Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Cloth Design Theory
Cloth Design Theory
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 INTRODUCTION
1 g T1 /T2
12 1 Taverage 1 g T1 /T2 1 g T1 /T2
MS / MD .S2 S
1 (2.1)
Fm
Fm - the empirical weave factor
S1, S2 - warp and weft setting respectively
12
t f m (kN)1/ 2 (2.2)
where t = maximum ends or picks per inch, k = constant that depends on yarn
type and yarn number in an indirect system, m = constant varying according
to weave, and f = average float (average number of threads per float). The
constant k is 134 for worsted yarn from 100% wool. The constant m was
determined empirically for different weaves as shown in Table 2.1.
Weave m
Basket weaves 0.45
Twill weaves 0.39
Satin weaves 0.42
Equation (2.2) is also valid for the case where warp and weft are of
different counts.
agree with Law’s results calculated upto 10 threads per floats and there is
little divergence from Armitage’s results which are
t S(yN)1/ 2 (2.3)
where t = maximum ends or picks per inch, y = cloth setting constant that
depends on the yarn numbering system, N = yarn count in the indirect system,
and s = setting ratio varying with weave upto 4 threads per float (b) up to 4.5
threads per float the results obtained by Armitage Law and Brierley do not
differ by more than a thread per inch and (c) for twill weaves of threads per
float higher than 3 Ashenhurst’s two theories showed lower maximum threads
per inch than Brierley, Armitage and Law’s experimental figures.
(a) for cloths woven from equal count in warp and weft
P = CE-0.67.
N2
where A , N1 = warp yarn count in an indirect system,
N1
by Seyam and El-Shiekh on the grounds that the geometry is such that it is
difficult to construct the fabric. Newton’s view is that the tightness of a fabric
is best calculated in relation to the nearest maximum-sett fabric. This is
similar to the method used by Hamilton (1964).
(K1 K 2 ) actual
Tightness T = (2.4)
(K1 K 2 )limit
d1 d
where K1 = , K2 = 2 and d1, d2, p1 and p2 are diameter and pick spacing in
p1 p2
warp and weft.
inside fabrics was due to Ashenhurst who, in 1884, gave the first
comprehensive theory of cloth structure for estimating the maximum density
of packing of threads in a cloth commonly known as the maximum sett of a
woven cloth. He derived a formula for calculating the maximum square sett of
a cloth in terms of the diameter of its constituent yarns, and the number of
threads and intersections in its weave repeat. He assumed that the yarns were
of circular cross section and that the distance between yarns at each
intersection was equal to the diameter of the yarn, though this second
assumption was corrected by him later. Realising that yarns compress very
easily and thus offer difficulties in ascertaining their transverse dimensions,
he established empirical relations between the diameter and the count of yarns
for different counting systems such as woollen, worsted and cotton. The
relationship first noted by Murphy (1927) in 1927 that the yarn diameter
varies as the square root of the yarn count, also existed in Ashenhurst’s
empirical formulae. Despite being based on unrealistic assumptions,
Ashenhurst’s cloth setting theory provided a very useful guide to cloth
construction. However, in 1922 Law (1922) criticised Ashenhurst’s theory by
showing that it was practically possible to weave fabrics to a greater sett than
those estimated by Ashenhurst’s formula. As to why Ashenhurst’s formulae
under-estimated the maximum square sett of a cloth, Law suggested that the
estimates of yarn diameters obtained from Ashenhurst’s formula were much
higher than the measured values of diameter of yarns. This observation led
Law to apply necessary corrections to Ashenhurst’s formulae for calculating
the yarn diameter, and hence the maximum square sett of a cloth. In
measuring the diameter of yarns, they had recognised that different fibres and
different systems of yarn manufacture were likely to affect the overall yarn
density, which would itself influence the yarn diameter and hence the
maximum square sett achievable in a cloth.
findings remained the subject for many researchers for sometime. It was not
until when Helliwell (1940), after measuring yarn diameters by various
methods, showed that reasonable agreement existed between the measured
values of diameters and those calculated from Ashenhurst formulae. Also,
Dickson (1953) had reported that the value of yarn diameter calculated from
Ashenhurst’s formulae always fell between the value of diameter based on
direct measurement of the free “uncompressed” yarn and the value of the
effective diameter of “compressed” yarn in a fabric and was therefore a useful
estimate. The findings of Helliwell and Dickson thus supported Ashenhurst’s
theory of cloth setting.
