An Investigation of Physical, Mechanical, and Comfort

Properties of Branded Woven Bottom Wear Summer Fabrics

A thesis submitted by

Zunaira Fatima
(2018-NTU-MSCF-6048)

In partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of

Master of Science
in
Advanced Clothing & Fashion

Directorate of Graduate Studies & Research

School of Engineering & Technology

NATIONAL TEXTILE UNIVERSITY, FAISALABAD

August 2022
 DEDICATION
This modest effort is dedicated to my
Parents, Teachers
&
Late Grandmother

ii
 CERTIFICATE
NATIONAL TEXTILE UNIVERSITY, FAISALABAD
This thesis written by Ms. Zunaira Fatima under the direction of her supervisors and
approved by all the members of the thesis committee, has been presented to and accepted
by the Dean/ Director Graduate Studies and Research, in partial fulfillment of the
requirement of the degree of Master of Science in Advanced Clothing & Fashion.

____________________________ ______________________________
Co-Supervisor Supervisor

____________________________ ______________________________
Internal Examiner External Examiner

____________________________ ______________________________
Chairman, Dean/ Director,
Department of Clothing Graduate Studies & Research

Dated: _____________________

iii
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Allah never wastes any effort I put into my work and is rewarded according to the amount
of devotion put into it. I set my heartfelt and humble thanks before Him, who
strengthened me with the courage and capability to complete my research work and
enabled me to contribute a drop in the existing oceans of scientific knowledge. Trembling
lips and wet eyes praise for Holy Prophet (S.A.W) who is forever a torch of guidance for
the entire humanity.
I do not have words at command to express my feelings and profound admiration for my
affectionate late grandmother, parents, and family for their spiritual and moral support to
carry me through my studies and master’s thesis.
My earnest gratitude to my supervisor Dr. Ahsan Nazir and co-supervisor Dr. Zulfiqar Ali
for their cooperation, constructive criticism, keen interest, intensive teaching, and
dynamic supervision throughout my studies and research endeavors.
Thank you to many individuals whose valuable suggestions and constructive comments
contributed to the success of this research thesis. I am also deeply grateful to the
Technician of the textile comfort lab and the whole team of the National Testing and
Research Center (NTRC) of National Textile University, Faisalabad, because of their help
in the completion of my practical part of the research.
My gratitude will remain incomplete if I do not mention the contribution of my friends
who assisted and encouraged me to complete my research study. It will be un-justice if I
do not extend my thanks to my sisters who accorded me indescribable help and
cooperation during my studies.

Zunaira Fatima

iv
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Description Page
TITLE PAGE ........................................................................................................................ i
DEDICATION .....................................................................................................................ii
CERTIFICATE .................................................................................................................. iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT .................................................................................................. iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS ..................................................................................................... v
LIST OF NOTATIONS .....................................................................................................vii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS .......................................................................................... viii
LIST OF TABLES .............................................................................................................. ix
LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................. x
ABSTRACT .......................................................................................................................xii
Chapter 1 .............................................................................................................................. 1
Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Background .............................................................................................................. 1
1.2 Summer clothing requirements ................................................................................ 1
1.3 Selection of clothing ................................................................................................ 2
1.4 Clothing environmental system of the human body ................................................ 2
1.5 Clothing comfort ...................................................................................................... 4
Components of clothing comfort .................................................................... 6
Classification of clothing comfort .................................................................. 6
1.6 Customer trends for the comfort of clothing............................................................ 9
1.7 Literature review ...................................................................................................... 9
Introduction.................................................................................................... 9
Perception of clothing brands ...................................................................... 12
Factors affecting the physical, mechanical, and comfort properties of the
woven fabric ............................................................................................................... 15
1.8 Research gap .......................................................................................................... 20
Aim of the study............................................................................................ 21
1.9 Specific objectives and scope of the project .......................................................... 21
Chapter 2 ............................................................................................................................ 22
Materials and method ......................................................................................................... 22
2.1 Experimental .......................................................................................................... 22
2.1.1 Materials ...................................................................................................... 22
2.1.2 Fabric specifications .................................................................................... 23
2.1.3 Methodology ................................................................................................ 24
2.1.4 Combinations of developed optimized samples ........................................... 25
2.1.5 Equipment and parameters for testing......................................................... 26
Chapter 3 ............................................................................................................................ 35
Results and discussion ....................................................................................................... 35
3.1 Comfort properties of bottom wear lawn fabrics offered by different brands ....... 35
3.1.1 Air permeability of bottom-wear lawn fabrics ............................................. 36
3.1.2 Water vapor permeability of bottom-wear lawn fabrics .............................. 37
3.1.3 Moisture management transmission of bottom-wear lawn fabrics .............. 39
3.1.4 Resilience (stiffness) of bottom-wear lawn fabrics ...................................... 40
3.1.5 Softness of bottom-wear lawn fabrics .......................................................... 42
3.1.6 Smoothness of bottom-wear lawn fabrics .................................................... 43
3.1.7 Drape coefficient of bottom-wear lawn fabrics ........................................... 45
3.1.8 Wrinkle recovery of bottom-wear lawn fabrics ........................................... 46
3.2 Mechanical properties of bottom-wear lawn fabrics offered by different brands . 48
3.2.1 Tear strength (warp) of bottom-wear lawn fabrics...................................... 48
3.2.2 Tear strength (weft) of bottom-wear lawn fabrics ....................................... 50

v
 3.2.3 Tensile strength (warp) of bottom-wear lawn fabrics.................................. 52
3.2.4 Tensile strength (weft) of bottom-wear lawn fabrics ................................... 53
3.2.5 Pilling resistance of bottom-wear lawn fabrics ........................................... 55
3.3 Physical properties of bottom-wear lawn fabrics offered by different brands....... 56
3.3.1 GSM of bottom-wear lawn fabrics ............................................................... 56
3.3.2 Ends per Inch of bottom-wear lawn fabrics................................................. 58
3.3.3 Picks per Inch of bottom-wear lawn fabrics ................................................ 59
3.3.4 Fabric count (warp) of bottom-wear lawn fabrics ...................................... 61
3.3.5 Fabric count (weft) of bottom wear-lawn fabrics ........................................ 63
3.4 Comfort matrix....................................................................................................... 64
3.4.1 Significance of comfort matrix ..................................................................... 65
3.4.2 Methods used to develop comfort matrix ..................................................... 65
3.5 Development of optimized fabrics ......................................................................... 70
3.5.1 Test results of constructed fabrics ............................................................... 70
3.5.2 Ranking as per subjective contribution of parameters ................................ 74
3.5.3 Final ranking for finest-constructed fabrics ................................................ 75
3.5.4 Statistical data analysis ............................................................................... 76
3.5.5 Correlational analysis ................................................................................. 79
Chapter 4 ............................................................................................................................ 83
Conclusions ........................................................................................................................ 83
4.1 Conclusions ............................................................................................................ 83
4.2 Future suggestions ................................................................................................. 85
References .......................................................................................................................... 86

vi
 LIST OF NOTATIONS
°C = Degree centigrade
cm = Centimeter
GSM = Gram per square meter
mm = Millimeter
N = Newton
Ne = Yarn count
W = Watt
% = Percentage
/sec = Per second

vii
 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
ASTM = American society of testing and materials
AATCC = American Association of textile chemists and colorists
AP = Air permeability
ANOVA = Analysis of variance
CFF = Crossing-over firmness factors
EPI = Ends per inch
ISO = International organization for standardization
KES-FB = Kawabata evaluation system for fabrics
MMT = Moisture management transmission
OMMC = Overall moisture management capability
PPI = Picks per inch
PHVs = Primary hand values
RH = Relative humidity
THV = Total hand value
WVP = Water vapor permeability
Wp = Warp
Wt = Weft

viii
 LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1: Fabric specifications of pre-summer fabrics.....................................................23
Table 2.2: Fabric specifications of summer fabrics ...........................................................24
Table 2.3: Fabric specifications of post-summer fabrics ...................................................24
Table 2.4: Factors and levels .............................................................................................25
Table 2.5: Design of experiment ........................................................................................25
Table 2.6: Combinations for fabric construction ...............................................................25
Table 2.7: Equipment and methods for the testing of physical properties.........................26
Table 2.8: Equipment and methods for the testing of mechanical properties ....................28
Table 2.9: Equipment and methods for the testing of comfort properties .........................31
Table 3.1: Air permeability of pre-summer, summer, and post-summer lawn fabrics ......36
Table 3.2: Water vapor permeability of pre-summer, summer, and post-summer lawn
fabrics .................................................................................................................................38
Table 3.3: Moisture management transmission of pre-summer, summer, and post-summer
lawn fabrics ........................................................................................................................39
Table 3.4: Resilience (stiffness) of pre-summer, summer, and post-summer lawn fabrics
............................................................................................................................................41
Table 3.5: Softness of pre-summer, summer, and post-summer lawn fabrics ...................42
Table 3.6: Smoothness of pre-summer, summer, and post-summer lawn fabrics .............44
Table 3.7: Drape coefficient of pre-summer, summer, and post-summer lawn fabrics .....45
Table 3.8: Wrinkle recovery of pre-summer, summer, and post-summer lawn fabrics ....47
Table 3.9: Tear strength (warp) of pre-summer, summer, and post-summer lawn fabrics49
Table 3.10: Tear strength (weft) of pre-summer, summer, and post-summer lawn fabrics
............................................................................................................................................50
Table 3.11: Tensile strength (warp) of pre-summer, summer, and post-summer lawn
fabrics .................................................................................................................................52
Table 3.12: Tensile strength (weft) of pre-summer, summer, and post-summer lawn
fabrics .................................................................................................................................53
Table 3.13: Pilling resistance of pre-summer, summer, and post-summer lawn fabrics ...55
Table 3.14: GSM of pre-summer, summer, and post-summer lawn fabrics ......................57
Table 3.15: Ends per inch of pre-summer, summer, and post-summer lawn fabrics ........58
Table 3.16: Picks per inch of pre-summer, summer, and post-summer lawn fabrics ........60
Table 3.17: Fabric count (warp) of pre-summer, summer, and post-summer lawn fabrics
............................................................................................................................................61
Table 3.18: Fabric count (weft) of pre-summer, summer, and post-summer lawn fabrics63
Table 3.19: Results of thermo-physiological and sensorial comfort properties ................67
Table 3.20: Results of overall comfort properties .............................................................68
Table 3.21: Test results of optimized developed fabrics ...................................................70
Table 3.22: Ranking as per subjective contribution of parameters ....................................74
Table 3.23: Final ranking for finest-optimized developed fabrics .....................................75
Table 3.24: Analysis of variance .......................................................................................76
Table 3.25: Thermo-physiological comfort correlations ...................................................79
Table 3.26: Sensorial comfort correlations ........................................................................80
Table 3.27: Overall comfort correlations ...........................................................................81

ix
 LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1: Factors of clothing selection.............................................................................. 1
Figure 1.2: Factors affecting the clothing selection ............................................................. 3
Figure 1.3: Clothing environmental system of the body...................................................... 4
Figure 1.4: Elements of clothing comfort ............................................................................ 5
Figure 1.5: Human body thermoregulatory system ............................................................. 7
Figure 1.6: Sensory receptors in human skin ....................................................................... 8
Figure 2.1: Complete work plan flow chart ....................................................................... 22
Figure 2.2: GSM cutter ...................................................................................................... 26
Figure 2.3: Micronaire tester 675....................................................................................... 26
Figure 2.4: Pick glass, pin, and measuring scale ............................................................... 27
Figure 2.5: Weight scale tester........................................................................................... 28
Figure 2.6: Elmendorf tear tester (Gateslab technologies de laboratoire SARL, France) . 29
Figure 2.7: Ametek lloyd instrument (Universal tensile tester) ......................................... 29
Figure 2.8: Martindale pilling tester (Roaches International Limited UK) ....................... 30
Figure 2.9: SDL Atlas air permeability tester .................................................................... 31
Figure 2.10: Refond water vapor permeability tester ........................................................ 32
Figure 2.11: SDL Atlas moisture management transmission tester ................................... 33
Figure 2.12: Phabrometer tester ......................................................................................... 34
Figure 3.1: Comparison of air permeability for summer woven lawn fabrics ................... 37
Figure 3.2: Comparison of water vapor permeability for summer woven lawn fabrics .... 39
Figure 3.3: Comparison of moisture management transmission for summer woven lawn
fabrics ................................................................................................................................. 40
Figure 3.4: Comparison of resilience (stiffness) for summer woven lawn fabrics ............ 42
Figure 3.5: Comparison of softness for summer woven lawn fabrics ............................... 43
Figure 3.6: Comparison of smoothness for summer woven lawn fabrics.......................... 45
Figure 3.7: Comparison of drape coefficient for summer woven lawn fabrics ................. 46
Figure 3.8: Comparison of wrinkle recovery for summer woven lawn fabrics ................. 48
Figure 3.9: Comparison of tear strength (warp) for summer woven lawn fabrics ............. 50
Figure 3.10: Comparison of tear strength (weft) for summer woven lawn fabrics............ 51
Figure 3.11: Comparison of the tensile strength (warp) for summer woven lawn fabrics 53
Figure 3.12: Comparison of the tensile strength (weft) for summer woven lawn fabrics . 54
Figure 3.13: Comparison of pilling resistance for summer woven lawn fabrics ............... 56
Figure 3.14: Comparison of GSM values for summer woven lawn fabrics ...................... 58
Figure 3.15: Comparison of ends per inch for summer woven lawn fabrics ..................... 59
Figure 3.16: Comparison of picks per inch for summer woven lawn fabrics .................... 61
Figure 3.17: Comparison of fabric count (warp) for summer woven lawn fabrics ........... 62
Figure 3.18: Comparison of fabric count (weft) for summer woven lawn fabrics ............ 64
Figure 3.19: Comfort matrix for ladies’ woven bottom wear summer fabrics .................. 69
Figure 3.20: Comfort matrix for ladies’ woven bottom wear summer fabrics .................. 70
Figure 3.21: Comparison of air permeability for optimized developed fabrics ................. 71
Figure 3.22: Comparison of water vapor permeability for optimized developed fabrics .. 71
Figure 3.23: Comparison of moisture management for optimized developed fabrics ....... 72
Figure 3.24: Comparison of resilience (stiffness) for optimized developed fabrics .......... 72
Figure 3.25: Comparison of softness for optimized developed fabrics ............................. 73
Figure 3.26: Comparison of smoothness for optimized developed fabrics ....................... 73
Figure 3.27: Comparison of drape coefficient for optimized developed fabrics ............... 74
Figure 3.28: Comparison of wrinkle recovery for optimized developed fabrics ............... 74
Figure 3.29: Comparison of the subjective contribution of optimized constructed fabrics
............................................................................................................................................ 75
Figure 3.30: Comparison of final ranking for finest-constructed fabrics .......................... 75
Figure 3.31: DF statistical analysis of variance ................................................................. 77

x
Figure 3.32: Adj SS statistical analysis of variance ........................................................... 77
Figure 3.33: Adj MS statistical analysis of variance ......................................................... 78
Figure 3.34: F-Value statistical analysis of variance ......................................................... 78
Figure 3.35: F-Value statistical analysis of variance ......................................................... 79
Figure 3.36: Pearson correlation analysis of thermo-physiological comfort ..................... 80
Figure 3.37: P-Values of thermo-physiological comfort ................................................... 80
Figure 3.38: Pearson correlation analysis of sensorial comfort ......................................... 81
Figure 3.39: P-Values of sensorial comfort ....................................................................... 81
Figure 3.40: Pearson correlation analysis of overall comfort ............................................ 82
Figure 3.41: P-Values of overall comfort .......................................................................... 82

xi
 ABSTRACT
Human comfort is complex but still considered as a universal need of human beings and a
shield between the nearby atmospheres. In Pakistan, diverse climate changes are taking
place due to global warming with the increase in temperature and humidity which is
affecting a person’s general performance and attitude. Fine cotton woven fabrics for
ladies are extraordinarily common within the subcontinents where the summers remain
blistering and consecutive rainy seasons that are quite moist and hot. Lawn fabric has
become more popular due to the weather conditions in Pakistan.
In Pakistan, lawn fabric is one of the most used fabrics for ladies’ summer apparel there
are still no complete scientific studies on the physical, mechanical, and comfort properties
of lawn fabrics made from fine cotton. This research aims to investigate the physical,
mechanical, and comfort properties of ladies’ summer wear lawn fabrics made from fine
cotton which are in demand by Pakistani brands and the textile industry.
Initially, a baseline study was conducted to investigate and evaluate the physical,
mechanical, and comfort properties of 30 lawn commercially available Pakistani branded
ladies’ bottom-wear woven summer fabrics with three summer segments. As per the
evaluation, the best results of physical properties in pre-summer, summer, and post-
summer include GSM (93, 92, 93), EPI (126, 140, 130) and PPI (90, 85, 97), warp count
(65.00, 63.94, 66.03) and weft count (64.74, 58.52, 58.52) respectively. Mechanical
properties of pre-summer, summer, and post-summer include tear strength of warp (14.90
(N), 13.22 (N), 13.30 (N)) and weft (14.86 (N), 12.96 (N), 15.00 (N)), the tensile strength
of warp (413 (N), 417 (N), 430 (N)) and weft (306 (N), 281 (N), 294 (N)), and pilling
(4.50, 4.50, 4.50) respectively. Comfort properties of pre-summer, summer, and post-
summer include air permeability (range 1292 mm/sec, 1647 mm/sec, 1293 mm/sec),
water vapor permeability (99.44, 99.75, 98.28), moisture management transmission (0.69,
0.76, 0.69). Phabrometer was used to find the sensorial comfort properties that include
resilience (37.28, 19.36, 43.45), softness (89.70, 90.40, 89.78), smoothness (60.95, 61.83,
60.77), drape coefficient (28.06, 16.16, 31.64), and wrinkle recovery percentage (94.05,
92.81, 87.39) respectively.
The main study comprised a comparison of fabrics produced with the blend ratio varieties
of Pakistani cotton with Egyptian cotton. Results show that fabric produced from the
blend of Egyptian and Pakistani cotton is best in air permeability, water vapor
permeability, resilience, softness, and smoothness compared to other cotton blend rations.
Fabrics constructed from the other cotton blend rations give overall better mechanical and
comfort properties. ANOVA was used as the statistical method with the contribution of

xii
subjective assessment to rank the finest fabric. Thermo-physiological and sensorial
comfort properties of the finest sample with the specification of 70% Egyptian and 30%
Pakistani cotton with 80/1 yarn count were used to develop this fabric, 59 is the GSM of
this sample.
Keywords: finest fabric, comfort, lawn, physical and mechanical properties, sensorial,
cotton woven fabric, Phabrometer, Pakistani brands.

xiii
 Chapter 1
1 Introduction
1.1 Background
The basic needs of humans are food, clothes, and shelter. After fulfilling the primary
need for food, human beings look for the second most important need of clothing [1].
Comfort is usually tough in the relevancy to a single aspect that is the reason behind the
discomfort, which can be environmental, physical, physiological, or perceptual [2].
Comfort is considered as the universal need of human beings and is complicated and
inherent. It is influenced by the state of physiological clothing, psychological clothing,
and surrounding ecology. Clothing is considered as a close environment for the human
body, which plays an important part in achieving human comfort [3,4].
Numerous components can also consider as the factors that influence clothing selection
[1] and are divided into four major sections shown below in Figure 1.1.

Social Factors Economic Factors

Enviornme-ntal
Physical Factors
Factors

Figure 1.1: Factors of clothing selection

1.2 Summer clothing requirements
In Pakistan, diverse climate changes are taking place due to global warming. A person’s
general performance and attitude are affected by an increase in temperature and humidity
[5,6]. This increase is caused because the summer season is becoming warmer and
longer. To improve productivity, working efficiency was increased and health hazards
were reduced between the outer environment and the human body in which clothing

1
plays a vital role [7]. Micro-spaces between the human skin and clothes are called
microclimate, which affects environmental conditions and creates discomfort for the user
[8]. Pakistani women must perform multiple tasks in their daily routines such as cooking
and outdoor working in a hot environment. Suitable clothing improves the daily living
experiences of ladies and gives them physical and psychological comfort and satisfaction
[9].
1.3 Selection of clothing
Several factors affect the criteria used for the selection of clothing as explained in Figure
1.2. Generally, the factors that affect clothing selection can be divided into four main
groups which include economic, social, physical, and environmental [10].
Therefore, comfort in clothing is a common and important requirement of customers. In
clothing systems, different parameters including air and moisture transmission, heat,
materials, and patterns for garment making have considerable effects on the customer
perception of comfort [1,11].
1.4 Clothing environmental system of the human body
Clothing is always considered as the shield between the nearby atmosphere and the
human body. Securing the human body from unpredictable environmental and weather
conditions is the significant role of clothing [12]. The selection of clothing for daily
routine use depends on different factors, which are shown below in Figure 1.3.
This system regulates different processes happening at the same time, which defines the
behavior of the users towards comfort. The human body interacts with the clothing and
surrounding environment in daily routine. Four types of processes happen together during
this interaction [13].
These processes are:
 Physical interaction between clothing and environment
 Physiological developments in the human body
 Neurophysiological processes
 Psychological progress [13]
According to the law of physics among the human body and clothing, factors that convey
the physical stimuli to affect the human body’s comfort and stamina are reflection and
absorption of mechanical sensation and light, and the transmission of moisture and heat
through the clothing. The body follows the law of physiology, which defines the sensorial
and thermoregulatory reactions of the body and finds out the body’s existence in a critical
situation [13].

2
 Figure 1.2: Factors affecting the clothing selection
The response of the sensory and thermoregulatory systems to the physical stimuli, which
are expressed from the interactions of the clothing environment with the human body
named as the process of the neurophysiological system. This process sends these signals
to the human brain that affect the comfort status. A psychological process is defined as a

3
process in which the human brain communicates with sensory stimuli through a specific
observation against the previous exposures and internal needs of the evaluation and
assessment of these sensory observations. Therefore, the customer’s comfort is the
subjective conclusion and observation based on the absorption of these four processes
[13].

Figure 1.3: Clothing environmental system of the body

1.5 Clothing comfort
Comfort is one of the most vital elements of clothing and is considered as the state of
pleasance. It also creates a harmony of psychological, physical, and physiological
comfort between human beings and the surrounded environment [1,14].
The structures and underlying standards are developing and formalizing with interaction
and diversity of environment, which relates to the requirements of human physiology and
comfort attributes. The research methods and analysis of human comfort and clothing
performance had additionally developed. Findings from this research have helped to
develop high-performance fibers and narrative structures that can develop a variety of
yarns, fabrics, and clothing. There are numerous methods, which involve the human
body, clothing, and environment. These methods provide helpful tools that can identify
important factors for designing various materials and measure clothing performance
concealed by extreme environmental conditions [3].
Clothing comfort is based on four elements which are the major aspects of comfort
[1,15,16] shown below in Figure 1.4.

4
 Thermo-
physiological

Sensorial/
Physiological
Tactile

Fitting

Figure 1.4: Elements of clothing comfort

Comfort and satisfaction with clothing are influenced by all characteristics of clothing
also as by attitudinal and psychological perceptions of the user. The clothing
characteristics consist of the physical characteristics of the fibers and material from
which the clothing is developed. Characteristics include tactile characteristics, design
features, brand labels, fabric/garment care information, and price. According to the
process, clothing and the human body have a two-way relationship. The clothing protects
the user from environmental hazards like heat, cold, fire, venomous agents, etc. for which
it is designed. At the same time, clothing reacts to the user with adverse situations, e.g.,
through undesirable thermal insulation once it is not required, or the sweat that is
considered as allowed evaporation, from the surface of the skin through blocking.
Layer(s) in clothing is the only defense system against severe heat, and it restricts the
efficient evaporative cooling of the body. Therefore, the user faces dangerous and painful
circumstances while working close to fire, effects can be overheating, dehydration,
and sometimes even collapses. In regular conditions, a normal person-produced
metabolic heat, which is around 80 watts (equal to an electrical bulb) without any type of
movement, and during the circumstance of high activity, it will quickly rise
over a kilowatt. Thus, the human body requires a good cooling system, which can be
provided through the physiological system of the body [1,3,4,16]. The most important
and effective mechanisms of heat transmission are:
 For the effective circulation of sweat, which is in the internal layer of the skin, every
type of metabolic heat is produced and should be carried to the internal surface of the
body from the skin.

