Theme

The thread: Measured, not claimed — page 3

Page 3 of 6 of the essays on this thread.

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.

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.

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

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

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.

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

A colour order against a 2/2 twill. The visible face of a 2/2 twill under 2 colour orders, drawn at the repeat the divisor arithmetic allows and outlined at the repeat the surface has. A filled cell is a dark thread on the face, which is the warp's colour where the warp is up and the weft's where it is not — so none of these patterns is in the draft, and the draft is the same in all of them. The colour period and the weave repeat beat exactly as a reed's grouping beats against a weave: the surface repeats on the least common multiple of the two, which here is 8×8 and 4×4. What the panels cannot show is colour: the two threads are drawn as filled and empty, and two colours of similar value make a pattern far weaker than this.

Pattern and colour

A colour order beats the weave it is threaded on

The reed's grouping beats against the weave repeat and the arithmetic is a least common multiple. A colour order is a second grouping of the same warp and the arithmetic is identical — but where the reed's beat is a fault to be dented out of a cloth, the colour order's beat is the pattern the cloth is sold for. Across 472 colour orders on four weaves the divisor bound is the surface's exact repeat in 470 or more, and the handful that beat it have no pattern left at all.

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.

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.

A designed thin place does not get worse and an accidental one does. The thinnest place a yarn reaches, against how many gauge lengths of it are tested, for a slub yarn and for a randomly uneven yarn of the same 36.3% coefficient of variation. The slub's floor is its base count — 89% of its mean — and it is a horizontal line, because a designed variation has a stated minimum and never goes below it. The random yarn's minimum is an order statistic and falls without limit: 56% over 10 lengths and 22% over 30000. So the advantage is not a number but a function of how much yarn is being asked about, running from 1.6× to 4.0×. What the curve cannot show is the break itself: a yarn's strength at a thin place is not proportional to its linear density there, and the conversion needs a fibre model.

Compound and figured cloths

A designed thin place is kinder than an accidental one

A slub yarn and a badly spun one can carry exactly the same coefficient of variation, and the number tells a mill nothing about which it has. The designed variation has a floor — its base count, and it never goes below it — while the accidental one has a tail that falls further the more yarn is tested. At 36% CV the slub bottoms at 89% of its mean and the random yarn reaches 24%, and the gap widens from 1.6 to 3.7 times as the test grows from ten gauge lengths to ten thousand.

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.

Setting and geometry

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.

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

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.

After the loom

A loop is set and not sprung

The way out of a model that predicts a jersey should spread is to stop treating its yarn as a straight rod bent into a loop. A yarn that has been wetted, heated and dried has taken the loop as its own natural shape — and once the natural shape is the loop, every force downstream becomes computable with the relaxed fabric as the origin.

A rib is quietest at a gap of two diameters. The through-thickness force of a one-by-one rib against the bed gap it is knitted at, in units of the yarn's own diameter. It does not rise from the bottom, and the dip is geometry rather than noise: a crossing is shared between the two half periods either side of its sinker loop, and each of those also carries the interlacing's own diameter — one climbing with it and one against. At a gap of two diameters the second half period climbs nothing at all, and the fabric is at its quietest through its own thickness. Above that both halves climb the same way and everything rises together, which is the regime a real rib is knitted in: 14.8 mN at 5 diameters against 7.0 mN at two.

Knits and other structures

A rib is quietest at two diameters

Open the beds of a rib and everything about it should get stronger. It does not. The through-thickness force falls to a minimum at a bed gap of exactly two yarn diameters and rises on both sides of it, because a crossing's climb and an interlacing's own climb cancel there.

A bouclé at an overfeed of 0.80. A core of 20 tex running straight, an effect thread of 30 tex delivered 80 per cent faster than it, and a binder of 15 tex over the top. The surplus effect thread has nowhere to go but into loops, and their size is not a free choice: a semicircular loop of radius r consumes r(π − 2) of surplus, so at one loop every 3 mm the radius is 2.10 mm — 0.70 of the spacing. The yarn's resultant count is 89 tex and the sum of its three components is 65, because the effect enters multiplied by its own overfeed. What the drawing cannot show is the load path: the core and the binder are at the yarn's own length and the effect thread is longer than the yarn, so a pull on the yarn is carried by 39 per cent of its mass and the loops stay slack.

