INTER LABORATORY TESTING SCHEME - …textilescommittee.nic.in/writereaddata/files/ilpt16c.pdfINTER LABORATORY TESTING SCHEME ON “Testing of Chemical parameters in Textile Material”

INTER LABORATORY TESTING SCHEME

ON

“Testing of Chemical parameters in Textile Material”

TC/ILTS/16/CHEM-2/2014

Designed and Conducted by

PPPrrrooofffiiiccciiieeennncccyyy TTTeeessstttiiinnnggg PPPrrrooovvviiidddeeerrr

LLLaaabbbooorrraaatttooorrriiieeesss

TEXTILES COMMITTEE Ministry of Textiles, Government of India

P. Balu Road, Prabhadevi Chowk, Prabhadevi, Mumbai – 400 025. Ph : (022) 6652 7542, Fax : 6652 7554

[email protected] & [email protected] www.textilescommittee.gov.in

2014

mailto:[email protected]


Inter Laboratory Testing Scheme

OOnn

““TTeessttiinngg ooff CChheemmiiccaall ppaarraammeetteerrss iinn TTeexxttiillee MMaatteerriiaall””

TC/ILTS/16 /CHEM-2/2014

Designed and Conducted by

PPPTTT PPPRRROOOVVVIIIDDDEEERRR LLLaaabbbooorrraaatttooorrriiieeesss

TEXTILES COMMITTEE Ministry of Textiles, Government of India

P. Balu Road, Prabhadevi, Mumbai – 400 025.

Ph : (022) 6652 7542, Fax : 6652 7554 [email protected] & [email protected]

www.textilescommittee.gov.in

2014



http://www.textilescommittee.gov.in/

Page 1 of 24 This is electronically generated document. No signature requires. This document is downloaded from www.textilescommittee.gov.in

NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE PT PROVIDER . PT Provider, Laboratory, TEXTILES COMMITTEE (Ministry of Textiles, Government of India) P. Balu Road, Prabhadevi, Mumbai – 400 025. Ph : (022) 6652 7542, Fax : 6652 7554, E-mail : [email protected], E-mail : [email protected]

KEY PERSONS (1) Shri Kartikay Dhanda, PT-Coordinator

Director(Laboratories), Textiles Committee, Mumbai –400 025 Ph: 91 22 6652 7519, Fax: 91 22 6652 7554,

(2) Dr. K.S. Muralidhara, PT-Quality Manager Joint Director(Laboratories), Textiles Committee, Mumbai –400 025 Ph: 91 22 6652 7542, Fax: 91 22 6652 7554,

(3) Shri M.S. Shyamsundar, PT-Technical Manager

Quality Assurance Officer (Laboratory), Textiles Committee, Tirupur – 641602 Report prepared by: Shri M.S.Shyamsundar, PT – Technical Manager SCHEME : INTER LABORATORY TESTING SCHEME -TC/ILTS/16/CHEM-2/2014 - TTeessttiinngg ooff

CChheemmiiccaall ppaarraammeetteerrss iinn TTeexxttiillee MMaatteerriiaallss DATE OF ISSUE: November 19, 2014

CONFIDENTIALITY : All the information furnished by the participant laboratories shall be kept confidential by the PT Provider and the same shall not be revealed to others. However, if the accrediting body, for example NABL, requests the PT provider to furnish the performance of any of the participant laboratories, the same shall be provided to them directly, after obtaining permission of the concerned participant laboratory

COPY RIGHT: This report is property of Textiles Committee, the PT Provider. The copy right of this report is retained with Textiles Committee. This report should not be reproduced by others in full or partially in any form without obtaining the consent from Textiles Committee, in writing Disclaimer: The PT Schemes are meant for evaluation of performance of the participating laboratory for the specified tests undertaken in the programme only and are voluntary in nature. Further, it is clarified that reasonable care has been taken to meet the requirement of ISO/IEC 17043:2010, while designing and conducting the Schemes. Participating laboratories are expected to exercise due diligence while carrying out the tests and meet all safety, statutory and accreditation body’s requirements. PT Provider and Textiles Committee will not be responsible for any claim/damages arising out of participating in this programme




I N D E X

S. No. Contents Page No.

1 PT-Provider details

1

2 Index

2

3 Report on Inter Laboratory Testing Scheme

Preamble 3

Textiles Committee 3

PT-Provider 4

The Present Programme 4

Advisory Group 6

Participants 7

Proficiency Test Proceedings 7

Compilation of the Test Results 8

Determination Assigned Value 8

Determination of Standard Deviation for Proficiency Assessment

9

Performance Evaluation of Participants 9

Interpretation of Performance Comment 10

Outliers and Stragglers 10

General Advise to the Participants on the performance

10

4 Annexure - Performance Evaluation of each Participant – Test wise

12

S.No. Table Page No.