5
 Through this mechanism, the skin will be capable to generate the
mandatory quantity of sweat.
 With the help of this method, sweat that generates through clothing effectively
transmits together in both liquid and vapor form [1].
In clothing, comfort is the elementary and universal need that customers require and seek
for a good and luxury feel along with comfort after they purchase clothing along with
different textile materials. In our lives clothing is extremely vital that they tend to use
every day, to get psychological and physiological comfort with the appropriate physical
circumstances around the human body for survival [1,14].
Now a day, natural materials are trendier in fashion, linen and its blended fibers have
increased in status and risen in name as well as cotton. Mainly three comfort parameters
that are tactile, psychological, and thermal have a quantitative relationship, not with
all fabric properties. This can be mainly associated with the fashions prevailing in
a society [15]. Therefore, possessing a smart understanding related to basic comfort in
clothing is very essential to improve and maintain the standards of living to survive as a
human being [1,17].
Components of clothing comfort
According to Goldman, fashion, fit, function, and feel are the four F’s of clothing
comfort. Marketing trends and styles of clothing are used that are suitable for users which
relates to fashion and customers’ psychological comfort. Air circulation that is delivered
from clothing, patterns for stitching, and fabric weight create an impact on the clothing
fit. For protection from climate conditions, functional factors are very important which is
a link with the maintenance of body heat stability [18].
Classification of clothing comfort
Clothing comfort can classify into four classes:
 Thermo-physiological comfort
 Sensorial or tactile comfort
 Psychological comfort
 Clothing fit comfort [19]
 Thermo-physiological comfort
Thermo-physiological comfort of the human body is related to the combination of heat
and moisture in clothing. Under comfortable thermal conditions, the maximum effects are
achieved during the physical activity of the human body [19].
With the help of radiation, convection, conduction, and respiration process heat is
produced from the metabolic system of a human body and is dispersed into the

6
environment. Heat loss is necessary to balance the body’s thermal stability by making the
heat production rate equal. Hyperthermia or hypothermia may cause when there is excess
heat in the body and lower work efficiency [20].
For the thermal balance of the human physique, 37±5°C is the essential body core
temperature. The process of the thermoregulatory system in the human body can see
below in Figure 1.5 [10].

Figure 1.5: Human body thermoregulatory system

A person can live comfortably without wearing clothes in the 26°C to 30°C range of
temperature but with the clothes, he or she can live comfortably doing different physical
activities in the temperature range of -40°C to 40°C. Therefore, clothing plays a very
important role in protecting the human body from thermal microclimate [21]. Different
clothing items cover round-about 90% of the human body. Therefore, in that case, the
thermoregulatory system through the clothing is mainly affected by the thermal
performance of the human body and transmitted features [22].
 Sensorial comfort
Mechanical and heat perceptions are provoked through the fabric interaction with the
skin. Sensorial comfort is very difficult to define due to the user’s sensitivity to the
clothes worn [23]. Human skin contains a multilayered structure, which generates various
sensations because of the sensory receptors present in the skin. Receptors are found in
three forms i.e., noci-receptors, mechanoreceptors, and thermo-receptors. Warmness and
coldness, pain, pressure, and vibration are skin-generated perceptions, which can see
below in Figure 1.6 [24].

7
 Figure 1.6: Sensory receptors in human skin
Among the body and fabric, there are two levels of interaction. The first level is about the
indigenous sensation that occurs against the skin and the inclusive sensation of the
garment is the second level. Unevenness, tenderness, and tickling are included in the first
level, which relates to tactile comfort. Heaviness and tightness are included in the second
interaction level related to pressure comfort [25].
 Psychological comfort
Psychological clothing comfort described the person liking toward clothing, which is
associated with affection and desire [26]. The physical processes of a person provide
stimuli to the sensory organs of a human. Neurophysiological impulses are generated
from the human body after receiving these stimuli. For the regulation of heat creation,
trembling, bloodstream, and moisture transmission rate, healing actions take place as
these neurophysiological impulses are directed to the brain. Based on previous
understandings, the brain is responsible to evaluate and handle all the impulses for the
subjective observations of multiple different feelings. Factors that interrupt the evaluation
and assessment processes are traditional, ecological, social, and physical [12,27,28].
In the marketing study, psychological scaling is the method used extensively to find out
human preferences and thoughts about clothing comfort [29,30]. According to Fiske,
category scale, absolute scale, equality scale, and ranking scale are mainly the four types
of measurement scales. Category scale type is used for the judgment of the subjective
evaluation of clothing comfort [10,31,32].
 Clothing fit comfort
Clothing fit comfort describes that comfort is the most important factor for the user,
which relates to the fit and size of the clothing [33]. Clothing fit assessment is dependent

8
on aesthetics and touch perceptions. Fabric porosity, the weight of clothing layers,
movement of clothing over the skin, and compressional force that is applied on the
surface of the skin are the main factors that influence the fitting comfort of clothing [10].
Prediction is that the clothing is adjusted to the wearers’ body shape and the closest
environment, so that is why it is distorted and fitted in coordination with human body
movement. Skin irritation and inappropriate thermal and moisture transmission are
constrained cardio-vascular flow that is caused due to the unfit garment and create
discomfort to the users [34].
1.6 Customer trends for the comfort of clothing
Now a day, in the world of modernism, to fulfill psychological and physiological
requirements, modern customers demand clothing products with better aesthetics, fully
functional, and improved comfort properties because comfort become the most common
and essential desire. The purchasing decisions of customers are influenced by very
important criteria which are income, education, profession, age, and gender of a
person/customer. Today’s customers are complementing their emotional state for the
clothing selection and want good looks, soft feels, and performance from clothing.
Therefore, in clothing the main quality is comfort. One of the key issues is improving and
understanding clothing comfort [35].
1.7 Literature review
Introduction
Clothing comfort has been the most important need of customers. In current years
particularly clothing comfort had more deceptive. Demands from the all-around
customers of the world regarding advanced comfort performances in their clothes also
including aesthetics have been received. Therefore, most fibers and textile materials
marketers recognized comfort as the most important feature of a garment for its
consumers. This specified that customers are involved with smell, touch, intuition, and
feel to purchase the garment. Comfort is considered as a complicated, advanced, and
vague perception to measure, due to the interactions between the procedures. Physical
changes, as well as the mechanisms of wet transfer and heat, are taking place within the
human body, clothing, and environmental system along with the physiological responses
to the human body. Those changes can be directly measured or can calculate through the
information gathered from measured factors. However, comfort could not separate from
the psychological aspect, which is the different feelings of subjective perception. Sensory
signals formulate through the brain after subjective perceptions. With all previous
experiences, which is required to evaluate and to do weight of all sensory perceptions

9
inline, internal needs and external effects that be wearer expertise and have an impact to
come on our future buying decisions. As a result, customers’ demands are increasing for
more and more comfortable clothes and the additional importance to investigate comfort
is taken into consideration [4,14,17,36].
Clothing interacts with the body and the changing of different levels of thermoregulation
that is required consequently. In addition, physical properties are required with the
interaction and different results of the specific garment/clothing. Textile materials and
garments properties hold both heat/moisture transfer and mechanical properties, the
complicated outcomes of those properties characterized the consistency of fabric comfort.
This highlights the necessity for multiple factors that is very important to consider
throughout the clothing analysis and evaluation. Correspondingly, the thickness of the
fabric and properties of surface texture activate tactile and thermal inputs, which is
underpinning the wetness perception of skin in dynamic and static clothing applications.
Tactile comfort primarily depends on the fabric characteristics of the surface and
mechanical properties. Mechanical properties like bending, stretching, compression, and
cutting, calculate the properties of tactile comfort at low-stress levels. Therefore, the
behaviors of the fabric’s transmission are relevant to thermal
comfort, specifically air permeability, water vapor transmission, and thermal resistance.
As result, the thermal comfort perception is powerfully concluded through the moisture
that is locked in the wearer’s clothing. In addition, the weight of the fabric and the fit of
clothing might cause changes in the pressure of fabric-to-skin, which represents tactile
sensory modality that is contributive to skin status perception [2,15,37].
All the maintenance of life is relevant to the exchange of substances. The warmth control
center of the human body is within the brain, which regulates the transportation of heat
through the flow of blood using blood vessels’ capillaries to the surface of the skin and
the sweat discharge. To manage heat exchange, the protection of the body against
undercooling and overheating is feasible. In this circumstance, thermal processes are
controlled by chemical regulation, and heat loss is controlled by physical regulation.
Thermal energy, which is released from the generated energy, heats the human body
because of the decomposition of fats and rich energy molecules. Transfer of heat will
transpire by respiration, evaporation, physical phenomenon, convection, and radiation.
The transfer of heat through radiation continuously happens between the environment
and the body. The body stays in both situations and relies on the difference in the body
surface temperature, skin temperature, and airflow. Transfer of heat through sweat
evaporation always increases and exists in a hot environment. If the temperature rises in

10
the environment within the normal body temperature, the skin gets hot and sweats more
intensely which causes a fast increase in the heat loss of the body. Transfer of heat
through evaporation from the surface of the skin is up to the quantity of moisture on the
skin and the variation between the environment and the pressures of water vapor [38,39].
In today’s clothing industry, moisture management is considered as a major and very
important performance criterion, that decides the comfort levels of fabric. For providing
thermo-physiological clothing, comfort clothing must have good water vapor properties
as well as the property of liquid moisture transmission. In the human body, the two major
mechanisms that are considered the best cooling systems are sweating and evaporation.
Clothing has a significant role, which is keeping the body comfortable by removing
sweat. In physiological clothing comfort, the two very important factors which are
affecting the clothing system are drying rate and liquid transporting of fabric [16,40,41].
One of the most significant properties among all others in a practical fabric is air
permeability, which is depending on the structures and the values of the pores. In garment
designing, the parameters which are defining clothing comfort and user satisfaction
depend on fabric mechanical properties and air permeability. Mechanical properties are
those that we can measure through applying force [42,43].
In textiles, thermo-physiological properties significantly define the transportation of
liquid moisture, heat, and moisture vapor from the skin surface to the atmosphere from
the clothing, also providing a comfortable microclimate to the user is the most difficult
task to do. Layers of clothing that are worn next to skin had two very significant
properties. To soak the perspiration of moisture from the skin surface is the initial and
main property and the other one is the transmission of the moisture to the atmosphere to
provide a comfortable feel to the user [16,44,45].
An attempt to understand the basics of the physical comfort of clothing was determined
through the transportation of thermal properties of cotton, polyester, and the mixed
material of cotton/polyester. As a result, both the construction methods of the fabric and
the constituent properties of fibers influence thermal transportation. A user/wearer can
experience the physical comfort of the fabric in a specific given environmental
circumstance which is critically influenced by moisture transportation, and thermal
and tactile properties [46,47].
Fine cotton woven fabrics for ladies are extraordinarily common within the subcontinents
also in every specific part of the world, where the summers remain blistering and
consecutive rainy seasons that are quite moist and hot. Fabrics that are specified must not
be very thin that they are enough weak to break and must not be very thick to create an
uncomfortable feeling. In specific regions, the development of fabric might do through

11
the utilization of the yarn counts that are coarser and are with a lower variety of picks and
ends per inch. This can be developed by the exploitation of yarn counts that are finer with
a higher variety of picks and ends per inch for the enhancement of the best parameters of
fabric to achieve favorable fabric strength properties and air permeability [48,49].
This research provides the approach in methodology to analyze the contributions of hand-
feel, constructional and mechanical properties to observe the level of tactile comfort in
the fabric, which can use in clothing. This method relies on the usage of instrumental
measurements for the construction and mechanical variables with the combination of
psychophysical procedures for evaluating both the quantitative and qualitative aspects of
comfort and sensory hand-feel expertise. A method that is used to approach human
sensory conclusions of the comfort and hand-feel properties, differentiates these studies
from others. To predict the comfort and handle properties of fabric only by using the
‘Kawabata mechanical measures’, therefore, derived methods of Kawabata, which are
used to calculate the properties like comfort and hand-feel in the fabrics used in clothing.
These final methods are not predictive, with the sense of getting dependent and
freelance measures to the surface of the fabric, which predicts the dependent variables
from the independent variables. Instead of some simple methods, get ‘Kawabata
mechanical measures’ on the sampling fabrics, which can calculate ‘comfort’ and ‘hand-
feel’ values algorithmically. In terms of perceived hand-feel or fabric comfort, they do
get not a single independent verification from any human respondents [50–52].
Perception of clothing brands
Lawn fabric was never considered as a preferred formal wear fabric but currently, it has
become more popular due to the weather conditions in Pakistan. As time is passing, the
summer season is becoming extensive, and the temperature is rising day by day in the
summer. According to the current scenario of weather in Pakistan, summers last for eight
months of a year. Using high-class technology, textile mills in cooperation with the
native designers in the unit manufacturing area have the best quality of lawn fabric. In the
1970s lawn was being used as casual wear and it was rarely used for formal dressing. The
lawn was available at outlets as one-piece, two-piece, and overall print. With the time,
changing in fashion and increasing trend of ladies towards buying fabric of lawn
particularly in the summer season. Textile mills started turning out with many differences
in printed designs and are creating the use of delicate technology to provide the best lawn
material in a wide range. The very lightweight material is taken to make lawn from good
quality and very fine cotton yarn which can be checked by its partially clear look.
Finishes applied on the lawn might vary. Textile mills are currently introducing lawns

12
associated with well-known local designers and developing various lawn brands. As time
passed by, the fashion and style of lawns have modified a lot. Wider silhouettes and
modern cutlines had been replaced with the standard three-piece dupatta shalwar, and
kameez. That is the reason currently Pakistan is recognized globally and famous for its
beautiful prints. As a citizen of a Muslim country, Pakistani ladies according to their
culture and workplace environment demands to wear a dress that looks formal. Back in
the day, it is hard for females of Pakistan to wear any outfit that provides a
proper appearance and at the same time reflects Pakistani culture. However,
currently, our creative Pakistani designers have fixed this problem by introducing
innovative concepts and modifications to the existing lawn. The
designer lawn is currently turning out with patches of silk, velvet, chiffon, satin, and
georgette also with thread work, embroidery, laces, innovative cuts, etc. All
such embellishments on the lawn outfits have created an ideal outfit that is more suitable
for Pakistani-employed ladies [10,41].
To differentiate the products and goods of one company from another, branding is used
qualitatively [53,54]. In the purchase decision of customers, the origin of a country also
has a great impact in addition to branding [55,56]. Advertisement is the factor, which is
determined as one of the strongest factors and considered the behavior changes in
customers purchasing [57].
A survey was conducted in India related to the growth of the retail market of garments
and also the age and behavior of the young customers towards the preferences about the
purchase of clothing [58]. It is found that young customers prefer international brands to
domestic or daily life clothing [59].
On the customers of Bangladesh, another survey was conducted and explored the liking
and purchasing decisions towards the local clothing products [60]. The result of this
survey, concludes that most customers’ decisions are based on product value, concession,
price, comfort, and visual appearance [61].
The study reported that things that had a great effect on the user’s buying performance
are premium and self-esteem, brand status, image, and reputation of any local or
international brand [62].
Different presentations of lawn brands and their channeling affect the performance of
Pakistani buyers. Due to the limited availability of lawn brands and personal reasons like
discount offers, advertisements, brand labels, current trends, price, quality, fabric, and
fashion, Pakistani female customers explore more choices and alternatives. Brands
factors and clothing comfort have a great influence on Pakistani females purchasing
behavior [63,64].

13
Sustainability is a key parameter these days and plays an important role in development.
It became a major requirement of today’s fashion. To accomplish the need for
sustainability in the latest comfort of aware customers, in this study an effort had
achieved to discover the probabilities of manufacturing high-quality fabrics for clothing.
As time advanced, people paid a lot of emphasis and attention to eco-friendly textile
materials. These trends end up with an inspiration in which the fabrics that may develop
and use the fabrics have been obtained and manufactured by using renewable sources
such as natural fibers, which can use as a substitute for conventional synthetic fibers.
Now cotton fibers are also considered non-eco-friendly fibers because it needs a lot of
pesticides and chemicals along with water. Currently, the users are health and fashion-
conscious which is why they shift toward eco-friendly fabrics. Comfort is the most
significant feature of apparel and clothing among all. Comfort in clothing is largely
related to three collective aspects thermal tactile and psychological. Aesthetics of the
clothing is mainly associated with psychological comfort and normally the quantitative
properties of fabrics hold no dependence on fashion trends in a specific society. The
interaction between the skin and fabric throughout the wearing depends on tactile
comfort. It interacts with the fabric’s surface characteristics and mechanical properties.
Anyhow, thermal comfort plays an important role to measure the abilities of fabric to
keep up the skin temperature of the wearer and to handle the transmission behaviors (like
air permeability, liquid water transmission, water vapor, and thermal insulation or
conductivity) of fabric [7,65,66].
In the Sub-Continents, the Middle East, and nearby areas of this world, which are known
and considered for the humid and hot summer seasons; fine cotton fabrics are very
important and famous for fashionable ladies’ summer wear. The purpose of the study
helps to investigate the comfort, hand-feel, and mechanical properties of the fine
cotton fabric considering the two main and common factors of yarn and counting for the
improvement of wrinkle recovery, drape-ability, moisture management capability, air
permeability, softness, and smoothness. Durability and comfort are deliberated as two
major and significant requirements in all apparel. Thermo-physiological comfort of
clothing relay mainly on moisture management capability, air permeability, and water
vapor resistance of the fabric in summers. Fabric resilience and softness generally depend
on sensorial comfort. The aesthetic appearance of a garment is particularly influenced by
its wrinkle recovery and drape-ability, which creates impact through its strength. In this
state, the thin fabrics should contain good tear strength, which is essential when offered
to resist the ripping of fabric due to interaction with rough surfaces or slightly sharp
objects. The most important aspects that contribute to the overall strength of fabric are

14
fabric density, crimp, weave design, yarn count, fibers, and yarn strength. The comfort of
the garment is a significant concern of the current customers. In thermo-physiological
comfort, features like moisture management and air permeability in clothing are relevant
to the human body. However, porosity, cover factor, fabric density, yarn count, fabric
weight, fineness, fiber type, and further structural factors have considerable effects on
moisture resistivity, air, and heat of fabrics. By touching the fabric, the critical instinct of
humans toward clothing is characterized as the hand-feel properties, which interact the
garment with the skin and raise the eat as well as the mechanical perceptions. Sensorial
comfort is hard to specify due to the sensitivity of the users because the fabric is worn
near the skin. Fabric surface properties, which include fullness, smoothness, and softness
also some of the mechanical variability of fabrics, such as wrinkling, and drape are the
most significant tactile/handle and visual characteristics. Several useful methods are
available for the assessment of the hand-feel properties of the fabrics namely
Phabrometer, FTT (Fabric Touch Tester), FAST (Fabrics Analysis by Simple Tests), and
KES-FB (Kawabata Evaluation System for Fabrics). Phabrometer testing is classified as
the best technique for calculating the properties such as wrinkle recovery, relative
hand value, drape, smoothness, softness, and resilience. Fabric experiences the ‘low
stress’ properties of mechanical like compression, tensile, shear, bending, and frictional
forces throughout the extraction method by using the Phabrometer. In Pakistan and
different countries of the sub-continent along with the Middle East, ladies prefer woven
fabrics that are made from fine cotton as summer apparel because of its appropriate
properties such as comfort and hand-feel, which turn into more critical once the weather
turns sometimes hot humid, and mostly hot-dry. This study hopes to provide an improved
vision to develop the fine cotton fabrics for summer season apparel and to optimize all
the comfort, mechanical, sensorial, and visual properties [16,51,52,67].
Factors affecting the physical, mechanical, and comfort properties of the woven
fabric
The physical, mechanical, and comfort properties of fabrics are influenced by many
factors such as fiber properties, yarn properties, fabric construction (i.e. count, warp
density, weft density, thickness, and cover factor), and finishing treatments [68–70].
 Physical and Mechanical properties
For clothing, fabric strength is the fundamental physical and mechanical property, which
has a major impact on the selection of clothing. There are numerous factors on which
fabric strength is dependent such as type of fiber, fiber blend, yarn count, multiple twists,
different spinning techniques, and physical and mechanical properties of the yarn.
Constructional parameters of the fabric also have a great influence on fabric strength such

15
as ends and picks density, weave structure, and setting of the weft. Fabric strength also
has significant effects like wet processing method and testing conditions such as relative
humidity (RH), temperature and pH, standard test methods for testing, and operating
duration. Therefore, to control the fabric strength it is very important to enhance the
fibers, yarn, fabric, and finishing parameters [68–70]. The measurements of the tearing
and breaking strength of fabrics are very important because these strength properties are
directly related to fabric usage [71].
i. Effect of fibers
Fabric strength, touch properties, flexural rigidity, and fullness can be achieved by
creating the variation in cross-sectional shapes of natural and manmade fibers, which are
also included in special clothing requirements [72–74]. In textile fabrics, tensile strength,
elongation, and tearing strength properties may be affected by the cross-sectional shapes
of textile fibers [75].
Due to the interruption against climate circumstances, soft and light feel, and good
filtration property, microfilament woven fabrics are tough for conventional fabrics.
Because of the low strength of fabrics, the functional performance and life of products
are reduced as the strength properties of microfilament fabrics are critical and important
[76–78]. Tensile and elongation properties of conventional and microfilament woven
fabrics were compared with the help of selected three main weave designs (plain, twill,
and satin), five filament input factors, and four weft setts. The discovery was that, if the
filament fineness and weft setts were increased it could increase the weft tensile strength
[79].
ii. Effect of yarn
In the physical and mechanical properties of apparel and clothing, there are various
parameters of yarns, which have a very important impact on them such as fibers content,
yarn count, yarn crimp, and twist factors [80,81].
Study-related to the effects of weft yarn composition on the work wears quality was
already observed. Physical and mechanical properties such as yarn count, GSM, end and
picks per inch, pilling, tear strength, and tensile were measured. Blends that were used for
the development of yarn are polyester, modal, bamboo, combed cotton, and linen with
their blends. Combed cotton yarn and modal yarn show low pilling whereas, tear and
tensile properties of modal yarn were higher. The pinning structures of yarn produced
from different methods and machines great impact on the yarn’s physical and mechanical
properties. In the clothing industry, the worsted fabric is commonly used for suiting
purposes due to its good tearing strength. As the tearing properties of worsted fabrics
were explored, with the help of different weft yarn combinations made through the

16
various methods of yarn spinning. The discovery was that the solo yarn fabric was greater
in tearing strength rather than the single ring and Siro yarn fabrics were at the least in
tearing strength. Whereas, two-ply ring yarn fabric is the highest in tearing strength [82–
84].
Structural parameters of yarn (yarn crimp, count, twist, etc.) are also influenced by the
physical and mechanical properties of fabrics. Evaluation regarding the combined effect
of yarn twist and count on the tear, tensile, and bursting strength of the fabric took place.
After the implementation of regression techniques for the analysis of results, which
shows that there was no significant difference between bursting and tensile strength with
the structural parameters of yarn. However, a statistically significant difference was
available in tearing strength [85].
iii. Effect of fabrics
Weaving, knitting, non-woven techniques, and braiding are the different techniques from
which various types of fabrics can manufacture. To produce woven fabrics, two sets of
yarn interlacement are used in warp and weft directions. To construct the different
designs of woven fabric, variation is required in interlacement patterns. This also has a
significant effect on the physical and mechanical properties of woven fabrics [86].
Woven fabrics have great strength properties and are greatly influenced by constructional
parameters. Effects of plain and twill weave structures were observed on the tear and
tensile strength, stiffness, pilling resistance, and abrasion. It proves that the tensile
strength of the plain weave was higher than the twill weave but in the case of tearing
strength, the effect is vice versa. The strength of the woven fabric is very important
because it is in link with its serviceability [87,88].
After exploring, the tear strength of worsted fabrics, it was discovered that lower CFF
(Crossing-over firmness factor) in loose construction shows higher tearing strength.
Compared to other fabric types, the performance and dimensional stability of woven
fabrics are good [84].
According to different weave structures such as plain, twill, matt, sateen, and diamond,
the tensile strength of woven fabrics was also examined, and findings show that loose
construction and higher interlacements reduced the tensile strength. Factors that have a
great impact on the tensile performance of woven fabric are an arrangement of yarn
interlacement, gaps between yarns, and the number of yarns present in the fabric cross-
section. To evaluate the tensile strength of woven fabrics regression statistical method
was used. The tensile strength of the yarn, fabric densities, and weave structures were the
predicted factors selected to increase the tensile strength of woven fabrics [89–91].