Yet the reasons for the ambiguity about the diameter of the yarn
and the shape of its cross section were not then clearly understood and Peirce
in 1937 put forward a fundamental and rather formidable mathematical
treatment of the geometry of cloth structure wherein the yarns were once
again assumed to be circular in cross sections, as well as being inextensible
and completely flexible. As it had been in Ashenhurst’s and Law’s theories of
19
cloth setting, the diameters of the interlacing yarns figure as one of the most
important yarn properties in Peirce’s theory of fabric geometry. Like
Ashenhurst and Law, it was realised by Peirce that the diameters of yarns
could perhaps best be described from their counts. Peirce, however, also
considered the effect of yarn density in deriving a relationship between the
diameter and count of the yarn. From experimental work carried out mainly
on thick twisted ropes of cotton yarns, Peirce concluded that a specific
volume of 1.1 cm3/g adequately represents the overall density of yarns in
cotton fabrics. Peirce, however, indicated that the apparent specific volume of
a free thread would vary considerably with twist, fibre type, treatment and
method of measurement. The effects of twist and fibre type on the specific
volume of both staple and continuous filament yarns have been investigated
later by a number of researchers and notable results of a few of these
investigations are reported by Hearle (1969). Concerning the packing of fibres
in yarns, Peirce introduced a term called yarn porosity. Commonly known as
the yarn packing fraction which he defined as the ratio of the fibre specific
volume to the yarn specific volume. He showed that a cotton yarn, with its
specific volume equal to 1.1 cm3/g and the density of its constituting fibres
equal to 1.1 cm3/g and the density of its constituting fibres equal to 1.52 g/cm3
is actually composed of approximately 60% fibre the remaining 40% being air
space. This porous structure of a yarn does suggest how easily the yarns might
compress and their cross sectional shapes distort when acted upon by lateral
comprehensive forces. By considering the yarns to be like circular cylinders
and to have a specific volume of 1.1 cm3/g a3/g. Peirce derived a relationship,
which like Ashenhurst’s and Laws’ formulae expressed that “the yarn
diameter d, varies inversely as the square root of the yarn count (indirect) N”,
as is reflected in his formula:
1
d (inch) = (2.5)
28 N
S1 T1 S2 T2
O 1000 1000 100 (2.6)
5 1 5 2
1 0.73Kl1 1 0.73Kl2
where T1/2 are warp and weft linear densities, respectively 1/2 are warp and
weft raw material densities, respectively K1/2 are warp and weft weave factors
by Galceran, respectively.
In the Brierley’s case, fabric structure factor is the ratio of set of the
given fabric “square” structure analogue with the set of the standard wire
plain weave fabric. The original Brierley’s factor called as maximum
setting/maximum density can be calculated by the following equation:
1 g T1 /T2
12 1 Taverage 1
g T1 /T2
1
g T1 /T2
MS / MD .S2 S1 (2.7)
Fm
2.5 GALUSZYNSKI
R 1( 2)
F1(2) (2.8)
t1(2)
Galceran’s (1961) weave factor Kl1(2) and Neves warp and weft
interlacing coefficients CCWA and CCWE are similar to it.
t1
Kl1 CCWA (2.9)
R 1R 2
and
t2
Kl 2 CCWE (2.10)
R 1R 2
The shortcoming of these factors is that they estimate only a single thread and
do not take into account interlacing of adjacent threads.
22
6
6R 1R 2 2n f K1n fi
i 1
C (2.11)
6R 1R 2
where R1 and R2 are the warp and weft repeat of the weave respectively, nf is
the number of free fields, nfi – the number of free fields belong to group i (all
free fields are distributed into six groups ki – elimination factor of group i.
1
Fm (2.12)
c
1 3R 1R 2
P1(2) 6
(2.13)
C1( 2) 3R1R 2 2n f 1( 2) n
K1(2) f l / 2i
i 1
d1( 2)
K1(2) (2.14)
p1( 2)
S1( 2) (F2(1) 1)
TS1(2) d1(2) 2 (2.15)
F2(1) 4
where d1(2) are warp and weft diameters, respectively, F1(2) are warp and weft
average float lengths respectively, S1(2) warp and weft settings respectively.