1 ILPT schemes conducted by the PT Provider 4

2 Tests covered in TC/ILTS/16/CHEM-2/2014 5

3 Advisory Group 6

4 Assigned Values 9

5 Interpretation of Performance comments 10

6 Outliers and stragglers Analysis 11

7 List of outliers and stragglers 11


Report on Inter Laboratory Testing Scheme

Preamble:

Increasing awareness on textile quality and the buyer requirements are forcing textile

manufacturers and traders to test quality of textile products from reputed laboratories. Reputation of

any laboratory depends upon the result it produces. The test report given by any laboratory should be

precise, accurate, repeatable and reproducible. This means, a set of results obtained within a

laboratory by testing a representative sample at any time interval should be comparable. And also,

the result obtained over testing a representative sample in any laboratory should be comparable with

that of any other laboratory and fall within the statistical tolerance limit. In other words, the laboratory

should be able to generate comparable results by performing the same test

The repeatability and reproducibility of any test result involves the laboratory’s competence in

conducting the test which involves the testing equipment, the skill and knowledge of technical

manpower working in the laboratory, the testing conditions and test method adopted. In this pursuit,

the laboratory has to meet a requirement of maintaining its own management system as per ISO/IEC

17025:2005, to participate in Inter Laboratory Comparison (ILC) and/or Inter Laboratory Proficiency

Testing Scheme (ILPT)

Inter laboratory Comparison is defined by ISO/IEC 17043 as, Evaluation of participant

performance against pre-established criteria by means of inter laboratory comparisons. The goal of

the Inter-laboratory Comparisons (ILC) is to provide verification of each participating laboratory’s

technical capability by obtaining a measurement that agrees with all other Laboratories using different

make & model of testing equipment and man-power. The requirement for inter laboratory

comparisons remains in place today, and has been further entrenched into metrology management

systems by its incorporation in the requirements of ISO/IEC 17025:2005

Textiles Committee:

Textiles Committee is a statutory body under the Ministry of Textiles, Government of India,

established in the year 1963 vide an act of parliament. The Committee has set up 16 laboratories

throughout the country for catering to the testing requirements of the textile trade and industry.

Fourteen laboratories of Textiles Committee are accredited as per ISO/IEC 17025:2005 by National

Accreditation Board for testing & calibration Laboratories (NABL), India. Laboratory at Mumbai is the

first in India to get accredited in the field of Textile Testing. All the laboratories of Textiles Committee

have facilities to test mechanical and chemical test parameters. Nine laboratories of Textiles

Committee have Eco testing facilities. By virtue of the Act, Textiles Committee develops many test

standards and also adopts many national and international standards for testing purpose.


PT-Provider:

The Laboratory, Textiles Committee at Mumbai conducts as PT Provider, Inter Laboratory

Proficiency Testing (ILPT) schemes for the benefit of Textile Testing laboratories. The national

accreditation agency, NABL nominated laboratory of Textiles Committee at Mumbai, as nodal agency

for two ILPT schemes. The German Standards body, Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt (PTB),

Germany recognized the schemes conducted by Textiles Committee and sponsored some

laboratories of SAARC countries under its Quality Infrastructure Development Project (QIDP) in

SAARC countries. Apart from India, laboratories from Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal, China, Hong

Kong, Vietnam and USA also participate in the ILPT schemes conducted by Textiles Committee

In order to offer ILPT schemes professionally as a PT Provider, the laboratory of Textiles

Committee at Mumbai has implemented the Management System in accordance with the

requirements stipulated in ISO/IEC 17043 : 2010. The PT Provider has conducted 16 schemes since

2007. The details are given in Table – 1

The Present Programme:

Design: In order to assess the reproducibility of the test results being reported by the various

textile testing laboratories, this Proficiency Testing Scheme for Chemical testing - TC/ILTS/16/CHEM-

2/2014 was designed. The test parameters thus covered in the present PT Scheme and suggested

test methodsare given in Table – 2. However, participants were required to use the test method which

is routinely adopted for the testing of regular samples. Hence, laboratories could adopt any equivalent

standard or validated in-house method which is equivalent to the suggested standards.