17
In woven fabric, cover factors that play an important role in the strength behavior are
weave structures, looming tension, and weft parameters of fabric along with pick density
and count. Considerable effect on the fabric strength caused when weft cover factors
increased. Pick density is directly proportional to the strength properties of woven fabrics
[85,92–96].
 Comfort properties
Thermo-physiological comfort, sensorial comfort, psychological comfort, and fitting
comfort are defined as the different elements of comfort. It was found out that comfort is
customers’ main demand for outside wear. Thermal and moisture are the elements that
control clothing comfort, and their resistivity was also determined. The region, gender,
age, and economic and social needs create a difference in the preferences of clothing
comfort [97].
A group of Turkish users faced difficulties regarding key comfort apparel comfort
significance. During the questionnaire, an assessment of 325 people was conducted for
the investigation of different comfort characteristics. In the survey related to the study,
variables such as fabric and garment qualities, demographics, purchasing patterns,
apparel judgment for sensory evaluation, and sensation in wet conditions were included.
Results revealed that the main criteria for the purchasing decisions of Turkish customers
were the fitting and comfort of apparel [2].
i. Effect of fibers
Thermal comfort properties of fabrics were evaluated through polyester and different
blends of polyester/viscose. Thermal resistance and permeability values were shown
higher, and conductance was shown lower with the twill weave in tri-lobal fiber. Thermal
resistance increased with the rise in linear density and decreased occurred in the
absorption and conductance. With the fiber count, wicking, air and moisture absorptivity
of fabric were higher whereas, polyester in the non-circular form worked in the favor of
wicking, air, and moisture transmission in the case of cross-sectional shapes [47,98].
For the study of sensorial and thermal comfort properties of woven fabrics, different
types of fibers such as soybean, bamboo, and viscose fibers, cotton, the elastic fiber in the
weft with sea-cell, and polyester/cotton in warp were selected. Primary and total hand
values, wicking behavior, water vapor resistance, and thermal resistance were evaluated.
Results showed that fiber types had a significant impact on the comfort properties of
fabric [99,100]. Thermal and sensorial comfort also examined the influence of fabric
structures, the number of weft threads, and the blend ratio of polyester-cotton on the
properties of woven fabrics. The conclusion showed that with the content of polyester,

18
total hand value and thermal insulation increased however, air and moisture transmission
decreased [101,102].
To access the thermal and sensorial comfort of woven fabrics, linen fibers and their
blends with viscose and cotton were used. Different linear densities of linen,
linen/viscose, and linen/cotton blends were selected, and the outcomes showed that while
blending with viscose and cotton, 100% linen fabric exhibits good drape and aesthetic
properties, and the linen fabric was improved. Thermal insulation, moisture transmission
properties, and air permeability of linen and linen blended fabrics are good [38].
ii. Effect of yarn
Spinning methods, structures, and yarn types all have a great impact on the thermal and
sensorial comfort of woven fabrics. With Dri-release yarn in weft, the effects of four
different types of yarns are described. The double-layered fabric was produced by using
cotton/polyester, bamboo, Tencel, and modal as a four-ring spun yarn in the weft
direction and cotton yarn in the warp direction. It concludes that for activewear products,
fabric that is produced from Dri-release and cotton yarn had good thermal comfort.
Different rotor, ring, and friction spinning methods were used to make compact, combed
carded woven fabric. Thermal and sensorial comfort performance along with the comfort
features of these fabrics was determined. It concludes that with the combination of
different yarns, the cool tactile feelings of compact yarn were good, but the weft compact
yarn was suitable for summers. However, thermal insulation had higher in carded yarn
and was suitable for winter clothing [103–107].
Plain weave fabric properties produced with cotton/acrylic bulked yarn were explored
and the input variables were twist levels, yarn counts, and shrinkage percentage. Through
the response surface statistical technique, an effect on the physical, sensorial, and comfort
properties of fabric was checked, and the design factors were optimized. This fabric in
comparison with 100% cotton fabric improved thermal resistance, and air and moisture
transmission [108].
The investigation was by introducing the Elite dense yarn, the comfort properties of
woven fabric and the comfort properties of normal and compact yarns were compared.
With plain and twill structures, fabric samples were produced from normal and compact
yarn by using cotton fibers. It was recognized from the results that compact yarn had
higher air permeability and moisture diffusion but was lower in thermal resistivity than
normal [109].
iii. Effect of fabrics
Due to the structural parameters of fabric like fabric count, cover factor, thread density,
and weave design, the comfort properties of woven fabric are influenced. Using sweat

19
guarded hot plate instrument to test the effects of different fabric structures on the
thermal behavior of fabric, which produces from a polyester/cotton blend. It was found in
the results that diced, cellular and plain weave had the highest thermal resistance that was
suitable for cold weather conditions as compared to matt and twill weave, which were
suitable for hot weather conditions [110,111].
After the picking insertion methods were checked along with the effects of weave
structures on moisture behavior and air permeability of woven fabrics, it was found that
all the types of fibers, weave types, weft density, and pick insertion methods were
different. In addition, the sensorial and thermal comfort properties such as wicking, water
absorbency, water vapor transmission, and air permeability were evaluated. Outcomes of
the evaluation showed that air and moisture transmission was better in the twill weave
with three-pick insertion as compared to single and double pick insertion in plain weave.
As compared to other fabrics, water absorbency is lower and the thermal resistance and
wicking ability of twill fabric is higher [101,112–114].
Pick density and tightness of warp threads analyze the impact of linear density of weft
yarn on sensorial comfort properties such as fabric bending, and drape characteristics
were determined. Bending rigidity increased when the warp tension was increased.
However, no significant effects were found on the drape coefficient. Drape increased
with weft thickness and density but there was no effect on bending rigidity in the weft
direction [115,116].
1.8 Research gap
The performance of apparel or a garment can determine by the comfort of the fabric in
the wearer’s opinion. In this manner, clothing comfort is measured as the most significant
quality feature for fabricators and brand designers that helps the
whole apparel performance and wearers’ satisfaction. Wearer freedom of movement,
perspiring and apparel fit are the major considerable comfort complications. This study
reveals that the previous analysis has focused that the females of Pakistan
simply concentrate on shopping for patterns, not on the properties of summer clothing,
which influence feminine consumers’ buying decisions. However, no study exists
concerning comfort in the context of Pakistani weather conditions. The literature relevant
to clothing comfort of woven fabric shows that major work has been done on mechanical
and thermal comfort as compared to sensorial/tactile and no study specifically focuses on
Ladies’ summer woven bottom wear fabrics comfort in Pakistan.

20
 Aim of the study
The purpose of this work is to study fiber blends and structural parameters of ladies’
summer bottom wear fabrics that provide maximum mechanical, sensorial, and thermo-
physiological comfort in pre-summer, summer, and post-summer segments.
1.9 Specific objectives and scope of the project
 To evaluate physical, mechanical, thermo-physiological, and sensorial comfort
properties of popular Pakistani brands’ bottom-wear woven fabrics for ladies.
 To do comparative analysis and investigate fabrics regarding their physical,
mechanical, thermo-physiological, and sensorial comfort properties.
 To finalize the comparative study for optimum comfort properties which are
appropriate for pre-summer, summer, and post-summer seasons.
 To develop a comfort matrix with respect to physical, mechanical, thermo-
physiological, and sensorial comfort properties of bottom wear summer fabrics.
 To construct the best of the best fabric with respect to physical, mechanical,
thermo-physiological, and sensorial comfort properties of bottom wear summer
fabrics.

21
 Chapter 2
2 Materials and method
To investigate the textile material, it is very important to know test methods and their
procedure. This research described the testing of textiles to conclude and evaluate the
characteristics and properties of fabrics. This also involves the proper use of machines,
instruments, tools, and techniques to understand the inter-relationship between the
properties and the investigation of different properties of textile material [117].
This chapter explains the detailed methodology, which is used to investigate the physical,
mechanical, and comfort properties of branded woven bottom wear summer fabrics, also
standard test methods and instruments used for the investigation of different properties,
which were tested in this study. It also explains the materials used in the study including
lawn fabric. According to the research methods, the complete process flow chart of the
methodology that is followed in this study can see below in Figure 2.1.

Sourcing of Branded Woven Bottom Wear Fabrics

Testing of Samples

Data Analysis

Evaluation of Results

Comfort Matrix

Development of Optimise Sample

Figure 2.1: Complete work plan flow chart

2.1 Experimental
2.1.1 Materials
From the respective outlets of Pakistan, the fourteen most popular Pakistani clothing
branded ladies’ woven cotton summer bottom wear fabrics were purchased in their ready-
to-sale form the analysis of their comfort and mechanical properties. All the purchased
fabrics were color dyed and due to the confidential details of the related textile industry,
the textile processing parameters cannot be checked as finished fabrics were purchased
from the market. After conditioning the fabric samples under standard atmospheric
conditions, all the tests were conducted according to standard test methods. Famous
Pakistani brands have studied for the selection of fabric such as:

22
  S.S # 55, 56  S.T # 15, 16
 E.T # 52, 53  A.K # 24, 25, 26
 N.L # 2, 33, 54  SP # 48, 49, 61
 W.D # 46  K.S # 8, 9
 K.H # 20, 21, 22, 51  O.M # 6
 G.A # 14  Z.N # 59, 60
 L.L # 30, 32  E.D # 27, 58
According to the investigation, all these brands use different lawn fabrics for the
development of ladies’ bottom wear fabrics as per the summer weather conditions which
are divided into three segments (Pre-summer, Summer, and Post-summer).
2.1.2 Fabric specifications
Analysis of fabric composition confirmed that 100% cotton with a 1/1 plain weave
structure was used to develop the branded bottom wear fabrics. A wide range and
variations were shown in the results of different physical, mechanical and comfort
properties. The number of ends per inch of these branded bottom wear fabrics is more
than the number of picks per inch but the count of warp and weft vary in numbers which
produced structurally stable and commercially cost-effective branded woven bottom wear
summer fabrics. These branded fabrics are divided into three major groups. Each group
consists of ten selected “bottom wear lawn fabrics” of selected weather conditions. As all
the samples of bottom wear fabrics were tested, the following specifications are found in
pre-summer bottom wear summer fabrics which are given in Table 2.1.
Table 2.1: Fabric specifications of pre-summer fabrics

Sr. No. Sample code GSM EPI PPI Wp Count Wt Count

1 K.S # 8 93 106 69 61.74 36.53
2 S.T # 16 87 105 68 60.66 40.04
3 K.H # 20 75 105 90 65.00 64.74
4 A.K # 25 85 106 66 60.58 36.83
5 W.D # 46 87 107 72 61.63 60.66
6 S.P # 48 89 126 66 59.68 38.30
7 K.H # 51 80 105 85 60.67 56.26
8 E.T # 53 79 103 67 60.58 39.29
9 N.L # 54 83 123 76 59.64 54.86
10 S.S # 55 76 105 83 59.68 60.93
Min. 75 103 66 59.64 36.53
Max. 93 126 90 65.00 64.74
Mean 83 109 74 60.99 50.02
S.D. 6 8 9 1.59 11.63

As all the samples of bottom wear fabrics were tested, the following specifications are
found in summer bottom wear summer fabrics which are given in Table 2.2.

23
Table 2.2: Fabric specifications of summer fabrics

Sr. Sample
GSM EPI PPI Wp count Wt count
No. code
1 N.L # 2 84 128 80 63.94 57.74
2 O.M # 6 92 108 68 63.94 40.51
3 G.A #14 86 85 70 46.66 41.06
4 K.H # 22 81 108 85 62.75 58.52
5 A.K # 24 77 102 66 61.63 39.29
6 L.L # 30 90 111 68 60.66 38.56
7 S.P # 49 88 118 64 60.67 40.43
8 E.T # 52 78 103 68 61.64 41.65
9 E.D # 58 85 118 65 57.75 37.83
10 Z.N # 59 92 140 65 59.68 37.19
Min. 77 58 64 46.66 37.19
Max. 92 140 85 63.94 58.52
Mean 85 112 70 59.93 43.28
S.D. 5 15 7 5.03 7.96

As all the samples of bottom wear fabrics were tested, the following specifications are
found in post-summer bottom wear summer fabrics which are given in Table 2.3.
Table 2.3: Fabric specifications of post-summer fabrics

Sr.
Sample code GSM EPI PPI Wp count Wt count
No.
1 K.S # 9 93 117 68 57.75 37.62
2 S.T # 15 86 104 70 66.03 40.85
3 K.H # 21 80 107 97 63.94 58.52
4 A.K # 26 78 102 64 63.75 41.65
5 E.D # 27 85 106 69 63.75 40.63
6 L.L # 32 85 104 83 59.68 47.47
7 N.L # 33 83 122 80 58.70 56.28
8 S.S # 56 83 110 67 60.67 34.28
9 Z.N # 60 87 130 66 60.67 40.51
10 S.P # 61 91 118 65 59.64 38.84
Min. 78 102 64 57.75 34.28
Max. 93 130 97 66.03 58.52
Mean 85 112 73 61.46 43.67
S.D. 5 9 11 2.72 7.98

2.1.3 Methodology
For this research, fourteen brands and three seasons were selected as the independent
variable. The two basic factors for this study were brands and seasons. Brands had
fourteen levels and seasons had three levels which are shown below in Table 2.4.

24
Table 2.4: Factors and levels

Factors
Sr. No. 1 2
Weather conditions
Brands
1 2 3
1 S.P
2 G.A
3 N.L
4 A.K
5 S.T
6 L.L
Levels

7 E.T
Pre-summer Summer Post-summer
8 S.S
9 K.H
10 E.D
11 W.D
12 O.M
13 Z.N
14 K.S

Based on the above-selected factors and levels, the design of the experiment was
developed. According to the requirements and material, ten out of fourteen brands took
place for each weather condition which is shown below in Table 2.5.
Table 2.5: Design of experiment
Sr.
Factors Levels
No.
1 Brands 10
2 Weather conditions 03
Total combinations 30

2.1.4 Combinations of developed optimized samples

According to the research and requirements of the study, three combinations in blend
ratio are selected as per the strength, quality, and fineness of the yarn with the constant
count and fabric construction ratio. Following are the combinations used to construct the
finest fabric which is given in Table 2.6.
Table 2.6: Combinations for fabric construction
Egyptian cotton Pak cotton Yarn count Fabric
S. No. GSM
(%) (%) (Ne) construction
1 70 30 80/1 80*80/90*90 59
2 50 50 80/1 80*80/90*90 63
3 30 70 80/1 80*80/90*90 62

25
2.1.5 Equipment and parameters for testing
For the sake of testing, “bottom wear lawn fabric samples” of different brands had been
purchased. After purchasing the fabric samples were conditioned and investigated, later
appropriate standard test methods were applied to determine physical, mechanical, and
comfort properties by ISO and ASTM standard test methods.
 Testing of physical properties
According to the research and requirements of the study, the following are the equipment
and methods used for the testing of physical properties, which are given in Table 2.7.
Table 2.7: Equipment and methods for the testing of physical properties
Sr.
Parameters Test standards Test equipment
No.
GSM Cutter and Micronaire
1 GSM ASTM D3776
Tester 675
2 Ends and picks per inch ASTM D3775 Pick Glass and Scale
3 Warp and weft count ASTM D3775 Weight Scale

i. GSM test
GSM of fabric was investigated according to the “ASTM D3776” standard test method
on “GSM cutter and Micronaire tester 675” which are shown below in Figures 2.2 and
2.3.

Figure 2.2: GSM cutter

Figure 2.3: Micronaire tester 675

26
This test was conducted on conditioned fabric samples which were received after 24
hours of conditioning under the standard atmospheric Temperature of (20 ± 2oC) and (RH
65 ± 4%) of relative humidity. In fabrics, GSM is simply the method of measuring the
fabric weight and is known as grams per square meter. Factors that affect the values of
GSM are yarn count and thickness. In the fabric cross-section, the higher GSM number
produces the denser fabric and low GSM has caused thin fabric production accordingly.
ii. End and picks per inch test
Ends and picks per inch of fabric were investigated according to the “ASTM D3775”
standard test method through the “Pick glass, pin, and measuring scale” which is shown
below in Figure 2.4.

Figure 2.4: Pick glass, pin, and measuring scale

This test was conducted on conditioned fabric samples which were received after 24
hours of conditioning under the standard atmospheric Temperature of (20 ± 2oC) and (RH
65 ± 4%) of relative humidity. In the woven fabric, the number of warp and weft threads
per inch is described as ends and picks per inch of fabric.
The thickness of the thread and weave design varies due to the number of ends and picks
per inch. Fabric ends and picks per inch itself is the major factor of all the above tests. In
the fabric cross-section, higher ends and picks per inch are required to develop the finer
fabric.
iii. Warp and weft count test
Warp and weft count of fabric were investigated according to the “ASTM D3775”
standard test method on the “Weight scale tester” which is shown below in Figure 2.5.

27
 Figure 2.5: Weight scale tester
This test was conducted on conditioned fabric samples which were received after 24
hours of conditioning under the standard atmospheric Temperature of (20 ± 2oC) and (RH
65 ± 4%) of relative humidity. Warp and weft count are described as the fabric densities
or in other words number of threads per unit length in both directions of the fabric.
In the fabric cross-section, the fabric count of warp and weft plays a very important role
because it shows the crimp values and the weight of the yarn which is used in warp and
weft directions. Fabric count itself is the major factor in all the above tests.
 Testing of mechanical properties
According to the research and requirements of the study, the following are the equipment
and methods used for the testing of mechanical properties, which are given in Table 2.8.
Table 2.8: Equipment and methods for the testing of mechanical properties

Sr.
Parameters Test standards Test equipment
No.

Gateslab (Elmendorf Tear

1 Tear strength ISO 13937-1
Tester)

Breaking (Tensile) strength Ametek Lloyd Instrument

2 ISO 13934-1
by strip method (Universal Tensile Tester)

Roaches (Martindale Pilling

3 Pilling resistance ISO 12945-2
Tester)

i. Tear strength test

Tear strength was investigated according to the “ISO 13937-1” standard test method on
the “Elmendorf tear tester (Gateslab technologies de laboratoire SARL, France)” which is
shown below in Figure 2.6.

28
 Figure 2.6: Elmendorf tear tester (Gateslab technologies de laboratoire SARL, France)
This test was conducted on all five conditioned fabric samples of each direction which
were received after 24 hours of conditioning under the standard atmospheric Temperature
of (20.7 ± 2oC) and (RH 64 ± 4%) of relative humidity. The weight of tearing is adjusted
at C. It could say that by applying the force on the fabric under a defined condition, tear
strength is the ability of a fabric to resist the propagation of a tear. This also explains that
the low number of ends and picks per inch in fabrics has a loose structure. Factors that
affect the values of tear strength are yarn count and ends and picks/inch. In the fabric,
loose inter-section points of yarns have more freedom of movement for yarn, which
contributes to tearing resistance. On the other side, the increased inter-section points of
yarn tighten the structure of the fabric, and this causes the reduction in freedom of
movement of yarn to resist tearing force, which in result decreases the tear strength of
fabric accordingly.
ii. Tensile strength test
Tensile strength was investigated according to the “ISO 13934-1” standard test method
on “Ametek Lloyd instrument (Universal tensile tester)” which is shown below in Figure
2.7.

Figure 2.7: Ametek lloyd instrument (Universal tensile tester)

29
This test was conducted on all five conditioned fabric samples of each direction which
were received after 24 hours of conditioning under the standard atmospheric Temperature
of (20.4 ± 2oC) and (RH 64 ± 4%) of relative humidity. Pre-tension was adjusted at 5N
according to weight per unit area of fabric samples and gauge length was set at 200mm.
The tensile strength of a fabric is explained through the measured resistance to a tensile
load or stress in the warp direction or the weft direction. If the thread densities increased
from both directions, the tensile strength of the fabric tends to increase also. Fabric
density and count, crimp, weave design, yarn strength, and inherent fiber strength are the
major factors that contribute to fabric strength to increase the tensile strength of the
fabric. The fabric that is made from the coarser yarn has more tensile strength because of
the greater strength in yarn and thick fabric structure which shows the higher values of
strength at the cross-section points of warp and weft yarns.
iii. Pilling test
Pilling was investigated according to the “ISO 12945-2” standard test method on
“Martindale pilling tester (Roaches International Limited UK)” which is shown below in
Figure 2.8.

Figure 2.8: Martindale pilling tester (Roaches International Limited UK)

This test was conducted on all five conditioned fabric samples of each direction which
were received after 24 hours of conditioning under the standard atmospheric Temperature
of (20.7 ± 2oC) and (RH 64.6 ± 4%) of relative humidity. A total number of rubs was set
at 1000 and the abrasion was adjusted at 140 mm. Pilling is described as one or more
tangled fibers that are held on the fabric surface in the form of bunches and balls and the
resistance which comes in the form of pills on the fabric surface is called pilling
resistance. Fabric and yarn pilling are produced according to the movement of fiber
within the yarn. Less movement of fibers is required within the yarn for less pilling on
the fabric surface that is why the most important thing is the dimensional stability of
yarn. Yarn count, fiber length, dimensions, blends, and types are the mainly included

30
factors. Furthermore, the pilling properties of the fabric are much related to the yarn’s
hairiness property, which uses in the construction of the fabric. An increase in the number
of longer hair fibers in the yarn has a critical influence on pilling formation. It is visible
that the pilling formation tendency decrease when finer and less hairy yarns are used. On
the surface of the fabric, there is more pilling caused due to the hairier yarns and on the
other side, the compact structure and well-aligned yarns caused very low pilling which
shows the higher pilling resistance.
 Testing of comfort properties
According to the research and requirements of the study, the following are the equipment
and methods used for the testing of comfort properties, which are given in Table 2.9.
Table 2.9: Equipment and methods for the testing of comfort properties
Sr. Test
Parameters Test equipment
No. standards
SDL Atlas Air Permeability
1 Air permeability ISO 9237
Tester
Water vapor permeability
2 ISO BS 720 Refund WVP Tester
(Cup Method)
Moisture management of
3 AATCC 195 SDL Atlas MMT Tester
textiles
Relative Hand Value of using
Phabrometer
 Resilience score
AATCC TM-
4  Softness score Phabrometer
202
 Smoothness score
 Drape coefficient
 Wrinkle recovery rate

i. Air permeability test

Air permeability was investigated according to the “ISO 9237” standard test method on
“SDL Atlas Air Permeability Tester” which is shown below in Figure 2.9.

Figure 2.9: SDL Atlas air permeability tester

31
This test was conducted on all five conditioned fabric samples of each direction which
were received after 24 hours of conditioning under the standard atmospheric Temperature
of (21 ± 2oC) and (RH 65 ± 4%) of relative humidity. Air pressure was adjusted at 100
Pa. Under a specific air pressure, the path of air that passed through a fabric defines its air
permeability. Factors that affect the values of air permeability are covering factors, yarn
count, ends, and picks/inch. In the fabric cross-section, a smaller number of fibers are
present, as a result, the number of pores increases, and the air permeability of the fabric
increased accordingly.
ii. Water vapor permeability test
Water vapor permeability was investigated according to the “ISO BS 720” standard test
method on the “Refond Water Vapor Permeability Tester” which is shown below in
Figure 2.10.

Figure 2.10: Refond water vapor permeability tester

This test was conducted on all five conditioned fabric samples of each direction which
were received after 24 hours of conditioning under the standard atmospheric Temperature
of (21 ± 2oC) and (RH 65 ± 4%) of relative humidity. Water vapor resistance is defined
through the measurement of evaporative heat in ISO-thermal conditions and with the
pressure of water vapor from the difference between two faces of material that divides by
the evaporative heat flux per unit area in the direction of the gradient. Factors that affect
the values of water vapor permeability are a cover factor, GSM, compact structure, yarn
count, and thickness. In fabric cross-section, extra fibers are present which causes a
reduction in the number of pores, as a result, there is an increase in the thermal resistance
of the fabric.

32
 iii. Moisture management transmission test
Moisture management transmission was investigated according to the “AATCC 195”
standard test method on the “SDL Atlas moisture management transmission tester” which
is shown below in Figure 2.11.

Figure 2.11: SDL Atlas moisture management transmission tester

This test was conducted on all five conditioned fabric samples of each direction which
were received after 24 hours of conditioning under the standard atmospheric Temperature
of (21 ± 2oC) and (RH 65 ± 4%) of relative humidity. Transportation of liquid moisture
(also known as sweat) away from the skin to the garment’s out surface is called the
ability of moisture management transmission. Factors that affect the values of moisture
management transmission are compact structure, yarn count, and yarn density. In
between the yarn interlacement, finer yarn with more twists increases gaps, which causes
OMMC values of fabric to increase and lower the values when the twists decreased. As
fabric density is directly proportional to OMMC, courser yarn has more hairiness and less
porosity, which resists moisture flow. On the other hand, the finer yarn has less hairiness
and more porosity, which helps the moisture to flow easily.
iv. Relative hand values
Relative hand values were investigated according to the “AATCC TM-202” standard test
method on the “Phabrometer tester” which is shown below in Figure 2.12. This test was
conducted on all five conditioned fabric samples of each direction which were received
after 24 hours of conditioning under the standard atmospheric Temperature of (21 ± 2oC)
and (RH 65 ± 4%) of relative humidity. Hand properties of the fabric are associated with
the psychological, physiological, and social perceptions of human beings. The stiffness of
the fabric depends on the bending property. In that case, the values of bending stiffness
that is measured by the phabrometer show that the lower values of stiffness are preferred
in good drape and wearing comfort.

33
 Figure 2.12: Phabrometer tester
Fabric smoothness depends on the surface properties of the fabric. So, after being
measured by phabrometer, fabric that is suggested as the smooth fabric has a less
frictional coefficient. The term softness is one of the most used terms to describe clothing
comfort. There have multiple meanings for fabric softness, depending on the end uses of
fabrics; it can relate to the smoothness and flexibility of fabrics. Wrinkle performance
and recovery of the fabrics are associated with inter-fiber friction and fiber
viscoelasticity. Bending a fabric in a stripe formed by a heavy load at a specific air-
conditioned and controlled time, after that release the load and measure the angle of
recovery. This method of testing wrinkle recovery is called the most common method.
During physical activities, fabric stiffness is more critical than softness for the customers
because if the fabric is stiff then it creates problems. A better THV means less stiffness
and higher softness and smoothness values.