24
where
d 1(2)
K1(2) (2.17)
F2(1) d1(2)
F2(1) 1
S( 2) 4
K1(2) can be calculated from the curve which was plotted by Peirce according
to his formula of maximal setting. Galceran’s (1961) structure factor is
calculated as follows:
S T1 S2 T2
OG 1000 1000 (2.18)
5 1 5 2
1 0.73Kl1 1 0.73Kl2
where T1(2) are warp and weft linear densities, respectively, k (1/ 2 )
are warp and
6
6R 1T2 Zn f K i n fi
i 1
C (2.19)
6R1R 2
where R1 and R2 are the warp and weft repeat of the weave, respectively, nf is
the number of free fields defined in the woven structure between the yarns, nfi
the number of free field’s belonging to group i (all free fields are distributed
into six groups), Ki is the elimination factor of group, and subscripts 1 and 2
denote warp and weft, respectively.
3R 1R 2
P1(2) 6
(2.20)
3R 1R 2 2n fi92) K i n fi (2)
i 1
26
These factors evaluate not only a single thread float but an interlacing of
adjacent threads as well and can be calculated for all the types of the weaves.
Further, a most convenient form of structural factor called firmness factor ( )
has been proposed by Milasius, which has been demonstrated to be applicable
universally. This firmness factor can be used in the design of new fabrics, to
evaluate their properties, estimate fabric weavability, and consider the
weaving process parameters.
12 1 Tav a b
S1 S2 (2.21)
P1
S1 1 S2 2
(2.22)
S1 S2
S1T1 S2T2
Tav (2.23)
S1 S2
2 T1
1 3 T2
a , b (2.24)
2 T1 2 T1
1 1
3 T2 3 T2
Milasius’s index is very useful for characterising fabrics on the basis of their
structure. His contribution to fabric structure area is quite significant and
monumental.
the interlacements and floats in the structure for predicting the mechanical
parameters and fabric hand values. The CFF is given by equation where
crossing-over line is defined as the place at which interlacing point changes,
for example, the warp yarn changes from over to under the weft yarn, or vice
versa for weft in the warp direction (Figure 2.3). Similarly, FYF is calculated
from the type of floats, number of floats of each type and overall interlacing
points in the repeat as given by the following expression (Figure 2.2).
i wp i wf
1 (2.27)
R 1.R 2
f wp f wf
F (2.28)
R 1.R 2
I F 2 (2.29)
29
RF
D1W (2.30)
Number of int er sec tions in warp
RW
D1F (2.31)
Number of int er sec tions on filling
Warp cover factor (K1) and weft cover factor (K2) serve as a measure of the
relative tightness of fabric.
Where
Tex
C warp and C wcft = 4.44 x 10-3 x x Yarn count / cm (2.35)
f
It is defined by
This is given by
Given the warp cover factor (Ki) and.yarn balance (Beta factor)
Peirce (1937) developed the following equation for arriving at the maximum
weft cover factor (l<2) in plain cotton woven fabrics having a weave factor
(M) of
2 2
28 28
1 1 (2.38)
(1 )K1 (1 )K1
beta factors (0.109 to 10). These Tables are very useful to fabric engineer in
arriving at the practical design parameters related to the textile structures.
Maximum threads per inch Compact cover factor x Cotton count (2.39)
Compact cover factors for some of the synthetic filaments are as follows:
Nylon : 24.4
Polyester : 26.8
Kevlar aramid : 27.4
Glass : 36.5
Thus the maximum number of filament yarns in the one inch of the
four synthetic fibers can be arrived at by first converting the filament denier
into cotton count by dividing 5315 by denier and multiplying the same by
respective compact cover factors.
Sulzer (1982) have published charts for the range of weft density
feasible for specific fabrics woven on their shuttleless projectile weaving
37
machines based on their practical experience, assuming that the warp and weft
yarns are of medium quality.
