Theme

The thread: A mechanism, not a material — page 3

Page 3 of 6 of the essays on this thread.

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

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.

Whether a cloth's hairs can reach one another. n_A λ² for each construction in this site's table — the hairs per square millimetre times the square of their own length, which is the pure number that asks whether a hair can touch its neighbour. It is a count times an area, so it has to be a pure number. Every one of them is under one, which means no ordinary woven cotton cloth has a hair layer at all: it has isolated whiskers on a bare surface. The dashed line is the threshold. The spread across the whole table is only 1.9-fold, because the density goes as the sett times the root of the count and those move in opposite directions as a cloth is made finer — so construction is almost powerless here, and everything that crosses this threshold does so by finishing rather than by weaving.

Knits and other structures

A knit gives up its fibres more easily

Knitwear pills and shirting does not, and the fibres are often the same fibres. The difference is a count of yarn per unit area and a pressure between threads, and both of them push a knit over a threshold that a woven cloth of the same yarn cannot reach.

A slot and a square of the same area do not pass the same air. A hole of 62500 square micrometres, drawn out from a square to a slot twenty times longer than it is wide, at constant area throughout. The open area is unchanged by construction and the flow is not: it falls to 39 per cent of the square's. Two things move the same way and neither is a correction to the other — the hydraulic diameter falls as the rectangle is drawn out, and the shape factor rises from 14.23 for a square towards 24 for an infinitely thin slit, which is Shah and London's result quoted rather than derived. This is why a weave's float matters to what it passes even where its cover does not: a float lays parallel threads side by side and the hole beside it is a slot.

Weaves

A satin's hole is a slot

Two cloths at the same cover have the same open area, exactly, and do not pass the same air. A float lays parallel threads side by side and the hole beside them is long rather than square, and drawing a hole out at constant area cuts what it passes to two fifths — because the hydraulic diameter falls and the shape factor climbs, and both of them move the same way.

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.

Setting and geometry

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.

The coarsest pore and the finest, in one muslin. A muslin's two pore systems asked the same question. Water at a contact angle of 120° is held back by a pore of radius r at a head of 2γ|cos θ|/ρgr, so the hole between four threads — hydraulic radius 134 µm — holds 56 mm of water, and the space between the fibres inside a thread — 2.50 µm — holds 2975 mm. Water takes the cheapest path, so the cloth leaks at the first of them and the second is never asked. Turn the contact angle round to a wetting one and the same two radii give a rise instead, and now it is the finest that decides, because that is the one that lifts highest: 5950 mm. One expression, two ends of a distribution, and the fabric's two properties read opposite ends of it.

After the loom

The pore that wicks is the pore that leaks

A cloth's water resistance and a cloth's wicking are one expression, read at the two ends of a contact angle. The geometry cannot be chosen to give both, because it is the same geometry; the only thing that decides which a fabric does is a finish. And the two questions do not even read the same pore — a rise is set by the finest and a leak by the coarsest, so the same cloth lifts water three metres and holds it back at fifty-six millimetres.

Where a muslin's warmth actually is. A muslin's own thermal resistance is 0.0108 m²K/W, and the still-air layer clinging to its outside is 0.12 — so 92 per cent of what a person is wearing is air that is not in the cloth. Wind takes it: the boundary layer thins as the square root of the speed, and above a few metres per second the air is also being driven straight through the fabric, which shorts out whatever resistance the fabric had. The pair leaves 22 per cent of the still-air value at 16 m/s. Both mechanisms take away air rather than cloth, which is why a windproof layer works and a thicker weave does not, and why the fibre — which the conductivity bracket could not separate anyway — never enters this figure.

Cloth doing a job

The wind takes the air and not the cloth

A shirting's own thermal resistance is eight per cent of what a person wearing it has; the other ninety-two is a still-air layer half a millimetre thick clinging to its outside. Wind destroys both, and it destroys the larger one first and by a mechanism that has nothing to do with the fabric — so a windproof layer works by keeping air still rather than by resisting heat.

$Eight fibres through one cloth, and the bracket that hides them. A muslin is 19 per cent fibre and the rest air, so its thermal conductivity is a two-phase mixture, and how the fibre and the air are arranged is not something any amount of knowing the fractions settles. What is settled is Wiener's pair of bounds: heat across a series arrangement sees the harmonic mean and along a parallel one sees the volume average, and every real arrangement lies between. Each bar here is one fibre's whole band, from the series bound at its lowest published conductivity to the parallel bound at its highest. Not one of the eight clears any other, so this model cannot tell wool from nylon in a fabric — and the same cloth at twice the thickness has twice the resistance, exactly. Air's own conductivity is marked, and every band sits within a fifth of it.$ Mechanics and drape

Warmth is a thickness of air

A fabric is a tenth fibre and the rest air, so its thermal conductivity is a mixture of the two — and the pair of bounds that any mixture must lie between comes out narrower than the difference between wool and nylon. The model cannot tell one fibre from another in a cloth. What it can tell, exactly and with no bracket at all, is that twice the thickness is twice the warmth.

