American Journal of Science and Technology

2016; 3(4): 97-107

http://www.aascit.org/journal/ajst

ISSN: 2375-3846

Keywords Tearing Strength,

Weaving Conformation,

Textile,

Tearing Strength Test

Received: April 26, 2016

Accepted: June 15, 2016

Published: July 19, 2016

Inquisition the Purport of Weaving Conformation on Tearing Strength

Nasrin Ferdous, Reashad Bin Kabir

Department of Apparel Manufacturing Management & Technology, Shanto-Mariam University of

Creative Technology, Dhaka, Bangladesh

Email address robinreashad@yahoo.com (R. B. Kabir)

Citation Nasrin Ferdous, Reashad Bin Kabir. Inquisition the Purport of Weaving Conformation on Tearing

Strength. American Journal of Science and Technology. Vol. 3, No. 4, 2016, pp. 97-107.

Abstract Fabric performance has immensely correlated with tearing strength; as throughout the

test the yarns wreck one by one and that is the basic reason for fabric breakdown during

usage. The endeavor of this effort is to study a number of factors affecting the tearing

strength of different weave structure. Fundamentally ASTM D2261-07 Standard Test

Method for Tearing Strength of Fabrics by the Tongue (Single Rip) Procedure (Constant-

Rate-of Extension Tensile Testing Machine) was scrutinized in order to hit upon the

precise outcome.

1. Introduction

The variety of fabric structures is divided into four groups as woven, knitted, braids

and nonwovens [1]. Basic weave can be classified into three major types: i) Plain ii)

Twill and iii) Satin/Sateen. There are other types of weaves are available like Matt

weave, Diamond weave [2]. The useful life for clothing and other fabrics can be

designated by Tearing strength [3]. In contrast with tensile strength, the magnitude of

tearing strength spirals from the fact that it is further intimately allied to serviceability.

Thus, an appraisal of fabric utility, perhaps it might play a great role [4]. Buyers add a

demand of minimum fabric strength to the mandatory fabric specifications because it is

not only an indication of fabric quality but also of yarn and fiber used in the fabric [5].

Assumption or Prediction of fabric mechanical properties such as strength, elongation,

bending and shear is an intricate task, as it requires complete understanding of fabric

structural mechanics and the interaction between warp and weft threads. Therefore, the

solution of the fabric strength prediction problem could be performed by employing the

empirical and computational models such as artificial neural network (ANN) or classical

regression analysis [6]. However, The Tearing Strength is a measure of the resistance to

tearing of either the warp or weft series of yarns in a woven fabric. A fabric which tears

easily is regarded as an inferior product. The amount of resistance of a fabric to tearing is

often important and particularly in fabrics like Bandage Cloth, Adhesive Tapes Military

Fabric and so on [7]. The utility of a torn article is reduced; at best it is patched up and

may be used for a less important job and at worst the article is scrapped. The resistance

of a fabric to tearing has been studied by various laboratories and some general

conclusion has been drawn:

i. Threads break singly or in very small groups during the tear therefore the single-

thread strength of the component yarn is of great importance.

ii. High-set fabrics preclude thread movement and the assistance by thread grouping is

therefore greatly reduced [8].

American Journal of Science and Technology 2016; 3(4): 97-107 98

2. Literature Review

Tearing Strength of the fabric is mainly depends on fiber,

yarn and fabric characteristics along with mechanical and

chemical finishing treatments applied to the fabrics. Over the

yarns, researchers has been directed to investigate the

influence of yarn parameters (single yarn strength, uniformity,

linear density, smoothness, extensibility, twist and type of

yarn)and fabric parameters (weave, fabric sett, crimp and

weight/m2) on Tearing Strength. A few studies related to the

effect of fiber characteristics have also been reported. The

majority of these investigations were executed through the

utilization of yarns spun from ring spinning technology [9].

Compact spinning is a modified version of ring spinning

process that is developed recently to produce yarns of better

quality and smooth structure through better utilization of fiber

properties [10-12]. Apart from this, the tearing strength is

affected by changes in yarn geometry, fabric geometry,

relaxation of the fibers and their frictional characteristics. The

movement of the yarns will be restricted in tight constructions

and results in a low tearing strength. Loose and open

constructions allow yarns to move and group together, thus

result in a high tearing strength. The tear strength is high with

the designs having groups of yarnswoven together, such as rib

weaves and basket weaves [13].

3. Materials & Methods

3.1. Materials

In order to perform this particular work, Rapier Loom used

for manufacturing fabric. The manufactured fabric was Plain,

Matt, Twill, Diamond and Sateen/Satin. Then samples were

prepared for tearing strength test and tested by Titan

Universal Strength Tester. For measuring GSM, GSM cutter

and electric balance were used.