Tw Tf
K (2.40)
w f
Na
t (2.41)
N
38
K 4 Fm
N (2.42)
Tex
nTex1.Tex 2
Tex (2.43)
n1Tex1 n 2Tex 2
Thus, for plain weave, the texture is 0.5(2 divided by 2+2); for 1/3
twill, the texture is 0.667(4 divided by 4+2); and for 8 end satin, the texture is
0.8 (8 divided by 8+2) the maximum cloth cover factor for plain weave would
be given by Wc = 0.5, Fc = 0.5, Cc = (0.5+0.5)-(0.5 x 0.5) = 0.75;
(a) Kevlar style -713 has 31 ends and 31 picks per inch of 1000
denier yarn in plain weave.
Maximum threads per inch = compact cover factor of
Kevlar (27.4) x cotton count (2.305) = 63;
(b) Kevlar style -328 having 17 ends and 17 picks per inch of
1420 denier Kevlar in plain weave and having cloth cover
factor (Cc) of 0.539 is by comparison with style-713 relatively
loose construction with 71.87% 'tightness' (0.539 divided by
0.75 x 100)
40
Ashenhurst has dealt with the sett of fabrics in his book. Seyam has
critically reviewed the concept of fabric tightness in his work. A series of
papers published by Seyam has dealt with the fabric structure and its effect on
fabric properties.
Shear
Shear stress Shear strain
CFF hysteresis
(G/cm) Tan
(G/cm)
Plain 2 10 15.95 0.022
Basket 1 2.7 9.16 0.178
Satin 0.8 1.8 7.7 0.277
The FFF (Fabric Firmness Factor) values for all the eight fabrics
have been calculated and they are given in Table 2.3 along with CFF and
FYF.
Table 2.3 Calculated results of CFF and FYF and FFF for 8 fabrics of
Fatahi and Alamdar Yazdi (2012) (Figure 2.5)
(a) Plain (b) 2/2 Twill (c) 2/6 Twill (d) Warp Rib (e) Basket weave
Figure 2.5 Weave structures used by Fatahi and Alamdar Yazdi (2012)
45
Hearle and Shanahan (1978) have pointed out that the inclusion of a
bending energy term allows the Peirce geometry to be used for calculations
involving extension. They have provided the predicted load extension curves
of a plain weave fabric. Clulow and Taylor (1963) have looked at the
relationship between the theoretically predicted and experimental values of
fabric and have pointed out the need to include flexural rigidity for accurately
predicting the load extension curves.
3
12B1P2 B2 1 cos 2 1
E1 1 (2.48)
P1 13 sin 2 1 B1 3
2 cos 2 2
46
3
12B2 P1 B1 2 cos 2 2
E2 1 (2.49)
P2 33 sin 2 3 B2 3
1 cos 2 1
f . p2 = v. h2 (2.50)
Therefore
v h2
f f' f" f' 1 (2.51)
f ' p2
2
v p2 h1
f' 1 (2.52)
h2 f ' p2
h1
The ratio was obtained using purely geometrical relations. The term
p2
p2/f was calculated by defining the strain energy, in the warp thread, due to
the bending deformations caused by f alone, then differentiating the energy
49
v
expression according to Castiglianos rule, Using a similar procedure,
h2
was calculated after finding the strain energy in the weft caused by ‘v’ alone.
The final expression for the fabric modulus was given by
8B1 B2 p32
E1 1 F1 ( 1 , 2 ) (2.53)
p1h12 B1p13
where
2 2
h1
sin 3/ 2 ( 2 ) 1 0.56
p2
F1 ( 1 , 2 ) (2.54)
F2 ( 2 ).2 2(1.12) 2
and
1 1
The modulus k sin and H sin
2 4 2k
The principle of minimum energy was then applied with any one of
the displacements (say x1) chosen as the dependent mode of deformation. This
gives
m
x1 U j
Fk F1 ,k 2,3,... (2.58)
xk j 1 j xk
m
x E U j
and F1 1 i 1,2,...,, n. (2.59)
yi yi j 1 j yi
y E 1 E 2
Fx Fy (2.60)
x 1 x1 2 x
y E E 1 E 2 E D
Fy . (2.61)
1 1 1 1 2 1 D 1
y E E 1 E 2 E D
Fy . (2.62)
2 2 1 2 2 2 D 2
1 1
1 1 1 2
d1 d 1 , d2 d 2 (2.63)
1 2
Here, E is the strain energy stored in the structure that is given as a function
of yarn modulus and bending rigidity. Primes marked above the variables in
the equations.