Compound and figured cloths

A fancy yarn has its crimp in the wrong thread

A bouclé is made by feeding an effect thread eighty per cent faster than the core it wraps, so the yarn contains more thread than it is long — which is crimp by this collection's own definition. A cloth's crimp is in the thread that carries the load, so removing it is the cloth's first extension. A bouclé's surplus is in a thread that carries nothing, so pulling the yarn stretches the core at once and the loops never straighten. Thirty-nine per cent of the yarn's mass is on the load path, and the other sixty-one is decoration.

Two layers in depth, and the beat perspective makes. An eye, a near grid and a far grid of the same pitch, with a ray from the eye to every bar of the far grid and a dot where each ray crosses the near one. The far bars land on the near layer at 8 to every 9, so the two grids drift out of register and back into it every 8 bars: in register the gaps line up and light comes through, half-way between them the far bars sit in the near gaps and block it. That spacing is the distance divided by the gap, times the pitch, and nothing about the threads or the angle between the layers enters it. The gap here is drawn at one eighth of the distance so the bars can be counted; two sheers 50 mm apart seen from 3 m are at a gain of 60. What the drawing cannot show is a real layer's thickness and its own irregular spacing, both of which the arithmetic treats as absent.

Pattern and colour

Two sheers make a moiré that walks with the viewer

Hang two identical sheer curtains a few centimetres apart and a moiré appears with no angle between them and no difference in their threads. Perspective alone makes the far one look finer. The fringes are p·V/D apart, which means they cover the same angle from every distance; they move one for one with a person walking past, which is the parallax of the horizon; and a far layer stretched by one per cent makes them vanish at exactly one distance, which says which layer is coarser and by how much.

Setting and geometry

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.

Weaves

A crepe is flat in its draft and not in its surface

A crepe weave is chosen by pushing the draft's correlations as flat as they will go. That criterion turns out to tie: on the base this collection uses, 4,416 of the 5,040 rearrangements reach the floor. Sixteen of them additionally spread their crown line perfectly evenly — and the crepe actually drawn is not one of the sixteen.

A thickness is a property of the pressure it was measured at. What a gauge reports for sheeting against the pressure it presses with. At 1 kPa it reads 0.382 mm, which is the cloth; at 0.02 kPa it reads 0.555 mm, which is the cloth plus 87 µm of hair on each face. The difference is 31% of the reading and it is not a compressibility: nothing in the fabric has been squashed, the foot has simply stopped in a different place. That is why every thickness standard specifies its pressure to two figures, and why comparing a thickness from one standard with a thickness from another is comparing two different measurements of two different objects. The dashed line is the cloth's own geometric thickness, which no reading below the crossover ever reaches.

Mechanics and drape

A compression curve is two laws in series

A published fabric compression exponent is a fitted number with no derivation attached, and this site has already said why: the range it is fitted over straddles two regimes. One of them turns out not to be in the cloth at all.

Thirty micrometres is a buckling load. The wool fibre diameter at which a protruding end reaches the measured threshold for prickle, against how far it protrudes. A fibre end pressed against skin is a column held at the cloth and free to slide at its tip, so it buckles at 20.19EI/ℓ² and carries no more load than that; below the threshold it bends away and is felt as touch, above it the load stands and is felt as pain. At a two-millimetre protrusion — which this site's own hair model puts in the top fifth of a wool's population — the threshold diameter is 32 µm, bracketed at 29–34 by the range of the measured force. Neither the thirty micrometres nor the two millimetres was put in. The band is the force bracket, and the fourth power in I = πd⁴/64 is what makes the boundary sharp: at a mean of 21 µm and a spread of 24%, 3.2% of the fibres are over it, and it is that few per cent that decides whether a garment can be worn.

Cloth doing a job

Prickle is a buckling load

The wool trade specifies comfort against skin by the percentage of fibres coarser than thirty micrometres, and the thirty is a measured boundary with no derivation attached. It is a column formula: solve for the diameter at which a protruding fibre end stops bending away and starts standing its ground, and thirty micrometres falls out.