Fabric specification: �������������

����� ������×64.5''

Temp. & R.H (%): 28°C, 65% R.H.

Fig. 1. Titan Universal Strength Tester.

3.2. Methods

The maximum force required to tear a specimen is called

tearing strength. The force acting substantially parallel to the

major axes of the test specimen.

ASTM D2261-07(Tearing Strength Test):

ASTM D2261-07 Standard Test Method for Tearing

Strength of Fabrics by the Tongue (Single Rip) Procedure

(Constant-Rate-of-Extension Tensile Testing Machine)

Fig. 2. Fabric Tensile Test device.

a) This test method covers the measurement of the tearing

strength of textile fabrics by the tongue (single rip)

procedure using a recording constant-rate-of-extension-

type (CRE) tensile testing machine.

b) This test method applies to most fabrics including

woven fabrics, air bag fabrics, blankets, napped fabrics,

knit fabrics, layered fabrics, pile fabrics. The fabrics

may be untreated, heavily sized, coated, resin-treated,

or otherwise treated. Instructions are provided for

testing specimens with or without wetting.

c) Tear strength, as measured in this test method, requires

that the tear be initiated before testing. The reported

value obtained is not directly related to the force

required to initiate or start a tear.

d) Two calculations for tongue tearing strength are

provided: the single-peak force and the average of five

highest peak forces.

e) The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units

are to be regarded as the standard. The inch-pound

units may be approximate.

Test Method Synopsis:

A rectangularspecimen, cut in the centre of a short edge to

form a two-tongued (trouser shaped) specimen, in which one

tongue of the specimen is gripped in the upper jaw and the

99 Nasrin Ferdous and Reashad Bin Kabir: Inquisition the Purport of Weaving Conformation on Tearing Strength

other tongue is gripped in the lower jaw of a tensile testing

machine. The separation of the jaws is continuously

increased to apply a force to promulgate the tear. At the same

time, the force developed is recorded. The force to continue

the tear is calculated from autographic chart recorders or

microprocessor data collection systems.

Connotation and Utilization:

a) This test method is considered satisfactory for

acceptance testing of commercial shipments since

current estimates of laboratory precision are

acceptable, and the test method is used extensively in

the trade for acceptance testing.

b) Depending on the nature of the specimen, the data

recording devices will show the tearing force in the

form of a peak or peaks. The highest peaks appear to

reflect the strength of the yarn components, fiber

bonds, or fiber interlocks, individually or in

combination, needed to stop a tear in a fabric of the

same construction.

Fig. 3. Sample for Tearing Strength.

c) Most textile fabrics can be tested by this test method.

Some modification of clamping techniques may be

necessary for a given fabric due to its structure. Strong

fabric or fabrics made from glass fibers usually require

special adaptation to prevent them from slipping in the

clamps or being damaged as a result of being gripped

in the clamps.

d) The CRE-type is the preferred tearing testing machine.

This test method allows the use of the CRT-type tensile

machine when agreed upon between the purchaser and

the supplier.

4. Experimental

4.1. Tearing Strength Test Procedure

i. For the tearing strength test ASTM D2261 method used.

For doing this test at first a fabric specimen of 200 mm

length and 75mm width taken. At the middle point of

specimen width we cut 3 inch inner side and made a

mark at more 75 mm inner side. Then placed the two

end of the cut point into two jaws of the Titan tearing

strength tester. Subsequently starting to test, and fabric

was teared through the middle vertical line up to 75

mm. Then a graph found from computer software. After

that we found mean tearing force was also foundfrom

top five tearing points from the graph.

ii. Tearing Strength Test Specimen:

Test Method:ASTM D2261

Jaw Size:Upper Jaw= 100x25 mm

Lower Jaw= 100x25mm

Specimen Size:Length= 200mm

Width:75 mm

Pre-tension:2N

Fig. 4. Tearing strength test fabric specimen.

4.2. Graphical Representation for Each

Weave

i. Plain Weave:

For Warp

American Journal of Science and Technology 2016; 3(4): 97-107 100

Fig. 5. (Specimen 1).

Fig. 6. (Specimen 2).

Fig. 7. (Specimen 3).

For Weft

Fig. 8. (Specimen 1).

Fig. 9. (Specimen2).

Fig. 10. (Specimen 3).

101 Nasrin Ferdous and Reashad Bin Kabir: Inquisition the Purport of Weaving Conformation on Tearing Strength

Table 1. Tearing strength test for plain weave fabric.