Table – 1 ILPT schemes conducted by the PT Provider

S.No Identity of the ILPT Year Field PT

items

No. of test

parameters

No. of participants

1 TC/ILTS/MECH/01/07 2007 Mechanical Fibre, Yarn & Fabric

17 70

2 TC/ILTS/CHEM/02/07 2007 Chemical Fabric 13 70

3 TC/ILTS/MECH/03/08 2008 Mechanical Fabric 11 60


5 TC/ILTS/MECH/05/09 2009 Mechanical Fabric 11 50

6 TC/ILTS/MECH/06/09 2009 Mechanical Yarn 12 31

7 TC/ILTS/MECH/07/09 2009 Mechanical Fibre 15 14




11 TC/ILTS/MECH/11/10-11 2010-11 Mechanical Fabric 10 65

12 TC/ILTS/CHEM/12/10-11 2010-11 Chemical Fabric 10 70


S.No Identity of the ILPT Year Field PT

items

No. of test

parameters

No. of participants

13 TC/ILTS/Mech-1/2012-13 2012-13 Mechanical Yarn&Fabric 13 42

14 TC/ILTS/Chem-1/2012-13 2012-13 Chemical Fabric and clothing

accessory

12 56

15 TC/ILTS/15/Mech-2/2014 2014 Mechanical Fabric 8 50

16 TC/ILTS/16/Chem-2/2014 2014 Chemical Fabric 8 45

Table – 2 : Tests covered in TC/ILTS/16/CHEM-2/2014

S.No Test parameter Standards suggested

1 Identification of fibres and Suitable Standard test method

for identification of fibre and

blend composition 2

Quantitative analysis of fibre mixtures-Chemical

Dissolution method

3 Flammability – inclined IS 11871-B / ASTM D 1230

4 Flammability – Vertical IS 11871-A / ASTM D 6413

5 Determination of Scouring loss in cotton textile materials IS 1383

6 Determination of water repellency of fabrics by spray test IS 390 / ISO 4920 / AATCC 22

7 Colour fastness of Textile Materials to Laundering AATCC 61-1A

8 Identification of Class of dye IS 4472

Advisory Group:

As per the requirements stipulated in ISO/IEC 17043:2010, an Advisory Group comprising

the following internal and external experts having the necessary expertise in testing of Textiles and/or

statistics was constituted

Table – 3 : Constitution of Advisory Group

S.No Expert Affiliation Field of

expertise

1 Shri. Kartikay Dhanda, Director (Laboratories), Textiles Committee, Mumbai –400 025

Chairman Textile testing

2 Dr.K.S. Muralidhara, Joint Director (Laboratories), Textiles Committee, Mumbai –400 025

Member Textile testing

3 Shri. S.G. Pathi, Joint Director (Laboratories), Textiles Committee, Mumbai –400 025


4 Shri. K. Selvaraj, Deputy Director (Laboratories), Textiles Committee, Mumbai–400 025 Assessor (ISO/IEC 17025), NABL.


5 Shri. S .P. Singh, Asst. Director (Laboratories), Textiles Committee, Kanpur-208005 Assessor (ISO/IEC 17025), NABL



S.No Expert Affiliation Field of

expertise

6 Shri. M. S. Shyamsundar, Quality Assurance Officer, (Laboratories) Textiles Committee, Tirupur–641602, Assessor (ISO/IEC 17025), NABL

Member Textile testing& Statistics

7 Dr. P.V. Varadarajan Principal Scientific Officer (Rtd), CIRCOT, Mumbai Assessor (ISO/IEC 17025), NABL

External Technical Expert

Textile testing

The terms of reference of the Advisory Group were as follows:

a) Planning requirements

b) Identification and resolution of any difficulties expected in the preparation and maintenance of

homogeneous proficiency test items, or in the provision of stable assigned value for a

proficiency test item;

c) Preparation of detailed instructions for participants

d) Comments on any technical difficulties raised by participants

e) Provision of advice in evaluating the performance of participants

f) Comments on the results and performance of participants as a whole and, where appropriate,

groups of participants or individual participants;

g) Provision of advice for participants (within limits of confidentiality), either individually or within the

report;

h) Responding to feedback from participants; and

i) Planning or participating in technical meetings with participants.

