction of it.

Where the cover factor comes from

A cotton cover factor is threads per inch over the root of the count, and the scale says twenty-eight means a covered surface. The twenty-eight is not a convention: it is the reciprocal of Peirce's yarn diameter, and the trade's practical ceilings of fourteen and twenty-two fall straight out of it.

setting · Cover Everywhere a sheeting can go. Every state a sheeting of 28 × 26 threads per centimetre in 25 and 25 tex can reach without a yarn changing length, solved from Peirce's plain-weave geometry. The set is a curve and not a region: 4.03 per cent of extension is available along the warp, and reaching it costs 6.98 per cent of the width.

A cloth extends by moving its crimp

Everybody says the extension available along the warp is the warp's own crimp. On six of eight ordinary cloths it is not — a close sheeting has 14.61 per cent of warp crimp and reaches 4.03 per cent, because the limit lives in the weft.

mechanics · Tensile Pull it lengthways and it narrows. The same cloth before and after a small extension along the warp. No thread has stretched: the extension came out of the warp crimp, that crimp went into the weft, and the fabric is narrower for it.

What crimp interchange actually conserves

Pull a cloth lengthways and it narrows, because the crimp moves from one system to the other. Inextensibility says that much and no more — it is one equation short of an answer, and the second equation everybody uses is an assumption with a name.

setting · Crimp What the geometry says about a tear. A slit in a woven cloth, with the ends ahead of the tip gathered into the group that will break together. How many can gather is the opening divided by the slack in each gap, and the slack is the thread spacing less the thread diameter — an expression with no weave in it at all.

Does a loose weave tear better

The trade says a twill tears stronger than a plain weave of the same yarn, because fewer interlacings let the threads group. The geometry of that grouping has no weave in it at all — and where the geometry does speak, it predicts the opposite.

weaves · Float Everywhere a muslin can go. Every state a muslin of 24 × 22 threads per centimetre in 20 and 20 tex can reach without a yarn changing length, solved from Peirce's plain-weave geometry. The set is a curve and not a region: 6.59 per cent of extension is available along the warp, and reaching it costs 21.82 per cent of the width.

Pulled both ways, only one can give

A cloth at constant thread length has one degree of freedom, so its reachable states are a curve rather than a region. Equal extension in both directions meets that curve at exactly one point — the state the cloth is already in — so the amount available is nought.

mechanics · Tensile Swelling, at the same count. The same yarn before and after mercerisation, drawn to one scale. Its linear density has not changed — the same grams per kilometre go into the cloth — but the fibre occupies more volume, which is a lower packing factor and a larger diameter. Every consequence in this field follows from that single number.

Mercerising is a packing factor

Cotton held in caustic soda swells, and everything the treatment is famous for follows from one number in this site's diameter calculation. The lustre it is actually sold for does not, and saying which consequences are computed and which are not is the whole of the discipline here.

finishing · Lustre finish 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 The sett moves the flux and not the height. A 20 tex cotton yarn woven at every sett from 8 to 34 threads per centimetre. Above: the hole between the threads lifts from 27 to 234 mm as the cloth closes, while the space between the fibres lifts 6.37 m at every one of them — so the cloth's maximum is the flat line, and the sett does not touch it. Below: the permeability of those holes falls by a factor of 292 over the same range. Both curves are monotone, so there is no optimum — only an interval, ending at the jam at 34.6 threads per centimetre.

The sett decides how much, not how high

Every rung of this ladder so far has found the sett deciding something. This one finds it deciding nothing at all: a cloth's maximum rise is 6.37 m at eight threads per centimetre and 6.37 m at thirty-four, because the sett cannot reach inside a yarn.

setting · Sett The stitch density that makes the strongest seam. Seam strength against stitch density, as the two limits that decide it: the sewing thread crossing the seam, which rises with the stitches, and the fabric the needle perforates, which falls. The seam is the lower of the two, so the optimum is where they cross — and whether the fabric line falls at all is decided by the clear gap between threads against the width of the needle.