34
 Chapter 3
3 Results and discussion
In Pakistan, many brands of ladies’ summer apparel are trending on top for their fashion,
cutline, and prints but all the brands are only working on fashion and prints rather than
the comfortability and long-term use of the fabric as they are not focusing on
sustainability. Typically, there is no research available on comfort and mechanical
properties due to a lack of knowledge and focus. Until now there are few methods to
grade or evaluate the fabric performance which is used by manufacturers. To score the
performance of fabric hand properties and subjective measurements are normally used.
For better customer response, hit and fabric manufacturers to increase and improve
thermal, sensorial, and mechanical comfort properties in fabric use trial methods often.
However, there is no quantified data easily available in the existing literature for the
public domain related to the mechanical, physical, and comfort properties of these
fabrics. Therefore, ladies’ summer apparel of some Pakistani branded woven fabrics was
selected which are available commercially to create a standard and benchmark. Selected
fabrics brands are based on their popularity and availability in Pakistan. Structural,
physical, sensorial, and thermal comfort properties were investigated.
This chapter explains the detailed results and discussions after the investigation of the
different physical, mechanical and comfort properties of branded woven bottom wear
summer fabrics according to the standard test methods that were tested in this study.
After the detailed description of results and discussion, this chapter also explains the
development of comfort matrix and optimized fabrics which are constructed according to
the improved physical, mechanical and comfort properties along with the procedures used
to develop the best of the best fabric. This chapter also covers a detailed discussion on
statical data analysis, tables, and figures which gives more clarification in finding the
finest fabric as the final objective of this study.
3.1 Comfort properties of bottom wear lawn fabrics offered by different brands
According to the standard test methods, comfort properties of lawn fabrics include air
permeability, water vapor permeability, moisture management transmission, resilience,
softness, smoothness, drape coefficient, and wrinkle recovery were investigated which
were offered by different brands in the market during pre-summer, summer, and post-
summer segments. Average values of 30 samples were recorded with the sequence of 10
samples of each summer segment in all test methods. Additionally, excel software is used
to compare and develop the clustered column graphs of all the test methods data
regarding pre-summer, summer, and post-summer fabrics, which are separated into three
groups to have a better understanding of the comparison.

35
3.1.1 Air permeability of bottom-wear lawn fabrics
Air permeability values of each summer segment are arranged in ascending order. From
the collected data, it was concluded that the minimum air permeability of bottom-wear
lawn fabric is 447 mm/sec, and the maximum is 1647 mm/sec given in Table 3.1.
Table 3.1: Air permeability of pre-summer, summer, and post-summer lawn fabrics

Sr. Post-
Code Pre-summer Code Summer Code
no. summer

487
447 mm/sec N.L #
1 W.D # 46 Z.N # 59 641 mm/sec (22.44) mm/sec
(30.98) 33
(13.82)
539
826 mm/sec S.T #
2 K.S # 8 N.L # 2 764 mm/sec (32.23) mm/sec
(27.58) 15
(75.95)
663
849 mm/sec Z.N #
3 S.P # 48 O.M # 6 937 mm/sec (60.02) mm/sec
(28.58) 60
(25.02)
755
935 mm/sec S.S #
4 N.L # 54 S.P # 49 945 mm/sec (20.99) mm/sec
(30.13) 56
(61.44)
842
974 mm/sec S.P #
5 E.T # 53 A.K # 24 946 mm/sec (39.37) mm/sec
(29.26) 61
(104.30)
964
1031 mm/sec K.S #
6 S.S # 55 G.A #14 1056 mm/sec (79.70) mm/sec
(75.34) 9
(28.66)
1031
1098 mm/sec E.D #
7 A.K # 25 L.L # 30 1058 mm/sec (20.00) mm/sec
(37.19) 27
(38.67)
1097
1109 mm/sec L.L #
8 K.H # 20 K.H # 22 1114 mm/sec (69.01) mm/sec
(63.82) 32
(21.78)
1259
1234 mm/sec A.K #
9 S.T # 16 E.D # 58 1195 mm/sec (67.65) mm/sec
(84.33) 26
(45.23)
1293
1292 mm/sec K.H #
10 K.H # 51 E.T # 52 1647 mm/sec (68.39) mm/sec
(48.60) 21
(74.02)

As per the test results given above in Table 3.1, the following are the division of air
permeability values:
 Fabric sample K.H # 51 has the highest and W.D # 46 has the lowest values of AP.
Overall, 5 fabric samples (S.S # 55, A.K # 25, K.H # 20, S.T # 16, K.H # 51) have
above AP values from 1000 mm/sec whereas the other 5 samples (W.D # 46, K.S # 8,
S.P # 48, N.L # 54, E.T # 53) values have below from 1000 mm/sec in pre-summer.

36
 Fabric sample E.T # 52 has the highest and Z.N # 59 has the lowest values of AP.
Overall, 5 fabric samples (G.A # 14, L.L # 30, K.H # 22, E.D # 58, E.T # 52) have
above AP values from 1000 mm/sec whereas the other 5 samples (Z.N # 59, N.L # 2,
O.M # 6, S.P # 49, A.K # 24) values have below from 1000 mm/sec in summer.
 Fabric sample K.H # 21 has the highest and N.L # 33 has the lowest values of AP.
Overall, 4 fabric samples (E.D # 27, L.L # 32, A.K # 26, K.H # 21) have above AP
values from 1000 mm/sec whereas the other 6 samples (N.L # 33, S.T # 15, Z.N # 60,
S.S # 56, S.P # 61, K.S # 9) values have below from 1000 mm/sec in post-summer.
The air permeability causes a good passage rate of airflow in the fabric. Samples that
have higher values provide good body perspiration due to finer yarn and decreased
amount of other cover factors which cause higher air permeability. On the other hand,
lower values cause less transfer of moisture from the body due to the increased cover
factors with low air permeability in all three-summer segments [14,39]. The fabrics range
from approximately 400 mm/sec to 1700 mm/sec as shown in Figure 3.1.

1800

1600 W.D # 46 Z.N # 59 N.L # 33

1400 K.S # 8 N.L # 2 S.T # 15

S.P # 48 O.M # 6 Z.N # 60

1200
N.L # 54 S.P # 49 S.S # 56

1000 E.T # 53 A.K # 24 S.P # 61

800 S.S # 55 G.A #14 K.S # 9

A.K # 25 L.L # 30 E.D # 27

600
K.H # 20 K.H # 22 L.L # 32
400
S.T # 16 E.D # 58 A.K # 26

200 K.H # 51 E.T # 52 K.H # 21

0
Pre-summer Summer Post-summer

Figure 3.1: Comparison of air permeability for summer woven lawn fabrics
3.1.2 Water vapor permeability of bottom-wear lawn fabrics
Water vapor permeability values of each summer segment are arranged in ascending
order. From the collected data, it was concluded that the minimum water vapor
permeability of bottom-wear lawn fabric is 91.36 and the maximum is 99.75 given in
Table 3.2.

37
Table 3.2: Water vapor permeability of pre-summer, summer, and post-summer lawn
fabrics

Sr. No. Code Pre-summer Code Summer Code Post-summer

1 W.D # 46 93.85 K.H # 22 91.36 L.L # 32 93.15
2 K.H # 20 94.64 G.A #14 93.51 K.H # 21 94.50
3 A.K # 25 96.28 A.K # 24 94.20 S.T # 15 95.16
4 S.S # 55 96.66 E.D # 58 97.05 A.K # 26 95.73
5 K.S # 8 97.50 S.P # 49 97.66 N.L # 33 95.81
6 K.H # 51 97.60 O.M # 6 97.72 Z.N # 60 96.31
7 S.T # 16 98.47 N.L # 2 98.08 K.S # 9 96.59
8 N.L # 54 99.40 L.L # 30 98.58 S.P # 61 97.42
9 S.P # 48 99.44 E.T # 52 99.33 E.D # 27 97.81
10 E.T # 53 99.44 Z.N # 59 99.75 S.S # 56 98.28

As per the test results given above in Table 3.2, the following are the division of water
vapor permeability values:
 Fabric sample E.T # 53 has the highest and W.D # 46 has the lowest values of WVP.
Overall, 9 fabric samples (K.H # 20, A.K # 25, S.S # 55, K.S # 8, K.H # 51, S.T # 16,
N.L # 54, S.P # 48, E.T # 53) have above WVP values from 94.00 whereas only 1
sample (W.D # 46) value has below from 94.00 in pre-summer.
 Fabric sample Z.N # 59 has the highest and K.H # 22 has the lowest values of WVP.
Overall, 8 fabric samples (A.K # 24, E.D # 58, S.P # 49, O.M # 6, N.L # 2, L.L # 30,
E.T # 52, Z.N # 59) have above WVP values from 94.00 whereas the other 2 samples
(K.H # 22, G.A # 14) values have below from 94.00 in summer.
 Fabric sample S.S # 56 has the highest and L.L # 32 has the lowest values of WVP.
Overall, 9 fabric samples (K.H # 21, S.T # 15, A.K # 26, N.L # 33, Z.N # 60, K.S # 9,
S.P # 61, E.D # 27, S.S # 56) have above water WVP values from 94.00 whereas only
1 sample (L.L # 32) value has below from 94.00 in post-summer.
Water vapor transmission which is also often referred to as breathability is very essential
and this is the ability of water vapor penetration in clothing. In the higher values of fabric
samples, WVP causes a good rate of water vapor flow because of improved factors which
include GSM, fabric counts, yarn density, EPI, and PPI. Similarly, in the lower values of
water vapor permeability, the flow of water vapours across the fabrics is reduced due to
the decreased values of influenced factors in all three-summer segments [14,39]. The
fabrics range from approximately 90.00 to 100.00 as shown below in Figure 3.2.

38
 102.00
W.D # 46 K.H # 22 L.L # 32

100.00
K.H # 20 G.A #14 K.H # 21

98.00 A.K # 25 A.K # 24 S.T # 15

96.00 S.S # 55 E.D # 58 A.K # 26

K.S # 8 S.P # 49 N.L # 33

94.00

K.H # 51 O.M # 6 Z.N # 60

92.00
S.T # 16 N.L # 2 K.S # 9
90.00
N.L # 54 L.L # 30 S.P # 61

88.00
S.P # 48 E.T # 52 E.D # 27

86.00 E.T # 53 Z.N # 59 S.S # 56

Pre-summer Summer Post-summer

Figure 3.2: Comparison of water vapor permeability for summer woven lawn fabrics
3.1.3 Moisture management transmission of bottom-wear lawn fabrics
Moisture management transmission values of each summer segment are arranged in
ascending order. From the collected data, it was concluded that the minimum MMT of
bottom-wear lawn fabric is 0.53 and the maximum is 0.76 given in Table 3.3.
Table 3.3: Moisture management transmission of pre-summer, summer, and post-summer
lawn fabrics
Post-
Sr. no. Code Pre-summer Code Summer Code
summer
1 W.D # 46 0.53 (0.05) N.L # 2 0.55 (0.04) E.D # 27 0.40 (0.00)
2 K.H # 20 0.59 (0.02) G.A #14 0.55 (0.05) S.T # 15 0.55 (0.05)
3 A.K # 25 0.61 (0.02) O.M # 6 0.56 (0.06) A.K # 26 0.57 (0.01)
4 K.S # 8 0.65 (0.05) A.K # 24 0.57 (0.01) N.L # 33 0.59 (0.01)
5 K.H # 51 0.65 (0.04) K.H # 22 0.59 (0.01) K.H # 21 0.61 (0.05)
6 S.S # 55 0.65 (0.04) E.D # 58 0.66 (0.03) L.L # 32 0.62 (0.04)
7 S.T # 16 0.66 (0.05) L.L # 30 0.69 (0.10) S.S # 56 0.64 (0.01)
8 N.L # 54 0.66 (0.02) S.P # 49 0.72 (0.00) Z.N # 60 0.66 (0.03)
9 S.P # 48 0.69 (0.06) Z.N # 59 0.73 (0.07) K.S # 9 0.67 (0.11)
10 E.T # 53 0.69 (0.04) E.T # 52 0.76 (0.08) S.P # 61 0.69 (0.07)

As per the test results given above in Table 3.3, the following are the division of moisture
management transmission values:

39
 Fabric sample E.T # 53 has the highest and W.D # 46 has the lowest values of MMT.
Overall, all 10 fabric samples (W.D # 46, K.H # 20, A.K # 25, K.S # 8, K.H # 51, S.S
# 55, S.T # 16, N.L # 54, S.P # 48, E.T # 53) have above MMT values from 0.50 in
pre-summer.
 Fabric sample E.T # 52 has the highest and N.L # 2 has the lowest values of MMT.
Overall, all 10 fabric samples (N.L # 2, G.A # 14, O.M # 6, A.K # 24, K.H # 22, E.D
# 58, L.L # 30, S.P # 49, Z.N # 59, E.T # 52) have above MMT from 0.50 in summer.
 Fabric sample S.P # 61 has the highest and fabric E.D # 27 has the lowest values of
MMT. Overall, 9 fabric samples (S.T # 15, A.K # 26, N.L # 33, K.H # 21, L.L # 32,
S.S # 56, Z.N # 60, K.S # 9, S.P # 61) have above MMT values from 0.50 whereas
only 1 sample (E.D # 27) value has below from 0.50 in post-summer.
MMT creates a good ability rate of evaporation and transportation of moisture from the
skin to fabric. Higher values of fabric samples have finer yarn count, higher yarn density,
more GSM, increased amount of EPI, and PPI which create a good ability to absorb and
transport moisture from the skin to the outer surface in all three-summer segments
[39,41]. The fabrics range from approximately 0.40 to 0.80 as shown below in Figure 3.3.

0.80

0.70
W.D # 46 N.L # 2 E.D # 27

0.60 K.H # 20 G.A #14 S.T # 15

A.K # 25 O.M # 6 A.K # 26

0.50
K.S # 8 A.K # 24 N.L # 33

0.40 K.H # 51 K.H # 22 K.H # 21

S.S # 55 E.D # 58 L.L # 32

0.30
S.T # 16 L.L # 30 S.S # 56

0.20 N.L # 54 S.P # 49 Z.N # 60

S.P # 48 Z.N # 59 K.S # 9

0.10
E.T # 53 E.T # 52 S.P # 61

0.00
Pre-summer Summer Post-summer

Figure 3.3: Comparison of moisture management transmission for summer woven lawn
fabrics
3.1.4 Resilience (stiffness) of bottom-wear lawn fabrics
Resilience (stiffness) values of each summer segment are arranged in ascending order.
From the collected data, it was concluded that the resilience (stiffness) of bottom-wear
lawn fabric is 4.18 and the maximum is 43.45 given in Table 3.4.

40
Table 3.4: Resilience (stiffness) of pre-summer, summer, and post-summer lawn fabrics
Post-
Sr. No. Code Pre-summer Code Summer Code
summer
1 S.S # 55 14.18 Z.N # 59 14.69 E.D # 27 14.61
2 K.H # 20 14.31 K.H # 22 14.87 S.S # 56 15.11
3 K.H # 51 14.34 O.M # 6 15.53 Z.N # 60 15.24
4 S.P # 48 15.55 S.P # 49 15.97 A.K # 26 15.29
5 E.T # 53 15.62 E.T # 52 15.99 S.P # 61 15.88
6 K.S # 8 15.91 A.K # 24 16.02 K.H # 21 16.55
7 A.K # 25 16.03 N.L # 2 16.20 S.T # 15 16.70
8 S.T # 16 17.52 L.L # 30 17.01 K.S # 9 18.61
9 N.L # 54 18.88 E.D # 58 17.68 N.L # 33 26.48
10 W.D # 46 37.28 G.A #14 19.36 L.L # 32 43.45

As per the test results given above in Table 3.4, the following are the division of
resilience (stiffness) values:
 Fabric sample W.D # 46 has the highest and S.S # 55 has the lowest values of
resilience. Overall, 7 fabric samples (S.P # 48, E.T # 53, K.S # 8, A.K # 25, S.T # 16,
N.L # 54, W.D # 46) have above resilience values from 15.00 whereas the other 3
samples (S.S # 55, K.H # 20, K.H # 51) values have below from 15.00 in pre-
summer.
 Fabric sample G.A # 14 has the highest and sample Z.N # 59 has the lowest values of
resilience. Overall, 8 fabric samples (O.M # 6, S.P # 49, E.T # 52, A.K # 24, N.L # 2,
L.L # 30, E.D # 58, G.A # 14) have above resilience values from 15.00 whereas the
other 2 samples (Z.N # 59, K.H # 22) values have below from 15.00 in summer.
 Fabric sample L.L # 32 has the highest and E.D # 27 has the lowest values of
resilience. Overall, 9 fabric samples (S.S # 56, Z.N # 60, A.K # 26, S.P # 61, K.H #
21, S.T # 15, K.S # 9, N.L # 33, L.L # 32) have above resilience values from 15.00
whereas only 1 sample (E.D # 27) value has below from 15.00 in post-summer.
The resilience of fabric has a huge influence on the performance of garments which also
relates to user comfort and extensibility criteria. Fabric samples with higher values have
more GSM, fine yarn count, high density, and an increased number of EPI and PPI.
These factors improve the strength and extensibility properties which means comfort is
achieved by not bounding the user. In lower values with a smaller number of factors, the
fabric will remain in the baggy state without any recovery properties, a fabric tear easily

41
which means it has low strength and can’t bear more pressure in all three-summer
segments [39]. The fabrics range from approximately 14.00 to 45.00 as shown below in
Figure 3.4.

50.00

45.00

40.00 S.S # 55 Z.N # 59 E.D # 27

K.H # 20 K.H # 22 S.S # 56
35.00
K.H # 51 O.M # 6 Z.N # 60
30.00 S.P # 48 S.P # 49 A.K # 26

25.00 E.T # 53 E.T # 52 S.P # 61

K.S # 8 A.K # 24 K.H # 21
20.00
A.K # 25 N.L # 2 S.T # 15
15.00 S.T # 16 L.L # 30 K.S # 9

10.00 N.L # 54 E.D # 58 N.L # 33

W.D # 46 G.A #14 L.L # 32
5.00

0.00
Pre-summer Summer Post-summer

Figure 3.4: Comparison of resilience (stiffness) for summer woven lawn fabrics
3.1.5 Softness of bottom-wear lawn fabrics
The softness values of each summer segment are arranged in ascending order. From the
collected data, it was concluded that the softness of bottom-wear lawn fabric is 80.69 and
the maximum is 90.40 given in Table 3.5.
Table 3.5: Softness of pre-summer, summer, and post-summer lawn fabrics

Sr. No. Code Pre-summer Code Summer Code Post-summer

1 W.D # 46 81.26 G.A #14 86.78 N.L # 33 80.69

2 K.S # 8 87.92 E.D # 58 87.27 L.L # 32 81.20
3 N.L # 54 87.97 L.L # 30 88.12 S.P # 61 87.67
4 E.T # 53 88.47 O.M # 6 88.33 K.S # 9 87.74
5 S.T # 16 88.72 Z.N # 59 88.40 Z.N # 60 88.13
6 A.K # 25 88.79 A.K # 24 89.21 S.T # 15 88.42
7 S.P # 48 89.40 N.L # 2 89.47 S.S # 56 88.80
8 K.H # 20 89.62 K.H # 22 89.53 E.D # 27 89.41
9 S.S # 55 89.65 S.P # 49 89.84 K.H # 21 89.45
10 K.H # 51 89.70 E.T # 52 90.40 A.K # 26 89.78

As per the test results given above in Table 3.5, the following are the division of softness
values:

42
 Fabric sample K.H # 51 has the highest and W.D # 46 has the lowest values of
softness. Overall, 9 fabric samples (K.S # 8, N.L # 54, E.T # 53, S.T # 16, A.K # 25,
S.P # 48, K.H # 20, S.S # 55, K.H # 51) have above softness values from 86.00
whereas the only 1 sample (W.D # 46) value has below from 86.00 in pre-summer.
 Fabric sample E.T # 52 has the highest and G.A # 14 has the lowest values of
softness. Overall, all 10 fabric samples (G.A # 14, E.D # 58, L.L # 30, O.M # 6, Z.N
# 59, A.K # 24, N.L # 2, K.H # 22, S.P # 49, E.T # 52) have above softness values
from 86.00 in summer.
 Fabric sample A.K # 26 has the highest and N.L # 33 has the lowest values of
softness. Overall, 8 fabric samples (S.P # 61, K.S # 9, Z.N # 60, S.T # 15, S.S # 56,
E.D # 27, K.H # 21, A.K # 26) have above softness values from 86.00 whereas the
other 2 samples (N.L # 33, L.L # 32) values have below from 86.00 in post-summer.
The softness of the fabric is an important parameter. The perception of softness in higher
values of fabric samples has more compression, smoothness, and flexibility due to the use
of finer yarn which has more EPI, PPI, and GSM which reduces core thickness with a
suitable increase in pressure in all three-summer segments [39]. The fabrics range from
approximately 80.00 to 90.00 as shown below in Figure 3.5.

92.00

90.00
W.D # 46 G.A #14 N.L # 33
88.00
K.S # 8 E.D # 58 L.L # 32

86.00 N.L # 54 L.L # 30 S.P # 61

E.T # 53 O.M # 6 K.S # 9
84.00
S.T # 16 Z.N # 59 Z.N # 60
82.00 A.K # 25 A.K # 24 S.T # 15
S.P # 48 N.L # 2 S.S # 56
80.00
K.H # 20 K.H # 22 E.D # 27
78.00 S.S # 55 S.P # 49 K.H # 21
K.H # 51 E.T # 52 A.K # 26
76.00

74.00
Pre-summer Summer Post-summer

Figure 3.5: Comparison of softness for summer woven lawn fabrics

3.1.6 Smoothness of bottom-wear lawn fabrics
The smoothness values of each summer segment are arranged in ascending order. From
the collected data, it was concluded that the smoothness of the bottom-wear lawn fabric is
50.57 and the maximum is 61.83 given in Table 3.6.

43
Table 3.6: Smoothness of pre-summer, summer, and post-summer lawn fabrics

Sr. No. Code Pre-summer Code Summer Code Post-summer

1 W.D # 46 50.57 E.T # 52 55.65 L.L # 32 51.48
2 S.T # 16 55.70 G.A #14 55.90 A.K # 26 56.22
3 E.T # 53 56.85 A.K # 24 56.40 K.H # 21 56.40
4 K.H # 20 57.19 L.L # 30 56.99 E.D # 27 57.07
5 K.H # 51 57.91 E.D # 58 57.43 S.T # 15 59.08
6 S.S # 55 58.06 K.H # 22 57.43 K.S # 9 59.28
7 A.K # 25 58.30 N.L # 2 58.61 S.P # 61 59.82
8 S.P # 48 59.67 O.M # 6 59.66 N.L # 33 60.17
9 K.S # 8 59.91 S.P # 49 60.72 S.S # 56 60.33
10 N.L # 54 60.95 Z.N # 59 61.83 Z.N # 60 60.77

As per the test results given above in Table 3.6, the following are the division of
smoothness values:
 Fabric sample N.L # 54 has the highest and W.D # 46 has the lowest values of
smoothness. Overall, 9 fabric samples (S.T # 16, E.T # 53, K.H # 20, K.H # 51, S.S #
55, A.K # 25, S.P # 48, K.S # 8, N.L # 54) have above smoothness values from 55.00
whereas only 1 sample (W.D # 46) value has below from 55.00 in pre-summer.
 Fabric sample Z.N # 59 has the highest and E.T # 52 has the lowest values of
smoothness. Overall, all 10 fabric samples (E.T # 52, G.A # 14, A.K # 24, L.L # 30,
E.D # 58, K.H # 22, N.L # 2, O.M # 6, S.P # 49, Z.N # 59) have above smoothness
values from 55.00 in summer.
 Fabric sample Z.N # 60 has the highest and L.L # 32 has the lowest values of
smoothness. Overall, 9 fabric samples (A.K # 26, K.H # 21, E.D # 27, S.T # 15, K.S #
9, S.P # 61, N.L # 33, S.S # 56, Z.N # 60) have above smoothness values from 55.00
whereas only 1 sample (L.L # 32) value has below from 55.00 in post-summer.
The smoothness is measured by using the dynamic or static friction force applied to the
fabric. The friction force scale is usually more comparative instead of the normal force
used on the fabric surface and the speed of movement can also vary in higher values. The
more the values are higher the smoother the fabric is because of the use of finer yarn
which has more EPI, and PPI. Also have more GSM, yarn count, density, and strength. In
lower values, the friction quality is not good, and the fabric is not considered functional
as fabric GSM, EPI, PPI, and count are in lesser amounts in all three-summer segments
[39]. The fabrics range from approximately 50.00 to 70.00 as shown below in Figure 3.6.

