Effect of Fabric Softener

8/12/2019 Effect of Fabric Softener

1/22

Effect of fabric softener onproperties of a single jersey

knitted fabric made of cottonand spandex yarn

Roqaya SadekTextile Engineering Department, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this research is to study the effect of softener treatment on plain jerseyfabrics with properties made of cotton and spandex yarn.

Design/methodology/approach Samples with 100 percent cotton yarns, spandex yarns in

alternating courses (half plating) and spandex yarns in every courses (full plating) were produced on acircular knitting machine where the two latter cases were produced at five different levels of spandexextension. After the dyeing process, fabrics were treated with fabric softener using two softener types(cationic and silicon) and all type two concentrations (3 percent, 6 percent) to evaluate the mostappropriate softener type and concentration on fabric friction force, sewing needle penetration forceand weight loss percent under different levels of spandex extension.

Findings Results showed that silicon softener treatment results in high decreases in fabric sewingneedle penetrating force, friction force and while treatment with cationic softener results in highdecreases in weight loss percent for 100 percent cotton, half and full plating fabrics.

Originality/value There is a growing need to study the effect of softeners when spandex yarns areused in the production of knitted fabric which results in high increase of stitch density. This researchcompares the effects of two different softener types at different concentrations on the properties ofboth plain jersey fabric produced from 100 percent cotton yarns and from cotton/spandex yarns with

different stitch density.KeywordsSilicon, Cationic, Bare spandex yarn, Half and full plating, Fabric softeners, Fabric testing

Paper typeResearch paper

1. IntroductionFabric damage is also one of knitted fabrics defects which occur during sewingprocess as shown in Figure 1. So, knitted fabrics are treated with fabric softenersapplied in the final finishing stages in order to improve fabric performance duringsewing process, to improve fabric handle and the appearance and to increase fabric lifetime.

Softeners act as fiber lubricants which reduce the coefficient of friction in between

fibers, in between yarns and in between fabric and other surfaces thus reduce thesewing needle penetration force during sewing which in turn increase needle life timeand reduce needle temperature especially when sewing fabric made from man madefibers at high sewing speed (Tomasino, 1992). Lower coefficients of friction alsoincrease the abrasion resistance. But there are some fabric softener influences on theproperties of color shade and is then capability of soiling.

There is a growing need to study the effect of softeners when spandex yarns are usedin the production of knitted fabric which results in high increase of stitch density.

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/0955-6222.htm

Effect offabric softener

251

Received 22 October 2011Revised 9 February 2012

Accepted 9 February 2012

International Journal of Clothing

Science and Technology

Vol. 24 No. 4, 2012

pp. 251-272

q Emerald Group Publishing Limited

0955-6222

DOI 10.1108/09556221211232847


2/22

The aim of this research is to compare between the effects of two different softener typesat different concentrations on the properties of both plain jersey fabric produced from100 percent cotton yarns and from cotton/spandex yarns with different stitch density.

2. Literature surveyJang and Yeh (1993) studied the effect of silicone softeners and silane-coupling agents onthe performance properties of twill cotton fabrics. A cationic softener was also used forcomparison. Cotton fabric samples were treated with a pad-dry-cure process from anaqueous bath containing the softener and other additives. The results indicated thatsilicone softeners provide better durable press performance with a higher retention ofmechanical properties and durability compared with the cationic softener. In addition,the type of reactive group, the viscosity, and the adsorption mechanism of the softener,

as well as treatment conditions such as curing temperature, are crucial factors affectingthe performance properties of the treated fabrics. Furthermore, the study ofthe silane-coupling agent revealed that it plays an important role in improving thedurability and performance of silicone softeners, especially the linear reactive type.The results also suggested that improvements in wrinkle recovery are mainly due to theformation of an elastic silicone polymer network, which entraps fibers within its matrix,thus improving the fabrics ability to recover from deformation.

Min and Tae (2002) studied to improve the dimensional properties of wool fabric, twokinds of silicone polymers are applied to plasma pretreated wool. With this treatment,hygral expansion increases slightly but remains smaller than that of silicone treatedwool without the plasma pretreatment. The wrinkle recovery angles of wool increasewith the treatment, and the values of fabric treated with plasma and silicone polymersare higher than those with no plasma as pretreatment. In addition, the harsher handleimparted by plasma modification is improved with silicone treatment. The resultsshowed that the plasma pretreatment modifies the cuticle surface of the wool fibers andincreases the reactivity of the wool fabric toward silicone polymers. Therefore, thecombination of plasma and silicone treatments can improve the dimensional stability,wrinkle resistance, and performance properties of the wool.

Nihat (2008) studied the effect of nano-silicon softener on abrasion, pilling resistanceand color fastness properties of knitted fabrics. Nano-silicon softeners are applied

Figure 1.Fabric damage duringsewing process

(a) (b)

Notes:(a) Damage in fabric; (b) damage shape after focus

IJCST24,4

252


3/22

to knitted fabric produced from with a wide range of raw materials and different knitstructure. Results showed that fabric with nano-silicon softener exhibited poor abrasionbut better pilling resistance and does not have significant effect on color fastnessproperties.

Darko and Dubravko (2008) studied the processing parameters during the process ofgarment production influence on knitted garment quality. Penetration force values wereobserved in view of the quantity and type of softeners, different sewing needle size andnumber of layers of the stitched sample of a dyed plain jersey. The results showed thatreduction of sewing needle penetration force depends on knitted fabric finishing, typeand quantity of softeners, their quantity, sewing needle size and number of layers of thestitched sample. The highest reduction of penetration force was observed when usingwax emulsion with fatty acid, and the lowest one when using fatty acid. By increasingthe number of layers of the stitched sample, an increase in the value of sewing needlepenetration force was also observed.