The stitch that weakens the seam

More stitches per centimetre put more sewing thread across a seam and more holes through the cloth beside it, so seam strength rises, crosses and falls. Whether the fabric line falls at all is decided by the clear gap between two threads against the width of the needle — the same arithmetic a filter cloth is specified by, doing a different job.

applied · Seams The loop that costs nothing to extend. A plain knitted loop at rest and extended by 35 per cent, with the arcs marked. The arcs' radius is the diameter of the yarn the loop wraps, 0.167 mm, and it is set by contact rather than by the fabric's dimensions — so extending the fabric lengthens the legs and bends nothing further. The bending energy is 0.0176 N·mm at both, and the model therefore asks no force at all for an extension a woven cloth would refuse. What the drawing cannot show is what a real knit's first few per cent do cost, which is friction and yarn flattening and is not a bending property.

A knit is soft because it bends

Ask the same energy question of a woven cloth and a knitted one and the answers are not different by a factor — they are different in kind. A woven cloth's bending energy changes the moment it is extended. A knitted loop's does not change at all, exactly, over the whole of its extension, because its arcs are held to a radius by contact rather than by the fabric's dimensions.

knits · Knit The two routes a poplin has to a strain. A poplin drawn in section at three places: as woven, at the end of what its crimp can supply, and past that. Between the first two the warp's crimp falls from 8.97% to 4.85% and the weft takes on what it gave up, and the thread length is 0.4953 mm in both — nothing has stretched, and the cloth is 3.93% longer. Between the second and the third the geometry cannot move because the weft's straight run has vanished, so the cloth's extra 2.0% is the thread's extra 2.0%. What the drawing cannot show is which of the two a piece of cloth has had: the first two states look different and the last two look the same, and it is the last two that differ in whether the cloth comes back.

A cloth gives back less than it took

Everything this collection computes about a deforming fabric is reversible, and no fabric is. The repair is not a new material property: a woven cloth has two routes to a strain, one of them costs its threads nothing and comes back in full, and where the first route runs out is a number about the sett with no fibre in it at all.

cloth · Memory The energy well, and where the cloth sits in it. The bending energy of a sheeting at every state on its own constant-thread-length locus, plotted against how the crimp divides between the two systems. The minimum is at 1.22 and the value every Peirce solution here is drawn at is 1.00, marked. The well's depth decides how firmly the ratio is settled, which is why an open scrim's measured crimp scatters and a close sheeting's does not. What the plot cannot show is the friction that stops a cloth reaching the bottom, which turns the minimum into a band.

The crimp ratio is not a measurement

Peirce's geometry is two thread systems, four unknowns and three equations. It cannot say how the crimp divides between warp and weft, so every cloth solved so far has been drawn at a ratio somebody chose. Give the threads a stiffness and the missing equation arrives — and for six of the eight cloths in the table it arrives with no material constant in it at all.

setting · Crimp 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 beat-up, at the fell. The last picks of a sheeting at 26 picks per centimetre, with the beat-up zone shaded. Driving the fell forward makes the warp take more crimp and more crimp takes more thread, which the warp can only supply by stretching — so the force is the warp tension times the crimp's elasticity with respect to the pick spacing, 0.182 here. That is 0.205 N per end and 573 N per metre of reed. What the drawing cannot show is that the shaded band's width cancels out of the derivation exactly; it is drawn because a reader needs to see what is being compressed, not because the answer depends on it.

The blow that sets the pick

The take-up gear decides how far the cloth moves between picks and says nothing about the blow that puts each pick where it goes. That blow is a force, and a virtual-work argument gives it in one line — with the length of the beat-up zone cancelling out of the answer exactly, which is the part worth having.

setting · Beat-up The load–extension curve, computed from a stiffness. The tension in one end of a sheeting against how far the cloth has been extended, computed as the slope of its bending energy along its own constant-thread-length locus. The curve passes through zero at the state of least energy, which is where an unloaded cloth sits, and rises either side of it. What the curve cannot show is what happens after the crimp runs out: past the end of the locus the load is carried by stretching yarn rather than by straightening it, and that is a modulus three orders of magnitude higher and a different figure.