extension for the case of twistless yarns. An assumption was made to suit this
case that the yarn cross sections occupy the cavity shaped by the other
crimped yarn in the cross-wise direction. Mashaly (1979) used the results to
investigate the effect of the inter-yarn forces developed during extension in
sustaining this twistless yarn structure. A more rigorous version of the force
approach has been given by Huang (1978). Kawabata et al (1973) introduced
a finite deformation theory based on force approach. They used a straightline
model to describe the yarns configuration initially and after deformation
Kawabata et al also treated other fabric deformations using the same principle
and model.
The Plain Seam- The most basic seam can be used effectively on
straight, curved or angular seams equally well, but the skill level of the
operative will vary depending on the intricacy of the seam. This type of seam
will require some form of neatening. The quickest method will be utilizing
one of the overlock machines, the 2 or 3 threads types being the most normal.
The choice is dictated by the laundering techniques, as previously discussed
in the stitch types section.
If the garments are being produced by “out workers” the over lock
facility may not be readily available, and so the “cap edging” technique may
be more practical as this is performed on the seam allowance being folded to
the wrong side of the fabric and being stitched along the folded edge to hold
the fold securely. This technique provides stability and allows the seam to lie
55
flat. Because of the fold of the fabric, this method of neatening tends to be
rather bulky and therefore unsuitable for bulky fabrics. Also the width of
seam allowance needs to be increased to allow the neatening to lie flat.
Both over locking and cap edging technique are easily produced
and require minimum skill level. However, both techniques would be
unsuitable for fabrics of a sheer or semi-sheer structure as the seam allowance
and its neatening would be visible on the right side of the garment which
would obviously impair the appearance of the garment.
Another decorative feature is to top stitch the seam, with either self
coloured thread or one of a contrast colour. When choosing this type of finish
it is imperative that the machinists have the necessary skill level in order to
meet the quality requirements of the finished garment as attention is being
drawn to the feature and therefore needs to be of a good quality. An
advantage of top stitching through a seam is that it can help to give extra
strength and stability to the seam.
bending tester. They found that a plain seam has little effect on fabric shear
rigidity and hysteresis but strongly influences bending rigidity.
They also pointed out that bending hysteresis and bending rigidity
were strongly affected by seam allowances. They found from their
experiments that the bending length of a fabric strip increased with the
addition of a vertical seam, but did not increase continuously with increased
seam allowance. The increase rate was most rapid at initial stage from seam
allowance = 0 mm (no seam) to 1 mm. When the seam allowance was greater
than2.5 mm, there was a limited increase in bending length.
summarized that the stiffness of textile fabrics depended upon their bending
directions, and in general the stiffness in bias directions was relatively small.
B = wc3 (2.64)
where B is the fabric bending rigidity, w is the weight of the fabric per unit
area and c is the fabric bending length. It is a measurement related to drape in
two dimensions. The stiffer the material, the larger the bending length c
obtained. Therefore, a higher value of c represents a stiff fabric, and vice
versa. For this equation, two measurements in the warp and weft directions
are insufficient to describe the stiffness of fabric anisotropy.
where B1, B2 and B are bending rigidities in warp, weft and directions
respectively. A similar equation was also considered empirically by Shinohara
et al (1980).
Results from Equations (2.65) and (2.66) are very similar to each
other, but the values of B obtained from equation (2.66) are slightly larger. When
B1 equals to B2, both equations show isotropic and circular polar diagram.
They pointed out that in general the bending rigidity in bias directions was
relatively small. Equation (2.67) neglected the restriction at the intersection of
thee warp and weft. This equation was useful in describing the behavior of
small restrictive and comparatively open fabrics. Therefore, equation results
in a marked deviation when the tight fabrics were examined.