$The presser foot sinks 1.8 µm into a 2/2 twill. A thickness gauge presses a flat foot onto the cloth at 1 kPa and reads the gap. It does not read the geometric thickness. The foot sinks until the area it is touching can carry the load, and that is 2.57% of the plan at a depth of 1.8 µm — so a 2/2 twill in sheeting whose outside stands 381.6 µm apart measures 379.8 µm. How far the foot sinks is a property of the draft, because the bearing area near the top is, and a weave with plateaux stops the foot in a fraction of the distance a plain weave lets it travel. The transverse stiffness used here is fitted to measured fabric thickness rather than predicted: across its published range the reading moves between 377.0 µm and 380.6 µm.$ What cloth is

A thickness gauge reads the draft

A presser foot does not stop at the top of a cloth. It sinks until the area it is touching can carry the load, and how far that is depends on the shape of the bearing curve near the top — which is a property of the weave. So there is a weave term inside a measurement nobody thinks of as a weave measurement, and it is worth about one per cent.

Three kinds of surface, and only one of them starts open. The bearing curves of a 2/2 twill in sheeting, of a terry loop pile, and of a cut corduroy pile of 30 tex, over the first six per cent of a cloth's thickness. The woven curve opens as the square root of the depth and the loop pile's does the same, because a loop's top is a curved thread like any other. The cut pile does not open: it is a flat line at 5.2% of the plan, from a depth of nothing, because a blade severed every tuft in one pass and left every end in one plane. That is not a larger contact area, it is a different kind of contact area — one that does not vanish as the load goes to zero, which is a property no woven surface has.

Compound and figured cloths

A pile is the only surface with no crowns

Every other fabric touches on the tops of curved threads, so its contact vanishes as the load goes to zero and the pressure on what is touching rises without limit. A cut pile touches on flat ends left in one plane by a blade — so its contact is finite at no load at all, its pressure concentration is bounded, and it is the only fabric whose abrasion mass loss is an honest measure of its damage.

A knitted loop, solved rather than drawn. 3 courses by 3 wales of a 20 tex cotton jersey at a 3.5 mm loop, tightness factor 12.8, with one stitch picked out. The centre line is the curve that minimises the yarn's own bending between one interlacing and the next, and the yarn is drawn at its own width of 167 µm so that the crowding is the fabric's rather than the drawing's. It is rounder than the horseshoe a knitting diagram draws, and deliberately so: a diagram draws the topology and an elastica draws the mechanics, and a rod with a fixed length between two fixed points does not hug a rectangle. Half the yarn between two interlacings is spare — the straight line between them is 51% of the yarn available — which is what lets a loop be solved as a free elastica at all. The tightest bend anywhere on it is 1.00 times one over the yarn diameter, the curvature of a yarn wrapped hard round another of the same size. Nothing arranged that: the only things imposed are the loop length and the two spacings.

Knits and other structures

A loop is nine tenths free run

Half the yarn in a knitted stitch is slack — the straight line between two interlacings is a little over half the thread available to span it. That is two orders of magnitude more room than a woven thread has, and it is why a knitted loop is a shape that can be solved rather than a shape that has to be constructed.

A slack twisted yarn takes a coil of one size. A 20 tex cotton at 1400 turns a metre. Its own torque is 2.060 µN·mm at the free bound, and a rod under tension T is stable while its torque stays under 2·√(B·T). Below that tension the straight state stops being a minimum and the thread wraps on itself at a radius of 0.91 mm. That radius is 2B/M, which is 2/(r·ω) once the torque is written out: it depends on the twist and on the ratio of the two stiffnesses, and on neither stiffness itself.

Pattern and colour

A crepe is a yarn that will not lie still

A crepe cloth's pebbled surface is the yarn's own torque acting on a cloth that cannot resist it. The instability that makes a slack yarn snarl says how large the pebbles should be, and the answer is a millimetre — which is what a crepe looks like.

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.

After the loom

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.

What a tear asks for is the weakest of a few. A tensile test pulls every thread in the width and averages them. A tear pulls the handful in the triangle at the tip of the cut, and what lets it move is whichever of those is weakest — so the quantity that governs is the minimum of a small sample, and two things follow that no mean can show. Its expectation is below the mean: at CV 15% the weakest of 4 is 0.853 of the mean thread, and the weakest of 40 is 0.718. And its scatter is enormous compared with a tensile test's: 10.9% against the 0.75% a mean of four hundred threads would show. A tear strength that varies by a tenth between specimens of the same cloth is not a badly run test. It is the only answer an extreme of four can give.

Cloth doing a job

A tear asks fewer threads than a pull

A strip test averages a hundred threads and a tear interrogates four. That difference alone accounts for the two things everybody knows about tear testing — that it reads low, and that it scatters — without anything about the cloth being different between the two tests.

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.

Mechanics and drape

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.

$A 20 tex cotton yarn and the fibre standing off it. 6 mm of a 20 tex ring-spun cotton yarn with the hair population this site computes from the yarn's own count and staple — 0.89 hairs per millimetre, every one of them drawn. The two axes are at different scales and have to be — the yarn is 167 µm across and its hairs reach past a millimetre, so a picture at one scale is either a bare line or a black rectangle. Along the yarn is 99 pixels to the millimetre and off it is 74, a 1-fold exaggeration of the vertical. Lengths are drawn from the exponential the model predicts, mean 621 µm; the rules mark one, two and three millimetres with the count a hair-counting instrument reports at each, and the hairs crossing each rule in the drawing are the ones those counts are about. At the yarn's own surface the long hairs cover 1.1% of the space beside it, which is why the picture is mostly gap. Nothing here is the short population, which carries most of the protruding length and none of the reach; and a hair reaching past the room the canvas has is drawn to the edge of it, so the very longest few are shortened in the drawing and not in the arithmetic.$ What cloth is

A yarn's surface is a distribution

This collection has computed where a cloth stops, and every one of those numbers is a statement about yarn. What a finger, a plate, a droplet or a ray of light actually meets first is a population of fibre ends standing off the yarn — and it is a population, with a count and a length, rather than a layer with a thickness.