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

After the loom

Two knits with one tightness factor are one knit

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

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.

What cloth 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.

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

Pattern and colour

A sheer hides whichever side is darker

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

Setting and geometry

Hairiness goes as the root of the count

A coarse yarn is hairier than a fine one and everybody knows it. What nobody has said is that its hairs are no longer — the count and the length obey different laws, one rises as a square root and the other does not move at all, and the identity behind both was asserted on this site for an entirely unrelated reason.

Warmth is a canopy, and a canopy grows as a logarithm. Thermal resistance of sheeting against how much its hair population has been multiplied by raising, both faces counted. The unraised cloth is given no still air at all, because its hairs cannot reach one another — n_A λ² is under one and there is no canopy to hold air still. Past the threshold the canopy's depth is λ·ln(n_A λ²), so every doubling of the hair population adds the same depth of nap and no more: the steps here are 434 µm apiece, all the way up. At 256× the nap is 3.07 mm deep and worth 39 times the cloth it grows on, which is the whole reason a flannel is warm and a poplin of the same yarn is not — a canopy is two parts in ten thousand fibre, so its conductivity is air's, while the cloth itself is a quarter fibre. What is claimed is a conduction resistance across a depth of nearly still air; whether the air is still is a question about flow and is not asked here.

Mechanics and drape

Warmth is mostly the hairs

This collection established that a fabric's thermal resistance is its thickness and not its fibre, and that twice the thickness is twice the warmth. It never asked what the thickness was made of. On a raised cloth almost none of it is cloth.

A shot effect needs a fibre with no ends. The peak-to-trough contrast of an eight-end satin in sheeting as the cloth is turned in the light, against how much hair stands on it. Bare, the contrast is 37 to one, because a straight thread's normals lie in the plane across it and the warp and the weft therefore reflect a quarter turn apart. A hair layer does two things and only one of them matters: it blocks, which takes the same factor off the peak and the trough and changes no contrast at all, and it returns light of its own, which is added to both. A hair population points every way at once, so its return has no azimuth in it — and adding a constant to both ends of a ratio of 37 destroys the ratio. On an ordinary spun cotton the contrast is already down to 5.1 to one; singeing recovers it to 29; raising kills it outright at 1.00. The one fibre with no staple length is the one fibre with no fibre ends, and every shot fabric ever woven is made of one.

Weaves

A hair layer veils a highlight

An eight-end satin's shine swings by a large factor as the cloth is turned, because a straight thread's normals lie in the plane across it. Put fibre ends on it and the swing disappears — not because the hairs block the light, which changes no contrast at all, but because they return light of their own that has no direction in it.

$A woven filter catches what its rating says it cannot. What fraction of a particle stream is intercepted by the hair layer of a filter cloth, against particle size, at three levels of raising. The cloth's own largest opening is 290 µm, so by geometry it stops nothing smaller than that at all — and the hairs catch a few per cent of particles ten and a hundred times finer, because a particle whose path passes within its own radius of a hair touches it. On a bare cloth the numbers are small; the point is that they are not zero, because a cake grows from the particles that stop, and once a cake exists the cloth is no longer doing the filtering. Raising the same cloth 32-fold takes a ten-micrometre capture from 0.8% to 23%, which is why a napped filter cloth exists. Interception is taken as the bare geometric ratio of the two diameters with no flow model behind it, so every number here is a lower bound.$ Cloth doing a job

A woven filter beats its own rating

A filter cloth's rating comes from the largest channel through it, and by geometry it stops nothing smaller. It stops a few per cent of particles ten times smaller anyway, on the fibre ends standing in its holes — and a few per cent is not filtration. It is exactly enough to start a cake, and after that the cloth is not filtering.

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

What holds a nap in a knit

A fibre buried in a woven cloth breaks rather than slides once about thirty-four millimetres of it is held, and a cotton staple buries about fourteen. In a knit the same figure is over a metre — seventy-five times the burial available — so nothing is ever close, and a raised knit sheds for the whole of its life.

What cloth is

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.