The term (J1+J2) is replaced by the stiffness value at the warp, weft and ±45º
directions. This result may be used to calculate other bending rigidities over
all possible directions as equation (2.71).
where BT is an expression of the bending rigidity per unit width of a thin fibre
web of linearly elastic fibres. If there are n1 yarns per unit length in the warp
direction, each containing v1 number of fabrics, and n2 yarns per unit length in
the weft direction, each containing v2 fibres. They assumed a two-dimensional
assembly of very long straight fibre of the same type, with bending rigidity B
and torsional rigidity Jy. Their approach incorporated the energy rather than
the ‘force method’. Chapman et al.’s model involves many variables which
61
Dhingra and Postle (1980, 1981) studied the effect of the straight
seams on bending rigidity by KES-F bending tester. They have found that a
plain seam has little effect on the fabric shear rigidity and hysteresis, but has a
great deal of influence on bending rigidity. The effect was found to be
especially significant at vertical seams. They also pointed out that the
bending rigidity and hysteresis were strongly affected by seam allowances.
Dawes and Owen (1972) have also looked at the bending behaviour
of fabric laminates Grosberg and Rhee (1972) have also made useful
contribution to the area of prediction of laminated fabrics.
The mathematics of the bending length test have been worked out
so that the length of overhanging fabric that subtends an arc of 41.5 from the
horizontal is twice the bending length.
64
2.23 WICKABILITY
2 cos
p (2.73)
R
R c2 P
Q (2.74)
8 L
dL R 2c P
g (2.75)
dt 8 L
R c cos 1/ 2
L t Ct1/2 (2.76)
2
where C is a constant.
L = C tk (2.77)
The logarithm of both sides of Equation (2.77) was taken and gave:
natural fibres in the fabric which changes the capillary size during the wicking
process has also been neglected. All these have led to limitations of the
wicking process.
2.23.1 Theoretical
H = atk (2.79)
Log a can be positive or negative. If the curve passes through the origin in the
case of relationship between Log H and Log tk
If a indicates the slope, the higher the value of a, the greater the
wickability.
Since K can take values from 0.21 to 0.48 (Zhuang et al 2002) and
a
“a” varies, the ratio of is suggested as the parameter to reflect the
k
wickability (W)
a
W (2.88)
K
when K = 0.5 (2.89)
W = 2a (2.90)
when K < 0.5 (2.91)
W > 2a (2.92)
H = ctk (2.93)
D eCos( )
hf t (2.94)
4
D 2h
De (2.95)
Dc
Textile fabrics play an important role in the day to day life of every
human being. They are used not only as clothing materials but also in many
life saving end uses and a host of industrial applications. Their applicability
for many end uses is determined by their liquid transport properties. Many
techniques have been developed and used to characterise and transport
properties of textile structures. Although liquid transport studies have been
carried out on different fabrics, the influence of fabric structural features has
not been fully explored.
2x x cos
P (2.95a)
i
force. The pressure of a liquid column inside capillary is Lgh where L is the
density of the liquid g is the acceleration, due to gravity and h is the height to
gravity and h is the height of liquid inside capillary. Liquid rises until both
pressures become equal at which, the set force driving the liquid becomes
zero. Height of the liquid column at this position is called equilibrium
wicking height (Leq) and it can be expressed by the following equation,
2x x cos
Leq (2.96)
i xgx L
rSi x x cos
L xt 0.5 (2.97)
2x
= K x t0.5 (2.98)
interyarn spaces. These capillaries are, however, open, discontinuous and are
connected in a very complex manner. Liquid transport in textile structures has
been studied by several methods. These methods are based on three modes of
wetting.
where either the time needed for the drop to sink into the fabric or the area
covered by the spreading drop is measured.
The first method, although simple and quick, is rarely used for
research proposes as it gives very limited information about the pore structure
and the kinetics of the absorption process. The other two methods have been
widely used by research workers as they provide relevant information and
mimic the spreading process of many industrial operations. The findings of
these studies on yarns and fabrics are summarised in the following sections.