j) Arbitration of any dispute(s) between participating laboratory(ies) and the PT provider

Participants:

In all 45 laboratories from India, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka were participated in this scheme

Proficiency Test Proceedings:

The laboratory of Textiles Committee (PT Provider), Mumbai, procured sufficient quantity of

materials (PT item) from a reputed textiles manufacturer for designing and conducting Inter

Laboratory Testing Scheme, on the basis of expected number of participants

Preparation of PT items: On receipt of the procured materials, PT items were prepared

ensuring the quantity of each PT item is adequate for the testing of all the parameters included in the

scheme. The PT items thus prepared from the material procured were numbered serially, packed in

self sealing polyethylene bags and labeled

Allotments of PT items: Allotments of PT items were done by following appropriate

Sampling procedures adopted by using Random Numbers generated by computer, for Homogeneity


testing, Stability testing and for distribution among participants. The remaining part of the population

was kept as reserve for replacement in case of loss or damage. Henceforth, the allotted PT items can

be referred as sample

Homogeneity testing: To verify the homogeneity of the prepared PT items homogeneity

testing was conducted at the laboratory of Textiles Committee at Mumbai, for the test parameters

covered in the scheme by adopting any one of the suggested methods. However, while conducting

performance evaluation of the participants, the “between- samples SD” calculated during

homogeneity testing by a particular method was used for calculating “SD of PT assessment” for

different methods adopted by the participants, as the inherent variation in the sample (degree of non

homogeneity) is independent of the test method adopted. The procedure given in ISO 13528:2005

was followed for conducting homogeneity testing

Dispatch of PT items: The Proficiency Testing items were dispatched to the respective

participant laboratories on 18th July 2014, along with the following:

(a) Form for Acknowledging the receipt of PT items

(b) Instructions to the participants in the Inter Laboratory Testing Scheme

(c) Form for reporting test results by the participants in the Inter Laboratory Testing Scheme

The participant laboratories were requested to send the test results by 18th August 2014. However, as

per request of participants and administrative reasons results were accepted till 30th September 2014.

The participant laboratories were also requested to

Treat the samples in the same manner as regularly tested samples and accordingly, codify

the samples such that the technical staff testing them are not aware that they are meant

for PT purposes;

Adopt the latest test method which is routinely used by the laboratory for the testing of

regular samples which may be any standard or validated in-house method;

Forward (i) copy of the in-house method adopted (if applicable) for testing any parameter

and also (ii) specify the standard method against which the validation has been done; and,

Forward photo copy of Scope of accreditation certificate as a proof of accreditation for the

test method adopted (applicable to accredited laboratories only).

The participants were informed that, in the absence of proof of accreditation, the participant’s

value will not be considered for arriving at “Assigned Value” for the concerned test parameter,

although, performance of the participant will be evaluated for this parameter. Further, it was also

informed that the test results that may be inappropriate for statistical evaluation, for example, gross


errors, miscalculations and transpositions may be excluded for calculation of summary statistics and

performance evaluation of participants.

Compilation of the Test Results:

In order to maintain the confidentiality of the participants of the PT Scheme, the individual

participants were given Code numbers which are generated by using computer. Subsequently, the

test results reported by the participants were tabulated and statistically analyzed for the basic

statistics viz., Mean, Median, Mode, Maximum, Minimum, Standard Deviation, etc., While doing so,

test results were checked for inappropriate for statistical evaluation, for example, gross errors,

miscalculations and transpositions

Determination Assigned Value:

To ensure the measurement traceability, only accredited participants are considered for

evaluating the Assigned Values. Thus due weightage is given to the accredited participants. That is,

this weightage is given only when the participant had submitted their Scope of accreditation along with

test results and accredited for the specific test in which the ILPT is conducted. However, when

sufficient number of accredited participants is not available for any test, Assigned Value is derived

from the consensuses from all participants for that parameter.