TopTearing

Points

Warp sample Weft Sample

No 1

N

No 2

N

No 3

N

WarpTop Points Mean

N

No 1

N

No2

N

No 3

N

Weft Top Points Mean

N

01. 9.8 11 11.95

9.89

23.2 19.5 21

20.287

02. 9.35 10.5 11.7 23.2 19.5 19.2

03. 9.1 9.4 10.3 22 19.1 19

04. 9 9.1 9.8 21.8 19.1 19

05. 9 9.1 9.25 21.1 18.6 18.7

Mean 9.25 9.82 10.6 22.32 19.16 19.38

ii. Matt Weave

For Warp

Fig. 11. (Specimen 1).

Fig. 12. (Specimen 2).

American Journal of Science and Technology 2016; 3(4): 97-107 102

Fig. 13. (Specimen 3).

For Weft

Table 2. Tearing strength test for Matt weave fabric.

TopTearing

Points

Warp sample Weft Sample

No 1

N

No 2

N

No 3

N

WarpTop Points Mean

N

No 1

N

No2

N

No 3

N

Weft Top Points Mean

N

01. 37.6 45.8 41

40.08

49.5 56.9 52.7

50.873

02. 36.9 45.8 41 48.6 56.5 51.6

03. 35.9 44.3 39.2 47.2 53.8 50.3

04. 35.5 44 38.2 46.9 52.5 49.5

05. 35 44 37 46.5 51.8 48.8

Mean 36.18 44.78 39.28 47.74 54.3 50.58

Fig. 14. (Specimen 1).

Fig. 15. (Specimen 2).

103 Nasrin Ferdous and Reashad Bin Kabir: Inquisition the Purport of Weaving Conformation on Tearing Strength

Fig. 16. (Specimen 3).

iii. Twill Weave:

ForWarp

Fig. 17. (Specimen 1).

Fig. 18. (Specimen 2).

Fig. 19. (Specimen 3).

For Weft

Fig. 20. (Specimen 1).

Fig. 21. (Specimen 2).

Fig. 22. (Specimen 3).

American Journal of Science and Technology 2016; 3(4): 97-107 104

Table 3. Tearing strength test for Twill weave fabric.

Top

Tearing

Points

Warp sample Weft Sample

No 1

N

No 2

N

No 3

N

WarpTop Points Mean

N

No 1

N

No2

N

No 3

N

Weft Top Points Mean

N

01. 17.3 17.1 18.9

17.25

42.2 43.9 26.6

36.053

02. 17.2 17 18 40.8 43.5 25.1

03. 17.2 16.5 17.9 40.8 42.1 25

04. 17.2 16.5 17.6 40.1 42 24.9

05. 16.9 16.4 17.1 40 40.6 23.2

Mean 17.16 16.7 17.9 40.78 42.42 24.96

iv. Diamond Weave:

For Warp

Fig. 23. (Specimen 1).

Fig. 24. (Specimen 2).

Fig. 25. (Specimen 3).

For Weft

Fig. 26. (Specimen 1).

Fig. 27. (Specimen 2).

Fig. 28. (Specimen 3).

105 Nasrin Ferdous and Reashad Bin Kabir: Inquisition the Purport of Weaving Conformation on Tearing Strength

Table 4. Tearing strength test for Diamond weave fabric.

TopTearing

Points

Warp sample Weft Sample

No 1

N

No 2

N

No 3

N

WarpTop Points Mean

N

No 1

N

No2

N

No 3

N

Weft Top Points Mean

N

01. 20.3 19 25.6

20.587

39.8 39.8 41.3

39.4

02. 20 18.4 25 39.8 39.8 40.1

03. 19.8 17.9 23.5 39.2 39.3 40.1

04. 19.8 17.9 22.3 38.9 39 38.4

05. 19.7 17.7 21.9 38.6 38.6 38.3

Mean 19.92 18.18 23.66 39.26 39.3 39.64

v. Sateen Weave:

For Warp

Fig. 29. (Specimen 1).

Fig. 30. (Specimen 2).

Fig. 31. (Specimen 3).

For Weft

Fig. 32. (Specimen 1).

Fig. 33. (Specimen 2).

Fig. 34. (Specimen 3).

American Journal of Science and Technology 2016; 3(4): 97-107 106

Table 5. Tearing strength test for Sateen Weave fabric.

Top

Tearing

Points

Warp sample Weft Sample

No 1

N

No 2

N

No 3

N

WarpTop Points Mean

N

No 1

N

No2

N

No 3

N

Weft Top Points Mean

N

01. 41.9 38.1 38.9

38.72

59.5 56.9 57.5

56.11

02. 41.1 38.1 37.5 59.5 56 55.6

03. 40.5 37.8 37.5 59 53.9 55.2

04. 40.5 37.8 36.9 58 53.2 54.9

05. 40.3 37.6 36.3 57.7 52.5 52.5

Mean 40.86 37.88 37.42 58.74 54.45 55.14

Table 6. Result for Tearing Strength Test at a glance.