The locus gets a force

This site has drawn the set of states a cloth can reach without stretching any yarn, and has never been able to say which of them it is in or what it would cost to move. Both questions are one derivative of a bending energy — and the answer explains the flat start every fabric's load–extension curve has, which is not slack yarn but a symmetry.

mechanics · Tensile 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 Selectable against reachable. How far up the take-up gear's catalogue a beat-up force reaches, on a sheeting. The catalogue holds 4,825 distinct pick densities between 8 and 40 per centimetre, which is the previous rung's count of what the machine can select. At 200 N per metre only 548 of them can be woven; at 2,000 it is 4,256. The fineness of the choice is untouched by the ceiling and the top of the range is cut off entirely, so the weft direction's advantage is resolution rather than reach. What the chart cannot show is the loom's own force, which depends on the beat-up mechanism and is not a property of the cloth.

A pick density is a force budget

The take-up ladder counted what a change-wheel take-up can select: 4,825 distinct pick densities between eight and forty threads per centimetre, against forty-nine warp setts a reed catalogue offers over the same range. That count assumed every setting is available. A beat-up force says otherwise, and cuts the top off the range without touching the fineness of the choice.

setting · Beat-up 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 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 A sheeting's crossing, dry and wetted. One crossing of a sheeting in section at three swellings: dry, at the swelling where its geometry has its last state, and fully wetted at 20%. The closure condition is that the two systems' crimp heights add to the cloth's thickness, and each can supply at most the height it reaches when its straight portion has just vanished. Swelling raises the demand in proportion and the supply more slowly, so the margin closes and then goes negative — at 9.29% for this cloth against cotton's 20%. The bottom panel is drawn as far as the threads reach and no further, because there is no state to draw. What the drawing cannot show is what happens instead, which is that the yarn is compacted.

The swelling a cloth cannot take

Three of the eight cloths in this collection's table have no wet state at all. A thread of fixed length cannot wrap a partner that has grown by a fifth, so the closure condition fails and the geometry has nothing to offer. What happens instead costs megapascals, and the alternative route is not merely dearer but unavailable — the thread would break first.

mechanics · Compression 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 The poplin's two budgets as it is held stretched. What is left of a poplin's interchange in each direction as it is held at more and more warp strain. The warp's budget falls to nothing at 3.93%, which is the point of the curve; the weft's rises, because the crimp the warp gives up is crimp the weft takes on. There is one locus and one position on it, so the two are not two quantities that happen to be related — they are the two distances from one point to the two ends of one curve. The consequence is that a pre-tensioned cloth has almost no warp recovery left and more weft recovery than it started with. What the plot cannot show is that the exchange rate between them is not constant: the curve is not a straight line, and its slope is the Poisson ratio this site computes elsewhere.

A cloth has one budget for two directions

A woven cloth looks as though it carries two independent reserves of free extension, one along the warp and one across the weft. It carries one. There is a single curve of states and a single position on it, so every hundredth spent one way is refunded the other — which means a pre-tensioned cloth has not used its recovery up, it has moved it.

mechanics · Tensile 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 An operation multiplies a spread by its own log-slope. A transformation does not leave a population's spread alone: if y goes as the kth power of x then a small spread in x becomes k times that spread in y, exactly in the limit and nearly so at the CVs a yarn has. So an operation with an exponent below one narrows the population it acts on — a thickness that goes as the square root of a load comes out at half the spread it went in with — and one with an exponent of four widens it fourfold. This is the same derivative that decided every bias in this ladder, read for its magnitude rather than for its curvature, and it is why a finish can be a variance-reducing operation without anyone having chosen it for that. The straight line through the origin is the whole of the rule; the departure from it at the right-hand end is the second-order term arriving, which is where the linearisation stops being one.