Initially, the robust average and the standard deviation of values reported by the accredited

laboratories (in respective tests) were determined for each parameter in accordance with the

procedure given in ISO 13528: 2005. Subsequently, robust Z Score were calculated on the basis of

the above. The test results of those laboratories which were found to be outliers (Z score more than

+3 or less than -3) were deleted and Robust Average of the remaining expert laboratories was again

calculated. This Robust average is treated as the assigned value for the concerned parameter

The Assigned Value of both the parameters thus arrived are given in Table–4.

Table 4: Assigned Values

S.No. Test Assigned

Value

Ro

bu

st

SD

of

Assig

ned

Valu

e

Un

cert

ain

ty o

f

Assig

ned

Valu

e

No

. o

f L

ab

s

co

ntr

ibu

ted

fo

r

Assig

ned

Va

lue

To

tal N

o. o

f

Accre

dit

ed

Lab

s

avail

ab

le f

or

the T

est

To

tal n

um

ber

of

part

icip

an

ts(*

)

1 Identification of fibre One Direction & Other Direction

Polyacrylonitrile + Cotton

NA

NA

22

23

42

2 Quantitative analysis of fibre mixtures-Chemical Dissolution method - Polyacrylonitrile %

73.9

2.15

0.6

19

20

43

3 Flammability – 45° Flame test Time to spread

Class - 1 NA NA 17$ 4 18

4 Flammability – Vertical Flame test Char length

Burnt Entire Length

NA NA 8$ 2

8


S.No. Test Assigned

Value

Ro

bu

st

SD

of

Assig

ned

Valu

e

Un

cert

ain

ty o

f

Assig

ned

Valu

e

No

. o

f L

ab

s

co

ntr

ibu

ted

fo

r

Assig

ned

Va

lue

To

tal N

o. o

f

Accre

dit

ed

Lab

s

avail

ab

le f

or

the T

est

To

tal n

um

ber

of

part

icip

an

ts(*

)

5 Scouring Loss (%) 12.2 0.7 0.2 21

$ 3

21

6 Water repellency of fabrics by spray test - Rating

90

NA

NA

24$

3

24

7 Colour fastness to Laundering a) Change in colour b) Staining on

Acetate/Cotton/Polyamide Polyester/Acrylic/wool

4.0

3.5/3.0/3.0 4.0/4.5/4.0

NA 0.5

rating 17 17 35

8 Identification of class of dye Reactive & Disperse

NA NA 14$ 4 15

(*)Total participants reported valid results in the respective method $ Consensus value from all participants; NA: Not Applicable

Determination of Standard Deviation for Proficiency Assessment (σ):

The robust average and the robust standard deviation (σ1) of all qualified values reported by

the participants were calculated for each of the test separately in accordance with the procedure given

in ISO 13528:2005. Subsequently, the “between-samples standard deviation (SS)” of homogeneity

testing data was compared with the standard deviation of all the participants. If SS 0.3 σ1 , then the

sample is considered as homogenous and the robust standard deviation of all the participants is

treated as Standard Deviation for Proficiency Testing. That is σ = σ1

If SS > 0.3 σ1 , then the sample is considered as heterogeneous and Standard Deviation for

Proficiency Assessment is calculated by adding allowance for heterogeneity of the sample as

stipulated in ISO 13528:2005, by using the formula

Performance Evaluation of Participants:

The performance of the individual participant was evaluated by adopting Robust Z score

technique given in ISO 13528:2005, as per the following formula:

XxZ

where x is the test result reported by the individual participant; X is the Assigned Value and σ is the

standard deviation of the Proficiency Assessment


In case of Ordinal test results the deviation of participant result by more than ½ grade

compared to Assigned Value is taken as unsatisfactory (and outliers) and all other results are taken

as satisfactory.

Test wise performance evaluation is given in Annexure.

Interpretation of Performance Comment:

Table – 5: Interpretation of Performance comment

Range Performance of Laboratory

Quantitative Results

│Z - Score│≤ 2 Satisfactory

2 <│Z - Score│< 3 Straggler

│Z - Score│≥ 3 Outlier

Ordinal Results

│Reported Value – Assigned Value │≤ ½ grade or 0.5 rating Satisfactory

│Reported Value - Assigned Value │> ½ grade or 0.5 rating Outlier

Outliers and Stragglers:

Overall performance of all the participants is good. There are no Stragglers. Outliers are very rare

and far. The Outlier and Straggler Analysis is given in Table – 6.