Compound and figured cloths

Hair, nap and pile are one construction

There are three surfaces made of fibre standing off a cloth, and they have been arrived at from three different directions and in three different fields. They are the same object at three settings, and what separates them is not what they are but how much of them anybody decided.

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.

Knits and other structures

The relaxed knit is not at a minimum

Differentiate a loop's bending energy along the fabric instead of across it and the answer should be zero, because a relaxed fabric is one nothing is pulling. It is not zero. It is tens of newtons a metre, downhill in both directions at once — and the three relaxation states everybody measures run the wrong way up the slope.

Twist is not torsion: a straight rod, twisted. A rod drawn with a cross painted along it, and the cross turned through 2 full turns from one end to the other. The rod is straight, so it has no Frenet frame at all — a straight line has no osculating plane to turn. The two discs above are the rod's ends seen down its own axis, which is where the twist is an angle rather than a foreshortened wiggle. The twist is the rotation of the painted cross about the rod's own tangent, and it is 2 turns whatever the centre line does. That is the quantity a torsional rigidity resists, and it is why a collection that solved a plane curve had not thereby dealt with torsion.

Pattern and colour

A shadow stripe is two twists

A cloth striped in one colour, where the stripe is visible only because alternate bands are spun the other way round. The pattern is carried entirely by which way the fibres lie on the yarn's surface, and it disappears when the light moves.

$A bundle is weaker than the threads it is made of. Threads pulled in parallel do not break together. The weakest goes first and hands its load to the rest, which are now carrying more than they were, so the bundle's peak load is reached before every thread is at its own strength. With a load per surviving thread of x carried by the fraction that has not yet broken, the bundle's strength per thread is the largest value of x(1 − F(x)) — Daniels' maximum, which for a lognormal at CV 15% is 0.7380 of the mean thread, reached with 93% of the threads still unbroken. A simulated bundle that knows none of that arithmetic sits above the limit at every finite size — its strength is a maximum over the sample it happens to have drawn — and closes on it as the bundle grows: 0.753, 0.744, 0.741 at the last three sizes. The scatter falls the other way, from 14.5% at one thread to 0.7% at 1600.$ Mechanics and drape

A bundle is weaker than its threads

Threads pulled together do not break together. The weakest goes first and hands its load to the rest, so a bundle carries its maximum well before every thread is at its own limit — and the shortfall is a quarter, decided by the spread and by nothing else.

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.

Setting and geometry

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.

Cloth doing a job

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.

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

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.

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.

The fold the trade actually makes. 2 singles of 20 tex cotton at 800 turns a metre, folded at 566 — a ratio of 0.707. That is 1/√2, the ratio at which the fold's surface helix angle equals its singles' — 22.8° — because a fold of 2 singles is √2 times the diameter. The trade's own bracket for 2 folds is 0.6 to 0.75, and it contains this number.

Compound and figured cloths

A leno twists what a weave only crosses

Every woven cloth's threads have a linking number of zero, and that is why an open cloth slips. A leno is the one woven structure whose warp ends wind about one another, so it is the one whose threads are linked — and it is famously the structure that holds at setts where nothing else does.

Knits and other structures

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.

Folding, and what it takes out of the singles. Two 20 tex singles spun at 800 turns per metre and folded the other way at 460 — a ratio of 0.575, which is the trade's own and is a measurement rather than a derivation. A single held at its ends and wound round its neighbour turns about its own axis once for every turn of the fold, so it is left with 340 turns per metre of its own: its surface fibres lie at 10.1° to its axis rather than the 22.8° they were spun at. Folding untwists. The short strokes are drawn at that residual angle; the two long curves are centre lines and are not the yarn — each strand is itself a bundle of 118 fibres, and the residual angle is what holds them.

Cloth doing a job

A sewing thread is a different animal

It is folded, balanced, lubricated and finished, and every one of those is an answer to a requirement no weaving yarn has. The lubricant is the interesting one: it makes the thread sewable by lowering the friction that was holding its own fibres together.

What a raising machine can catch in a 2/2 twill. The draft with every weft float long enough for a raising wire to lift marked on it. The teeth need an unsupported length of thread on the surface, so a cloth in which every thread is bound at every crossing offers them nothing at all — which is why a napped fabric is always a twill or a satin and never a plain weave.

After the loom

Raising moves the surface onto the hairs

A raising machine pulls fibre ends up out of the floats, and what a finger or a light then meets is not the cloth's surface at all but a layer of loose fibre standing above it. The criterion for which cloths can be raised is the same criterion, exactly, that decides which cloths have crown line — so raising spends the surface that would have made the fabric shine.

One hairiness reading does not fix the other. Every yarn on this curve has exactly the same total protruding fibre length — the quantity an integrating hairiness meter reports — and they differ in how that length is distributed. The count of hairs at least three millimetres long runs from 170 to 4354 per hundred metres, a factor of 26, across decay lengths real yarns actually have. The two instruments read two functionals of one population: the first moment N₀λ and the tail N₀e^(−3/λ). A correlation between them can exist only if λ is fixed across the yarns being compared, and λ is a fibre property, so it is not. That is the whole of why the trade's two hairiness numbers have never agreed, and it is arithmetic rather than instrumentation. What the figure cannot show is which of the two predicts anything: the tail does, because pilling, prickle and a printed edge all need reach.