A finish spends a spread before it spends a mean

Every operation on a cloth multiplies the variation it inherits by its own log-slope, so an operation with an exponent below one makes the cloth more even and one above it makes the cloth less even. Calendering, which is bought for evenness, has an exponent of 1.4.

finishing · Lustre finish The crossings under a 25 mm² presser foot. A 25 mm² foot on a muslin covers 12 ends and 11 picks, which is 132 crossings — and a first guess treats those as 132 chances of finding a thick place. They are not independent chances. Every crossing along one end shares that end's diameter, so the largest crossing is the largest end plus the largest pick, and the number of tries is 23: the threads. Each cell here is shaded by its own two diameters, and the darkest is at the meeting of the darkest row and the darkest column, which is what that identity looks like. The gauge rests on it and reads 0.431 mm, against 0.342 for the cloth's mean crossing — 26% over.

A thickness is a maximum, not a mean

A presser foot rests on whatever is highest beneath it, so the thickness of a fabric is an extreme value — and an extreme grows with how much cloth is asked. The standard specifies the foot's area because the foot's area is in the answer.

mechanics · Compression Where a muslin's warp jams, over 40 ends. 40 ends drawn at their own diameters, with every neighbouring pair's combined width plotted beneath. A cloth cannot be set closer than its threads will lie, and the pair that decides that is not the average pair — it is the widest one anywhere across the warp, which here is ends 8 and 9 at 205 µm apiece against a mean of 167 µm. Over the 2000 ends of a real warp rather than the 40 drawn here the worst pair is 42% above the mean, and it goes on growing with the width of the cloth: the same yarn in a wider loom jams sooner. The naive estimate that treats every window as an independent try overstates it by 0.48%, which is small enough to say that the overlap between neighbouring windows is not what is going on here.

A warp jams where its threads are thickest

The closest a cloth can be set is decided by its worst pair of neighbours, not its average thread — and the worst pair depends on how many pairs there are. The same yarn in a wider loom jams sooner, which makes a jammed sett a property of the machine as well as of the yarn.

setting · Sett 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 a knit gives when it is pulled. Force against course-wise extension for a 20 tex cotton jersey at a 3.5 mm loop, computed from the loop's own bending with the relaxed shape as the yarn's natural one. The loop length is the same at every point on the curve: nothing here is the yarn stretching. It reaches 92% extension at 2.96 N per metre and then stiffens by a factor of 85 over the rest of the range, as the straight line between two interlacings runs up against the yarn between them. This is the number the collection's second phase recorded as a lower bound it could not compute, and it is still a lower bound in one respect: friction at the contacts is not in it, so a real fabric is stiffer than this and does not come back along the same curve.

What a knit gives when it is pulled

How far a knit stretches by rearranging its loops is usually given as a bound rather than a number, because saying more needs a loop with bending stiffness in it. Solved from the loop's own bending, the answer is a curve: soft for a hundred per cent, then stiffening by a factor of eighty as the yarn between two interlacings runs out of ways to be anywhere but straight.

knits · Knit A jersey gets taller before it gets shorter. How much a 20 tex cotton jersey shortens along its wales as it is pulled along its courses, with the course spacing at every extension chosen to minimise the loop's energy rather than assumed. Over the first 81% it is negative — the fabric gets 2.0% taller as it is pulled wider — and only then does it start to contract, reaching 88% at the geometric limit. A material with a negative Poisson ratio is a curiosity; a knit has one over part of its range for a reason with no material in it at all, which is that widening a wale at a fixed loop length first lets the loop's tightest bends open and only later starts taking height away from it.

A jersey gets taller before it gets shorter

Pull a knit along its courses and the first thing it does is grow along its wales — by two per cent, over the first eighty per cent of extension, before it turns round and contracts. The transverse response changes sign, and there is no material in the explanation at all.

knits · Knit The evenness a cotton yarn cannot be better than. Lay staple fibres down at random and count how many cross a plane: the count is Poisson, its variance is its mean, and the coefficient of variation of the mass per unit length is therefore 1/√n with no material and no machine in it. The lower curve is that floor. At 5 tex there are 29 fibres in the section and the floor is 19.86 per cent; at 5 tex there are 29 and it is 19.86. The upper curve is what a yarn spun at an index of irregularity of 1.35 actually measures, which is the floor times a constant — so the whole shape belongs to the counting and none of it to the spinning. The exponent is exactly −½ and is asserted as such rather than fitted to the curve.