Tae (2001) studied the effects of silicone softeners on the dimensional properties of woolfabric. A scoured and crabbed plain-weave worsted fabric samples treated with a simplepad-dry-cure process in an aqueous bath with amino functional and epoxy functionalsilicone softeners. The results indicated that dimensional stability and performanceproperties improved. In addition, a hydrophilic epoxy functional silicone softener wasseemed to increase fiber swelling and prevents the reduction of hygral expansion.However, for the other properties, there were no significant variations when differentkinds of epoxy functional silicone softeners were used. Finally the most significant effectof the softeners was the surface coating, which reduces inter fiber or inter yarn friction.

Ana etal. (2005) studied the influence of pretreatment on cotton knitted fabrics handleproperties. Greige 100 percent carded cotton knitted fabric. Adding softener treatmentduring every process from finishing processes and tested cotton knitted fabric was alkaliand enzymatic scoured, pre-bleached and bleached in laboratory and in industrial

conditions. The results showed that the lower penetration force obtained for enzymaticscoured cottons is because not only such cotton is not damaged but also due to theremoval of some cotton impurities that poor handle. The mkin mean value for alkaliscoured and pre-bleached cotton is lower than enzymatic scoured.

Ayca and Binnaz (2005) studied the effects of elastane draw ratio, pre-settingtemperature and finishing process on the penetration forces of a sewing needle anddamage to elastane yarn during the sewing of cotton/elastane woven fabrics. Threefabric types with three different elastane weft yarn draw ratios were used. A pre-settingprocess was applied to all three types of fabric at two different temperatures and at thefinishing process half of the samples were treated with silicone and the other half werewashed only. Results showed that the sewability value in the warp direction of thesamples which were only washed was 68 percent and for the samples which were treated

with silicone it was 40 percent. As a result, the sewability was considered to be poor,especially for samples, which were only washed.

Gurarda and Meric (2007) presented the effects of elastane yarn type and fabricdensity on the seam performance of PET/elastane woven fabrics. The weft and warpyarns of the weft stretched fabrics were polyester-elastane covered yarn and polyesteryarn, respectively. Air-covered and twisted elastane weft yarns were used at twill andplain fabrics. Needle penetration forces were determined on an L&M sewability testerfor seam performance. The values of the needle penetration forces were between


253


4/22

64 and 370 cN and the needle damage index values varied between 18 and 73 percent.Elastane yarn type and fabric density had significant effects on the needlepenetration force.

George and Xu (1995) studied the distributions of the tangential and radial stresses

acting on the yam of a fabric during sewing as the sewing needle is inserted into thefabric by means of the mechanical principles of elasticity.

Carvalho etal. (2009) presented a system that allows the measurement of parameters ofneedle penetration during high-speed sewing. The system has been developed as a toolfor analysis of the most important mechanical effects occurring during high-speedsewing.

Stylios and Lloyd (1990), used low cost technique for predicting the degree of puckerby correlating measured values of fabric and thread mechanical properties andgeometrical relationships with the degree of pucker obtained in the seams.

3. Experimental work

3.1 Material and methodIn order to achieve the purpose of this research, half and full plating single jersey fabricswere produced with five different levels of spandex extensions. Also 100 percent cottonsingle jersey fabrics were produced. Experimental samples were knitted on a Relanit3.2 Mayer & Cie circular knitting machine with the following specifications:

. 24 gauges, 2,268 total needle count, 96 systems, with positive yarn feedingsystem during the knitting process.

. 40 dtex Bare spandex yarn was used, spandex means manufactured fibers inwhich the fibers forming substance is long-chain synthetic polymer comprised ofat least 85 percent of segmented polyurethane. Also 30/1 Ne combed cotton spunyarn was used.

Fabrics were prepared and dyed in a finishing mill as follows:

(1) Silt opening. The knitted fabric tube is silt open and laid flat.

(2) Heat setting. Samples were heat set without any traverse tension on the samewidth produced on knitting machine to keep the same fabric specifications, heatsetting machine was used with a speed of 5 m/min at 1858C.

(3) Closed width.Fabric was sewed back into tubular shape using industrial sewingmachine.

(4) Scouring. Fabric was fed to (250, LDT) GMBH jet dyeing machine and thescouring bath consists of (soap 2 gm/l and 4 gm/l caustic soda) which performsthe following operations:

.

boiling for 45 min, then flotation in cold water;. adding acetic acid (2 gm/l) at 508C for 10 min;

. immersion in hot water at 808C for 10 min; and

. flotation in cold water.

(5) Dyeing. The dyeing bath consists of (red reactive dye, 80 gm/l salt and 5 gm/lsoda ash). Red reactive dye consists of sun fix yellow S P D 1.5 percent and sunfix red S P D 3.5 percent which performs the following operations:

IJCST24,4

254


5/22

. adding salt on the cold for 15 min;

. dye withdrawal gradually for 20 min;

. raising temperature to 608C for 20 min;

.

soda ash withdrawal on three times and continuing to the end of dye process;. flotation; and

. fabric exit from machine without any softener treatment.

(6) Squeezing. Helint balloon squeezer machine wasused, the air pressurewas 2.4 barwith a speed from (20 to 80) m/min. The principle of this machine is stretching thefabric in the traverse direction to retain the fabric extension which appears in thefabric during dyeing process.

(7) Drying. GM6H kranz relax dryer was used at 1508C.

(8) Fabric softeners treatment in laboratory using automatic washing machine. Afterdyeing process, fabric samples were classified into five groups and each group

consists of 11 samples produced from (one is 100 percent cotton, half and fullplating each of them is at five different spandex extension percent): the usedautomatic washing machine was WPW 4022 automatic washing machine using(B) program:

. First group was washed at 458C for 20 min without any softener treatmentthen, dried in sunlight at room temperature at 308C for 12 h.