What cloth is

Two hairiness meters read two moments

The trade has two instruments for yarn hairiness and thirty years of failing to predict either from the other. They are not measuring the same thing badly. One reports the first moment of a distribution and the other reports a tail probability, and two functionals of one curve are related only through a parameter neither of them reports.

Knits and other structures

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.

Compound and figured cloths

A braid is a third way to hold threads

Weaving holds by friction and knitting holds by linking. A braid does neither: its strands travel across the structure and back, so no pair of them is linked and no pair of them returns to where it started — and it holds without a reed, a beat-up or a sett.

$Where a 20 tex yarn breaks, against how much was clamped. A tensile test clamps a length of yarn and pulls until the thinnest section between the clamps gives. So a yarn's strength is a minimum, and a minimum depends on how many independent tries the sample contains. The tries are not sections — a plane can be taken anywhere — but staple lengths, because two planes closer together than one fibre share most of their fibres. At 28 mm staple a 100 mm specimen holds 3.6 independent tries and a 500 mm one holds 17.9, and the longer test reads 11% lower. The spread is not fitted either: it is the evenness floor at 118 fibres times an index of 1.35, which is 13.4%.$ Mechanics and drape

A yarn breaks at its thinnest place

A tensile test does not measure a yarn. It measures the worst section between the clamps — so evenness and strength are one measurement taken twice, and the number of independent tries in a specimen is set by the length of a fibre.

Where the strain goes, at a 25° twist. Extend a twisted yarn and the fibres in it are not all strained alike. If each stays at its own radius — the affine model — a fibre at helix angle θ takes cos²θ of the yarn's strain, so the fibre on the axis takes all of it and the fibre at the surface takes 82.1% of it. The core reaches its breaking extension first and the yarn cannot realise its own fibres. If instead every fibre migrates between the core and the surface, every fibre has the same mean strain and they all break together. The two are exactly computable — 0.8214 against 0.9509 of what the fibres could give — and the ratio between them, 2/(cos α(1 + cos α)) = 1.158, is what migration is worth. The shading is that arithmetic and the two panels use the same scale.

Mechanics and drape

A straight fibre cannot share the load

Extend a twisted yarn and its fibres are not all strained alike: the one on the axis takes the whole of it and the one at the surface takes cos²α. So they do not break together, and what a wandering fibre is worth comes out as one expression with nothing fitted in it.

Z twist at 1600 turns per metre. A 20 tex cotton yarn, 0.167 mm across, with its surface fibres drawn as the helices they are. The angle between a surface fibre and the yarn's axis is 40.0°, and it is the only quantity in this family: the yarn is 13.8% shorter than the fibre in it and carries 59% of the strength the same fibre would give lying straight.

Weaves

The other crepe is in the yarn

A crepe weave puts the texture in the matrix. A crepe yarn puts it nowhere the matrix can see: the cloth is a plain weave, and the surface comes from a thread twisted so hard that it shortens by a seventh and spends the rest of its life trying to untwist.

$A cloth loses its strength long before it loses its mass. Rubbing a 2/2 twill in sheeting down, plotted against how much of its own solid volume has gone. The lower curve is the fraction of the plan the rubbing is touching; the upper is the fraction of the warp's section that has been cut away. They are wildly different because the wear is spread and the damage is concentrated: material comes off the whole surface, but it comes off every thread at the same place, and a thread breaks at its thinnest place. At one per cent of the mass gone the section is already 5% smaller. That is why a fabric that looks barely worn fails a strength test, and why abrasion resistance measured as mass loss and abrasion resistance measured as residual strength are two different quantities that are quoted as one.$ Cloth doing a job

A cloth loses its strength before its mass

Rub a fabric and it sheds material from all over its surface, but it sheds it from every thread at the same place — and a thread breaks at its thinnest place. So the strength gone is always several times the mass gone, the ratio is computable from the bearing curve, and it is worst for the weave whose crowns are points.

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.

After the loom

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.

At 0.1 kilopascals the plate is standing on hair. A flat foot pressed onto sheeting at 0.1 kPa, over 3 mm of cloth. It stops 25 µm above the cloth's own crowns, because that is where the hairs it is bending can carry the load: of the 10 hairs drawn, 9 reach higher than the foot and are laid over under it, and the rest are untouched. The vertical scale is set by the approach and not by the layer — 5188 pixels to the millimetre off the cloth against 192 along it — because the foot's height above the crowns is tens of micrometres and the layer it stands in is more than a millimetre, so a picture at one scale shows the second and not the first. The thickness reported is 0.432 mm against 0.382 mm for the cloth itself, so 12% of the reading is a population and not a fabric. The hair layer carries up to 0.23 kPa before the foot reaches the crowns at all. A laid-over hair is drawn as two straight segments where a real one is an elastica: the corner is a convenience and the height it turns at is the measurement. What the picture cannot show is that a bent hair leans on its neighbours, which the arithmetic behind it does not know either.

What cloth is

A light touch never reaches the crowns

This collection found that a plain weave touches at points and every other cloth touches along lines, and that the difference is an exponent rather than a factor. It is a real result about a real surface, and at the pressures a fabric is actually touched at, nothing ever reaches that surface.

Knits and other structures

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.