A finer yarn is a worse yarn

Fineness is the thing a yarn is priced for, and it is bought with irregularity at a fixed exchange rate. Once the spread is a function of the count, every correction this collection computes becomes a function of the count too — and the cheapest yarn on the shelf is the one the arithmetic describes best.

setting · Assembly Everything a plain knit can be, at one loop length. Bending energy over the two spacings a plain knit has to choose, for a 20 tex cotton yarn at a 3.5 mm loop, as a multiple of the energy the fully relaxed fabric holds. Darker is more. The solid edge is where the straight line between two interlacings reaches the yarn between them — the geometry's own limit, with nothing elastic in it — and there is no state beyond it at any force. Munden's three relaxation states are marked, and the thing to see is that they are not in a hollow: they lie along a slope, in order, with the most completely relaxed of them the highest. An unset yarn would slide down and to the right until it met the edge. Real fabrics sit where they were left.

How far a knit could go if its yarn were the limit

The yarn in a stitch allows three hundred and twenty per cent course-wise extension before the straight line between two interlacings reaches the thread spanning it. A jersey jams at about a hundred. The factor of three is the finding: what stops a knit stretching is not the loop running out of yarn.

knits · Knit 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 Two courses as centre lines, and their closest approach. The solved course of a 20 tex cotton jersey at a 3.5 mm loop, drawn in plan with the course below it, as centre lines, with the closest approach marked. The interlacing is where the model placed them one diameter apart. The closest they come is 0.130 mm — 0.780 of a diameter — and it is not at the interlacing. A round yarn cannot occupy this arrangement; a yarn flattened to 78% of its round diameter can, and flattened is what a yarn in a fabric measurably is.

The closest approach is not the crossing

Two wavy curves that touch at a point are not necessarily closest at that point. Whether they are depends on one thing: whether they run alongside one another or cross. That distinction decides which of this collection's two fabrics fits together and which does not.

cloth · Contact A yarn is pressed on part of its length and free on the rest. The distance from each point of one course to the nearest point of the course below, for a 20 tex cotton jersey at a 3.5 mm loop, along two wales. It runs from 0.780 diameters at the worst to 3.81 at the freest, and 20% of the length is inside one diameter of its neighbour. The line at one diameter is where a round yarn would begin to overlap. What the profile says is that a single flattening ratio is an average: the section a yarn takes changes along its own length, which every racetrack section this collection has drawn assumes it does not.

Where a yarn is thinnest

A yarn in a fabric is pressed where it crosses and free where it does not, so its section changes along its own length. Every flattening this collection has ever quoted is a single number for a profile that runs from four fifths of a diameter to nearly four.

cloth · Contact 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 A woven cloth asked the same question, and the answer is nearly one. The closest approach two crossing threads make, for four cloths from an open voile to a dense duck, in units of the separation they have where they touch. A value of one means the closest approach is exactly at the crossing and the cloth fits together; anything below one is an overlap. The values run from 1.000 to 0.955, so the worst overlap in the table is 4.5% of a contact separation — against 22% for a knitted fabric. The overlap rises with the crimp, which is what identifies the mechanism: the vertical gain from moving away from a crossing is the crimp, and a cloth that barely crimps has nothing to gain by moving.

A woven cloth asked the same question

A knitted fabric's two adjacent courses occupy the same space by a fifth of a diameter. A woven cloth's two systems overlap by nothing at all in an open cloth and by four and a half per cent in a dense one — and the difference is that they cross rather than run alongside.

weaves · Contact What leaving the plane costs, which is less than nothing. Bending energy a stitch against how far the yarn climbs between one interlacing and the next, for a 20 tex cotton jersey at a 3.5 mm loop. The curve falls. A climb is not an extra bend added to a curve that was otherwise unchanged; it is part of the straight line the thread has to span, so a longer climb leaves less slack to be spent on curvature. At a jersey's own climb of one diameter the energy is 24395 nJ against 25060 for the planar model — 2.7% lower, where an earlier estimate on this site put the ride at three per cent of the loop's bending and had the sign the other way round. At a rib's climb of three or four diameters the fall is 33%.