General Advise to the participants on the performance:

If a participant is found to be “Outlier”, necessary corrective action should be taken after

thorough investigation of the root cause of the problem.

Table – 6: Outlier and Straggler Analysis

S.No. Test

No

. o

f

Part

icip

an

ts*

Valid

Resu

lts

% o

f valid

Resu

lts

No

. o

f

Str

ag

gle

rs

% o

f

Str

ag

gle

rs

No

. o

f

Ou

tlie

rs

% o

f

Ou

tlie

rs

1 Identification of fibre 42 42 100 0 0 3 7.1

2 Composition of fibres-Chemical Separation 43 41 95.3 0 0 0 0

3 Flammability-Inclined 18 17 94.4 0 0 0 0

4 Flammability-Vertical 8 8 100 0 0 0 0

5 Scouring loss (mild method) 22 21 95.5 0 0 1 4.8

6 Water Repellency - Spray Test 24 24 100 0 0 0 0


S.No. Test

No

. o

f

Part

icip

an

ts*

Valid

Resu

lts

% o

f valid

Resu

lts

No

. o

f

Str

ag

gle

rs

% o

f

Str

ag

gle

rs

No

. o

f

Ou

tlie

rs

% o

f

Ou

tlie

rs

7

Colour fastness to laundering-AATCC 61-1A

(a) Change in colour 35 35 100 0 0 1 2.9

(b) Staining on

Acetate 34 34 100 0 0 2 5.9

Cotton 34 34 100 0 0 2 5.9

Nylon 34 34 100 0 0 3 8.8

Polyester 34 34 100 0 0 0 0

Acrylic 34 34 100 0 0 0 0

Wool 34 34 100 0 0 0 0

8 Identification of class of dye1 15 15 100 0 0 1 6.7

Identification of class of dye 2 15 15 100 0 0 0 0

Total 426 422 99.1 0 0 13 3.1

*Inclusive of Gross error and other methods.

Parameter-wise the outliers and stragglers are listed below:

Table – 7: List of Outliers and Stragglers

S.No. Test Stragglers Outliers

1 Identification of fibre Nil 16001, 16007, 16040

2

Composition of fibres-

Chemical Separation Nil Nil

3 Flammability-Inclined Nil Nil

4 Flammability-Vertical Nil Nil

5 Scouring loss (mild method) Nil 16013

6 Water Repellency - Spray Test Nil Nil

7

Colour fastness to laundering-

AATCC 61

Change in colour Nil 16007

Staining on

Acetate Nil 16018, 16042

Cotton Nil 16007, 16042

Nylon Nil 16007, 16042, 16044

Polyester Nil Nil

Acrylic Nil Nil

Wool Nil Nil

8 Identification of class of dye Nil 1607

Total Nil 13


Annexure

PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF EACH PARTICIPANT- TEST WISE

1. Identification of Fibres

Acrylic and Modacrylic are generic names of synthetic polymer fibres which contain the monomer

Acrylonitrile [C3H3N]. If acrylonitrile content is more than 85%, the fibre is categorized as Acrylic.

Otherwise the fibre is Modacrylic.

Acrylonitrile Hence, the chemical name is considered as Assigned Value. Accordingly,

Assigned Value One Direction Polyacrylonitrile + Cotton

Other Direction Polyacrylonitrile + Cotton

However, performance of participants who reported with generic names also awarded “Satisfactory” remark.