. Rest of groups were softener treated at 458C for 20 min, with two types offabric softeners: cationic softener (A) of clariant company under (Uni soft NCStrade name) based on fatty acid and polyethylene and silicon softener (B) ofeksoy company under (knit soft wa-et trade name) based on polysiloxanepolymers) with two level of softener concentrations (3 and 6 percent) withadding acetic acid to achieve pH 5.5 then dried in sunlight at roomtemperature 308C for 12 h.

3.2 Testing methodThe following properties were measured for with and without softener treatment, inaccordance to standard methods as follows:

. Fabric abrasion resistance was tested using M249 AATCC accelerator equippedtester by using AATCC 93 standard test method.

. Sewing needle penetration force and friction force measuring system.

In order to measure needle penetration force the measuring system which was usedand shown in Figure 2. This system was used with a home sewing machine due to low

weight parts and simple basic mechanism.The heavy pulley was replaced by a light pulley and the AC sewing machine motor

was replaced by a direct current DC servo motor, which always trying to keep its speedsconstant by consuming more or less electric power under different mechanical loading.

An electronic circuit was built up to measure the change of currentintensity consumed on the servo motor as an indication to the change of the feedingand needling mechanical loads. To determine the start of the sewing cycle the electronicmarker (micro-switch) this is shown in Figure 2 is used to specify the beginning


255


6/22

of the sewing cycle. It depends on a switch works only when tension rod reaches itsmaximum stroke up as it closes the electric circuit a voltage value is recorded. Machinesignal and micro switch signal were recorded simultaneously by PCSu1000 which is adigital storage oscilloscope as shown in Figure 2 that uses an IBM compatible computerand a monitor to display wave forms. It is used as a data acquisition system by means ofconverting analog signal to digital signal.

The results can be recorded as a data file which can be then analyzed by computerprograms. The oscilloscope records 2,000 samples in each record.

The specifications of the sewing machine and PC laptop as follow.A Pfaff sewing machine is used with 301 stitch type, 5 stitches/cm, needle number of

14 and a speed of max 300 stitches/min and the specifications PC laptop ProcessorIntelw celeronw cpu, 2.2 GHz and 2 GB of RAM.The measured property of 100 percent cotton, half and full plating cotton/spandex

fabrics with softener treatment was calculated as a percent from the measuredproperty of the fabric without softener treatment as follows:

Decrease PercentC 2D

D

*100 1

where:

C value of the property for fabric with softener treatment.

D value of the property for fabric without softener treatment.

4. Results and discussion4.1 Sewing needle penetration force in case of 100 percent cotton fabricFigure 3 shows the effect of softeners type and concentration percent on the sewing needlepenetration force (cN) for 100 percent cotton single jersey fabric at stitch density241 stitch/cm2. As shown, generally the softener treatment decreases the sewing needlepenetration force by an averagevalue (59percent) compared to the fabric without softenertreatment. The decrease percent of softener (A) at concentrations (3 percent, 6 percent)

Figure 2.The diagrammaticalsketch of the measuringsystem of sewing needlepenetration force

Power supply

Servo

motorSewing machine

Micro Switch

12

Ch1 Ch2

Digital

Oscilloscope

P.C.

6

9 V

IJCST24,4

256


7/22

was (27 percent, 58 percent), while the decrease percent of softener (B) at concentrations(3 percent, 6 percent) was (71 percent, 80 percent), respectively. The decrease percentof softener (B) was higher than softener (A), where the decrease percent of softener (B)at (3 percent) was more than twice the decrease percent of softener (A) and at 6 percentwas one and half time the decrease percent of softener (A). Statistical analysis one-wayANOVA test shows that the fabric softener treatment (with and without softener) affectson the sewing needle penetration force significantly at confidence limit 99.9 percent whenusing softener (B) at concentration 6 percent as shown in Table I.

4.2 Sewing needle penetration force in case of half plating fabricFigure 4 shows the effect of softeners type and concentration percent on sewing needlepenetration force (cN) for half plating single jersey fabric at different levels of stitchdensity. As shown, generally softener treatment decreases sewing needle penetrationforce by an average value of (41.6 percent) compared to fabric without softener treatment.

For softener (A), the average value of decrease percent for the different levels of stitchdensity is higher for concentration 6 percent (50 percent) compared to concentration3 percent (29 percent).

For softener (B), the average value of decrease percent for the different levels of stitchdensity is higher for concentration 3 percent (49 percent) compared to concentration3 percent (38 percent). The difference between softener A at concentration 6 percent andsoftener B at concentration 3 percent is very low so that softener B is considered moreeconomic.

Also, results show that softener (B) at concentration (3 percent) gives the max

decrease percent (63 percent) at the lower density and softener (A) at concentration

ANOVASum of squares df Mean square F Sig.

PENETFOR Between groups 175,202.3 1 175,202.3 135,525.8 0.000Within groups 10.342 8 1.293Total 175,212.6 9

Table I.One-way ANOVAfor the effect of softenertreatment (with softenerB 6 percent and without

softener) on sewingneedle penetration force

for 100 percent cottonfabric

Figure 3.Effect of softeners type

and concentration percenton the sewing needlepenetration force for

100 percent cottonsingle jersey fabric

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

without

softener

with

softener

A(3%)

with

softener

A(6%)

with

softener

B(3%)

with

softener

B(6%)

PenetrationForce(cN)


257


8/22

(3 percent) gives the max decrease percent (67 percent) at the highest density. The effectof stitch density is not clear which may be due to the low range of stitch density levels(294-345 s/cm2).