44
 70.00

60.00
W.D # 46 E.T # 52 L.L # 32
S.T # 16 G.A #14 A.K # 26
50.00
E.T # 53 A.K # 24 K.H # 21

40.00 K.H # 20 L.L # 30 E.D # 27

K.H # 51 E.D # 58 S.T # 15

30.00 S.S # 55 K.H # 22 K.S # 9

A.K # 25 N.L # 2 S.P # 61
20.00 S.P # 48 O.M # 6 N.L # 33
K.S # 8 S.P # 49 S.S # 56
10.00 N.L # 54 Z.N # 59 Z.N # 60

0.00
Pre-summer Summer Post-summer

Figure 3.6: Comparison of smoothness for summer woven lawn fabrics

3.1.7 Drape coefficient of bottom-wear lawn fabrics
Lawn fabric drape coefficient values for each summer segment are arranged in ascending
order. From the collected data, it was concluded that the drape coefficient of bottom-wear
lawn fabric is 12.37 and the maximum is 34.64 given in Table 3.7.
Table 3.7: Drape coefficient of pre-summer, summer, and post-summer lawn fabrics

Sr. No. Code Pre summer Code Summer Code Post-summer

1 S.S # 55 12.37 K.H # 22 12.83 E.D # 27 12.76

2 K.H # 51 12.45 Z.N # 59 12.83 S.S # 56 12.97
3 K.H # 20 12.52 S.P # 49 13.11 A.K # 26 13.08
4 S.P # 48 13.06 E.T # 52 13.32 Z.N # 60 13.23
5 E.T # 53 13.59 O.M # 6 13.38 S.P # 61 13.78
6 A.K # 25 13.61 N.L # 2 13.47 K.H # 21 13.84
7 K.S # 8 13.69 A.K # 24 13.62 S.T # 15 14.03
8 S.T # 16 14.64 L.L # 30 14.42 K.S # 9 15.25
9 N.L # 54 15.25 E.D # 58 15.00 N.L # 33 21.52
10 W.D # 46 28.06 G.A #14 16.16 L.L # 32 31.64

As per the test results given above in Table 3.7, the following are the division of drape
coefficient values:
 Fabric sample W.D # 46 has the highest and S.S # 55 has the lowest values of drape.
Overall, 7 fabric samples (S.P # 48, E.T # 53, A.K # 25, K.S # 8, S.T # 16, N.L # 54,

45
 W.D # 46) have above drape coefficient values from 13.00 whereas the other 3
samples (S.S # 55, K.H # 51, K.H # 20) values have below from 13.00 in pre-
summer.
 Fabric sample G.A # 14 has the highest and K.H # 22 has the lowest values of drape.
Overall, 8 fabric samples (S.P # 49, E.T # 52, O.M # 6, N.L # 2, A.K # 24, L.L # 30,
E.D # 58, G.A # 14) have above drape coefficient values from 13.00 whereas the
other 2 samples (K.H # 22, Z.N # 59) values have below from 13.00 in summer.
 Fabric sample L.L # 32 has the highest and E.D # 27 has the lowest values of drape.
Overall, 8 fabric samples (A.K # 26, Z.N # 60, S.P # 61, K.H # 21, S.T # 15, K.S # 9,
N.L # 33, L.L # 32) have above drape coefficient values from 13.00 whereas the other
2 samples (E.D # 27, S.S # 56) values have below from 13.00 in post-summer.
The drape coefficient is the ratio of the undraped area of the fabric. The drape property or
drape ability of fabric is measured from the sheer, bending, and stiffness properties that
are under motion. The higher values of the drape coefficient create a stiffer fabric as these
samples have more GSM, EPI, PPI, fine count, and density in all three-summer segments
[39]. The fabrics range from approximately 10.00 to 35.00 as shown below in Figure 3.7.

40.00

35.00
S.S # 55 K.H # 22 E.D # 27
30.00 K.H # 51 Z.N # 59 S.S # 56

K.H # 20 S.P # 49 A.K # 26

25.00
S.P # 48 E.T # 52 Z.N # 60

20.00 E.T # 53 O.M # 6 S.P # 61

A.K # 25 N.L # 2 K.H # 21

15.00 K.S # 8 A.K # 24 S.T # 15

S.T # 16 L.L # 30 K.S # 9

10.00
N.L # 54 E.D # 58 N.L # 33

5.00 W.D # 46 G.A #14 L.L # 32

0.00
Pre-summer Summer Post-summer

Figure 3.7: Comparison of drape coefficient for summer woven lawn fabrics
3.1.8 Wrinkle recovery of bottom-wear lawn fabrics
Wrinkle recovery values were measured for each summer segment arranged in ascending
order. From the collected data, it was concluded that wrinkle recovery of bottom-wear
lawn fabric is 59.59% and the maximum is 94.05% given in Table 3.8.

46
Table 3.8: Wrinkle recovery of pre-summer, summer, and post-summer lawn fabrics

Sr. No. Code Pre-summer Code Summer Code Post-summer

1 W.D # 46 59.59 G.A #14 66.02 L.L # 32 67.56

2 A.K # 25 67.83 A.K # 24 67.95 K.H # 21 71.12

3 K.H # 20 71.79 L.L # 30 72.46 S.T # 15 71.52

4 S.T # 16 72.39 K.H # 22 75.41 A.K # 26 71.81

5 N.L # 54 75.93 N.L # 2 75.71 E.D # 27 76.36

6 E.T # 53 76.40 E.T # 52 75.93 K.S # 9 77.37

7 K.S # 8 77.15 E.D # 58 76.45 Z.N # 60 78.72

8 S.S # 55 78.22 O.M # 6 77.43 S.S # 56 81.19

9 K.H # 51 80.97 Z.N # 59 85.00 S.P # 61 82.10

10 S.P # 48 94.05 S.P # 49 92.81 N.L # 33 87.39

As per the test results given above in Table 3.8, the following are the division of wrinkle
recovery values:
 Fabric sample S.P # 48 has the highest and W.D # 46 has the lowest values of wrinkle
recovery. Overall, 8 fabric samples (K.H # 20, S.T # 16, N.L # 54, E.T # 53, K.S # 8,
S.S # 55, K.H # 51, S.P # 48) have above wrinkle recovery values from 70.00%
whereas the other 2 samples (W.D # 46, A.K # 25) values have below from 70.00% in
pre-summer.
 Fabric sample S.P # 49 has the highest and G.A # 14 has the lowest values of wrinkle
recovery. Overall, 8 fabric samples (L.L # 30, K.H # 22, N.L # 2, E.T # 52, E.D # 58,
O.M # 6, Z.N # 59, S.P # 49) have above wrinkle recovery values from 70.00%
whereas the other 2 samples (G.A # 14, A.K # 24) values have below from 70.00% in
summer.
 Fabric sample N.L # 33 has the highest and L.L # 32 has the lowest values of wrinkle
recovery. Overall, 9 fabric samples (K.H # 21, S.T # 15, A.K # 26, E.D # 27, K.S # 9,
Z.N # 60, S.S # 56, S.P # 61, N.L # 33) have above wrinkle recovery values from
70.00% whereas only 1 sample (L.L # 32) value has below from 70.00% in post-
summer.

47
Wrinkle recovery is the measurement of crease resistance. In higher values, wrinkle
recovery is less in weft and more in the warp direction because the quality and strength of
warp yarns are high due to higher GSM, finer yarn count, higher density, and increased
number of ends per inch rather than weft yarns in all three-summer segments [39]. The
fabrics range from approximately 60.00% to 100.00% as shown below in Figure 3.8.

100.00

90.00

W.D # 46 G.A #14 L.L # 32

80.00
A.K # 25 A.K # 24 K.H # 21
70.00
K.H # 20 L.L # 30 S.T # 15

60.00 S.T # 16 K.H # 22 A.K # 26

N.L # 54 N.L # 2 E.D # 27

50.00
E.T # 53 E.T # 52 K.S # 9
40.00
K.S # 8 E.D # 58 Z.N # 60

30.00 S.S # 55 O.M # 6 S.S # 56

K.H # 51 Z.N # 59 S.P # 61

20.00
S.P # 48 S.P # 49 N.L # 33
10.00

0.00
Pre-summer Summer Post-summer

Figure 3.8: Comparison of wrinkle recovery for summer woven lawn fabrics
3.2 Mechanical properties of bottom-wear lawn fabrics offered by different
brands
According to the standard test methods, mechanical properties of lawn fabrics include
tear strength of warp and weft, the tensile strength of warp and weft, and pilling were
investigated which were offered by different brands in the market during pre-summer,
summer, and post-summer segments. Average values of 30 samples were recorded with
the sequence of 10 samples of each summer segment in all test methods. Additionally,
excel software is used to compare and develop the clustered column graphs of all the test
methods data regarding pre-summer, summer, and post-summer fabrics, which are
separated into three groups to have a better understanding of the comparison.
3.2.1 Tear strength (warp) of bottom-wear lawn fabrics
Tear strength (warp) values of each summer segment are arranged in ascending order.
From the collected data, it was concluded that the minimum tear strength of bottom-wear
lawn fabric is 8.04 (N) and the maximum is 14.90 (N) given in Table 3.9.

48
Table 3.9: Tear strength (warp) of pre-summer, summer, and post-summer lawn fabrics

Sr. no. Code Pre-summer Code Summer Code Post-summer

1 S.P # 48 9.30 (0.41) K.H # 22 9.22 (0.15) S.S # 56 8.04 (0.25)
2 S.S # 55 9.52 (0.31) E.D # 58 9.72 (0.31) N.L # 33 8.24 (0.27)
3 E.T # 53 9.60 (0.25) S.P # 49 10.44 (0.36) K.S # 9 8.42 (0.47)
4 W.D # 46 9.84 (0.52) N.L # 2 10.62 (0.21) S.T # 15 8.80 (0.39)
5 A.K # 25 10.12 (0.50) E.T # 52 11.52 (0.57) Z.N # 60 8.98 (0.25)
6 K.H # 51 10.60 (0.46) L.L # 30 11.70 (0.22) K.H # 21 9.04 (0.40)
7 K.H # 20 10.60 (0.55) Z.N # 59 12.00 (0.49) E.D # 27 9.06 (0.32)
8 N.L # 54 11.00 (0.59) O.M # 6 12.08 (0.37) L.L # 32 10.08 (0.08)
9 K.S # 8 11.48 (0.45) A.K # 24 13.08 (0.36) S.P # 61 10.12 (0.33)
10 S.T # 16 14.90 (0.47) G.A #14 13.22 (0.37) A.K # 26 13.30 (0.61)

As per the test results given above in Table 3.9, the following are the division of tear
strength (warp) values:
 Fabric sample S.T # 16 has the highest and S.P # 48 has the lowest values of tear
strength (warp). Overall, 6 fabric samples (A.K # 25, K.H # 51, K.H # 20, N.L # 54,
K.S # 8, S.T # 16) have above tear strength (warp) values from 10.00 (N) whereas the
other 4 samples (S.P # 48, S.S # 55, E.T # 53, W.D # 46) values have below from
10.00 (N) in pre-summer.
 Fabric sample G.A # 14 has the highest and K.H # 22 has the lowest values of tear
strength (warp). Overall, 8 fabric samples (S.P # 49, N.L # 2, E.T # 52, L.L # 30, Z.N
# 59, O.M # 6, A.K # 24, G.A # 14) have above tear strength (warp) values from
10.00 (N) whereas the other 2 samples (K.H # 22, E.D # 58) values have below from
10.00 (N) in summer.
 Fabric sample A.K # 26 has the highest and S.S # 56 has the lowest values of tear
strength (warp). Overall, 3 fabric samples (L.L # 32, S.P # 61, A.K # 26) have above
tear strength (warp) values from 10.00 (N) whereas the other 7 samples (S.S # 56,
N.L # 33, K.S # 9, S.T # 15, Z.N # 60, K.H # 21, E.D # 27) values have below from
10.00 (N) in post-summer.
The tear strength of warp is the ability of the fabric to resist the force applied for tearing.
It is more important to access the serviceability of fabric. The more the GSM, yarn
strength, EPI, and PPI are, the strength is high in fabric samples of higher values. Tearing
strength is directly related to the yarn strength of the fabric. The same rules apply to end
and picks per inch, more EPI, and PPI gave more tear strength with the use of filament or
compact yarns. Greater strength means more protection from tearing troubles. For the
lower values samples, these properties are not that good which causes low tear resistance

49
and sometimes has poor abrasion ability that’s why when the damage occurs it fails
quickly in all three-summer segments [14,39]. The fabrics range from approximately 8.00
(N) to 16.00 (N) as shown below in Figure 3.9.
16.00

14.00
S.P # 48 K.H # 22 S.S # 56
12.00 S.S # 55 E.D # 58 N.L # 33
E.T # 53 S.P # 49 K.S # 9
10.00
W.D # 46 N.L # 2 S.T # 15

8.00 A.K # 25 E.T # 52 Z.N # 60

K.H # 51 L.L # 30 K.H # 21
6.00 K.H # 20 Z.N # 59 E.D # 27
N.L # 54 O.M # 6 L.L # 32
4.00
K.S # 8 A.K # 24 S.P # 61
S.T # 16 G.A #14 A.K # 26
2.00

0.00
Pre-summer Summer Post-summer

Figure 3.9: Comparison of tear strength (warp) for summer woven lawn fabrics
3.2.2 Tear strength (weft) of bottom-wear lawn fabrics
Tear strength (weft) values of each summer segment are arranged in ascending order.
From the collected data, it was concluded that the minimum tear strength of bottom-wear
lawn fabric is 6.82 (N) and the maximum is 15.00 (N) given in Table 3.10.
Table 3.10: Tear strength (weft) of pre-summer, summer, and post-summer lawn fabrics
Post-
Sr. No. Code Pre-summer Code Summer Code
summer
1 N.L # 54 8.36 (0.32) N.L # 2 9.34 (0.21) K.S # 9 6.82 (0.45)
2 E.T # 53 9.80 (0.39) K.H # 22 9.64 (0.35) N.L # 33 7.50 (4.52)
3 S.P # 48 10.32 (0.59) Z.N # 59 11.78 (0.25) L.L # 32 8.40 (2.66)
4 W.D # 46 10.36 (0.23) S.P # 49 11.84 (0.18) K.H # 21 8.62 (0.38)
5 K.H # 51 10.82 (0.34) G.A #14 12.20 (0.48) S.P # 61 9.00 (0.25)
6 K.H # 20 11.00 (0.41) A.K # 24 12.32 (0.51) Z.N # 60 10.16 (0.32)
7 K.S # 8 11.82 (0.48) L.L # 30 12.38 (0.19) S.T # 15 10.30 (0.54)
8 S.S # 55 12.76 (0.33) E.T # 52 12.40 (0.29) S.S # 56 11.50 (0.58)
9 A.K # 25 13.00 (0.30) E.D # 58 12.68 (0.84) E.D # 27 13.00 (0.49)
10 S.T # 16 14.86 (0.28) O.M # 6 12.96 (0.66) A.K # 26 15.00 (0.43)

As per the test results given above in Table 3.10, the following are the division of tear
strength (weft) values:

50
 Fabric sample S.T # 16 has the highest and N.L # 54 has the lowest values of tear
strength (weft). Overall, 8 fabric samples (S.P # 48, W.D # 46, K.H # 51, K.H # 20,
K.S # 8, S.S # 55, A.K # 25, S.T # 16) have above tear strength (weft) values from
10.00 (N) whereas the other 2 samples (N.L # 54, E.T # 53) values have below from
10.00 (N) in pre-summer.
 Fabric sample O.M # 6 has the highest and N.L # 2 has the lowest values of tear
strength (weft). Overall, 8 fabric samples (Z.N # 59, S.P # 49, G.A # 14, A.K # 24,
L.L # 30, E.T # 52, E.D # 58, O.M # 6) have above tear strength (weft) values from
10.00 (N) whereas the other 2 samples (N.L # 2, K.H # 22) values have below from
10.00 (N) in summer.
 Fabric sample A.K # 26 has the highest and K.S # 9 has the lowest values of tear
strength (weft). Overall, 5 fabric samples (Z.N # 60, S.T # 15, S.S # 56, E.D # 27,
A.K # 2) have above tear strength (weft) values from 10.00 (N) whereas the other 5
samples (K.S # 9, N.L # 33, L.L # 32, K.H # 21, S.P # 61) values have below from
10.00 (N) in post-summer.
Tear strength is measured to check the resistance that how well a fabric can endure the
tearing. By taking stronger yarns, GSM, EPI, PPI, and thread count are increased in the
higher values of the weft. The friction between yarns has decreased to increase the tear
strength. In the lower values, the movement of yarns has restricted for tight constructions
which causes low tearing strength in all three-summer segments [14,39]. The fabrics
range from approximately 6.00 (N) to 16.00 (N) as shown below in Figure 3.10.

18.00

16.00
N.L # 54 N.L # 2 K.S # 9
14.00
E.T # 53 K.H # 22 N.L # 33

12.00 S.P # 48 Z.N # 59 L.L # 32

W.D # 46 S.P # 49 K.H # 21
10.00
K.H # 51 G.A #14 S.P # 61
8.00 K.H # 20 A.K # 24 Z.N # 60
K.S # 8 L.L # 30 S.T # 15
6.00
S.S # 55 E.T # 52 S.S # 56
4.00 A.K # 25 E.D # 58 E.D # 27
S.T # 16 O.M # 6 A.K # 26
2.00

0.00
Pre-summer Summer Post-summer

Figure 3.10: Comparison of tear strength (weft) for summer woven lawn fabrics

51
3.2.3 Tensile strength (warp) of bottom-wear lawn fabrics
Tensile strength (warp) values of each summer segment are arranged in ascending order.
From the collected data, it was concluded that the minimum tear strength of bottom-wear
lawn fabric is 266 (N) and the maximum is 430 (N) given in Table 3.11.
Table 3.11: Tensile strength (warp) of pre-summer, summer, and post-summer lawn
fabrics
Pre- Post-
Sr. No. Code Code Summer Code
summer summer
1 K.H # 20 281 (16.03) G.A #14 266 (15.65) L.L # 32 276 (2.30)
2 E.T # 53 288 (13.86 N.L # 2 268 (20.70) A.K # 26 295 (20.40)
3 W.D # 46 297 (10.69) E.T # 52 276 (21.38) S.S # 56 297 (14.00)
4 S.S # 55 304 (4.16) A.K # 24 291 (13.30) N.L # 33 312 (20.40)
5 A.K # 25 308 (19.85) O.M # 6 298 (18.09) K.S # 9 313 (19.61)
6 K.S # 8 311 (7.85) K.H # 22 301 (18.90) S.P # 61 350 (8.02)
7 K.H # 51 315 (22.53) L.L # 30 325 (21.96) E.D # 27 353 (12.35)
8 S.T # 16 326 (19.60) E.D # 58 335 (14.84) K.H # 21 363 (11.06)
9 S.P # 48 377 (11.71) S.P # 49 384 (6.80) S.T # 15 372 (23.44)
10 N.L # 54 413 (18.73) Z.N # 59 417 (8.82) Z.N # 60 430 (14.97)

As per the test results given above in Table 3.11, the following are the division of tensile
strength (warp) values:
 Fabric sample N.L # 54 has the highest and K.H # 20 has the lowest values of the
tensile strength (warp). Overall, 7 fabric samples (S.S # 55, A.K # 25, K.S # 8, K.H #
51, S.T # 16, S.P # 48, N.L # 54) have above tensile strength (warp) values from 300
(N) whereas the other 3 samples (K.H # 20, E.T # 53, W.D # 46) values have below
from 300 (N) in pre-summer.
 Fabric sample Z.N # 59 has the highest and G.A # 14 has the lowest values of the
tensile strength (warp). Overall, 5 fabric samples (K.H # 22, L.L # 30, E.D # 58, S.P #
49, Z.N # 59) have above tensile strength (warp) values from 300 (N) whereas the
other 5 samples (G.A # 14, N.L # 2, E.T # 52, A.K # 24, O.M # 6) values have below
from 300 (N) in summer.
 Fabric sample Z.N # 60 has the highest and L.L # 32 has the lowest values of the
tensile strength (warp). Overall, 7 fabric samples (N.L # 33, K.S # 9, S.P # 61, E.D #
27, K.H # 21, S.T # 15, Z.N # 60) have above tensile strength (warp) values from 300
(N) whereas the other 3 samples (L.L # 32, A.K # 26, S.S # 56) values have below
from 300 (N) in post-summer.
The tensile strength is the maximum stress and can be sustained by structural tension.
Samples will tear when the stress is applied and maintained on the fabric samples. In
higher values of fabric samples, density of the fabric, strength of thread used in yarn,

52
variety, and quality of the fabric used are the top factors that influence the tensile strength
of fabrics. But in the lower values of tensile, properties like sample thickness, elongation,
and breaking strength are not much focused in all three-summer segments [14,117]. The
fabrics range from approximately 250 (N) to 450 (N) as shown below in Figure 3.11.
500

450

400 K.H # 20 G.A #14 L.L # 32

E.T # 53 N.L # 2 A.K # 26
350
W.D # 46 E.T # 52 S.S # 56
300 S.S # 55 A.K # 24 N.L # 33

250 A.K # 25 O.M # 6 K.S # 9

K.S # 8 K.H # 22 S.P # 61
200
K.H # 51 L.L # 30 E.D # 27
150 S.T # 16 E.D # 58 K.H # 21
S.P # 48 S.P # 49 S.T # 15
100
N.L # 54 Z.N # 59 Z.N # 60
50

0
Pre-summer Summer Post-summer

Figure 3.11: Comparison of the tensile strength (warp) for summer woven lawn fabrics
3.2.4 Tensile strength (weft) of bottom-wear lawn fabrics
Tensile strength (weft) values of each summer segment are arranged in ascending order.
From the collected data, it was concluded that the minimum tear strength of bottom-wear
lawn fabric is 190 (N) and the maximum is 306 (N) given in Table 3.12.
Table 3.12: Tensile strength (weft) of pre-summer, summer, and post-summer lawn fabrics
Sr. No. Code Pre-summer Code Summer Code Post-summer
1 W.D # 46 209 (13.84) N.L # 2 190 (8.87) L.L # 32 214 (2.30)
2 S.S # 55 215 (11.53) O.M # 6 222 (18.19) N.L # 33 216 (17.31)
3 N.L # 54 222 (8.08) K.H # 22 228 (10.05) K.H # 21 223 (16.56)
4 K.S # 8 224 (9.83) A.K # 24 231 (8.00) S.P # 61 234 (3.05)
5 K.H # 51 230 (13.65) Z.N # 59 242 (7.55) A.K # 26 240 (5.17)
6 K.H # 20 237 (13.77) E.T # 52 250 (7.54) E.D # 27 243 (17.17)
7 A.K # 25 240 (6.05) L.L # 30 250 (11.10) K.S # 9 246 (16.75)
8 E.T # 53 243 (1.15) S.P # 49 256 (3.21) S.T # 15 277 (12.30)
9 S.T # 16 271 (14.53) G.A #14 264 (8.01) Z.N # 60 287 (7.23)
10 S.P # 48 306 (11.26) E.D # 58 281 (1.04) S.S # 56 294 (7.63)

As per the test results given above in Table 3.12, the following are the division of tensile
strength (weft) values:
 Fabric sample S.P # 48 has the highest and W.D # 46 has the lowest values of the
tensile strength (weft). Overall, 2 fabric samples (S.T # 16, S.P # 48) have above

53
 tensile strength (weft) values from 250 (N) whereas the other 8 samples (W.D # 46,
S.S # 55, N.L # 54, K.S # 8, K.H # 51, K.H # 20, A.K # 25, E.T # 53) values have
below from 250 (N) in pre-summer.
 Fabric sample E.D # 58 has the highest and N.L # 2 has the lowest values of the
tensile strength (weft). Overall, 5 fabric samples (E.T # 52, L.L # 30, S.P # 49, G.A #
14, E.D # 58) have above tensile strength (weft) values from 250 (N) whereas the
other 5 samples (N.L # 2, O.M # 6, K.H # 22, A.K # 24, Z.N # 59) values have below
from 250 (N) in summer.
 Fabric sample S.S # 56 has the highest and L.L # 32 has the lowest values of the
tensile strength (weft). Overall, 7 fabric samples (L.L # 32, N.L # 33, K.H # 21, S.P #
61, A.K # 26, E.D # 27, K.S # 9) have above tensile strength (weft) values from 250
(N) whereas the other 3 samples (S.T # 15, Z.N # 60, S.S # 56) values have below
from 250 (N) in post-summer.
The tensile strength is measured by the maximum amount of applied force or tension that
fabric can take before breaking to resist anymore. Its properties are directly relevant to
fiber, yarn, thread, and trimming that effect the breaking strength and maximum
elongation. The elongation percentage is produced with its original length when a fiber,
yarn, or fabric is stretched. In the highest values of fabric samples, the tensile strength has
more fineness, warp density, fabric structure, yarn twist fibers variety, and blending
ratios. By increasing the weft fabric density and high interweaving resistance, weft
strength, stretching, and friction increase but warp strength decrease. Fiber variety, blend
ratio, and high interlacement numbers are the key factors used in the highest values of
fabric samples for the tensile strength in all three-summer segments [14,117]. The fabrics
range from approximately 150 (N) to 350 (N) as shown below in Figure 3.12.
350

300
W.D # 46 N.L # 2 L.L # 32
S.S # 55 O.M # 6 N.L # 33
250
N.L # 54 K.H # 22 K.H # 21

200 K.S # 8 A.K # 24 S.P # 61

K.H # 51 Z.N # 59 A.K # 26
150 K.H # 20 E.T # 52 E.D # 27
A.K # 25 L.L # 30 K.S # 9
100 E.T # 53 S.P # 49 S.T # 15
S.T # 16 G.A #14 Z.N # 60
50 S.P # 48 E.D # 58 S.S # 56

0
Pre-summer Summer Post-summer

Figure 3.12: Comparison of the tensile strength (weft) for summer woven lawn fabrics

54
3.2.5 Pilling resistance of bottom-wear lawn fabrics
Pilling resistance values of each summer segment are arranged in ascending order. From
the collected data, it was concluded that the minimum pilling resistance of bottom-wear
lawn fabric is 3.40 and the maximum is 4.50 given in Table 3.13.
Table 3.13: Pilling resistance of pre-summer, summer, and post-summer lawn fabrics

Sr. No. Code Pre-summer Code Summer Code Post-summer

1 K.S # 8 4.00 N.L # 2 3.40 S.T # 15 3.40

2 K.H # 20 4.00 L.L # 30 3.40 E.D # 27 3.40

3 W.D # 46 4.00 O.M # 6 4.00 K.S # 9 4.00

4 S.P # 48 4.00 G.A #14 4.00 L.L # 32 4.00

5 E.T # 53 4.00 K.H # 22 4.00 N.L # 33 4.00

6 S.T # 16 4.50 S.P # 49 4.00 Z.N # 60 4.00

7 A.K # 25 4.50 E.T # 52 4.00 K.H # 21 4.50

8 K.H # 51 4.50 A.K # 24 4.50 A.K # 26 4.50

9 N.L # 54 4.50 E.D # 58 4.50 S.S # 56 4.50

10 S.S # 55 4.50 Z.N # 59 4.50 S.P # 61 4.50

As per the test results given above in Table 3.13, the following are the division of pilling
resistance values:
 Fabric sample S.S # 55 has the highest and K.S # 8 has the lowest values of pilling
resistance. Overall, all 10 fabric samples (K.S # 8, K.H # 20, W.D # 46, S.P # 48, E.T
# 53, S.T # 16, A.K # 25, K.H # 51, N.L # 54, S.S # 55) have above pilling values
from 4.00 in pre-summer.
 Fabric sample Z.N # 59 has the highest and N.L # 2 has the lowest values of pilling
resistance. Overall, 8 fabric samples (O.M # 6, G.A # 14, K.H # 22, S.P # 49, E.T #
52, A.K # 24, E.D # 58, Z.N # 59) have above pilling values from 4.00 whereas the
other 2 samples (N.L # 2, L.L # 30) values have below from 4.00 in summer.
 Fabric sample S.P # 61 has the highest and S.T # 15 has the lowest values of pilling
resistance. Overall, 8 fabric samples (K.S # 9, L.L # 32, N.L # 33, Z.N # 60, K.H #
21, A.K # 26, S.S # 56, S.P # 61) have above pilling values from 4.00 whereas the
other 2 samples (S.T # 15, E.D # 27) values have below from 4.00 in post-summer.