Participant Code

Reported Value Test Method

Performance Remark

One direction Other direction

16001 ACRYLIC COTTON NOT MENTIONED Outlier

16002 ACRYLIC+COTTON ACRYLIC+COTTON AATCC 20:2013 Satisfactory

16003 ACRYLIC+COTTON ACRYLIC+COTTON AATCC 20 Satisfactory

16004 POLYACRYLONITRILE + COTTON

POLYACRYLONITRILE + COTTON IS 667:1981(RA 2008) Satisfactory



16006 ACRYLIC+COTTON ACRYLIC+COTTON IS 667:1981(RA 2008) Satisfactory

16007 POLYESTER + COTTON POLYESTER + COTTON IS 667:1981(RA 2008) Outlier

16008 ACRYLIC+COTTON ACRYLIC+COTTON ISO 1833-12 Satisfactory

16009 MODACRYLIC+COTTON MODACRYLIC+COTTON ISO 1833-21 Satisfactory

16010 ACRYLIC+COTTON ACRYLIC+COTTON IS 667:1981(RA 2008) Satisfactory



16012 ACRYLIC,COTTON ACRYLIC,COTTON AATCC 20 Satisfactory


16014 MODACRYLIC+COTTON MODACRYLIC+COTTON AATCC 20 Satisfactory



16016 ACRYLIC+COTTON ACRYLIC+COTTON ISO 1833:2006 Satisfactory



16019 ACRYLIC+COTTON ACRYLIC+COTTON IS 667:1981 Satisfactory



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Acrylonitrile-2D.png


Participant Code

Reported Value Test Method Performance

Remark



16022 MODACRYLIC,COTTON MODACRYLIC,COTTON NOT MENTIONED Satisfactory







16029 ACRYLIC+COTTON ACRYLIC+COTTON ISO 1833-12:2006 Satisfactory






16033 ACRYLIC+COTTON ACRYLIC+COTTON NOT MENTIONED Satisfactory







16039 ACRYLIC+COTTON ACRYLIC+COTTON ISO 1833 Satisfactory

16040 POLYESTER + COTTON POLYESTER + COTTON IS 3416-1:1988 Outlier






16044 MODACRYLIC,COTTON MODACRYLIC,COTTON NOT MENTIONED Satisfactory

16045 ACRYLIC+COTTON ACRYLIC+COTTON ISO 1833-12:2006 Satisfactory

Number of Participants: 42

Remark:

* It is a de-facto standard to report blend of fibres by using the symbol ‘Plus’ and non blend by ‘Coma’. Since, the participants identified the fibres, performance is given as "Satisfactory”.

Participant 16036 did not report the identification of fibre but reported blend composition.


2. QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS OF FIBRE MIXTURES - CHEMICAL DISSOLUTION METHOD (POLYACRYLONITRILE %)

Participant Code

Reported value (%)

Test method adopted Z-

Score Performance

Remark

16001 79.7 IS 3421:1988 1.9 Satisfactory

16002 70.5 AATCC 20A:2013 -1.1 Satisfactory

16003 72.6 AATCC 20A -0.4 Satisfactory

16004 75.1 IS 3421:1988(RA 2011) 0.4 Satisfactory

16005 77.8 IS 3421:1988 1.3 Satisfactory

16006 79.9 NOT MENTIONED 2.0 Satisfactory

16008 73.5 ISO 1833-12 -0.1 Satisfactory

16009 69.5 ISO 1833-21 -1.5 Satisfactory

16010 75.1 IS 3421:1988 (RA 2010) 0.4 Satisfactory


16012 76.5 AATCC 20A 0.9 Satisfactory

16013 74.7 AATCC 20A:2012 0.3 Satisfactory



16016 71.5 ISO 1833:2006 -0.8 Satisfactory



16019 79.6 IS 3421:1988 1.9 Satisfactory



16022 78.0 NOT MENTIONED 1.4 Satisfactory

16023 79.1 IS 3421:1988 1.7 Satisfactory


16026 74.9 AATCC 20A3 0.3 Satisfactory



16029 72.3 ISO 1833-12:2006 -0.5 Satisfactory






16035 74.5 IS 3421:1988 0.2 Satisfactory

16036 73.0 ISO 1833:2006 -0.3 Satisfactory


16039 77.7 ISO 1833 1.3 Satisfactory


Participant Code

Reported value (%)


Score Performance

Remark


16042 78.6 IS 3421:1988 1.6 Satisfactory



16045 71.2 ISO 1833-12:2006 -0.9 Satisfactory

No. of participants 41

Maximum 79.9

Minimum 69.5

Mean 75.3

Std Deviation 2.80

Median 75.1

SUMMARY

Robust Average = 75.3%

Robust SD for all valid participants (1 ) = 3.0%

Between sample SD of Homogeneity testing (SS ) = 0.1779%

SD for PT Scheme with allowance for the heterogeneity if any () = 3.0212%

No heterogeneity observed

Assigned Value (X) = 73.4%

SD of PT Scheme() = 3.0%

Remarks:

(1) Results reported by participants 16007 and 16040 are not included for evaluation as they did not identify the fibres.