Statistical analysis (two way and three way) M-ANOVA test shows that the softenertype, concentration and stitch density affect on the sewing needle penetration force

significantly at confidence limit 99.9 percent as shown in Table II. Fabric softenertreatment (with and without softener) affects on the sewing needle penetration forcesignificantly at confidence limit 99.9 percent when using softener (B) at concentration3 percent as shown in Table III.

4.3 Sewing needle penetration force in case of full plating fabricFigure 6 shows the effect of softeners type and concentration percent on sewing needlepenetration force (cN) for full plating single jersey fabric at different levels of stitchdensity. As shown, generally softener treatment decreases sewing needle penetrationforce by an average value of (37 percent) compared to fabric without softener treatment.

For softener (A), the average value of decrease percent for the different levels of stitchdensity is higher for concentration 6 percent (39 percent) compared to concentration

3 percent (32 percent). For softener (B), the average value of decrease percent for thedifferent levels of stitch density is higher for concentration 6 percent (43 percent)compared to concentration 3 percent (34 percent).

Also, results show that softener (A)at concentration (6 percent) gives the max decreasepercent (60 percent) at the lower density and softener (B)at concentration (6 percent) givesthe max decrease percent (30 percent) at the highest density. The high difference betweendecrease percent lower and higher density in this case compared to the case of halfplating may be due to the higher range of stitch density level (363-499 s/cm2) in the case

Figure 4.

Effect of softeners typeand concentration percenton sewing needlepenetration force (cN)for half plating fabric

250

349 Stitch/cm2

311 Stitch/cm2 294 Stitch/cm2


200

150

100

50

0without

softener

PenetrationForce(cN)

with softener

A(3%)

with softener

A(6%)

with softener

B(3%)

with softener

B(6%)

IJCST24,4

258


9/22

ANOVAa,b

Uniquemethod

Sum

ofsquares

df

Meansquare

F

Sig.

PENHALF

Maineffects

(Combined)

5,533.495

6

922.249

5,695.2

40

0.000

SOFTCON

1,269.416

1

1,269.416

7,839.1

27

0.000

SOFTTYPE

633.100

1

633.100

3,909.6

35

0.000

STITCH

3,630.979

4

907.745

5,605.6

69

0.000

Two-way

interactions

(Combined)

31,646.975

9

3,516.331

21,714.6

80

0.000

SOFTCON*SOFTTYPE

11,333.302

1

11,333.302

69,987.4

58

0.000

SOFTCON*STITC

H

13,580.990

4

3,395.247

20,966.9

46

0.000

SOFTTYPE*STIT

CH

6,732.683

4

1,683.171

10,394.2

20

0.000

Three-wayinteractions

SOFTCON*SOFTTYPE*STITCH

2,863.682

4

715.920

4,421.0

81

0.000

Model

40,044.151

19

2,107.587

13,015.1

52

0.000

Residual

6.477

40

0.162

Total

40,050.629

59

678.824

Notes:aPENHALFbyS

OFTCON,SOFTTYPE,STITCH;

ball

effectsenteredsimultaneously

Table II.M-ANOVA for the effect

of softener type,concentration and stitch

density on sewing needlepenetration force for half

plating fabrics


259


10/22

of full plating, from Figures 4 and 5, softener B gives the highest decrease percent in bothcase of half and full plating.

Statistical analysis (two way and three way) M-ANOVA test shows that the softenertype, concentration and stitch density affect on the sewing needle penetration force

significantly at confidence limit 99.9 percent as shown in Table IV. Fabric softenertreatment (with and without softener) affects on the sewing needle penetration forcesignificantly at confidence limit 99.9 percent when using softener (B) at concentration(6 percent) as shown in Table V.

We find that softener B (silicon) is better than softener A (cationic) with 100 percentcotton, half and full plating fabrics. As there is a strong chemical bond between fibresurface and silicon softeners while there is a weak ionic attraction between fibre surfaceand cationic softeners the maximum decrease was found in the case of silicon softener

ANOVAa,b

Unique methodSum ofsquares df

Meansquare F Sig.

PENHALF Main effects (Combined) 72,475.930 5 14,495.186 14,495.186 0.000SOFRENER 58,842.808 1 58,842.808 58,842.808 0.000STITCH 13,633.122 4 3,408.280 3,408.28 0.000

Two-wayinteractions

SOFRENER*STITCH 14,816.884 4 3,704.221 3,704.221 0.000

Model 87,292.814 9 9,699.202 9,699.202 0.000Residual 20.000 20 1.000Total 87,312.814 29 3,010.787

Notes: aPENHALF by SOFRENER, STITCH; ball effects entered simultaneously

Table III.M-ANOVA for the effectof softener treatment(with softener B 3 percentand without softener)with different levelsstitch density on sewingneedle penetration forcefor half plating fabric

Figure 5.Effect of softeners typeand concentration percenton sewing needlepenetration force (cN)for full plating fabric

250

499 Stitch/cm2



200

150

100

50

0

without

softener

Pe

netrationForce(cN)

with softener

A(3%)

with softener

A(6%)

with softener

B(3%)

with softener

B(6%)

IJCST24,4

260


11/22

ANOVAa,b

Uniquemethod

Sum

ofsquares

df

Meansquare

F

Sig.