A rib's relaxation is not its bending either

A jersey does not settle where its bending energy is least, and this collection has said so for several rungs. A rib does not either, and the model now says how far from least it would have to go: sixteen yarn diameters of bed gap before the yarn runs out, against the two or three a machine is set to.

finishing · Shrinkage Where a loop's bending actually is. Half a stitch — from the crown of a needle loop's head to the bottom of the next sinker loop — with the curvature at every station drawn as a spine standing off the curve, in units of one over the yarn diameter. The centre line is drawn as a line rather than at the yarn's own width here, because the subject of this figure is the curvature and a yarn drawn at true width covers its own spines. The peak is 1.14, at 28% of the way along, and the curvature varies smoothly from one end to the other with no jump anywhere. That smoothness is the whole point: Peirce's construction joins an arc of constant curvature to a straight line of none, so its bending moment steps at the join, and a step in moment is a point force no thread can carry. An elastica has no steps in it, which is why its forces exist at all and his do not.

What a loop model still cannot say

A planar rod with a natural curvature and point contacts gets a knit's forces, its modulus and its extension. It does not get torsion, it does not get the third dimension the interlacing actually needs, and it does not stop adjacent courses passing through one another — which is why its extension ceiling sits three times beyond any jersey.

mechanics · Elastica Two courses at the yarn's own width, and the place they overlap. The solved course of a 20 tex cotton jersey at a 3.5 mm loop, drawn in plan with the course below it, each strand at the yarn's own diameter of 0.167 mm. Where the two overlap, the fabric is occupying the same space twice. The interlacing is where the model placed them one diameter apart. The closest they come is 0.130 mm — 0.780 of a diameter — and it is not at the interlacing. A round yarn cannot occupy this arrangement; a yarn flattened to 78% of its round diameter can, and flattened is what a yarn in a fabric measurably is.

The fabric that does not fit

Every solve in this collection minimises an energy over a centre line, and a centre line has no thickness. Nobody had checked whether the fabric that comes out of it can be built. It cannot: two adjacent courses of the relaxed jersey approach to four fifths of a yarn diameter, so the yarn passes through itself, at rest, everywhere.

knits · Contact 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.

The flattening nobody fitted

A yarn in cloth is not round, everybody knows it, and nothing has ever predicted how flat. This collection's own knitted geometry turns out to require a flattening of four fifths — from a solve that knew nothing about flattening, made no allowance for it, and would have been written the same way if the idea had never occurred to anybody.

knits · Contact Two courses at the yarn's own width, and the place they overlap. The solved course of a 24.2 tex cotton jersey at a 3.5 mm loop, drawn in plan with the course below it, each strand at the yarn's own diameter of 0.184 mm. Where the two overlap, the fabric is occupying the same space twice. The interlacing is where the model placed them one diameter apart. The closest they come is 0.140 mm — 0.761 of a diameter — and it is not at the interlacing. A round yarn cannot occupy this arrangement; a yarn flattened to 76% of its round diameter can, and flattened is what a yarn in a fabric measurably is.

What wetting does to the bending limit

A rod cannot be bent to a radius below its own. A relaxed knitted loop sits at twice that limit, and a wet yarn is a tenth thicker in the same loop — so wetting moves a fabric a tenth of the way towards a bend it cannot physically take.

finishing · State Two courses at the yarn's own width, and the place they overlap. The solved course of a 20 tex cotton jersey at a 3.5 mm loop, drawn in plan with the course below it, each strand at the yarn's own diameter of 0.167 mm. Where the two overlap, the fabric is occupying the same space twice. The interlacing is where the model placed them one diameter apart. The closest they come is 0.130 mm — 0.780 of a diameter — and it is not at the interlacing. A round yarn cannot occupy this arrangement; a yarn flattened to 78% of its round diameter can, and flattened is what a yarn in a fabric measurably is.