55
The dimensional stability of yarn is very important because if the yarn is dimensionally
stable then the movement of fibers is less in a yarn therefore, less pilling occurs on the
surface of the fabric. The heating temperature that is set has significantly affected pilling.
With the increase in heat temperature, the fibers in the fabric have improved pilling
resistance. Factors that affect the pilling are fiber dimensions and length, different types
of fibers and blends, yarn count, and fabric construction in the higher values fabric
samples. If the pilling decreases the yarn count becomes finer because finer yarns with
more inter-sections are used to weave fabric in all three-summer segments [14,39]. The
fabrics range from approximately 3.00 to 4.50 as shown below in Figure 3.13.

5.00

4.50

4.00 K.S # 8 N.L # 2 S.T # 15

K.H # 20 L.L # 30 E.D # 27
3.50
W.D # 46 O.M # 6 K.S # 9
3.00 S.P # 48 G.A #14 L.L # 32

2.50 E.T # 53 K.H # 22 N.L # 33

S.T # 16 S.P # 49 Z.N # 60
2.00
A.K # 25 E.T # 52 K.H # 21
1.50 K.H # 51 A.K # 24 A.K # 26
N.L # 54 E.D # 58 S.S # 56
1.00
S.S # 55 Z.N # 59 S.P # 61
0.50

0.00
Pre-summer Summer Post-summer

Figure 3.13: Comparison of pilling resistance for summer woven lawn fabrics
3.3 Physical properties of bottom-wear lawn fabrics offered by different brands
According to the standard test methods, physical properties of lawn fabrics include GSM,
ends, and picks per inch, and warp and weft count were investigated which were offered
by different brands in the market during pre-summer, summer, and post-summer
segments. Average values of 30 samples were recorded with the sequence of 10 samples
of each summer segment in all test methods. Additionally, excel software is used to
compare and develop the clustered column graphs of all the test methods data regarding
pre-summer, summer, and post-summer fabrics, which are separated into three groups to
have a better understanding of the comparison.
3.3.1 GSM of bottom-wear lawn fabrics
GSM values of each summer segment are arranged in ascending order. From the
collected data, it was concluded that the minimum GSM of bottom-wear lawn fabric is 75
and the maximum is 93 given in Table 3.14.

56
Table 3.14: GSM of pre-summer, summer, and post-summer lawn fabrics

Sr. No. Code Pre-summer Code Summer Code Post-summer

1 K.H # 20 75 A.K # 24 77 A.K # 26 78

2 S.S # 55 76 E.T # 52 78 K.H # 21 80

3 E.T # 53 79 K.H # 22 81 N.L # 33 83

4 K.H # 51 80 N.L # 2 84 S.S # 56 83

5 N.L # 54 83 E.D # 58 85 E.D # 27 85

6 A.K # 25 85 G.A #14 86 L.L # 32 85

7 S.T # 16 87 S.P # 49 88 S.T # 15 86

8 W.D # 46 87 L.L # 30 90 Z.N # 60 87

9 S.P # 48 89 O.M # 6 92 S.P # 61 91

10 K.S # 8 93 Z.N # 59 92 K.S # 9 93

As per the test results given above in Table 3.14, the following are the division of GSM
values:
 Fabric sample K.S # 8 has the highest and K.H # 20 has the lowest values of GSM.
Overall, 7 fabric samples (K.H # 51, N.L # 54, A.K # 25, S.T # 16, W.D # 46, S.P #
48, K.S # 8) have above GSM values from 80 whereas the other 3 samples (K.H # 20,
S.S # 55, E.T # 53) values have below from 80 in pre-summer.
 Fabric sample Z.N # 59 has the highest and A.K # 24 has the lowest values of GSM.
Overall, 8 fabric samples (K.H # 22, N.L # 2, E.D # 58, G.A # 14, S.P # 49, L.L # 30,
O.M # 6, Z.N # 59) have above GSM values from 80 whereas the other 2 samples
(A.K # 24, E.T # 52) values have below from 80 in summer.
 Fabric sample K.S # 9 has the highest and A.K # 26 has the lowest values of GSM.
Overall, 9 fabric samples (K.H # 21, N.L # 33, S.S # 56, E.D # 27, L.L # 32, S.T # 15,
Z.N # 60, S.P # 61, K.S # 9) have above GSM values from 80 whereas only 1 sample
(A.K # 26) values has below from 80 in post-summer.
GSM is referred to as the weight of a fabric. Fabric weight is very much dependent on the
fabric used. In higher values of the fabric samples, GSM is more which helps to develop
the thicker and more hard-wearing fabric with finer yarns and count. These fabrics help
to regulate body temperature and increase performance in all three-summer segments
[117]. The fabrics range from approximately 70 to 100 as shown below in Figure 3.14.

57
 100

90

80 K.H # 20 A.K # 24 A.K # 26

S.S # 55 E.T # 52 K.H # 21
70
E.T # 53 K.H # 22 N.L # 33
60 K.H # 51 N.L # 2 S.S # 56
N.L # 54 E.D # 58 E.D # 27
50
A.K # 25 G.A #14 L.L # 32
40
S.T # 16 S.P # 49 S.T # 15
30 W.D # 46 L.L # 30 Z.N # 60
S.P # 48 O.M # 6 S.P # 61
20
K.S # 8 Z.N # 59 K.S # 9
10

0
Pre-summer Summer Post-summer

Figure 3.14: Comparison of GSM values for summer woven lawn fabrics
3.3.2 Ends per Inch of bottom-wear lawn fabrics
Lawn fabric’s end per inch values of each summer segment is arranged in ascending
order. From the collected data, it was concluded that the minimum number of EPI of
bottom-wear lawn fabric is 85 and the maximum is 140 given in Table 3.15.
Table 3.15: Ends per inch of pre-summer, summer, and post-summer lawn fabrics

Sr. No. Code Pre summer Code Summer Code Post-summer

1 E.T # 53 103 G.A #14 85 A.K # 26 102
2 S.T # 16 105 A.K # 24 102 S.T # 15 104
3 K.H # 20 105 E.T # 52 103 L.L # 32 104
4 K.H # 51 105 O.M # 6 108 E.D # 27 106
5 S.S # 55 105 K.H # 22 108 K.H # 21 107
6 K.S # 8 106 L.L # 30 111 S.S # 56 110
7 A.K # 25 106 S.P # 49 118 K.S # 9 117
8 W.D # 46 107 E.D # 58 118 S.P # 61 118
9 N.L # 54 123 N.L # 2 128 N.L # 33 122
10 S.P # 48 126 Z.N # 59 140 Z.N # 60 130

As per the test results given above in Table 3.15, the following are the division of ends
per inch values:
 Fabric sample S.P # 48 has the highest and E.T # 53 has the lowest values of ends per
inch. Overall, 2 fabric samples (N.L # 54, S.P # 48) have above ends per inch values
from 110 whereas the other 8 samples (E.T # 53, S.T # 16, K.H # 20, K.H # 51, S.S #
55, K.S # 8, A.K # 25, W.D # 46) values have below from 110 in pre-summer.

58
 Fabric sample Z.N # 59 has the highest and G.A # 14 has the lowest values of ends
per inch. Overall, 5 fabric samples (L.L # 30, S.P # 49, E.D # 58, N.L # 2, Z.N # 59)
have above ends per inch values from 110 whereas the other 5 samples (G.A # 14,
A.K # 24, E.T # 52, O.M # 6, K.H # 22) values have below from 110 in summer.
 Fabric sample Z.N # 60 has the highest and A.K # 26 has the lowest values of ends
per inch. Overall, 5 fabric samples (S.S # 56, K.S # 9, S.P # 61, N.L # 33, Z.N # 60)
have above ends per inch values from 110 whereas the other 5 samples (A.K # 26,
S.T # 15, L.L # 32, E.D # 27, K.H # 21) values have below from 110 in post-summer.
Ends per inch of woven fabric are known as warp direction yarn. Ends per inch samples
are measured by the number of yarns available in one inch. Normally it is the simplest
method to find out the ends per inch. The number of EPI varies and depends on the
thickness of threads and patterns which are used for weaving. In the higher values of
fabric samples, EPI yarn is higher than PPI yarn. Higher ends per inch help to produce
compact, dense, and finer fabric because the finer fabric has more threads per inch. Take-
up is the process in which the numbers of EPI and shrinkage in the size of the fabric have
increased. Tightly woven fabric shrinks more and thus the number of ends per inch
increases more in all three-summer segments [117]. The fabrics range from
approximately 80 to 140 as shown below in Figure 3.15.
160

140
E.T # 53 G.A #14 A.K # 26
120 S.T # 16 A.K # 24 S.T # 15
K.H # 20 E.T # 52 L.L # 32
100
K.H # 51 O.M # 6 E.D # 27

80 S.S # 55 K.H # 22 K.H # 21

K.S # 8 L.L # 30 S.S # 56
60 A.K # 25 S.P # 49 K.S # 9
W.D # 46 E.D # 58 S.P # 61
40
N.L # 54 N.L # 2 N.L # 33
S.P # 48 Z.N # 59 Z.N # 60
20

0
Pre-summer Summer Post-summer

Figure 3.15: Comparison of ends per inch for summer woven lawn fabrics
3.3.3 Picks per Inch of bottom-wear lawn fabrics
Picks per inch values were measured for each summer segment and are arranged in
ascending order. From the collected data, it was concluded that the minimum number of
PPI of bottom-wear lawn fabric is 64 and the maximum is 97 given in Table 3.16.

59
Table 3.16: Picks per inch of pre-summer, summer, and post-summer lawn fabrics

Sr. No. Code Pre-summer Code Summer Code Post-summer

1 A.K # 25 66 S.P # 49 64 A.K # 26 64

2 S.P # 48 66 E.D # 58 65 S.P # 61 65

3 E.T # 53 67 Z.N # 59 65 Z.N # 60 66

4 S.T # 16 68 A.K # 24 66 S.S # 56 67

5 K.S # 8 69 O.M # 6 68 K.S # 9 68

6 W.D # 46 72 L.L # 30 68 E.D # 27 69

7 N.L # 54 76 E.T # 52 68 S.T # 15 70

8 S.S # 55 83 G.A #14 70 N.L # 33 80

9 K.H # 51 85 N.L # 2 80 L.L # 32 83

10 K.H # 20 90 K.H # 22 85 K.H # 21 97

As per the test results given above in Table 3.16, the following are the division of picks
per inch values:
 Fabric sample K.H # 20 has the highest and A.K # 25 has the lowest values of picks
per inch. Overall, 5 fabric samples (W.D # 46, N.L # 54, S.S # 55, K.H # 51, K.H #
20) have above picks per inch values from 70 whereas the other 5 samples (A.K # 25,
S.P # 48, E.T # 53, S.T # 16, K.S # 8) values have below from 70 in pre-summer.
 Fabric sample K.H # 22 has the highest and S.P # 49 has the lowest values of picks
per inch. Overall, 3 fabric samples (G.A # 14, N.L # 2, K.H # 22,) have above picks
per inch values from 70 whereas the other 7 samples (S.P # 49, E.D # 58, Z.N # 59,
A.K # 24, O.M # 6, L.L # 30, E.T # 52) values have below from 70 in summer.
 Fabric sample K.H # 21 has the highest and A.K # 26 has the lowest values of picks
per inch. Overall, 4 fabric samples (S.T # 15, N.L # 33, L.L # 32, K.H # 21) have
above picks per inch values from 70 whereas the other 6 samples (A.K # 26, S.P # 61,
Z.N # 60, S.S # 56, K.S # 9, E.D # 27) values have below from 70 in post-summer.
The thickness and thinness of PPI yarn vary in fabric. In the higher PPI values, the
greater number of PPI creates a more compact, dense, and finer fabric because finer yarns
contain a greater number of PPI compared to coarser yarns in all three-summer segments
[117]. The fabrics range from approximately 60 to 100 as shown below in Figure 3.16.

60
 120

100
A.K # 25 S.P # 49 A.K # 26

S.P # 48 E.D # 58 S.P # 61

80 E.T # 53 Z.N # 59 Z.N # 60

S.T # 16 A.K # 24 S.S # 56

K.S # 8 O.M # 6 K.S # 9

60
W.D # 46 L.L # 30 E.D # 27

N.L # 54 E.T # 52 S.T # 15

40
S.S # 55 G.A #14 N.L # 33

K.H # 51 N.L # 2 L.L # 32

20 K.H # 20 K.H # 22 K.H # 21

0
Pre-summer Summer Post-summer

Figure 3.16: Comparison of picks per inch for summer woven lawn fabrics
3.3.4 Fabric count (warp) of bottom-wear lawn fabrics
Fabric count values of each summer segment are arranged in ascending order. From the
collected data, it was concluded that the minimum fabric count of bottom-wear lawn
fabric is 46.66 and the maximum is 66.03 given in Table 3.17.
Table 3.17: Fabric count (warp) of pre-summer, summer, and post-summer lawn fabrics

Sr. No. Code Pre summer Code Summer Code Post-summer

1 N.L # 54 59.64 G.A #14 46.66 K.S # 9 57.75

2 S.P # 48 59.68 E.D # 58 57.75 N.L # 33 58.70

3 S.S # 55 59.68 Z.N # 59 59.68 S.P # 61 59.64

4 A.K # 25 60.58 L.L # 30 60.66 L.L # 32 59.68

5 E.T # 53 60.58 S.P # 49 60.67 S.S # 56 60.67

6 S.T # 16 60.66 A.K # 24 61.63 Z.N # 60 60.67

7 K.H # 51 60.67 E.T # 52 61.64 A.K # 26 63.75

8 W.D # 46 61.63 K.H # 22 62.75 E.D # 27 63.75

9 K.S # 8 61.74 N.L # 2 63.94 K.H # 21 63.94

10 K.H # 20 65.00 O.M # 6 63.94 S.T # 15 66.03

61
As per the test results given above in Table 3.17, the following are the division of count
(warp) values:
 Fabric sample K.H # 20 has the highest and N.L # 54 has the lowest values of the
count. Overall, 7 fabric samples (A.K # 25, E.T # 53, S.T # 16, K.H # 51, W.D # 46,
K.S # 8, K.H # 20) have above count values from 60.00 whereas the other 3 samples
(N.L # 54, S.P # 48, S.S # 55) values have below from 60.00 in pre-summer.
 Fabric sample O.M # 6 has the highest and G.A # 14 has the lowest values of the
count. Overall, 7 fabric samples (L.L # 30, S.P # 49, A.K # 24, E.T # 52, K.H # 22,
N.L # 2, O.M # 6) have above count values from 60.00 whereas the other 3 samples
(G.A # 14, E.D # 58, Z.N # 59) values have below from 60.00 in summer.
 Fabric sample S.T # 15 has the highest and K.S # 9 has the lowest values of the count.
Overall, 6 fabric samples (S.S # 56, Z.N # 60, A.K # 26, E.D # 27, K.H # 21, S.T #
15) have above count values from 60.00 whereas the other 4 samples (K.S # 9, N.L #
33, S.P # 61, L.L # 32) values have below from 60.00 in post-summer.
The quality of the woven fabric is explained by fabric construction and count. Warp yarn
count is primarily referred to as construction which means the number of warp yarns in
one inch of fabric. The yarn count is based on the fineness and thickness of yarns. In the
higher values of warp yarn count, the higher count is used to develop the finer yarn. Finer
yarns create a smoother fabric with a higher thread count. Factors that affect the quality
parameters of the fabric during construction of the fabric include EPI, PPI, GSM, fabric
width, and types of weaves used in all three-summer segments [15,117]. The fabrics
range from approximately 40.00 to 70.00 as shown below in Figure 3.17.

70.00

60.00
N.L # 54 G.A #14 K.S # 9
S.P # 48 E.D # 58 N.L # 33
50.00
S.S # 55 Z.N # 59 S.P # 61
A.K # 25 L.L # 30 L.L # 32
40.00
E.T # 53 S.P # 49 S.S # 56

30.00 S.T # 16 A.K # 24 Z.N # 60

K.H # 51 E.T # 52 A.K # 26

20.00 W.D # 46 K.H # 22 E.D # 27

K.S # 8 N.L # 2 K.H # 21
10.00 K.H # 20 O.M # 6 S.T # 15

0.00
Pre-summer Summer Post-summer

Figure 3.17: Comparison of fabric count (warp) for summer woven lawn fabrics

62
3.3.5 Fabric count (weft) of bottom wear-lawn fabrics
Fabric count values were measured for each summer segment and are arranged in
ascending order. From the collected data, it was concluded that the minimum fabric count
of bottom-wear lawn fabric is 34.28 and the maximum is 64.74 given in Table 3.18.
Table 3.18: Fabric count (weft) of pre-summer, summer, and post-summer lawn fabrics

Sr. No. Code Pre-summer Code Summer Code Post-summer

1 K.S # 8 36.53 Z.N # 59 37.19 S.S # 56 34.28

2 A.K # 25 36.83 E.D # 58 37.83 K.S # 9 37.62

3 S.P # 48 38.30 L.L # 30 38.56 S.P # 61 38.84

4 E.T # 53 39.29 A.K # 24 39.29 Z.N # 60 40.51

5 S.T # 16 40.04 S.P # 49 40.43 E.D # 27 40.63

6 N.L # 54 54.86 O.M # 6 40.51 S.T # 15 40.85

7 K.H # 51 56.26 G.A #14 41.06 A.K # 26 41.65

8 W.D # 46 60.66 E.T # 52 41.65 L.L # 32 47.47

9 S.S # 55 60.93 N.L # 2 57.74 N.L # 33 56.28

10 K.H # 20 64.74 K.H # 22 58.52 K.H # 21 58.52

As per the test results given above in Table 3.18, the following are the division of count
(weft) values:
 Fabric sample K.H # 20 has the highest and K.S # 8 has the lowest values of the
count. Overall, 6 fabric samples (S.T # 16, N.L # 54, K.H # 51, W.D # 46, S.S # 55,
K.H # 20) have above count values from 40.00 whereas the other 4 samples (K.S # 8,
A.K # 25, S.P # 48, E.T # 53) values have below from 40.00 in pre-summer.
 Fabric sample K.H # 22 has the highest and Z.N # 59 has the lowest values of the
count. Overall, 6 fabric samples (S.P # 49, O.M # 6, G.A # 14, E.T # 52, N.L # 2,
K.H # 22,) have above count values from 40.00 whereas the other 4 samples (Z.N #
59, E.D # 58, L.L # 30, A.K # 24) values have below from 40.00 in summer.
 Fabric sample K.H # 21 has the highest and S.S # 56 has the lowest values of the
count. Overall, 7 fabric samples (Z.N # 60, E.D # 27, S.T # 15, A.K # 26, L.L # 32,
N.L # 33, K.H # 21) have above count values from 40.00 whereas the other 3 samples
(S.S # 56, K.S # 9, S.P # 61) values have below from 40.00 in post-summer.

63
Weft yarn count is the numerical representation to describe the thinness or thickness,
coarseness, and fineness of the yarn. Factors that affect the higher values of weft yarn
count are ply and thickness of yarn etc. Compact and smoother fabric is produced with
finer yarns that contain higher thread count in all three-summer segments [15,117]. The
fabrics range from approximately 30.00 to 70.00 as shown below in Figure 3.18.

70.00

60.00
K.S # 8 Z.N # 59 S.S # 56

A.K # 25 E.D # 58 K.S # 9

50.00
S.P # 48 L.L # 30 S.P # 61

E.T # 53 A.K # 24 Z.N # 60

40.00
S.T # 16 S.P # 49 E.D # 27

N.L # 54 O.M # 6 S.T # 15

30.00
K.H # 51 G.A #14 A.K # 26

20.00 W.D # 46 E.T # 52 L.L # 32

S.S # 55 N.L # 2 N.L # 33

10.00 K.H # 20 K.H # 22 K.H # 21

0.00
Pre-summer Summer Post-summer

Figure 3.18: Comparison of fabric count (weft) for summer woven lawn fabrics
3.4 Comfort matrix
The comfort of fabric is based on the combination of aesthetics and performance. As a
concept in the study, comfort is an indefinable thing. It is also varied according to the
urge and end-use of the wearer. Comfort is already had shown as a key factor in the sales
of textile products and the textile industry. Customers are preferably choosing comfort in
clothing rather than styling which is also shown in current marketing research. Textile
industries, companies, and brands are still frequently using subjective assessment in
terms of hand comfort properties of fabric even though objective measurements of these
properties are now can measure with the help of modern machinery which helps us to
find out the accurate values of comfort properties. Kawabata Evaluation System and
Phabrometer System are the two mainly used technologies to get the values. Eventually,
textile products are discriminated against due to the customer usage of subjective
assessment. For the textile and apparel industries, subjective assessment traditionally
shaped the basis of fabric evaluation. As for fabric comfort, still there are several reasons
why the industries are moving towards objective measurement. Mainly the reasons

64
include, the uncertainty associated with subjective assessments, the increased automation
in textile processes, the need for “quick response” in the industries, and finally, the issue
of the loss and replacement of experienced workers.
3.4.1 Significance of comfort matrix
The purpose of this work is to provide a modified comfort matrix for the Pakistani
industry so that decisions regarding the pass or fail of fabric quality can be made. These
quality parameters are based on the values of the fabric comfort matrix. This method
aims to provide a low-cost, time-saving, and high-speed work process method.
3.4.2 Methods used to develop comfort matrix
For this study, both objective and subjective assessment methods were used. Phabrometer
was used to measure the values of comfort properties to create the comfort matrix for the
assessment of fabric. Here is the process of developing the comfort matrix.
 Subjective assessment with the help of a questionnaire.
 Find the average values by calculating the questionnaire results.
 Formulas are used to find the ranking values for the development of the matrix.
 Questionnaire
For the subjective assessment, thirty-five questionnaires were filled to develop the
ranking and comfort matrix for the lawn fabrics. Following is the used questionnaire
which is given below.