Fabric Type Mean Tearing Force(N)

Warp Weft

Plain 9.89 20.28

Matt 40.08 50.873

Twill 17.25 36.053

Diamond 20.587 39.4

Sateen 38.72 56.11

Fig. 35. Mean Tearing Force for Warp.

Fig. 36. Mean Tearing Force for Weft.

5. Discussions

The behavior of woven fabrics under tearing loads is quite

different from their other behavior like tensile loading. In

case of tensile loading, all the yarns in the direction of

loading share the load; in tear loading only one, two, or at

most a few yarns share the load. So the fabric structures play

very important roles in determining the fabric tear strength.

Restricted movement of yarn during loading of tight

constructions will show low tearing strength. That’s why

plain weaves show low tearing strength. Loose, open

constructions allow more freedom for the yarns to move and

group together, thus presenting bundles of yarns to the

tearing load; in consequence, the tear strength is high. So

designs which have groups of yarns woven together, such as

matt & loose structure like sateen weaves will have high tear

strengths.

6. Conclusion

To sum up, it is obvious that, tearing behavior of a fabric is

vastlyreliant on the weave designs. Elevated interlacement

causes superior crimp in the load bearing direction may lead

to lower breaking strength whereas too much bigger floats

also cause lower breaking strength because of looser

structure.

References

[1] Zeydan M. (2010), “Prediction of Fabric Tensile Strength By Modelling the Woven Fabric, Woven Fabric Engineering”, Polona Dobnik Dubrovski (Ed.), Sciyo Publisher.

[2] Kabir, R. B. (2013), “Tensile & Tearing Strength Test of Different Weave Structures”, 1st ed., Lambert Academic Publishing, Germany.

[3] Lord P R, Mohamed M H (1994), Weaving: Conversion Yarn to Fabric, Merrow Publishing Co. Ltd, England.

0

10

20

30

40

50

Mean Tearing Force (N)

Mean Tearing

Force (N)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Mean Tearing Force

(N)

Mean Tearing

Force (N)

107 Nasrin Ferdous and Reashad Bin Kabir: Inquisition the Purport of Weaving Conformation on Tearing Strength

[4] Scelzo W A, Backer S, and Boyce M C (1994), Mechanistic Role of Yarn and Fabric Structure in Determining Tearing Resistance of Woven Cloth, Part 1: Understanding Tongue Tear, Textile Research Journal, 64 (5), pp. 291-304.

[5] Malik, Z. A., Hussain T., Malik M. H., and Tanwari A. (2011), “Selection of Yarn for the Predefined Tensile Strength of Cotton Woven Fabrics”, Fibers and Polymers, Vol. 12, No. 2, 281-287.

[6] Majumdar, A.; Ghosh, A.; Saha, S. S.; Roy, A.; Barman, S.; Panigrahi, D. &Biswas, A. (2008), “Empirical Modelling of Tensile Strength of Woven Fabrics” Fibers and Polymers, Vol. 9, No. 2, 240-245.

[7] P Angappan and R Gopalakrishnan (2007) Textile Testing, 8th edition, p. 293, Tamil Nadu, S. S. M. Institute of Textile Technolgy.

[8] J E Booth (2009) Principles of Textile Testing, 3rd edition, p. 436, Oxford, Butterworth Heinemann Ltd.

[9] S Dhamija, C Manisha (2007) “Tearing Strength of cotton fabrics in relation to certain process and loom parameters”, Indian journal of fibers and textile research, Vol. 32, pp. 439-445.

[10] Chellamani K P, Arulmozhi & Vittopa M K, (2000). Compact spinning-The spinning of the future, Asian Textile Journal, 9(9), pp. 30-33.

[11] Ishtiaque-SM, Salhotra-KR, Kumar (2003), “A Study of effect of spinning process”, Asian Textile Journal, 12(12), pp. 74-82.

[12] Dash J R, Ishliaque S M & R Alagirusamy (2002), “Properties and processibility of compact yarns”, Indian Journal of Fiber & Textile Research, Vol. 27; pp. 362-368.

[13] Skelton, J., (1980), Tearing behaviour of woven fabrics, in J. W. S. Hearle et al “ Mechanics of flexible fibre assemblies”, Sijthoff & Noordhoff, p. 243.Hu, J. and Chan, Y. F., (1998), Effect of Fabric Mechanical Properties on Drape, Textile Research Journal, 68 (1), 57-64.