PENFULL

Maineffe

cts

(Combined)

17,835.757

6

2,972.460

28,459.5

53

0.000

SOFTCON

3,821.492

1

3,821.492

36,588.5

36

0.000

SOFTTYPE

3,35.869

1

335.869

3,215.7

45

0.000

STITCH

13,677.397

4

3,419.349

32,738.2

59

0.000

Two-way

interactions

(Combined)

19,158.962

9

2,128.774

20,381.7

55

0.000

SOFTCON*SOFTTYPE

62.755

1

62.755

600.8

38

0.000

SOFTCON*STITC

H

11,121.765

4

2,780.441

26,621.0

91

0.000

SOFTTYPE*STIT

CH

7,974.442

4

1,993.611

19,087.6

49

0.000

Three-wa

yinteractions

SOFTCON*SOFTTYPE*STITCH

17,718.344

4

4,429.586

42,410.6

81

0.000

Model

54,712.063

19

2,879.582

27,570.3

07

0.000

Residual

4.178

40

0.104

Total

54,716.241

59

927.394

Notes:aPENFULLbySOFTCON,SOFTTYPE,STITCH;

ball

effectsenteredsimultaneously

Table IV.M-ANOVA for the

effect of softener type,concentration and stitch

density on sewing needlepenetration force for full

plating fabrics


261


12/22

with 6 percent concentration for 100 percent cotton, half and full plating fabric. Theseresults are consistent with the former studies of Ayca and Binnaz (2005).

4.4 Friction force in case of 100 percent cotton fabric

Figure 6 shows the effect of softeners type and concentration percent on the friction force(cN) for 100 percent cotton single jersey fabric at stitch density 241 stitch/cm2. As shown,generally softener treatment decreases the friction force by an average value (15 percent)compared to the fabric without softener treatment. The decrease percent of softener (A) atconcentrations (3 percent, 6 percent) was (11 percent, 19 percent), while the decreasepercent of softener (B) at concentrations (3 percent, 6 percent) was (12 percent, 18 percent),respectively. The results show that the effect of softener (B) is approximately equal to theeffect of softener (A) either at concentrations (3 or 6 percent). Statistical analysis one-wayANOVA test shows that the fabric softener treatment (with and without softener) affectson thefriction force significantly at confidence limit 99.9 percent when using softener(B) atconcentration 6 percent as shown in Table VI.

ANOVAa,b


Meansquare F Sig.

PENFULL Main effects (Combined) 66,462.933 5 13,292.587 13,292.587 0.000SOFRENER 55,004.003 1 55,004.003 55,004.003 0.000STITCH 11,458.930 4 2,864.733 2,864.733 0.000

Two-wayinteractions

SOFRENER*STITCH 4,582.594 4 1,145.649 1,145.649 0.000

Model 71,045.527 9 7,893.947 7,893.947 0.000Residual 20.000 20 1.000

Total 71,065.527 29 2,450.535Notes: aPENFULL by SOFRENER, STITCH; ball effects entered simultaneously

Table V.M-ANOVA for the effectof softener treatment(with softener B 6 percentand without softener) andstitch density on sewing

needle penetration forcefor full plating fabrics

Figure 6.Effect of softener type andconcentration on frictionforce for 100 percentcotton single jersey fabric

0

50

100

150

200

250

FrictionForce(cN)

without

softener

with

softener

A(3%)

with

softener

A(6%)

with

softener

B(3%)

with

softener

B(6%)

IJCST24,4

262


13/22

4.5 Friction force in case of half plating fabricFigure 7 shows the effect of softeners type and concentration percent on the friction force(cN) for half plating single jersey fabric at different levels of stitch density. As shown,generally softener treatment decreases the friction force by an average value of

(21 percent) compared to fabric without softener treatment.For softener (A), the average value of decrease percent for the different levels of stitch

density is higher for concentration 6 percent (23 percent) compared to concentration3 percent (14.6 percent).

For softener (B), the average value of decrease percent for the different levels ofstitch density is higher for concentration 6 percent (28.5 percent) compared toconcentration 3 percent (19 percent).

Also, results show that softener (B) at concentration (6 percent) gives the maxdecrease percent (32 percent) at the lower density and at softener (B) at concentration(6 percent) gives the max decrease percent (20 percent) the highest density. Therefore,the highest decrease percent they are using softener B at concentration 6 percent and toconfirm the result with the softener B at high and low density.

Statistical analysis (two way and three way) M-ANOVA test shows that the softenertype, concentration and stitch density affect the friction force significantly at


FRICTFOR Between groups 5,314.408 1 5,314.408 5,742.699 0.000Within groups 7.403 8 0.925Total 5,321.811 9

Table VI.One-way ANOVA for the

effect of softenertreatment (with softenerA 6 percent and without

softener) on friction forcefor 100 percent

cotton fabric

Figure 7.Effect of softener type and

concentration percent onfriction force (cN) for

half plating fabric

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

without

softener

with softener

A(3%)

with softener

A(6%)

with softener

B(3%)

with softener

B(6%)

FirictionForce(cN)

394 Stitch/cm2311 Stitch/cm2 294 Stitch/cm2



263


14/22

confidence limit 99.9 percent as shown in Table VII. Fabric softener treatment (with andwithout softener) affects on the friction force significantly at confidence limit99.9 percent when using softener B at concentration 6 percent as shown in Table VIII.

4.6 Friction force in case of full plating fabricFigure 8 shows the effect of softeners type and concentration percent on friction force(cN) for full plating single jersey fabric at different levels of stitch density. As shown,generally softener treatment decreases friction force by an average value of (20 percent)comparing to fabric without softener treatment.


For softener (B), the average value of decrease percent for the different levels of stitchdensity is higher for concentration 3 percent (25 percent) compared to concentration6 percent (22 percent).

Also, results show that softener (B) at concentration (3 percent) gives the max

decrease percent (18 percent) at the lower density and softener (B) at concentration(6 percent) gives the max decrease percent (30 percent) at the highest density.Statistical analysis (two way and three way) M-ANOVA test shows that the softenertype, concentration and stitch density affect on the friction force significantly atconfidence limit 99.9 percent as shown in Table IX. Softener treatment (with and withoutsoftener) affects on the friction force significantly at confidence limit 99.9 percent whenusing softener (B) at concentration (3 percent) as shown in Table X.