65
 NATIONAL TEXTILE UNIVERSITY FAISALABAD

Name: ________________________ Major of Degree: ________________________

(Performa A+B) HEC/NRPU/9937/01

1. Subjective assessment of AP, WVP, and MMT contribution in thermal comfort of lawn
fabrics
Type of Share in thermal comfort
Contributing Properties thermal comfort
comfort (%)
Air Permeability (AP)
Thermal
Water Vapor Permeability (WVP)
Comfort
Liquid Moisture Management (MMT)

2. Subjective assessment of Softness, Smoothness, and Stiffness contribution in Sensorial

comfort of lawn fabrics
Type of Contributing Properties thermal Share in sensorial comfort
comfort comfort (%)
Softness
Sensorial
Smoothness
Comfort
Stiffness

3. Subjective assessment of Drape Coefficient, Wrinkle Recovery, and Stiffness

contribution in Sensorial comfort of lawn fabrics
Type of Contributing Properties thermal Share in sensorial comfort
comfort comfort (%)
Drape Coefficient
Physiological
Wrinkle Recovery
Comfort
Stiffness

4. Subjective assessment of comfort type contribution in the overall comfort of summer

wear cotton lawn fabrics
(Please fill the third column as per your perception)
Share in overall
Type of comfort Properties included in each comfort type
comfort (%)
Air Permeability, Water vapor Permeability,
Thermal Comfort
Liquid moisture management
Sensorial Comfort Softness, Smoothness, Stiffness
Physiological Drape Coefficient, Wrinkle recovery,
Comfort Stiffness

66
Please consider that:
 Thermal comfort is related to maintain body temperature through sweat evaporation.
 Sensorial comfort is related to skin feel through contact.
 Physiological Comfort is related to optical feeling through eye vision.
 Results of the questionnaire
The average values were found by calculating the questionnaire results regarding thermo-
physiological (AP, WVP, MMT) and sensorial (Softness, Smoothness, Resilience)
comfort properties which are given in Table 3.19.
Table 3.19: Results of thermo-physiological and sensorial comfort properties
Thermo-physiological comfort 100% Sensorial comfort 100%
Sr. No. AP WVP MMT Softness Smoothness Resilience
1 50% 20% 30% 55% 35% 10%
2 40% 30% 30% 50% 30% 20%
3 30% 40% 30% 40% 40% 20%
4 30% 40% 30% 40% 40% 20%
5 40% 25% 35% 35% 45% 20%
6 40% 30% 30% 45% 35% 20%
7 30% 20% 50% 40% 40% 20%
8 35% 30% 35% 40% 40% 20%
9 30% 30% 40% 40% 35% 25%
10 30% 40% 30% 45% 30% 25%
11 50% 35% 15% 60% 30% 10%
12 30% 20% 50% 40% 30% 30%
13 50% 30% 20% 60% 30% 10%
14 20% 35% 45% 55% 35% 10%
15 40% 30% 30% 50% 35% 15%
16 35% 35% 30% 45% 35% 20%
17 35% 30% 35% 50% 30% 20%
18 35% 35% 30% 50% 25% 25%
19 65% 8% 27% 45% 35% 20%
20 40% 30% 30% 45% 45% 10%
21 30% 35% 35% 40% 35% 25%
22 50% 10% 40% 50% 30% 20%
23 35% 35% 30% 40% 30% 30%
24 30% 40% 30% 40% 30% 30%
25 35% 35% 30% 35% 40% 25%
26 35% 35% 30% 40% 30% 30%
27 35% 30% 35% 30% 40% 30%
28 30% 35% 35% 40% 35% 25%
29 30% 25% 45% 32% 37% 31%
30 50% 30% 20% 45% 30% 25%
31 35% 35% 30% 45% 30% 25%
32 29% 26% 45% 34% 36% 30%
33 35% 35% 30% 40% 40% 20%
34 40% 30% 30% 45% 35% 20%
35 45% 25% 30% 60% 20% 20%
Average 37.11% 30.11% 32.77% 44.17% 34.23% 21.60%

67
The average values were found by calculating the questionnaire results regarding overall
comfort properties including thermo-physiological and sensorial comfort properties
which are given in Table 3.20.
Table 3.20: Results of overall comfort properties
Overall comfort
Sr. No. Thermo-physiological comfort Sensorial comfort
1 43% 57%
2 50% 50%
3 63% 37%
4 63% 37%
5 53% 47%
6 50% 50%
7 63% 37%
8 53% 47%
9 53% 47%
10 50% 50%
11 40% 60%
12 63% 37%
13 50% 50%
14 53% 47%
15 66% 34%
16 50% 50%
17 67% 33%
18 77% 23%
19 53% 47%
20 51% 49%
21 60% 40%
22 30% 70%
23 50% 50%
24 63% 37%
25 57% 43%
26 57% 43%
27 57% 43%
28 50% 50%
29 56% 44%
30 50% 50%
31 50% 50%
32 51% 49%
33 60% 40%
34 50% 50%
35 33% 67%
Average 53.86% 46.14%

 Development of the comfort matrix

Formulas were used to find the ranking values of thermal, sensorial, and overall comfort
properties to develop the comfort matrix and to check the comfort parameters easily.
Following the used formulas which are given below:

68
 Thermal Comfort = 37.11 % AP + 30.11 % WVP + 32.77 % MMT
 Sensorial Comfort = 44.17 % Softness + 34.23 % Smoothness + 21.6 % Stiffness
 Overall Comfort = 53.86 % THERMO + 46.14 % SENSO
Matrix is a simple analysis tool that can modify easily over time to adjust the changes
that happen in fabric types and perhaps most importantly; it can be updated with the
additional test parameters related to comfort properties. With the help of a matrix, we can
easily check the data. As compared to other statistical analyses for each parameter, this
provides the simplest way to look at the data.
At first look, everyone can easily see that certain parameters are performing differently
within their type. Thus, the matrix allows the viewer to analyze the comfort parameters
for a fabric type that must be improved and those that have already improved.
Simultaneously, based on the number of parameters this also helps to categorize
comfortable fabrics.
This comfort matrix is referred to the collected data of numbers with the arrangement in
columns and rows. Overall comfort value was measured from 100% which was divided
into 53.86% thermos-physiological and 46.14% sensorial comfort according to subjective
assessments and statistical analysis.
Furthermore, these two properties were divided according to the necessary elements
which include 37.11% AP, 30.11% WVP, 32.77% MMT, and 44.17% softness, 34.23%
smoothness, 21.60% resilience respectively. Values that are given in the matrix are
referred to as the elements that are shown below in Figure 3.19.

Figure 3.19: Comfort matrix for ladies’ woven bottom wear summer fabrics

69
3.5 Development of optimized fabrics
Construction of fabric involves the fibers and yarns conversion into a fabric having
different characteristics which are applied in the form of various methods and materials.
The performance of the fabric relay on the contribution of three key elements. These
elements are fiber type, yarn type, and fabric construction. According to the research
requirements and results, the complete process flow chart is given below in Figure 3.20.

Test Results of Constructed Fabric

Ranking as Per Subjective Parameters

Final Ranking for Best of the Best Fabric

Statistical Analysis

Figure 3.20: Comfort matrix for ladies’ woven bottom wear summer fabrics
3.5.1 Test results of constructed fabrics
Fabric samples were conditioned and investigated, and later appropriate standard test
methods by ISO and ASTM were applied to determine physical, mechanical, and comfort
properties. Average values of 3 samples regarding air permeability, water vapor
permeability, moisture management, resilience (stiffness), softness, smoothness, drape
coefficient, and wrinkle recovery were recorded which are given in Table 3.21.
Table 3.21: Test results of optimized developed fabrics

S. No. Parameters Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3

1 Air permeability 1491 1200 1194
2 Water vapor permeability 98.37 92.25 93.17
3 Moisture management 0.71 0.69 0.75
4 Resilience (stiffness) 19.52 18.43 18.60
5 Softness 93.62 92.58 92.84
6 Smoothness 57.88 57.52 57.62
7 Drape coefficient 14.43 14.01 14.05
8 Wrinkle recovery 64.55 67.60 61.97

Moreover, excel software compares and develops the clustered column graphs of all the
test methods data regarding pre-summer, summer, and post-summer fabrics, which are
separated into three groups to have a better understanding of the comparison.

70
  Air permeability of optimized developed fabrics
The air permeability value of sample 1 is 1491 mm/sec, sample 2 is 1200 mm/sec, and
sample 3 is 1295 mm/sec as shown below in Figure 3.21. The results show that sample 1
has the highest air permeability because of good air passage through the fabric.

1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3

Figure 3.21: Comparison of air permeability for optimized developed fabrics

 Water vapor permeability of optimized developed fabrics
The water vapor permeability value of sample 1 is 98.37, sample 2 is 92.25, and sample 3
is 93.17 as shown below in Figure 3.22. The results show that sample 1 has the highest
water vapor permeability due to the improved ability of water vapor penetration and more
rapidly water vapor flows through the fabric.

99
98
97
96
95
94
93
92
91
90
89
Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3

Figure 3.22: Comparison of water vapor permeability for optimized developed fabrics
 Moisture management of optimized developed fabrics
The moisture management value of sample 1 is 0.71, sample 2 is 0.69, and sample 3 is
0.75 as shown below in Figure 3.23. The results show that sample 3 has the highest

71
moisture management transmission which has improved the ability of absorption,
evaporation, and transportation of humidity and moisture from the skin to the outer
surface of the fabric in the environment.

0.76
0.75
0.74
0.73
0.72
0.71
0.7
0.69
0.68
0.67
0.66
Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3

Figure 3.23: Comparison of moisture management for optimized developed fabrics

 Resilience (stiffness) of optimized developed fabrics
The resilience (stiffness) value of sample 1 is 19.52, sample 2 is 18.43, and sample 3 is
18.60 as shown below in Figure 3.24. The results show that sample 1 has the highest
resilience property with the increase of high strength and extensibility.

19.8
19.6
19.4
19.2
19
18.8
18.6
18.4
18.2
18
17.8
Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3

Figure 3.24: Comparison of resilience (stiffness) for optimized developed fabrics

 Softness of optimized developed fabrics
The software value of sample 1 is 93.62, sample 2 is 92.58, and sample 3 is 92.84 as
shown below in Figure 3.25. The results show that sample 1 has the highest softness
property with more breathability, durability, compression, smoothness, and flexibility.

72
 93.8

93.6

93.4

93.2

93

92.8

92.6

92.4

92.2

92

Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3

Figure 3.25: Comparison of softness for optimized developed fabrics

 Smoothness of optimized developed fabrics
The smoothness value of sample 1 is 57.88, sample 2 is 57.52 and, sample 3 is 57.62 as
shown below in Figure 3.26. The results show that sample 1 has the highest smoothness
property and has improved friction and roughness on the surface of the fabric.

58

57.9

57.8

57.7

57.6

57.5

57.4

57.3
Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3

Figure 3.26: Comparison of smoothness for optimized developed fabrics

 Drape coefficient of optimized developed fabrics
Drape coefficient value of sample 1 is 14.43, sample 2 is 14.01, and sample 3 is 14.05 as
shown below in Figure 3.27. The results show that sample 1 has the highest drape
coefficient ability with enhanced smoothness, flexibility, and stiffness.

73
 14.5
14.4
14.3
14.2
14.1
14
13.9
13.8
Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3

Figure 3.27: Comparison of drape coefficient for optimized developed fabrics

 Wrinkle recovery of optimized developed fabrics
The wrinkle recovery value of sample 1 is 64.55, sample 2 is 67.60 and, sample 3 is
61.97 as shown below in Figure 3.28. The results show that sample 2 has the highest
wrinkle recovery due to more strength in the warp direction.

69
68
67
66
65
64
63
62
61
60
59
Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3

Figure 3.28: Comparison of wrinkle recovery for optimized developed fabrics

3.5.2 Ranking as per subjective contribution of parameters
After completing the whole testing process, the results are evaluated using statistical
methods to determine the finest fabric through thermo-physiological and sensorial
comfort as per the subjective contribution given in Table 3.22.
Table 3.22: Ranking as per subjective contribution of parameters
S. No. Parameters Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3
Thermo-physiological comfort
1 as per the subjective 72.57 60.53 66.55
contribution
Sensorial comfort as per the
2 88.83 88.83 88.83
subjective contribution

74
Excel software is used to compare and develop the graphs as shown below in Figure 3.29.
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Thermo-physiological comfort as per Sensorial comfort as per subjective
subjective contribution contribution
Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3

Figure 3.29: Comparison of the subjective contribution of optimized constructed fabrics

3.5.3 Final ranking for finest-constructed fabrics
After completing the whole testing process, the results are evaluated using statistical
methods to conclude the results to find out the finest fabric through overall comfort level
as per the subjective contribution given in Table 3.23.
Table 3.23: Final ranking for finest-optimized developed fabrics

S. No. Parameter Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3

Overall comfort level as a
1 subjective contribution 80.07 73.59 76.83
(Finest fabric)

Excel software is used to compare and develop the graphs. So, sample number 1 is seen
as the finest developed fabric of all three fabrics as shown below in Figure 3.30.
82
80.07
80

78
76.83
76

74 73.59

72

70
Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3

Figure 3.30: Comparison of final ranking for finest-constructed fabrics

75
3.5.4 Statistical data analysis
At the end of this whole procedure to achieve the primary and secondary aims of the
study, the section of statistical analysis provides crucial information about the data and
samples which was collected and analyzed. These sections of statistical analysis have
sufficient information that helps to determine, whether the methodology that is used in
the research is perfect and valid for the planned analysis. This analysis has also provided
accurate information and sufficient data on the enrolled numbers for valid results.
Analysis of variance and correlational analysis is used to check the statistical data. The
analysis of variance and Pearson correlation coefficient indicates a positive, negative, and
statistically or highly significant correlation between p-values and f-values with the cover
factors such as warp count, weft count, EPI, and PPI.
 Analysis of variance
To find out the considerable difference between the ‘mean’ of two or more groups
ANOVA is used as the statistical test method. There are two used variances in ANOVA.
 Between-group variability
 Within-group variability
The within-group variability also known as error variance can’t be counted in the study
because it is based on the random difference present in the samples. That’s why between-
group variability statistical analysis is used. The results are shown below in Table 3.24.
Table 3.24: Analysis of variance

S. No. Sources DF Adj SS Adj MS F-value P-value

1 Regression 5 11207.70 2241.53 47.32 0

2 GSM 1 1550.20 1550.24 32.72 0
3 EPI 1 294.70 294.70 6.22 0.013
4 PPI 1 249.90 249.94 2.28 0.023
5 Wp count 1 347.30 347.33 7.33 0.007
6 WT count 1 100.50 100.49 2.12 0.147
7 Error 193 9142.80 47.37
8 Lack-of-fit 184 9142.80 49.69 13260495 0
9 Pure error 9 0 0

 DF statistical analysis of variance

Excel software compares and develops the clustered column graphs of DF data of the test
results as shown in Figure 3.31.

76
 250

200

150

100

50

Regression GSM EPI PPI Wp Count

Wt Count Error Lack-of-Fit Pure Error

Figure 3.31: DF statistical analysis of variance

 Adj SS statistical analysis of variance
Excel software compares and develops the clustered column graphs of Adj SS data of the
test results as shown in Figure 3.32.

12000

10000

8000

6000

4000

2000

Regression GSM EPI PPI Wp Count

Wt Count Error Lack-of-Fit Pure Error

Figure 3.32: Adj SS statistical analysis of variance

 Adj MS statistical analysis of variance
Excel software compares and develops the clustered column graphs of Adj MS data of
the test results as shown in Figure 3.33.

77
 2500

2000

1500

1000

500

Regression GSM EPI PPI Wp Count

Wt Count Error Lack-of-Fit Pure Error

Figure 3.33: Adj MS statistical analysis of variance

 F-Value statistical analysis of variance
Excel software compares and develops the clustered column graphs of F-Value data of
the test results as shown in Figure 3.34.

14000000

12000000

10000000

8000000

6000000

4000000

2000000

0
Regression GSM EPI PPI Wp Count

Wt Count Error Lack-of-Fit Pure Error

Figure 3.34: F-Value statistical analysis of variance

 P-Value statistical analysis of variance
Excel software compares and develops the clustered column graphs of P-Value data of
the test results as shown in Figure 3.35.

78
 0.2

0.15

0.1

0.05

0
Regression GSM EPI PPI Wp Count
Wt Count Error Lack-of-Fit Pure Error

Figure 3.35: F-Value statistical analysis of variance

3.5.5 Correlational analysis
Correlation analysis is the second method in this research which is used to look for the
relationships between variables. This method helps to investigate the values of the
variables within three summer segments that are related to each other.
In these correlational statistics, a calculated index is described with both the directions
and magnitude of a relationship. In this study, there are three types of directional
relationships presented together with the variables:
 Positive correlation
 Negative correlation
 Zero correlation (no correlation)
In positive correlation, it is indicated that when the numerical values of one variable are
increased or decreased, the values of the other variables are also changed in the same
direction. On the other hand, the numerical value in negative correlation indicates each
variable that is related in the opposing directions. While the values of one variable are
increased, the values of other variables are deceased. As for zero correlation, it indicates
that there is no relationship between the variables.
 Thermo-physiological comfort correlations
Pearson correlation analysis is applied for thermo-physiological comfort to find the
relationship between all the variables. Results are shown below in Table 3.25.
Table 3.25: Thermo-physiological comfort correlations
S. No. Structural parameters Pearson correlation P-value
1 GSM -0.579 0
2 EPI -0.133 0.061
3 PPI 0.037 0.608
4 Wp count 0.581 0
5 WT count 0.603 0

79
Excel software compares and develops the clustered column graphs of Pearson
correlation data of the test results as shown below in Figure 3.36.

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

-0.2

-0.4

-0.6

-0.8
GSM EPI PPI Wp Count Wt Count

Figure 3.36: Pearson correlation analysis of thermo-physiological comfort

Excel software has compared and developed the graphs as shown below in Figure 3.37.
0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
GSM EPI PPI Wp Count Wt Count

Figure 3.37: P-Values of thermo-physiological comfort

 Sensorial comfort correlations
Pearson correlation analysis is applied for sensorial comfort to find the relationship
between all the variables and the results are shown below in Table 3.26.
Table 3.26: Sensorial comfort correlations

S. No. Structural parameters Pearson correlation P-value

1 GSM -0.405 0
2 EPI 0.035 0.619
3 PPI -0.022 0.758
4 Wp count 0.561 0
5 WT count 0.603 0

80
Excel software compares and develops the graphs as shown below in Figure 3.38.

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

-0.2

-0.4

-0.6
GSM EPI PPI Wp Count Wt Count

Figure 3.38: Pearson correlation analysis of sensorial comfort

Excel software has also compared and developed the graphs as shown in Figure 3.39.

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
GSM EPI PPI Wp Count Wt Count

Figure 3.39: P-Values of sensorial comfort

 Overall comfort correlations
Pearson correlation analysis is applied for overall comfort to find the relationship
between all the variables. Results are shown below in Table 3.27.
Table 3.27: Overall comfort correlations
S. No. Structural parameters Pearson correlation P-value
1 GSM -0.554 0
2 EPI -0.052 0.468
3 PPI -0.007 0.922
4 Wp count 0.647 0
5 WT count 0.629 0

81
Excel software compares and develops the graphs as shown below in Figure 3.40.

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

-0.2

-0.4

-0.6

-0.8
GSM EPI PPI Wp Count Wt Count

Figure 3.40: Pearson correlation analysis of overall comfort

Excel software has compared and developed the graphs as shown below in Figure 3.41.

1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
GSM EPI PPI Wp Count Wt Count

Figure 3.41: P-Values of overall comfort

82
 Chapter 4
Conclusions
4.1 Conclusions
This research study was designed to investigate the physical, mechanical, and comfort
properties of branded woven bottom wear summer fabrics which were available in three
different summer segments of Pakistan. This study was divided into five objectives and
different conclusions were made.
The first two objectives were to investigate and evaluate the thirty commercially
available popular Pakistani brands of ladies’ bottom wear summer fabrics resulted in the
following conclusions: Comfort properties of pre-summer, summer, and post-summer
include air permeability (range 400 mm/sec to 1700 mm/sec), water vapor permeability
(range 91.36 to 99.75), moisture management transmission (range 0.40 to 0.80). The
Phabrometer method was used to find the resilience (range 14.00 to 45.00), softness
(range 80.00 to 90.00), smoothness (range 50.00 to 70.00), drape coefficient (range 10.00
to 35.00), and wrinkle recovery percentage (range 60.00% to 100.00%).
Mechanical properties of pre-summer, summer, and post-summer include tear strength of
warp (range 8.00 (N) to 16.00 (N)) and weft (range 6.00 (N) to 16.00 (N)), the tensile
strength of warp (range 250 (N) to 450 (N)) and weft (range 150 (N) to 350 (N)), and
pilling (range 3.00 to 4.50). Physical properties of pre-summer, summer, and post-
summer include GSM (range 70 to 100), EPI and PPI (range 60 to 140), and fabric count
of warp and weft (range 30.00 to 70.00).
These results lead the way to the third objective which was to finalize the selection of
materials for the achievement of the optimum comfort properties which were appropriate
for pre-summer, summer, and post-summer segments.
The fourth objective was to develop the comfort matrix for the popular Pakistani brands
for ladies’ woven bottom wear summer fabrics. Thermo-physiological and sensorial
comfort properties were the two main parameters to measure in a fabric so, that’s why the
comfort matrix was developed according to these properties. Overall comfort value was
measured from 100% which was divided in both properties (53.86% thermos-
physiological and 46.14% sensorial comfort) according to subjective assessments and
statistical analysis. Further, thermo-physiological and sensorial properties were divided
according to the necessary elements which include 37.11% air permeability, 30.11%
water vapor permeability, 32.77% moisture management transmission, and 44.17%
softness, 34.23% smoothness, 21.60% resilience respectively. These quality parameters
were based on the comfort values that help to categorize the comfortable fabrics.

83
The fifth objective was to develop three fabrics with systematic variation in cotton
materials and blends (70/30%, 50/50%, 30/70%) of Pakistani cotton with Egyptian cotton
by keeping the fabric constructional parameters constant at 80*80/90*90 and the yarn
count at 80/1. The following conclusions were drawn from fabric that was constructed
with a blend of 70% Egyptian and 30% Pakistani cotton that has significantly higher air
permeability, water vapor permeability, resilience, softness, smoothness, surface, and
hand properties than the other two blends. Fabric that was constructed with a blend ratio
of 30% Egyptian and 70% Pakistani cotton has better water vapor permeability, moisture
management transmission, resilience, softness, smoothness, surface, and hand properties.
Fabric that was constructed with an equal blend ratio of 50% Egyptian and 50% Pakistani
cotton has only good air permeability, surface, and hand properties but has considerably
the lowest ranking of the other two blends.
Overall, a fabric made from the blend ratio of 70% Egyptian and 30% Pakistani cotton
yarn was graded as the finest fabric using the total fabric performances and comfort index
ranking technique with the help of the subjective assessment. The highly ranked fabric
comfort properties results include air permeability (1491 mm/sec), water vapor
permeability (98.37), moisture management transmission (0.71), resilience (19.52),
softness (93.62), and smoothness (57.88).
Statistical analyses were made on thermos-physiological and sensorial comfort properties
of ladies’ bottom-wear lawn summer fabrics and correlated with the fabric’s physical and
structural properties. In the analysis of variance, ANOVA was used to find the F and P-
values. F-values include 47.32 regression, 32.72 GSM, 6.22 EPI, 2.28 PPI, 7.33 WP
count, 2.12 WT count, 13260495 lake of fit. P-values include 0 regression, 0 GSM, 0.013
EPI, 0.023 PPI, 0.007 WP count, 0.147 WT count, and 0 lake of fit but the F and P-values
of error and pure error was not found.
Pearson correlational analysis was the second method that was used to look for Pearson
correlational values for thermos-physiological comfort which includes -0.579 GSM, -
0.133 EPI, 0.037 PPI, 0.581 WP count, 0.603 WT count, and P-values includes 0 GSM,
0.061 EPI, 0.608 PPI, 0 WP count, 0 WT count. Pearson correlational values for sensorial
comfort includes -0.405 GSM, 0.035 EPI, -0.022 PPI, 0.561 WP count, 0.603 WT count,
and P-values includes 0 GSM, 0.619 EPI, 0.758 PPI, 0 WP count, 0 WT count. These
results helped to find the relationship between the variables of pre-summer, summer, and
post-summer segments.

84
4.2 Future suggestions
1. A similar study can be conducted on branded ladies’ bottom-wear winter fabrics
because there is no scientific study present for the fabrics used in Pakistan.
2. Woven fabrics with three fiber blends were developed in this study. The systematic
variation in the blend ratios of materials, yarn count, and constructional combinations
can be considered for the wide-range effects on fabric strength and comfort.
3. This study can further proceed to the chemical finishes level in which multiple
softeners can be applied and tested.

85
References
[1] M. Raccuglia, C. Heyde, G. Havenith, And S. Hodder, “Comfort In Clothing –
Determining The Critical Factors,” In 1st International Comfort Congress, 2017, P.
5.
[2] S. Kaplan And A. Okur, “The Meaning And Importance Of Clothing Comfort: A
Case Study For Turkey,” J. Sens. Stud., Vol. 23, No. 232, Pp. 688–706, 2008.
[3] M. Naushad, S. Saleem, And K. Rizvi, “Measuring Factors Regarding Branded
Lawn: Gauging The Effect Of Branding On Purchase Decision,” J. Econ. Sustain.
Dev., Vol. 5, No. 19, Pp. 16–21, 2014.
[4] M. Maqsood Et Al., “Modelling The Effect Of Weave Structure And Fabric
Thread Density On Mechanical And Comfort Properties Of Woven Fabrics,”
Autex Res. J., Vol. 16, No. 3, Pp. 160–164, 2016.
[5] O. F. Meteorology, “Review Of Advance In Research On Asian Summer
Monsoon,” Pakistan J. Meteorol., Vol. 6, No. 12, Pp. 1–113, 2010.
[6] Salma, “Climate Change And Variability Trends In Pakistan And Its
Environmental Effects,” University Of Peshawar, 2011.
[7] G. Song, Improving Comfort In Clothing. Woodhead Publishing Limited, 2011.
[8] M. Gorji, R. Bagherzadeh, And H. Fashandi, “Electrospun Nanofibers In
Protective Clothing,” In Electrospun Nanofibers, Isfahan, Iran: Elsevier Ltd., 2017,
Pp. 571–598.
[9] B. K. Behera And P. K. Hari, “The Basics Of Woven Fabric Structure,” In Woven
Textile Structure, 2010, Pp. 3–8.
[10] R. A. Das, Apurba, Science In Clothing Comfort, Vol. 53, No. 9. 2010.
[11] A. De Raeve, S. Vasile, And J. Cools, “Selected Factors Influencing Wear
Comfort Of Clothing: Case Studies,” J. Text. Eng. Fash. Technol., Vol. 4, No. 1,
2018.
[12] J. Y. Hu, Y. I. Li, And K. W. Yeung, Clothing Biosensory Engineering.
Cambridge England, 2006.
[13] W. Wardiningsih, “Study Of Comfort Properties Of Natural And Synthetic Knitted
Fabrics In Different Blend Ratios For Winter Active Sportswear,” Rmit
University, Melbourne, 2001.
[14] F. Iftikhar, T. Hussain, Z. Ali, A. Nazir, D. C. Adolphe, And L. Schacher,
“Investigation Of Thermo-Physiological Comfort And Mechanical Properties Of
Fine Cotton Fabrics For Ladies’ Summer Apparel,” J. Nat. Fibers, Vol. 0, No. 0,
Pp. 1–11, 2019.