The pressure a 23° twist puts on its own fibres. A twisted yarn squeezes itself. Every fibre under tension at a radius pulls inward with sin²θ of its tension per unit length, and integrating outward to the surface — where the pressure is zero by definition, because there is nothing outside to push against — gives p(r) = ½σ(cos²θ(r) − cos²α) in closed form. At a surface angle of 23° the pressure on the axis is 7.6 per cent of the core fibre's own axial stress and the mean over the section is 3.61 per cent of it. The shading is that closed form and the curve is the same function plotted; the shape is what matters, and its one uncompromising feature is the zero at the edge. The outermost fibres are held by nothing, which is why a yarn is hairy, why a surface fibre is the one that comes away on a finger, and why singeing changes a yarn's behaviour out of all proportion to the mass it removes.

Mechanics and drape

What grips the end of a fibre

A twisted yarn squeezes itself, and the squeeze holds the fibre ends in. Write the slip and the break out side by side and the fibre's own strength cancels — and so does the load on the yarn — leaving a gripped length that depends on fineness, friction and the twist and on nothing else.

Both halves of the twist curve, at 28 mm staple. The falling curve is obliquity and is exact — the affine end of the bracket, computed from the helix and nothing else. The rising curve is cohesion and is the half this collection had declined: a fibre end is gripped by friction under the twist's own radial pressure, the fibre's strength and the yarn's load cancel out of the comparison, and what is left is a critical length that depends on the twist through a pure function of the angle. Their product has a maximum at a twist factor of 3101 — 693 turns per metre at 20 tex, a surface angle of 20° — which is inside the range spinners use. The scale of the rising curve is fitted, through a contact efficiency of 0.05, and moving it moves the optimum; what it cannot move is the ordering between two staples or two fibres, which is what the two claims made from this figure are about.

Setting and geometry

The other half of the twist curve

This collection computed the falling half of the strength–twist curve exactly and declined the rising half as being out of reach. It is not out of reach. With the grip derived rather than assumed, the optimum comes out at a twist factor — and the same twist factor at every count, which is why the trade quotes twist factors at all.

A round thread reflects a beam into a fan. A round thread seen end-on, with a beam arriving from straight above. Every point across the thread has its own normal, tilted by the angle it sits at, and mirrors the beam through twice that angle — so a single direction in becomes a whole fan out, spread across the thread and not at all along it. Seen from the front that fan is a highlight lying along the thread, exactly as long as the length of thread that is straight, which is the float. Nothing about this depends on the fibre. A cylinder of any material returns a fan, and the only way to narrow it is to stop the section being a cylinder — which is what a calender does.

Weaves

A float reflects into a line

A cylinder cannot return a beam to a point. Its normals sweep the whole half-turn across it and nothing at all along it, so a straight thread throws light into a fan — seen as a highlight lying along the thread, exactly as long as the length of thread that is straight. The lobe of a satin is twice as narrow along the thread as across it; the lobe of a plain weave is exactly round.

$Two cloths touch on a fraction of what one cloth does. A 2/2 twill in sheeting pressed against a flat plate, and the same cloth pressed against another piece of itself. At an approach of 24.9 µm the single surface is touching 15.87% of the plan and the pair 3.130% — a factor of 5. The reason is that a gap between two rough surfaces is the sum of two depths, so both surfaces have to be near their own maxima at the same place, and the chance of that is the product of two small numbers. The pair's curve is the convolution of the two height distributions, computed exactly on histograms rather than fitted to a Gaussian — because a woven surface is bimodal and nothing about it is Gaussian.$ After the loom

Friction is two surfaces, not one

A gap between two rough bodies is the sum of two depths, so two cloths face to face touch on the convolution of their height distributions rather than on either of them. At the approach a light touch produces that is twenty times less contact than the same cloth against a plate — which is why a fabric's friction against a plate and against another fabric are two different measurements.

A seam stands 763 µm proud of a cloth 382 µm thick. A 10 mm seam allowance of 3 plies in a 60 mm panel of one, in sheeting. The seam stands 763 µm above the body of the garment — which is 102 times the depth at which the body cloth first comes into contact with anything at all. So a flat surface rubbed across this garment touches only the seam, over 16.7% of the area drawn, until it has crushed a whole thickness of fabric. Everything this collection computes about where wear lands on a woven surface applies inside that 16.7%, and the other 83.3% is not being touched.

Cloth doing a job

A seam stands proud and wears first

A seam allowance is three plies where the garment is one, so it stands three quarters of a millimetre above a cloth whose own surface has a few micrometres of contact in it. Anything flat rubbed across the garment touches the seam and nothing else — all of the wear on two or three per cent of the area, until a whole thickness of fabric has been crushed.

One canopy, two opposite outcomes, decided by a sign. What a canopy does to a drop, for sheeting raised 32-fold. A rough surface multiplies the cosine of the intrinsic contact angle by its roughness ratio, which here is 2.0 — a hair is a cylinder and contributes πd of surface for every d of shadow. So a fibre that wets at all is driven to complete spreading, and one that does not is driven to a Cassie state sitting on 32.4% solid and air. The dashed diagonal is what the bare fibre would do; the canopy pushes every point away from ninety degrees, in whichever direction it already lay. Raising is therefore not a wetting treatment or a repellency treatment — it is an amplifier, and which one it turns out to be was settled by the chemistry before the raising machine was switched on. What the figure cannot show is which state a real drop reaches, because both are available near the hinge and the one it finds depends on how it arrived.