We find that the decrease percent with softener B (silicon) is equal softenerA (cationic) for 100 percent cotton fabric while the decrease percent with softener B(silicon) at concentration 6 percent better than softener A (cationic) for half and fullplating fabrics. Softeners act as fiber lubricants and reduce the coefficient of frictionbetween fibers, yarns, and between a fabric and an object (Tomasino, 1992). Theseresults are consistent with the former studies of Anaet al.(2005).

4.7 Abrasion resistance (weight loss percent) in case of 100 percent cotton fabricFigure 9 shows the effect of softeners type and concentration percent on the weight losspercent for 100 percent cotton single jersey fabric at stitch density 241 stitch/cm2.As shown, the decrease percent of softener (A) at concentration (3 percent, 6 percent)was (27 percent, 25 percent), while the decrease percent of softener (B) at concentrations(3 percent) was (10 percent). The weight loss percent for softener B at concentration(6 percent) was higher than that for fabric without softener treatment by (34 percent).The highest decrease percent achieved with softener (A) at concentration (3 percent).Statistical analysis one-way ANOVA test shows that the fabric softener treatment (withand without softener) affects on the abrasion resistance (weight loss percent)significantly at confidence limit 99.9 percent when using softener (A) at concentration3 percent as shown in Table XI.

4.8 Abrasion resistance (weight loss percent) in case of half plating fabricFigure 10 shows the effect of softeners type and concentration percent on weight losspercent of half plating single jersey fabric at different levels of stitch density. As shown,generally softener treatment decreases weight loss percent by an average value of(32 percent) compared to fabric without softener treatment.

IJCST24,4

264


15/22

ANOVAa,b

Uniquemethod

Sum

ofsquares

df

Meansquare

F

Sig.

FEEDHALF

Mainef

fects

(Combined)

11,539.883

6

1,923.314

9,278.1

49

0.000

SOFTCON

7,381.282

1

7,381.282

35,607.6

24

0.000

SOFTTYPE

2,441.626

1

2,441.626

11,778.5

09

0.000

STITCH

1,716.975

4

429.244

2,070.6

90

0.000

Two-wayinteractions

(Combined)

1,434.713

9

159.413

769.0

13

0.000

SOFTCON*SOFT

TYPE

10.425

1

10.425

50.2

91

0.000

SOFTCON*STIT

CH

505.014

4

126.254

609.0

53

0.000

SOFTTYPE*STITCH

919.274

4

229.818

1,108.6

54

0.000

Three-w

ayinteractions

SOFTCON*SOFT

TYPE*STITCH

297.694

4

74.423

359.0

22

0.000

Model

13,272.290

19

698.542

3,369.7

95

0.000

Residua

l

8.292

40

0.207

Total

13,280.582

59

225.095

Notes:aFEEDHALFby

SOFTCON,SOFTTYPE,STITCH;

ba

lleffectsenteredsimultaneously

Table VII.M-ANOVA for the effect

of softener type,concentration and stitchdensity on friction force

for half plating fabrics


265


16/22


For softener (B), the average value of decrease percent for the different levels of stitch

density is higher for concentration 3 percent (17 percent) compared to concentration6 percent (16 percent).

Also, results show that softener (A) at concentration (3 percent) gives the maxdecrease percent (64 percent) at the lower density and softener (A) at concentration(6 percent) gives the max decrease percent (54 percent) at the highest density.

Statistical analysis (two way and three way) M-ANOVA test shows that the softenertype, concentration and stitch density affect on the weight loss percent significantly atconfidence limit 99.9 percent as shown in Table XII. Fabric softener treatment

ANOVAa,b

Unique method

Sum ofsquares df

Meansquare F Sig.

FEEDHAL Main effects (Combined) 806.969 5 8,161.394 8,161.394 0.000SOFRENE 8,401.959 1 8,401.959 8,401.959 0.000STITCH 2,405.010 4 601.253 601.253 0.000

Two-wayinteractions

SOFRENER*STITCH 2,350.294 4 587.573 587.573 0.000

Model 3,157.263 9 4,795.251 4,795.251 0.000Residual 20.000 20 1.000Total 3,177.263 29 1,488.871

Notes: aFEEDHALF by SOFRENER, STITCH; ball effects entered simultaneously

Table VIII.M-ANOVA for the effectof softener treatment(with softener B 6 percentand without softener) andstitch density on frictionforce for halfplating fabrics

Figure 8.Effect of softener type andconcentration percent onfriction force (cN) forfull plating fabric

499 Stitch/cm2



250

300

200

150

100

50

0without

softener

Friction

Force(cN)

with softener

A(3%)

with softener

A(6%)

with softener

B(6%)

with softener

B(6%)

IJCST24,4

266


17/22

ANOVAa,b

Uniquemethod

Sum

ofsquares

df

Meansquare

F

Sig.