86
[15] S. Raj And S. Sreenivasan, “Total Wear Comfort Index As An Objective
Parameter For Characterization Of Overall Wearability Of Cotton Fabrics,” J. Eng.
Fiber. Fabr., Vol. 4, No. 4, Pp. 29–41, 2009.
[16] I. Fatahi And A. Alamdar Yazdi, “Assessment Of The Relationship Between Air
Permeability Of Woven Fabrics And Its Mechanical Properties,” Fibres Text. East.
Eur., Vol. 18, No. 6, Pp. 68–71, 2010.
[17] Y. Jhanji, D. Gupta, And V. K. Kothari, “Thermo-Physiological Properties Of
Polyester–Cotton Plated Fabrics In Relation To Fibre Linear Density And Yarn
Type,” Fash. Text., Vol. 2, No. 16, 2015.
[18] R. F. Goldman, “The Four ‘Fs’ Of Clothing Comfort,” Environ. Ergon., Vol. 3, Pp.
315–319, 2005.
[19] H. Olschewski And K. Bruck, “Thermoregulatory, Cardiovascular, And Muscular
Factors Related To Exercise After Precooling,” J. Appl. Physiol., Vol. 64, No. 2,
Pp. 803–811, 1988.
[20] M. J. Tipton, N. Collier, H. Massey, J. Corbett, And M. Harper, “Physiological
Adaptation To Hot And Cold Environments,” In Experimental Physiology, Vol.
102, No. 11, 2017, Pp. 379–400.
[21] P. O. Fanger, “Thermal Environment - Human Requirements,” Environmentalist,
Vol. 6, No. 4, Pp. 275–278, 1986.
[22] R. T. Oǧulata, “The Effect Of Thermal Insulation Of Clothing On Human Thermal
Comfort,” Fibres Text. East. Eur., Vol. 15, No. 2, Pp. 67–72, 2007.
[23] N. Pan, “Quantificationand Evaluation Of Human Tactile Sense Towards Fabrics,”
Int. J. Des. Nat., Vol. 1, No. 1, Pp. 48–60, 2007.
[24] P. W. H. L. A. S. W. Wong, Y. Li, P. K. W. Yeung, “Neural Network Predictions
Of Human Psychological Perceptions Of Clothing Sensory Comfort,” Text. Res.
J., Vol. 73, No. 1, Pp. 31–37, 2003.
[25] I. B. W. Donald K. Freedheim, Handbook Of Psychology, Vol. 1. 1987.
[26] A. V Cardello, C. Winterhalter, And H. G. Schutz, “Predicting The Handle And
Comfort Of Military Clothing Fabrics From Sensory And Instrumental Data:
Development And Application Of New Psychophysical Methods,” Text. Res. J.,
Vol. 73, No. 3, Pp. 221–237, 2003.
[27] J. H. Andreen, J. W. Gibson, And O. C. Wetmore, “Fabric Evaluations Based On
Physiological Measurements Of Comfort*,” Text. Res. J., Vol. 23, No. 1, Pp. 11–
22, 1953.
[28] Y. Li, “The Science Of Clothing Comfort,” Text. Prog., Vol. 31, No. 1–2, Pp. 1–

87
 135, 2001.
[29] J. Bolender, “Hints Of Beauty In Social Cognition: Broken Symmetries In Mental
Dynamics,” New Ideas Psychol., Vol. 26, No. 1, Pp. 1–22, 2008.
[30] S. S. Stevens, “On The Theory Of Scales Of Measureme,” Science (80-. )., Vol.
103, No. 2684, Pp. 677–680, 1946.
[31] John F Stolte, J. F. S. Source, N. Directions, C. Press, And S. Url, “American
Journal Of Sociology,” Chicago, 1895.
[32] G. R. Dowling And D. F. Midgley, “Using Rank Values As An Interval Scale,”
Psychol. Mark., Vol. 8, No. 1, Pp. 37–41, 1991.
[33] E. Shin, “Exploring Consumers’ Fit Perceptions And Satisfaction With Apparel Fit
In General,” Iowa State University Ames, Iowa, 2013.
[34] G. Havenith, R. Heus, And W. A. Lotens, “Resultant Clothing Insulation: A
Function Of Body Movement, Posture, Wind, Clothing Fit And Ensemble
Thickness,” Ergonomics, Vol. 33, No. 1, Pp. 67–84, 1990.
[35] Y. L. Kwok, Y. Li, B. S. H. Wong, And W. S. S. Wu, “Perceptual Requirements
Of Hong Kong Consumers On Children’s Denim Wear,” J. Text. Inst., Vol. 89,
No. 3, Pp. 96–110, 1998.
[36] L. M. Sztandera, A. V. Cardello, C. Winterhalter, And H. Schutz, “Identification
Of The Most Significant Comfort Factors For Textiles From Processing
Mechanical, Handfeel, Fabric Construction, And Perceived Tactile Comfort Data,”
Text. Res. J., Vol. 83, No. 1, Pp. 34–43, 2013.
[37] H. N. Yoon And A. Buckley, “Improved Comfort Polyester: Part I: Transport
Properties And Thermal Comfort Of Polyester/Cotton Blend Fabrics,” Text. Res.
J., Vol. 54, No. 5, Pp. 289–298, 1984.
[38] B. K. Behera And I. Department Of Textile Technology, “Comfort And Handle
Behaviour Of Linen-Blended Fabrics,” Autex Res. J., Vol. 7, No. 1, Pp. 33–47,
2007.
[39] F. Iftikhar, Z. Ali, T. Hussain, A. Nazir, And D. C. Adolphe, “Influence Of Yarn
Count And Cover Factor On Mechanical, Comfort, Aesthetic And Hand Properties
Of Ladies’ Summer Apparel Fabrics,” J. Nat. Fibers, Vol. 00, No. 00, Pp. 1–12,
2019.
[40] K. Rani, L. Jajpura, And B. K. Behera, “Comfort Behavior Of Unconventional
Natural Fiber Based Union Fabrics,” J. Text. Sci. Technol., Vol. 5, Pp. 125–133,
2019.
[41] T. Malik And T. K. Sinha, “Clothing Comfort: A Key Parameter In Clothing,”

88
 Pakistan Text. J., Vol. 61, No. 1, Pp. 55–57, 2012.
[42] B. Mijović, I. S. Čubrić, And Z. Skenderi, “Measurement Of Thermal Parameters
Of Skin-Fabric Environment,” Period. Biol., Vol. 112, No. 1, Pp. 69–73, 2010.
[43] R. Bell, A. V. Cardello, And H. G. Schutz, “Relations Among Comfort Of Fabrics,
Ratings Of Comfort, And Visual Vigilance ’,” Percept. Mot. Skills, Vol. 97, No. 1,
Pp. 57–67, 2003.
[44] C. Voelker, S. Hoffmann, O. Kornadt, E. Arens, H. Zhang, And C.-L. Huizenga,
“Heat And Moisture Transfer Through Clothing Conrad,” In Eleventh
International Ibpsa Conference, 2009, Pp. 1360–1366.
[45] M. G. Tadesse, Y. Chen, L. Wang, V. Nierstrasz, And C. Loghin, “Tactile Comfort
Prediction Of Functional Fabrics From Instrumental Data Using Intelligence
Systems,” Fibers Polym., Vol. 20, No. 1, Pp. 199–209, 2019.
[46] M. C. Marsh, “The Thermal Insulating Properties Of Fabrics,” Text. Prog., Vol.
24, No. 4, Pp. 1–54, 2009.
[47] R. K. Varshney, V. K. Kothari, And S. Dhamija, “A Study On
Thermophysiological Comfort Properties Of Fabrics In Relation To Constituent
Fibre Fineness And Cross-Sectional Shapes,” J. Ofthe Text. Inst., Vol. 101, No. 6,
Pp. 495–505, 2010.
[48] P. Verdu, J. M. Rego, J. Nieto, And M. Blanes, “Comfort Analysis Of Woven
Cotton/Polyester Fabrics Modified With A New Elastic Fiber, Part 1 Preliminary
Analysis Of Comfort And Mechanical Properties,” Text. Res. J., Vol. 79, No. 1,
Pp. 14–23, 2009.
[49] A. S. W. Wong, Y. Li, And K. W. Yeung, “Statistical Simulation Of Psychological
Perception Of Clothing Sensory Comfort,” J. Text. Inst., Vol. 93, No. 1, Pp. 108–
119, 2002.
[50] H. G. Schutz, “Development And Application Of New Psychophysical Methods
For The Characterization Of The Handfeel And Comfort Properties Of Military
Clothing Fabrics,” 2002.
[51] N. Uren And A. Okur, “Analysis And Improvement Of Tactile Comfort And Low-
Stress Mechanical Properties Of Denim Fabrics,” Text. Res. J., Vol. 0, No. 00, Pp.
1–16, 2019.
[52] T. Tzanov, R. Betcheva, I. Hardalov, And L. Hes, “Thermophysiological Comfort
Of Silicone Softeners Treated, Woven Textile Materials,” Int. J. Cloth. Sci.
Technol., Vol. 11, No. 4, Pp. 189–197, 1999.
[53] Y. Zhang, “The Impact Of Brand Image On Consumer Behavior: A Literature

89
 Review,” Open J. Bus. Manag., Vol. 03, No. 01, Pp. 58–62, 2015.
[54] Cheng-Lu Wang, N. Y. . Siu, And A. S.Y.Hui, “Consumer Decision-Making
Styles On Domestic And Imported Brand Clothing,” Eur. J. Mark., Vol. 38, No. 1–
2, Pp. 239–252, 2004.
[55] N. Kinra, “The Effect Of Country-Of-Origin On Foreign Brand Names In The
Indian Market,” Mark. Intell. Plan., Vol. 24, No. 1, Pp. 15–30, 2006.
[56] R. K. Srivastava, “Impact Of Country Of Origin On Indian Consumers-Study Of
Chinese Brands,” Asian J. Mark., Vol. 8, No. 2, Pp. 54–70, 2014.
[57] Amandeep Kaur And Dr. Garima Malik, “A Study Of Consumers ’ Preferences In
Choosing International Apparel Brand In Delhi,” Pacific Bus. Rev. Int., Vol. 7,
No. 8, Pp. 25–32, 2015.
[58] A. Chakrapani, “Consumer Behavior And Preferences Of Indian Consumers
Towards Apparel Purchase In Retail Markets Of India,” Innov. J. Bus. Manag.,
Vol. 4, No. 2277–4947, Pp. 94–100, 2015.
[59] Karthikeyan Sundarraj, “An Investigation On Consumer Behavior And
Preferences Towards Apparel , Purchase By Indian Consumers Age 15 – 25,”
University Of Boras, 2011.
[60] M. M. Md. Mazedul Islam, Muhammad Mufidul Islam, Abu Yousuf Mohammad
Anwarul Azim, Md. Russel Anwar, “Customer Perceptions In Buying Decision
Towards Branded Bangladeshi Local Apparel Products,” Eur. Sci. J., Vol. 10, No.
7, Pp. 482–497, 2014.
[61] N. Ahmed And N. Ahmed, “Consumer Behavior Towards Clothing Apparel Of
Designer Brands : A Study On The Boutiques And Fashion Houses In
Bangladesh,” J. Bus. Stud., Vol. Xxxiv, No. 3, Pp. 197–217, 2013.
[62] F. Islam, M. Rahman, And A. Hossain, “Influence Of Factors On Female
Consumers’ Fashion Apparel Buying Behavior In Bangladesh,” Glob. J. Manag.
Bus. Res. E-Marketing, Vol. 14, No. 8, Pp. 48–56, 2014.
[63] U. Umbreen And M. Z. Rashidi, “Influence Of Lawn Exhibitions And Brand
Outlets On Consumers Buying Behavior,” J. Indep. Stud. Res. Soc. Sci. Econ.,
Vol. 10, No. 2, Pp. 45–60, 2012.
[64] H. Zeb, K. Rashid, And M. B. Javeed, “Influence Of Brands On Female
Consumer’s Buying Behavior In Pakistan,” Int. J. Trade, Econ. Financ., Vol. 2,
No. 3, Pp. 225–231, 2011.
[65] H. A. Kim And S. J. Kim, “Wear Comfort Properties Of Zrc/Al2o3/ Graphite-
Embedded, Heat-Storage Woven Fabrics For Garments,” Text. Res. J., Vol. 0, No.

90
 00, Pp. 1–14, 2018.
[66] F. P. Documents, “Jade - Containing Fiber , Yarn , And Moisture Wicking ,
Cooling Fabric,” Us 10 , 378 , 127 B2, 2019.
[67] K. Po M. Tang, C. Wai Kan, J. Tu Fan, M. K. Sarkar, And S. Leung Tso,
“Flammability, Comfort And Mechanical Properties Of A Novel Fabric Structure:
Plant-Structured Fabric,” Cellulose, Vol. 24, No. 9, Pp. 4017–4031, 2017.
[68] R. C. Chattopadhyay, “Design Of Apparel Fabrics: Role Of Fibre, Yarn And
Fabric Parameters On Its Functional Attributes,” J. Text. Eng., Vol. 54, No. 6, Pp.
179–190, 2008.
[69] M. L. Realff, M. C. Boyce, And S. Backer, “A Micromechanical Model Of The
Tensile Behavior Of Woven Fabric,” Text. Res. J., Vol. 67, No. 6, Pp. 445–459,
1997.
[70] H. Gabrijelčič, E. Cernoša, And K. Dimitrovski, “Influence Of Weave And Weft
Characteristics On Tensile Properties Of Fabrics,” Fibres Text. East. Eur., Vol. 16,
No. 2, Pp. 45–51, 2008.
[71] S. Adanur, Handbook Of Industrial Textiles. Alabama, Us.A, 1995.
[72] T. H. Oh, M. S. Lee, S. Y. Kim, And H. J. Shim, “Studies On Melt-Spinning
Process Of Hollow Fibers,” J. Appl. Polym. Sci., Vol. 68, No. 8, Pp. 1209–1217,
1998.
[73] S. K. Koc, S. Duzyer, R. Berger, And A. S. Hockenberger, “Effect Of Cross-
Sectional Shape On The Behaviour Of Cationic Dyeable Poly(Ethylene
Terephthalate) Fibres,” Text. Res. J., Vol. 82, No. 13, Pp. 1355–1362, 2012.
[74] M. A. Bueno, A. P. Aneja, And M. Renner, “Influence Of The Shape Of Fiber
Cross Section On Fabric Surface Characteristics,” J. Mater. Sci., Vol. 39, No. 2,
Pp. 557–564, 2004.
[75] E. Karaca, S. Omeroglu, And B. Becerir, “Effects Of Fiber Cross-Sectional Shapes
On Tensile And Tearing Properties Of Polyester Woven Fabrics,” Tekst. Ve
Konfeksiyon, Vol. 25, No. 4, Pp. 313–318, 2015.
[76] P. Leadbetter And S. Dervan, “The Microfibre Step Change,” J. Soc. Dye. Colour.,
Vol. 108, No. 9, Pp. 369–371, 1992.
[77] H. Kbra And O. Babaarsl, “Polyester Microfilament Woven Fabrics,” In Woven
Fabrics, 2012, Pp. 155–178.
[78] M. A. R. Al-Ansary, “The Influence Of Number Of Filaments On Physical And
Mechanical Characteristics Of Polyester Woven Fabrics,” Life Sci. J., Vol. 9, No.
3, Pp. 79–83, 2012.

91
[79] H. K. Kaynak And O. Babaarslan, “Breaking Strength And Elongation Properties
Of Polyester Woven Fabrics On The Basis Of Filament Fineness,” J. Eng. Fiber.
Fabr., Vol. 10, No. 4, Pp. 55–61, 2015.
[80] R. S. Blackburn, Biodegradable And Sustainable Fibres, Vol. 1. Cambridge
England, 2005.
[81] M. H. Seo, M. L. Realff, N. Pan, M. Boyce, P. Schwartz, And S. Backer,
“Mechanical Properties Of Fabric Woven From Yarns Produced By Different
Spinning Technologies: Yarn Failure In Woven Fabric,” Text. Res. J., Vol. 63, No.
3, Pp. 123–134, 1993.
[82] M. Zubair, H. S. Maqsood, And B. Neckar, “Impact Of Filling Yarns On Woven
Fabric Performance,” Fibres Text. East. Eur., Vol. 24, No. 5, Pp. 50–54, 2016.
[83] A. Mukhopadhyay, S. Ghosh, And S. Bhaumik, “Tearing And Tensile Strength
Behaviour Of Military Khaki Fabrics From Grey To Finished Process,” Int. J.
Cloth. Sci. Technol., Vol. 18, No. 4, Pp. 247–264, 2006.
[84] F. Mousazadegan And Ezazshahabi N, “Investigation Of The Tearing Performance
Of Fabrics With Various Constructions, Woven From Different Yarn Spinning
Systems,” J. Text. Polym., Vol. 5, No. 2, Pp. 76–82, 2017.
[85] M. D. Teli, A. R. Khare, And R. Chakrabarti, “Dependence Of Yarn And Fabric
Strength On The Structural Parameters,” Autex Res. J., Vol. 8, No. 3, Pp. 63–67,
2008.
[86] P. Grosberg And B. J. Park, “The Mechanical Properties Of Woven Fabrics Part Ii:
The Bending Of Woven Fabric,” Text. Res. J., Vol. 36, No. 5, Pp. 205–211, 1966.
[87] I. Jahan, “Effect Of Fabric Structure On The Mechanical Properties Of Woven
Fabrics,” Adv. Res. Text. Eng., Vol. 2, No. 2, Pp. 1–4, 2017.
[88] E. Eltahan, “Structural Parameters Affecting Tear Strength Of The Fabrics Tents,”
Alexandria Eng. J., Vol. 57, No. 1, Pp. 1–9, 2017.
[89] N. Ferdous, M. S. Rahmanb, R. Bin Kabir, And A. E. Ahmed, “A Comparative
Study On Tensile Strength Of Different Weave Structures,” Int. J. Sci. Res. Eng.
Technol., Vol. 3, No. 9, Pp. 1307–1313, 2014.
[90] P. K. Banerjee, S. Mishra, And T. Ramkumar, “Effect Of Sett And Construction
On Uniaxial Tensile Properties Of Woven Fabrics,” J. Eng. Fiber. Fabr., Vol. 5,
No. 2, Pp. 8–21, 2010.
[91] Z. A. Malik, M. H. Malik, T. Hussain, And F. A. Arain, “Development Of Models
To Predict Tensile Strength Of Cotton Woven Fabrics,” J. Eng. Fiber. Fabr., Vol.
6, No. 4, Pp. 46–53, 2011.

92
[92] M. M. Haque, “Effect Of Weft Parameters On Weaving Performance And Fabric
Properties,” Daffodil Int. Univ. J. Sci. Technol., Vol. 4, No. 2, Pp. 62–69, 2009.
[93] P. Swapan, K. Ghosh, S. Bairagi, And R. Bhattacharyya, “Study Of The Effect Of
Weft Parameters On The Properties Of Jute Fabrics Produced In S4a Loom Woven
From Single And Plied Weft Yarns,” Int. J. Innov. Res. Sci. Eng. Technol., Vol. 5,
No. 8, Pp. 15001–15011, 2016.
[94] C. Reddy, “Effect Of Weave Structure And Weft Density On The Physical And
Mechanical Properties Of Micro Polyester Woven Fabrics,” Life Sci. J., Vol. 9,
No. 3, Pp. 1326–1331, 2012.
[95] F. M. Z. Nasrun, M. F. Yahya, S. A. Ghani, And M. R. Ahmad, “Effect Of Weft
Density And Yarn Crimps Towards Tensile Strength Of 3d Angle Interlock
Woven Fabric,” Aip Conf. Proc., Vol. 1774, Pp. 1–6, 2016.
[96] M. Mebrate, N. Gessesse, And N. Zinabu, “Effect Of Loom Tension On
Mechanical Properties Of Plain Woven Cotton Fabric,” J. Nat. Fibers, Vol. 00, No.
00, Pp. 1–6, 2020.
[97] D. Dinardo, “Comparative Study Of Comfort Properties Of Five Different
Common Apparel Textiles,” Eastern Michigan University, 2011.
[98] E. Karaca, N. Kahraman, S. Omeroglu, And B. Becerir, “Effects Of Fiber Cross
Sectional Shape And Weave Pattern On Thermal Comfort Properties Of Polyester
Woven Fabrics,” Fibres Text. East. Eur., Vol. 3, No. 92, Pp. 67–72, 2012.
[99] S. Altas And B. Ozgen, “Investigation Of Fabric Properties Woven With Different
Fibres,” Tekstilec, Vol. 56, No. 2, Pp. 117–122, 2013.
[100] J. M. Rego, P. Verdu, J. Nieto, And M. Blanes, “Comfort Analysis Of Woven
Cotton/Polyester Fabrics Modified With A New Elastic Fiber, Part 2: Detailed
Study Of Mechanical, Thermo-Physiological And Skin Sensorial Properties,”
Text. Res. J., Vol. 80, No. 3, Pp. 206–215, 2010.
[101] R. K. Nayak, S. K. Punj, K. N. Chatterjeé, And B. K. Behera, “Comfort Properties
Of Suiting Fabrics,” Indian J. Fibre Text. Res., Vol. 34, No. 2, Pp. 122–128, 2009.
[102] D. Atalie And G. K. Rotich, “Impact Of Cotton Parameters On Sensorial Comfort
Of Woven Fabrics,” Res. J. Text. Appar., Vol. 24, No. 3, Pp. 1–21, 2020.
[103] E. Utkun, “Comfort-Related Properties Of Woven Fabrics Produced From Dri-
Release® Yarns,” Ind. Textila, Vol. 65, No. 5, Pp. 241–246, 2014.
[104] B. K. Behera, S. M. Ishtiaque, And S. Chand, “Comfort Properties Of Fabrics
Woven From Ring-, Rotor-, And Friction-Spun Yarns,” J. Text. Inst., Vol. 88, No.
3, Pp. 255–264, 1997.

93
[105] M. K. Singh And A. Nigam, “Effect Of Various Ring Yarns On Fabric Comfort,”
J. Ind. Eng., Vol. 2013, Pp. 1–7, 2013.
[106] A. T. Özgüney, C. Taşkin, P. Gürkan Ünal, G. Özçelik, And A. Özerdem, “Handle
Properties Of The Woven Fabrics Made Of Compact Yarns,” Tekst. Ve
Konfeksiyon, Vol. 19, No. 2, Pp. 108–113, 2009.
[107] G. K. Tyagi, G. Krishna, S. Bhatlacharya, And P. Kumar, “Comfort Aspects Of
Finished Polyester-Cotton And Polyester-Viscose Ring And Mjs Yarn Fabrics,”
Indian J. Fibre Text. Res., Vol. 34, No. 2, Pp. 137–143, 2009.
[108] A. Das, V. K. Kothari, And M. Balaji, “Studies On Cotton-Acrylic Bulked Yarns
And Fabrics. Part Ii: Fabric Characteristics,” J. Text. Inst., Vol. 98, No. 4, Pp.
363–376, 2007.
[109] A. Das, V. K. Kothari, And A. Sadachar, “Comfort Characteristics Of Fabrics
Made Of Compact Yarns,” Fibers Polym., Vol. 8, No. 1, Pp. 116–122, 2007.
[110] S. Ahmad, F. Ahmad, A. Afzal, A. Rasheed, M. Mohsin, And N. Ahmad, “Effect
Of Weave Structure On Thermo-Physiological Properties Of Cotton Fabrics,”
Autex Res. J., Vol. 00, No. 11, Pp. 1–5, 2014.
[111] H. Özdemir, “Thermal Comfort Properties Of Clothing Fabrics Woven With
Polyester/Cotton Blend Yarns,” Autex Res. J., Vol. 17, No. 2, Pp. 135–141, 2017.
[112] M. Umair, T. Hussain, K. Shaker, Y. Nawab, M. Maqsood, And M. Jabbar, “Effect
Of Woven Fabric Structure On The Air Permeability And Moisture Management
Properties,” J. Text. Inst., Vol. 107, No. 5, Pp. 1–10, 2015.
[113] M. Matusiak, “Influence Of The Structure Of Woven Fabrics On Their Thermal
Insulation Properties,” Fibres Text. East. Eur., Vol. 19, No. 5, Pp. 46–53, 2011.
[114] I. Kandi, P. Kedar, N. Das, And S. S. Mahish, “Thermo-Physiological Comfort
Properties Of P / B Blended Suiting Fabrics,” Int. J. Innov. Res. Sci. Eng.
Technol., Vol. 2, No. 12, Pp. 7620–7629, 2013.
[115] G. Süle, “Investigation Of Bending And Drape Properties Of Woven Fabrics And
The Effects Of Fabric Constructional Parameters And Warp Tension On These
Properties,” Text. Res. J., Vol. 82, No. 8, Pp. 810–819, 2012.
[116] J. D. Owen, “24—The Bending Behaviour Of Plain-Weave Fabrics Woven From
Spun Yarns,” J. Text. Inst., Vol. 59, No. 7, Pp. 313–343, 1968.
[117] Z. A. Malik, “Relationship Between Tensile Strength Of Yarn And Woven
Fabric,” Mehran University Of Engineering & Technology Jamshoro, 2011.

94