What cloth is

The hairs decide the sign of the wetting

Raising a cloth is not a wetting treatment and it is not a repellency treatment. It is an amplifier, and which of the two it turns out to be was settled in the dyehouse before the raising machine was switched on — by whether the fibre's own contact angle was above or below ninety degrees.

Why a cuff is ribbed. The force a knit pulls back with, over the range a cuff is used across. It rises the whole way — 0.79 N per metre at 23% to 3.38 at 104% — and it is small throughout, which is the combination a cuff needs and almost nothing else supplies. A rib gets its extension by geometry, folding alternate wales to opposite faces so that its relaxed width is about half its opened one, and it gets its recovery from the loop reconfiguring. Neither is the yarn stretching, which is why a cuff made of a fibre with no elastic recovery at all still works.

Knits and other structures

A rib pulls back on a force the loop supplies

A cuff has to give a great deal at almost no load and come back reliably, and no ordinary material does both. A rib gets its extension from folding, which is geometry, and its return from the loop reconfiguring, which is now a computable force — under four newtons a metre over the whole range a cuff works across.

plain over 5-end satin: what each layer's warp does. A warp end of each layer of a double cloth, in section over the same span of cloth, with the length of warp each eats drawn beneath. The crimps come from Peirce's geometry asked about a thread that bends at its own average rate rather than at every crossing, and they are 14.35% for the plain and 2.03% for the 5-end satin. They are not the same, so the two layers consume warp at different rates: a hundred metres of cloth takes 114.4 m of warp from one and 102.0 m from the other. A beam delivers one rate, so the difference has nowhere to go and accumulates with the length woven — one pick spacing after 4 mm. What the sections cannot show is the yarn's thickness, which is exaggerated so the path is legible; the crimps beside them are computed at the real diameter and are not read off these drawings.

Compound and figured cloths

Two layers need two beams

A layer weaving a metre of cloth eats one plus its crimp metres of warp, and a beam delivers one rate. A plain face over a five-end satin back differs by twelve percentage points of crimp, which is twelve metres of warp over a hundred-metre piece and one pick spacing of slack after four millimetres of weaving. The difference has nowhere to go and does not settle — so the only double cloth that can share a beam is two layers of the same weave at the same sett.

Mechanics and drape

The singles inside a ply are not the singles

Folding leaves each single with a fraction of its own twist, which should ruin its grip on its own fibres. It does not, because the ply's helix presses on the singles exactly as a single's helix presses on its fibres — and across the whole practical range the two very nearly cancel.

A hair layer is a balance, so singeing does not stay done. The hair population of a 20 tex cotton yarn under rubbing, started from a singed cloth and from an unusually fuzzy one. Abrasion does two opposite things: it frees ends that spinning left buried, from a supply of 2.23 per millimetre in the surface shell, and it removes hairs that are long enough to be caught. Where the two meet is a fixed point at 1.43 per millimetre, and the cloth goes there from either side with the same time constant — 248 cycles to halve the distance, whichever direction it is travelling. A singeing is therefore undone in a few hundred rubs, because the flame changed the stock and not the balance. What is predicted here is that a fixed point exists, that it does not remember the starting state, and that one rate serves both directions; where it sits relative to the spun level needs two rates the model does not supply, and it is set to reproduce the one thing everyone has noticed, which is that fabrics get fuzzier as they are worn.

After the loom

A hair layer is a balance, not a stock

Singeing takes under one per cent of a cloth's mass and changes its lustre, its friction, its printability and its pilling. It also does not stay done, because rubbing frees fibre ends as fast as it breaks them off, and a flame changes the stock while leaving the balance exactly where it was.

Cloth doing a job

Abrasion takes the hairs first

An abrasion test reports milligrams lost against cycles, and the first milligrams off any fabric are not fabric. On a bare cloth that stage is over in a few thousand cycles. On a napped one it is not over by the end of the test, so a Martindale on a fleece never measures the fleece.

A rib crosses a gap where a jersey crosses a diameter. A one-by-one rib in section across 5 wales, drawn at a bed gap of 3 yarn diameters — 0.501 mm — because the relaxed gap of a rib is a measurement this collection does not hold and every figure of one says what it was drawn at. Alternate wales sit on opposite beds, so every sinker loop between them travels the whole gap. In a jersey the same yarn climbs one diameter, 0.167 mm. That single difference takes the contact force from 38.30 mN at 11.7° out of the fabric to 72.51 mN at 16.2°, and the through-thickness part from 7.81 mN to 20.17 mN.

Knits and other structures

A rib climbs a gap

A jersey's yarn crosses one diameter between interlacings because that is what a crossing of two threads is. A rib's crosses the whole distance between the two beds. Nothing else in the model changes, and that one length is the whole mechanical difference between the fabrics.

The force at an interlacing, which no longer lies in the fabric. A crossing of a relaxed jersey in section on the left, with the thickness expanded 3×, and on the right the contact force drawn at the angle the solve gives it — which is a true angle, unlike anything in the section beside it. The head of one course and the feet of the next lie one yarn diameter apart through the fabric, 0.167 mm, so the interlacing is not a point in a plane and the force at it is not in one either. It comes out at 38.30 mN a stitch, turned 11.75° out of the fabric: 37.50 mN along the wales, which is what friction has to hold, and 7.81 mN through the thickness, which is what holds the two faces apart. Divided by the area a stitch occupies the second is 15.1 kPa, or 113 mmHg — a pressure, and the quantity a compression measurement reports.