FEEDFULL

Maineffects

(Combined)

8,553.646

6

1,425.608

6,249.8

79

0.000

SOFTCON

288.643

1

288.643

1,265.4

12

0.000

SOFTTYPE

4,530.618

1

4,530.618

19,862.2

77

0.000

STITCH

3,734.385

4

933.596

4,092.8

96

0.000

Two-wa

yinteractions

(Combined)

5,376.791

9

597.421

2,619.1

00

0.000

SOFTCON*SOFT

TYPE

1,935.517

1

1,935.517

8,485.3

25

0.000

SOFTCON*STIT

CH

1,876.153

4

469.038

2,056.2

69

0.000

SOFTTYPE*STITCH

1,565.120

4

391.280

1,715.3

76

0.000

Three-w

ayinteractions

SOFTCON*SOFT

TYPE*STITCH

2,262.542

4

565.635

2,479.7

51

0.000

Model

16,192.979

19

852.262

3,736.3

25

0.000

Residua

l

9.124

40

0.228

Total

16,202.103

59

274.612

Notes:aFEEDFULLby

SOFTCON,SOFTTYPE,STITCH;

balleffectsenteredsimultaneously

Table IX.M-ANOVA for the effect

of softener type,concentration and stitchdensity on friction force

for full plating fabrics


267


18/22

(with and without softener) affects on weight loss percent significantly at confidencelimit 99.9 percent when using softener (A) at concentration (3 percent) as shown inTable XIII.

4.9 Abrasion resistance (weight loss percent) in case of full plating fabricFigure 11 shows the effect of softeners type and concentration percent on weight losspercent for full plating single jersey fabric at different levels of stitch density. As shown,generally softener treatment decreases the weight loss percent by an average value of(35 percent) comparing to fabric without softener treatment.

ANOVAa,b


Meansquare F Sig.

FEEDHAL Main effects (Combined 2,609.304 5 4,521.861 4,639.646 0.000

SOFRENE 2,323.224 1 2,323.224 2,904.698 0.000STITCH 286.080 4 71.520 73.383 0.000

Two-wayinteraction

SOFRENE*STITCH 1,515.819 4 378.955 388.826 0.000

Model 4,125.123 9 2,680.569 2,750.393 0.000Residual 19.492 20 0.975Total 4,144.615 29 832.573

Notes: aFEEDHALF by SOFRENER, STITCH; ball effects entered simultaneously

Table X.M-ANOVA for the effectof softener treatment(with softener B 3 percentand without softener) andstitch density on frictionforce for full platingfabrics


ABRASION Between groups 3.306 1 3.306 225.683 0.000Within groups 0.117 8 1.465 102

02

Total 3.423 9

Table XI.One-way ANOVA forthe effect of softenertreatment (with softenerA 6 percent and withoutsoftener) on abrasionresistance for 100 percentcotton fabric

Figure 9.Effect of softener type andconcentration on abrasionresistance for 100 percentcotton single jersey fabric

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

WeightLoss%

without

softener

with

softener

A(3%)

with

softener

A(6%)

with

softener

B(3%)

with

softener

B(6%)

IJCST24,4

268


19/22

For softener (A), the average value of decrease percent for the different levels of stitchdensity is higher for concentration 3 percent (53 percent) compared to concentration6 percent (33.5 percent). For softener (B), the average value of decrease percent for thedifferent levels of stitch density is higher for concentration 6 percent (34 percent)compared to concentration 3 percent (19 percent).

ANOVAa,b

Unique methodSum ofsquares df Mean square F Sig.

ABRASHAF Main effects (Combined) 36.341 6 6.057 1,329.721 0.000SOFTCON 0.273 1 0.273 60.016 0.000SOFTTYPE 35.620 1 35.620 7,820.025 0.000STITCH 0.448 4 0.112 24.571 0.000

Two-wayinteractions (Combined)

3.199 9 0.355 78.044 0.000

SOFTCON*SOFTTYPE

5.954 10202

1 5.954 10202

13.070 0.001

SOFTCON

*STITCH1.398 4 0.349 76.704 0.000

SOFTTYPE

*STITCH1.742 4 0.436 95.626 0.000


SOFTCON

*SOFTTYPE

*STITCH

5.154 4 1.289 282.881 0.000

Model 44.695 19 2.352 516.434 0.000Residual 0.182 40 4.555 10203

Total 44.877 59 0.761Notes: aABRASHAF by SOFTCON, SOFTTYPE, STITCH; ball effects entered simultaneously

Table XII.M-ANOVA for the

effect of softener type,concentration and stitch

density on weight loss

percent due to abrasionfor half plating fabrics

Figure 10.Effect of softener type and

concentration percent onthe abrasion resistance

(weight loss percent) forhalf plating fabrics

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

Weightloss%

349Stitch/cm2 337 Stitch/cm2

321 Stitch/m2 311Stitch/cm2

294 Stitch/cm2

without

softener

with

softener

A(3%)

with

softener

A(6%)

with

softener

B(3%)

with

softener

B(6%)


269


20/22

Also, results show that softener (B) at concentration (6 percent) gives the max decreasepercent (55 percent) at the lower density and softener (A) at concentration (3 percent)gives the max decrease percent (55.3 percent) at the highest density. Statistical analysis(two way andthreeway) M-ANOVA test shows that the softener type, concentration and

the stitch density affect on the weight loss percent significantly at confidence limit99.9 percent as shown in Table XIV. Softener treatment affect on weight loss percentsignificantly at confidence limit 99.9 percent when using softener A at concentration3 percent as shown in Table XV.

We find that softener A better than softener B so, the chemical bond between fibresand silicon softener weaken tensile fiber properties or facilitate the slippage of fibresfrom fabric surface the maximum decrease in weight loss percent was found in case ofcationic softener with 3 percent concentration for 100 percent cotton, half and full platingfabrics. These results are consistent with the former studies of Nihat (2008).

