Generator

What a pre-shrunk label promises

What a pre-shrunk label promises
What a pre-shrunk label promisesThree lengths of the same cloth: as woven, as it leaves the compressive-shrinkage machine, and where it will finally settle. The residual shrinkage quoted on a label is measured against the second of these and the total against the first, so the two numbers are not the same quantity and cannot be subtracted.three lengths of one piece of clothas wovenafter the machinewhere it settles5.0% taken out6.0% from wovenresidual, as the wearer measures it: 1.05%the difference of the two percentages is 1.00% — not the same number, and the one usually quotedeach fraction drawn against the length it is a fraction ofnot over-shrunk

Three lengths of the same cloth: as woven, as it leaves the compressive-shrinkage machine, and where it will finally settle. The residual shrinkage quoted on a label is measured against the second of these and the total against the first, so the two numbers are not the same quantity and cannot be subtracted.

4 essays call preshrink. The drawing above is what it returns with no arguments at all; every call below passes it something, because a placement that passes nothing draws whichever member of the family the generator happens to default to rather than the weave its essay argues about.

Where it is called

Changing this generator changes every one of these figures.

What a pre-shrunk label promises. Three lengths of the same cloth: as woven, as it leaves the compressive-shrinkage machine, and where it will finally settle. The residual shrinkage quoted on a label is measured against the second of these and the total against the first, so the two numbers are not the same quantity and cannot be subtracted. After the loom

Pre-shrinking is a subtraction done in advance

A compressive-shrinkage machine takes four per cent out of a cloth before anybody buys it, and the label then quotes what is left. The two numbers are fractions of different lengths, so they cannot be subtracted — and the difference between doing that correctly and incorrectly is most of the number.

A membrane is cut smaller than it is. Warp and fill compensation against how far the crossings flatten under prestress. With the thread lengths and the cloth's thickness both fixed there is no strain available at all — the closure condition determines the state — so the whole of the compensation is the crossings squeezing and the crimp coming out. The direction that arrives with less crimp gives back less, which is why a warp compensates less than a fill. Cloth doing a job

A membrane is cut smaller than it is

A tensioned fabric roof is cut to a pattern smaller than the shape it will take, because stressing it makes it grow. At a fixed cloth thickness a prestress can only interchange crimp — one direction grows and the other shrinks — so everything that makes both directions grow is the crossings flattening, which is the one quantity here this site cannot compute.

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. After the loom

Two shrinkages, one tape measure

A cloth that comes out of a wash smaller has done two different things and the tape cannot tell them apart. One is geometric, recoverable and finished in minutes; the other is frictional, permanent and needs agitation. This collection can now compute both, and they have different signatures.

Wash-by-wash shrinkage, reported and modelled. The shrinkage an unfinished cotton cloth shows in each of five laundering cycles, beside what a model with no rate in it predicts. The model says a wash lets every crossing whose frictional barrier is below the cloth's current excess slip to the edge of its own band, and that is a distribution rather than a rate. Two numbers are fitted — the excess the cloth came off the loom with, 7.13%, and the spread of the barriers, 37.2× — against the first two washes. Washes three, four and five are predictions with nothing left to adjust and come out at 0.506%, 0.284%, 0.179% against reported 0.50%, 0.30%, 0.20%. What the bars cannot show is the finding underneath: the reported yarn-on-yarn friction range gives a spread of only 1.34×, which would have the tail over by the third wash. After the loom

A cloth shrinks most the first time

A laundering test reports five numbers and they fall away like a geometric series. Nothing in a wash is slow — a cloth is agitated tens of thousands of times in half an hour — so a second wash that shrinks it again is direct evidence that its frictional barriers are spread, and the ratio between successive washes measures how far.

The whole library · All essays