Compacting a spinning triangle moves one instrument and not the other. What happens to each hairiness reading when a 20 tex cotton yarn is spun compact instead of ring, as a percentage of the ring value. The total falls by 8% and the long hairs by 65%, a ratio of 8.3. The asymmetry is a prediction rather than a fit. Compaction removes ends that were unbound over a long stretch of the spinning triangle, which is the long population and nothing else; the short population is untouched, and it carries about 88% of the length the integrating instrument is adding up. So the instrument that sees everything barely moves and the one that sees only the tail collapses. The model under-states the fall in the total, because compaction certainly does something to the short population too and nothing here models it — the direction of that error is stated and it is the conservative one.

Setting and geometry

The spinning triangle decides the hair

A ring frame converges a flat ribbon of fibres to a round yarn, and for the length of that convergence the fibres at the ribbon's edges are held by nothing. Everything a spinner can do about hairiness is done in that triangle, and the two hairiness instruments respond to it by wildly different amounts.

What holds a thread in, as two factors. The two quantities whose product is the grip on a buried thread, for a woven poplin and a jersey of the same yarn. Each contact in the knit is lighter by 8.0 times, and the contacts are further apart by 5.6 — one per half loop length against one per thread spacing. They multiply rather than competing, so the grip per millimetre of buried thread is 31 times weaker in the knit, and the crossover length at which a thread breaks rather than slides moves with it: 11.6 mm in the cloth and 461 in the knit. The two factors are drawn separately because their product is two orders of magnitude and a bar chart of it would put the knit's bar below the width of a line.

Cloth doing a job

The knitted pilling criterion gets its number

Knitwear pills and shirting does not, and the standing explanation here has been that a knit presents more exposed yarn under less pressure between its threads. The second half had no number. It has one now, and it is bigger than the argument needed: the grip on a buried fibre is thirty times weaker in a knit than in a woven cloth of the same yarn.

Knits and other structures

How thick a knit is

Two centre lines pass at a diameter and each has a radius on either side, so a plain jersey is two yarn diameters thick with nothing fitted. It does not depend on the gauge, it lands inside the band of this collection's woven cloths, and it is lower than any gauge will read.

A knitted loop is a plane curve in a plane that is not the fabric's. A relaxed 20 tex jersey at a 3.5 mm loop, seen from the end of a course. Each course is a straight line because it is one: a half period leaves and arrives along the course direction, so the plane it bends in contains that direction, and a plane curve seen along a line in its own plane projects to a segment. The upper panel expands the thickness 3× so the arrangement can be seen and no angle may be measured off it; the lower panel is the same fabric at one scale, where the tilt is what it really is. The angle is 11.75°: a climb of one yarn diameter, 0.167 mm, against a drop of a course spacing and a diameter, 0.803 mm. Successive courses overlap by exactly one diameter, which is the interlacing, and the fabric is therefore 0.334 mm thick — two yarn diameters, with nothing fitted.

After the loom

A state is a thickness too

This collection's rule is that a fabric dimension quoted without its relaxation state is not a measurement. A knitted fabric has three dimensions and only two of them obey the rule: its thickness is the same in every state, because the interlacing that sets it does not relax.

What cloth is

A fabric is a population of contacts

Only a fifth of a knitted fabric's yarn is inside a diameter of its neighbour. So a fabric's friction lives in a fifth of its length, and every calculation this collection makes about withdrawal, slippage and fraying has assumed it lives everywhere.

A jacquard harness 130 cm wide under a 150 cm fall. A jacquard harness in front elevation, to scale: hooks spread over 40 cm, cords fanning down 150 cm to a comber board 130 cm wide, and hanging straight from the board to their mails. The centre cord is vertical and lifts its mail by the whole 10 cm hook lift; the edge cord leans 16.7° and lifts its mail 9.60 cm, 96.0% as far, and its bend at the board adds 9% to the hook's load at a friction coefficient of 0.3. What the drawing cannot show is the tie that decides which hook feeds which hole, which in a real mount is not the simple spread assumed here.

Compound and figured cloths

A jacquard harness needs three half-spans of height

A jacquard has no front shaft and no back one, so every end takes the same shed — as long as every cord hangs straight. Across the width they cannot: the hooks sit in a machine a few tens of centimetres wide and the comber board is as wide as the cloth, so an edge cord leans and its mail rises by the difference of two hypotenuses rather than by the hook's lift. Holding the edge shed within five per cent of the centre's takes a fall of about three times the edge cord's sideways reach, and that is a height a room has to have.