What cloth is

What a thickness gauge reads on a knit

The structure says two yarn diameters and the gauge says more, and the gap is not an error in either. A gauge lands on the highest crowns, through a canopy of protruding fibre, under a load that has already begun to compress both — and it does that on a surface that is nothing but crowns.

The magnification a cloth will carry. The largest magnification a moiré can be read at, against the irregularity of the cloth making it. The points are measured: a grating whose spacings are drawn from a seeded lognormal is laid against a perfect one, the fringes are found from the phase difference, and the gain is recorded at which their count first departs from what the ideal beat predicts. The product of the irregularity and that gain comes out at 0.82 to 0.84 across every irregularity tried, so the ceiling is 0.84 divided by the coefficient of variation — the solid curve. The dashed curve is the accumulated-wander model, in which position errors random-walk and the ceiling goes as the inverse square; it is wrong by a factor of 42 at a two per cent irregularity. What the plot cannot show is what a cloth's spacing irregularity actually is: it has not been measured, and the curve is therefore a prediction with an unmeasured input.

Pattern and colour

A moiré is a vernier, and it magnifies the error too

Two gratings a per cent apart in pitch beat at a hundred pitches, so a moiré reads a pitch difference at a hundred times — which is what a vernier is. The magnification is free and its ceiling is not: the fringes split when one thread's own spacing error reaches 0.84 of the pitch difference the beat is built on, so the usable gain is 0.84 divided by the cloth's coefficient of variation, inversely and not inverse-squarely. At an ordinary yarn's spacing irregularity, a moiré carries a magnification of five.

How many layers the repeat, the harness and the beams each allow. Three ceilings on the number of layers a double cloth can have, for five layer weaves. The repeat's bound is half its ends and is a property of the notation. The harness's is the strain budget — 13 shafts on an ordinary broad loom at a 1.0% warp strain limit — divided by the shafts one layer of that weave costs. The beams' is how many warps the loom carries, which is 2. The shortest of each three is marked, and it is the beams at the coarse end of the table and the harness at the fine end; the repeat is never the binding one except at two-end layers, where it happens to coincide with the harness. A double cloth of eight-end satin layers needs 16 shafts and the budget is 13, so it is a jacquard construction by arithmetic rather than by choice. What the bars cannot show is the pick rate: a k-layer cloth needs k times the picks per centimetre of finished cloth and takes k times as long to weave, which is a cost rather than a ceiling and is the reason four-layer cloths are rare even where they are possible.

Compound and figured cloths

The repeat allows four layers and the loom allows two

A repeat of eight ends can hold four separable cloths, and there is a witness that reaches the bound exactly. No loom weaves four. The harness's strain budget buys thirteen shafts and a layer costs its own weave's shaft count, so five-end satin layers stop at two and eight-end satin layers cannot be doubled on a dobby at all — and two differing layers already want a beam each. The notation's ceiling is the only one of the three that is never binding.

Which end of the bracket a thread in cloth is at. A yarn bends as a solid rod while its fibres cannot slide and as a loose bundle once they can, and the crossover is a curvature: the coherent state demands an axial force in the outer fibre that has to be built up by friction under the twist's own radial pressure. The curves are the crossover radius against twist at four contact efficiencies, the top one being 1.0 — the claim that fibres touch along their whole length, which nobody makes. The rule at the bottom is the radius a thread is bent to by its own crimp in a cloth, about 0.25 mm. Every curve is above the rule by at least 19-fold, so a thread in cloth is at the free end of its bracket at every twist and every efficiency, and the collection's habit of using the lower bound is a result rather than a convention.

Mechanics and drape

Twist decides where in the bracket

A yarn's bending rigidity can only be bracketed, and the bracket is three hundred wide. What decides where a yarn sits in it is whether its fibres can slide — and for a thread bent by its own crimp in a cloth, the answer is not close.

A calender multiplies the highlight by 32, and all of it is width. A 2/2 twill in sheeting pressed at increasing force, with the specular area recomputed at each state from the standard compression model. It rises from 0.91% of the plan to 28.9%, a factor of 32, while the cloth thins from 381.6 µm to 186.1 µm. The gain is not in the length of the crowns: that moves by 5 per cent. It is in their width, which moves by 31.8 times, because pressing puts a flat top on the section and a flat top has one normal rather than a fan of them. The finish does not polish the thread. It changes the dimension of the highlight, from a line to a band, and the arithmetic says so by refusing to put any of the gain in the other factor.

Weaves

A calender buys the width

Press a cloth and its lustre multiplies by twenty-four. None of that comes from the length of its crowns, which moves by six per cent; all of it comes from their width, because a flattened section has a plane on top of it and a plane has one normal rather than a fan of them. The arithmetic refuses to put any of the gain in the other factor.

The strong fibre is the one that pills. Standing pills per unit area by fibre, relative to wool, at one and the same fuzz supply — every row is the same cloth raised the same amount, so the only thing varying is how long a pill survives once it exists. A pill is not made, it is kept: rubbing generates it and rubbing breaks the fibres that tie it down, and a tie survives in proportion to how much force it takes to break. So polyester carries 18 times wool's standing population from the same generation rate, and the ordering here is exactly the ordering of tenacity and nothing else. Wool sheds its pills because wool's ties break. No two real fabrics have the same fuzz supply, which is why a wool knit still pills more than a cotton shirting in practice — the comparison drawn here isolates the tie and says nothing about the generation, and reading it as a ranking of fabrics would be wrong.