Figure 11.Effect of softener type andconcentration percent onabrasion resistance(weight loss percent)for full plating fabrics

0

1

2

3

4

5

Weightloss%


425 Stitch/cm2 402 Stitch/cm2363 Stitch/cm2

without

softener

with

softener

A(3%)

with

softener

A(6%)

with

softener

B(3%)

with

softener

B(6%)

ANOVAa,b


ABRAHALF Main effects (Combined) 51.427 5 10.285 2,533.340 0.000

SOFRENER 45.313 1 45.313 11,160.894 0.000STITCH 6.114 4 1.528 376.452 0.000

Two-wayinteractions

SOFRENER

*STITCH0.831 4 0.208 51.196 0.000

Model 52.258 9 5.806 1,430.165 0.000Residual 8.120 102

0220 4.060 102

03

Total 52.339 29 1.805

Notes: aABRAHALF by SOFRENER, STITCH; ball effects entered simultaneously

Table XIII.M-ANOVA for the effectof softener treatment(with softener A 3 percentand without softener) andstitch density on weightloss percent due toabrasion for halfplating fabrics

IJCST24,4

270


21/22

5. ConclusionGenerally adding softener to 100 percent cotton, half and full plating samples results indecrease in:

. The sewing needle penetration force by (59, 42 and 37 percent), respectively.

. The friction force by (15, 21.4 and 20 percent), respectively.

. The weight loss percent due to abrasion resistance by (7, 32 and 35 percent),respectively.

. Softener B (silicon) improves two properties for the 100 percent cotton fabric, halfand full plating samples which are the sewing needle penetration force and thefriction force.

ANOVAa,b


ABRASFUL Main effects (Combined) 5.904 6 0.984 320.533 0.000SOFTCON 0.212 1 0.212 69.191 0.000SOFTTYPE 5.169 1 5.169 1,683.562 0.000STITCH 0.523 4 0.131 42.611 0.000

Two-wayinteractions

(Combined) 11.424 9 1.269 413.455 0.000

SOFTCON*SOFTTYP 5.673 1 5.673 1,848.005 0.000SOFTCON*STITCH 1.043 4 0.261 84.923 0.000SOFTTYPE*STITCH 4.708 4 1.177 383.35 0.000


SOFTCON*SOFTTYP

*STITCH4.610 4 1.153 375.415 0.000

Model 21.938 19 1.155 376.103 0.000

Residual 0.123 40 3.070

10

203

Total 22.061 59 0.374

Notes: aABRASFUL by SOFTCON, SOFTTYPE, STITCH and ball effects entered simultaneously

Table XIV.M-ANOVA for the effect

of softener type,concentration and stitch

density on weight losspercent due to abrasion

for full plating fabrics

ANOVAa,b


Meansquare F Sig.

ABRASFUL Main effects (Combined) 31.842 5 6.368 62.146 0.000SOFRENER 29.976 1 29.976 292.519 0.000

STITCH 1.866 4 0.467 4.553 0.009Two-wayinteractions

SOFRENER*STITCH 1.086 4 0.271 2.649 0.064

Model 32.928 9 3.659 35.703 0.000Residual 2.050 20 0.102Total 34.977 29 1.206

Notes: aABRASFUL by SOFRENER, STITCH; ball effects entered simultaneously

Table XV.

M-ANOVA for the effectof softener treatment(with softener A 3 percentand without softener) and

stitch density on weightloss percent due to

abrasion for fullplating fabrics


271


22/22

. Softener A (cationic) improves only weight loss percent for the 100 percent cottonfabric, half and full plating samples.

. The results show that, adding the spandex yarn increases the density of Walesand courses, so, there is difficult sewing needle penetration force, and silicon hasthe best results with sewing needle penetration force.

References

Ana, M.L., Grancaric, M.V. and Rosa, A. (2005), Handle of cotton knitted fabrics influence ofpretreatments, paper presented at World Textile Conference Autex.

Ayca, G. and Binnaz, M. (2005), Sewing needle penetration forces and elastane fiber damageduring the sewing of cotton/elastane woven fabrics, Textile Research Journal, Vol. 75No. 8, pp. 628-33.

Carvalho, H., Rocha, A.M. and Monteiro, J.L. (2009), Measurement and analysis of needlepenetration forces in industrial high-speed sewing machine, Journal of the Textile

Institute, Vol. 100 No. 4.

Darko, U. and Dubravko, R. (2008), Influence of sewing needle penetration force on the quality ofknitted garment,Fibres & Textiles in Eastern Europe, Vol. 16 No. 4(69), pp. 85-9.

George, S. and Xu, Y.M. (1995), An investigation of the penetration force profile of the sewingmachine needle point, Journal of the Textile Institute, Vol. 86 No. 1.

Gurarda, A. and Meric, B. (2007), Effects of elastane yarn type and fabric density on sewingneedle penetration forces and seam damage of pet/elastane woven fabrics, Fibres& Textiles in Eastern Europe, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 73-6.

Jang, K. and Yeh, K. (1993), Effect of silicone softeners and silane coupling agents on theperformance properties of cotton fabrics, Textile Research Journal, Vol. 63 No. 10,pp. 557-65.

Min, S.K. and Tae, J.K. (2002), Dimensional and surface properties of plasma and silicone treatedwool fabric,Textile Research Journal, Vol. 72 No. 2, pp. 113-20.

Nihat, C. (2008), Effect of nano-silicon softener on abrasion and pilling resistance and colorfastness of knitted fabrics, Tekstile ve konfeksiyon.

Stylios, G. and Lloyd, D.W. (1990), Prediction of seam pucker in garments by measuring fabricmechanical properties and geometric relationships, International Journal of ClothingScience & Technology, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 6-15.

Tae, J.K. (2001), Effects of silicone treatments on the dimensional properties of wool fabric,Textile Research Journal, Vol. 71 No. 4, pp. 295-300.

Tomasino, C. (1992),Chemistry and Technology of Fabric Preparation and Finishing, Chemistryand Science College of Textiles North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC.

Corresponding author

Roqaya Sadek can be contacted at: [email protected]

IJCST24,4

272

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected] visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

Documents

Effect of Fabric Softener