1. Yarns
horizontally clamped yarn with its one end dipped in an infinite quantity of
liquid. In advanced versions of this technique, liquid flow is measured by
analysis of CCD images taken during capillary rise of coloured liquid in
yarns. Another technique is setting liquid sensitive sensors regularly along the
yarn segment. In the last technique, the weight variation of the liquid in the
yarn or force exerted by the liquid on yarn can be measured with a sensitive
electronic balance. Bayramli et al (1991) used it for glass fibres coated in
various ways and thus could measure axial capillary flow. However, this
technique is too delicate to use with spun staple fibre yarns, because of the
flexible nature of the yarns and also due to the fact that wetting force can
exceed the effects of capillary forces. Use of this method is more difficult in
the case of texturized yarns as they exhibit a tendency to recoil.
ri x cos
L xt 0.5 (2.99)
2x
= Kt0.5 (2.100)
principle when a solid is partially immersed in a liquid the wetting force (Fw)
exerted by the liquid on the solid is given by
Fw = Ps x LV x cos (2.101)
where Ps is the perimeter of the solid along touching boundary of the liquid,
LV is the surface free energy of the liquid-vapour interface or the surface
tension of the liquid, and is the contact angle. Hsieh’s (1994) contributions
on wetting are many. Their work showed that wetting characteristics of
fabrics do not depend on their configuration i.e. length of fabric width of
fabric fabric-water interface depth and fabric direction and it only depends on
the material (fibre) properties). This means that wettability of any fabric is the
same as the wettability of its constituent fibre and contact angles for fibre-
liquid and fabric-liquid are identical. Wicking on the other hand depends on
the fabric properties, specially the parameters which affect the pore size or
pore connectivity.
m wick
h wick (2.102)
xA cs x s
77
where Acs and f are the cross sectional area and the porosity of the fibrous
assembly, respectively. The porosity of the fibrous assembly was calculated
using the total weight of liquid wicked in the fibrous assembly at steady state.
From values of hwick the authors determined permeabilities of fabrics by fitting
the data to Washburn equation. The authors found that reduction of resin
surface tension favours, the wetting and wicking kinetics. Although lower
fibre reinforcement porosity resulted in a higher capillary pressure, it reduced
permeability. Thus there would be an optimum porosity at which the
spontaneous impregnation rates are the highest.
CL r
(2.103)
1 C L xr
-
where r is the ratio f, the density of fibre and L the density of liquid.
The authors argue that vertically hung fabric method gives more
appropriate values of porosity than the other methods such as mercury
porosimeter, liquid porosimeter or direct determination of porosity. The
authors state that mercury and liquid porosimeter gives somewhat wrong
values as experiments are needed to be carried out under pressure which
causes change in structure. Direct method also gives erroneous porosity
values as the thickness of fabrics is measured under some standard pressure
78
which changes the geometry of the pores. The porosity is calculated from the
following formula:
b
1 (2.104)
f
Fabric weight (g / cm 2 )
b (2.105)
Fabric thickness (cm)
Wt
Am (2.106)
x
2
dw xA 5/2
e x x cos 1 2
xA 5/e 2
xg * (2.107)
dt 4x 1/2 x w 8x 1/ 2 x
viscosity of liquid. Ae and g* are determined from the slope and interception
of the plot
dw 1
vs (2.108)
dt w
law. With modifications to the LW equation, models of the first category were
applied to study nylon yarns (Hollies et al 1956, Hollies et al 1957, Minor et
al 1959, Nyoni and Brook 2006) cotton and visease yarns (Hamdaoui et al
2007); PET yarns (Perwuelz et al 2001, Perwuelz et al 2000) and carbon fibre
bundles (Bayramli and Powell 1991). However, the equivalent capillary
radius and the equivalent contact angle in the LW equation are difficult to
quantify, and they are always derived experimentally. Although most models
of the second category are used to study axial impregnation (Amico and
Lekakou 2000, 2002a, 2002b, Deng et al 2003) they can be easily extended to
investigate transverse flow normal to the axis of yarn (Bayramli and Powell
1990, Pillai and Advani 1996, Young 2004b). However, characteristic
parameters of pore structure such as permeability, porosity are also difficult to
quantify and they are always obtained by experiments. Besides these two
categories, there are also some other available models to analyze liquid
wetting in fibrous assemblies, such as Ising model (Lukas and Pan 2003,
Lukas et al 2004, Zhong et al 2001, 2002, Zhong and Xing 2004).
Nyoni and Brook (2006) have studied the effect of yarn structure
and tension on the wickability of nylon 6.6 continuous and textured filament
yarns. The wicking performance was significantly affected by the tension
applied and twist inserted. The paper also discusses the unsaturated, saturated
and dry zones, which agrees with other studies carried out using image
analysis techniques.