A loop bends at twice its own radius

A rod of radius r cannot be bent to a centre-line radius below r without occupying its own space. A knitted loop's tightest bend is at 2.04 yarn radii — twice the hard limit, and falling as the fabric tightens. That is a ceiling on how tight a knit can be, from contact alone.

knits · Contact What leaving the plane costs, which is less than nothing. Bending energy a stitch against how far the yarn climbs between one interlacing and the next, for a 20 tex cotton jersey at a 3.5 mm loop. The curve falls. A climb is not an extra bend added to a curve that was otherwise unchanged; it is part of the straight line the thread has to span, so a longer climb leaves less slack to be spent on curvature. At a jersey's own climb of one diameter the energy is 24395 nJ against 25060 for the planar model — 2.7% lower, where an earlier estimate on this site put the ride at three per cent of the loop's bending and had the sign the other way round. At a rib's climb of three or four diameters the fall is 33%.

What leaving the plane costs

Every number the flat loop model produced, beside the same number with the climb in it. Four of the five fall, none moves by four per cent, and the estimate that priced the third dimension beforehand had the sign the wrong way round for a reason worth naming.

mechanics · Elastica The extension ceiling, with the yarn given a thickness. As a jersey is pulled along its courses the wale spacing grows and the course spacing has to fall, because the yarn between two interlacings is a fixed length. The upper curve is how small the course spacing may be before the yarn runs out; the lower is how small it may be before two adjacent courses occupy the same space. The geometric ceiling is 322% and the contact one 299% — 7% lower. That is the result and it is a negative one: a measured jersey extends by about a hundred per cent, so contact between courses is not what puts the computed ceiling three times beyond a real one. The candidate this ladder was written to test is ruled out.

Contact is not why a jersey stops

The model says a jersey can be pulled to three hundred and twenty per cent along its courses. Real ones stop at about a hundred. The recorded diagnosis was that nothing stops adjacent courses passing through one another — and giving the yarn a thickness closes seven per cent of a gap of two thirds.

knits · 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 What flattening costs, against what the loop's bending is worth. The energy of squashing a 20 tex cotton to the 78% the fabric's geometry demands, as a multiple of the whole bending energy of one stitch, at three lateral rigidities. The free bound is exactly zero: a bundle of fibres free to slide resists a change of shape at constant area not at all, so flattening is free and the bracket on it has no floor. The coherent bound is 36 times the loop's bending, so a yarn that could not rearrange could not be knitted into this fabric at all. The fabric flattens, so it is reading the free end — which is the fourth ordinary observation on this site to land at that end of the bracket.

Flattening is free and impossible

The fabric demands a flattening and the yarn has to supply it. At one end of this collection's oldest bracket the deformation costs exactly nothing; at the other it costs thirty-six times the whole bending energy of a stitch. The fabric flattens — which is the fourth everyday observation in one phase to land at the same end.

mechanics · Contact The crest, and the loop that ought to be holding it open. One course of the solved fabric in plan, with the two half periods that meet at a crest marked. They approach to 0.003 mm — 0.018 of a yarn diameter — and run within that of one another for more than a millimetre of arc. The ring drawn between them is the needle loop of the next course, which is what holds them apart in a fabric and what this model does not have: the interlacing was declared a point, and a point holds nothing open. The same omission is what makes the course's writhe zero and its linking number zero, so three of this collection's findings are one defect seen three ways.

What a contact model would have to do

This ladder has measured a fabric that does not fit and priced nothing. The repair is a different class of problem from the one this collection solves, it costs fifteen per cent of the yarn in a stitch, and it buys back four results — which is an unusually good return for a piece of modelling.

mechanics · Contact

Named alongside it

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

SettYarn diameterCrimpSpecificationPeirce's geometryCover factorPacking factorContactCoverCloth thicknessLoop lengthElastica

All concepts