Cloth doing a job

A pill is anchored, not made

Every account of pilling starts with how a ball of fibre forms and stops there, which explains why fabrics pill and not why some of them stay pilled. A pill is not a thing that happens; it is a standing population, and the number on a fabric at any moment is a generation rate times a lifetime.

$A print is as sharp as the hairs are long. How far ink carried on a hair reaches past a printed edge into the unprinted cloth, for sheeting in three states. A hair lying near the edge bridges as far as its own length, and the number bridging at least a distance x is (n_A λ/2)e^(−x/λ) — an exponential with the population's own decay length — so the visible feather is a quantile rather than a mean, taken here at one hair per 50 millimetres of edge. As woven the feather is 1911 µm, which is a fifteenth of an inch and coarser than any screen worth engraving: the cloth cannot hold better than 7 lines to the inch whatever the printer does. Singeing caps it at the flame's own reach of 200 µm and takes the cloth to 63 lines — a factor of 10, bought by burning off a fraction of one per cent of the cloth's mass. That is why singeing comes before printing and why nobody prints a fine figure on a raised cloth.$ After the loom

A print is as sharp as the hairs are long

Singeing comes before printing in every finishing route ever written down and the reason given is that the cloth must be smooth. The reason is sharper than that: ink carried on a fibre end reaches as far as the fibre is long, so the feather on a printed edge is a quantile of a hair population and nothing else.

The contact force turns as the climb grows. The two components of the contact force against the climb, for a 20 tex cotton jersey at a 3.5 mm loop. The force along the wales is what friction has to hold and the force through the thickness is what holds the fabric open, and the second is bought at the expense of the first. At a jersey's own climb of one diameter they are 37.50 mN and 7.81 mN; at four diameters, which is a rib on an open gap, they are 22.39 mN and 18.61 mN. The friction balance is the ratio: friction has the whole force to work with and only the along-the-wales part to hold, so the coefficient a relaxed knit would need falls from a half to 0.490.

What cloth is

Every fabric's thread lies in a plane

A woven thread's crimp wave lies in a plane at right angles to the cloth. A knitted loop lies in a plane twelve degrees off it. Both halves of this collection turn out to be one picture with one angle in it, and the angle decides how much of a fabric's contact force acts through its thickness.

$Two exponents in a compression curve. How far a flat plate sinks into plain, 2/2 twill, satin 8 in sheeting, against the pressure it is applying, on logarithmic axes where a power law is a straight line. The measured slopes over the light end of the range are 0.50 for the plain, 0.67 for the 2/2 twill, 0.67 for the satin 8 — against two thirds predicted for any weave carrying a float and one half for a weave carrying none. The prediction is one line of algebra: pressure is a stiffness times a strain times a bearing fraction, the bearing fraction is a square root of depth for a plateau and linear in it for a point, so the pressure is the three-halves power in the first case and the square in the second. Nothing is fitted to produce it; the slopes are measured afterwards and compared. At the heavy end every curve bends, because the crowns have merged and the cloth has stopped being a surface and started being a solid — which is a different regime with a different law, and it belongs to the compaction of a fibre mass rather than to the geometry of an interlacement.$ Mechanics and drape

A cloth compresses along its own bearing curve

A fabric's pressure–thickness curve is always fitted with an empirical power law and the exponent is reported without explanation. It is not empirical. At light loads it is two thirds for any weave carrying a float and one half for a weave carrying none, and the two numbers come out of one line of algebra with nothing fitted in it.

Turn the cloth and the highlight changes hands. A 2/2 twill in sheeting turned under a light, with the specular area of each system counted separately at each angle. The warp peaks at 0° and the weft at 83°, a quarter turn apart, and neither returns anything worth seeing where the other peaks. The reason needs no dye and no interference: a warp crown's normals all lie in the plane across the warp and have no component along it, so a warp float can only mirror light that arrives from across the warp. A cloth woven with one colour in the warp and another in the weft therefore shows one colour at one angle and the other a quarter turn away, which is the whole of shot silk — a geometric effect that has been sold as a mysterious one for three hundred years.

Weaves

Turn the cloth and the shine changes hands

A warp crown's normals all lie in the plane across the warp and have no component along it, so a warp float can only mirror light that arrives from across the warp. Turn the cloth a quarter turn and the weft takes over. That is the whole of shot silk — a geometric effect with no dye that changes and no interference in it.

A fifth of a strong fibre buys most of its pilling. How long a pill survives on a wool fabric as nylon is blended into it, relative to the pure wool. A pill is held by several anchor fibres and survives while any of them holds, so its life is set by the strongest anchor it happens to have — and the chance that a pill with 8 anchors has at least one strong one is 1 − (1 − x)^8, which is already 83% at a fifth. The blend therefore gets 83% of the pure strong fibre's pill life while keeping the whole of the weak fibre's fuzz supply, which is the worst of both. Nine tenths of the way arrives by 30%. No average of the two fibres' properties produces this curve: it is a maximum over a small sample, and a maximum is not an average. It is also why a fifteen-per-cent polyamide in a wool knit is notorious, and the arithmetic says the reputation is deserved.

Cloth doing a job

The strong fibre is the one that pills

A pill survives while any one of its anchors holds, which is a maximum over a small sample rather than an average — and a maximum behaves nothing like an average. A fifth of a strong fibre in a blend buys four fifths of the pure strong fibre's pill life while leaving the whole of the weak fibre's fuzz supply in place.

All themes