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 1.00, 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.

Mechanics and drape

A thread between two crossings is an elastica

Every crossing force Peirce's thread path can give comes from a tension, and a cloth on a table has none. What presses its threads together there is their own unwillingness to be bent — and recovering that needs a shape nobody had, because a path assembled from an arc and a straight line has a bending moment that jumps.

Mechanics and drape

A force is what an energy does when a crossing moves

The force a thread presses its neighbour with is the rate its bending energy changes as the crossing is displaced. Solved as a constrained minimisation, that number arrives with the shape rather than after it — and the same force, recovered a second time from the curve's own equilibrium, agrees to a tenth of a per cent.

Setting and geometry

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.

What the third dimension changes, and by how much. Every number the planar loop model produced, beside the same number with the climb in it, for a 20 tex cotton jersey at a 3.5 mm loop. Four of the five fall and none moves by as much as four per cent, which is the useful part of the answer: the planar model was not wrong about a jersey, it was a projection of the right curve. What it could not have at all is the quantity that is not on this list — the force through the fabric's thickness, 7.81 mN a stitch, which a model with no thickness has nowhere to put.

After the loom

The constants say nothing about thickness

Munden's two constants give a knitted fabric's wale and course spacings from its loop length alone, and the tightness factor collapses every fabric's shape onto one curve. Neither reaches the third dimension: two knits that are one knit in plan are two different thicknesses.

Knits and other structures

A jersey's course has no writhe

The mechanism everybody quotes for why a hard-twisted jersey leans is that the fabric relieves the yarn's twist by writhing. This collection's own solved course has a writhe of minus six parts in a million, and it is not small — it is exactly zero, by a symmetry, and the symmetry is a statement about what the model left out.

Weaves

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.

A repeat across a 1800-end warp. Four repeat widths laid across the same 1800-end warp, drawn at the warp's own scale. The pale bands at the two ends are the selvedge threading, 24 ends each, which weaves its own firmer weave and is not part of the design. Between them the body is ruled into whole repeats, alternating so they can be counted, and the marked bands at the two sides are the remainder — the part of a repeat that did not fit, split between the two selvedges because the trade centres the pattern. None of these four repeats divides the body exactly, and the leftovers run from 2 to 24 ends. What the drawing cannot show is what the break looks like: a quarter of a repeat at the selvedge reads as a border and half of one reads as a mistake, and where the line between those falls is a judgement.

What cloth is

A repeat has to fit the width

A repeat tiles the plane and a warp has two edges, so somewhere between them a repeat is cut through. The set of repeat widths that divide a warp exactly is the set of divisors of its body, and a body of a few thousand ends has a few dozen — two to eight per cent of the candidates. So a designer choosing a repeat for any reason except the width chooses one that does not fit, and the leftover averages half a repeat, split between the two selvedges.

$20 tex yarn in one layer and in 2. Sections across the width, to scale, of a cloth of 20 tex cotton at a cover of 0.8, and of the same yarn per area divided into 2 layers two ways: by count, 10.0 tex at the same sett, and by sett, 20 tex at 1/2 of the ends. Divided by count the cloth is 1.41 times as thick with a cover of 0.57 in each layer; divided by sett it is 2.00 times as thick with a cover of 0.40. At the free end of the yarn's stiffness bracket both are exactly as stiff as the single cloth; at the coherent end the first is 0.50 times as stiff and the second 1.00. What the sections cannot show is crimp, which thickens every layer by an amount the weave decides.$ Compound and figured cloths

A double cloth is only softer if its yarn is set

A double cloth is sold as weight without stiffness: two light cloths in place of one heavy one. Divide the same yarn into two layers and the cloth is √2 or twice as thick, but at the free end of a yarn's stiffness bracket — where an unset yarn sits — its bending rigidity does not move at all, because it is the number of fibres across the width times the stiffness of one. Only a set yarn makes the double cloth the softer, and stitching the layers together pushes it the other way.

All themes