Code Reported Value Method Adopted Reason for Rejection

16007 Polyester-79.0% IS 3416:1988 Gross Error. Identified the fibre as Polyester and analysed accordingly. 16040 Polyester-78.6% IS 3416-2:1999(RA 2003)

(2) The composition Polyacrylonitrile and Cotton blend, is critical due to the finish material and

dissolution procedure. If the finish is not removed completely before dissolution in Di Methyl

Formamide, the same will be added to Polyacrylonitrile. If the residue after DMF dissolution is

not washed thoroughly in boiling water, Polyacrylonitrile may re-precipitate and added to

cotton. Due to this criticality, participants happened to report the percentage of

Polyacrylonitrile from 69.5 to 79.3. However, the values are available continuously in the

entire range, for each value the neighborhood proves to be the Reproducibility.

Since the cotton (%) is complementary to Polyacrylonitrile (%), no evaluation is carried out for cotton (%).


-2.0

-1.5

-1.0

-0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

16001

16002

16003

16004

16005

16006

16008

16009

16010

16011

16012

16013

16014

16015

16016

16017

16018

16019

16020

16021

16022

16023

16025

16026

16027

16028

16029

16030

16031

16032

16033

16034

16035

16036

16037

16039

16041

16042

16043

16044

16045

Z-S

co

re

Participant Code

QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS OF FIBRES - POLYACRYLONITRILE %


3. FLAMMABILITY-INCLINED FLAME AT 45°

Participant Code

Reported value (s) Test method adopted Converted

Value Performance

Remark

16002 IBE ( CLASS 1 ) ASTM D 1230-2010 Class-1 Satisfactory

16003 DNI ASTM D 1230 Class-1 Satisfactory

16004 9.7 IS 11871-B:1986 (RA 2004) Class-1 Satisfactory

16013 DNI ASTM D 1230:2010 Class-1 Satisfactory





16027 DNI IS 11871-B:1986 (RA 2004) Class-1 Satisfactory

16028 IBE ASTM D 1230:2010 Class-1 Satisfactory

16032 10.7 ASTM D 1230 Class-1 Satisfactory







Total Number of Participants 17

DNI: Did Not Ignite IBE: Ignited But Extinguished.

Remarks: (1) For evaluation purpose all the reported values are converted into ‘Classification of fabric’ (2) Results reported by participant coded 16033 is not included for performance evaluation..

Participant code

Reported value (s) Test method

adopted Reason for Rejection

16033 Flame spreaded over the whole specimen immediately after application IS 11871-B

Gross error & Trivial Outlier

4. FLAMMABILITY- VERTICAL FLAME TEST

Assigned Value: Burnt Entire Length

Participant code Reported

value (cm) Test method adopted

Performance Remark

16004 BEL IS 118711-A:1986 (RA 2004) Satisfactory

16027 BEL IS 11871-A:1986(RA 2004) Satisfactory

16033 BEL IS 11871-A Satisfactory

16039 BEL ASTM D 6413 Satisfactory


16042 BEL IS 11871 Satisfactory




BEL: Burnt Entire Length *As sufficient number of accredited participant laboratories is not available, the Robust mean of all participants is taken as Assigned Value


5. SCOURING LOSS (%)

Participant code Reported value (%)


Score Performance

Remark


16004 11.5 IS 1383:1977 -0.6 Satisfactory

16008 13.0 IS 1383 0.7 Satisfactory

16010 12.1 IS 1383:1977(RA 2009) -0.1 Satisfactory

16011 12.4 IS 1383:1977 0.2 Satisfactory

16013 16.2 IS 1383:1977 3.5 Outlier


16019 12.4 IS 1383:1977 0.2 Satisfactory



16027 11.4 IS 1383 -0.7 Satisfactory


16031 11.7 IS 1383:1977 -0.5 Satisfactory



16034 11.9 IS 1383:1977 -0.3 Satisfactory

16035 12.3 IS 1383:1977 0.1 Satisfactory

16037 11.8 IS 1383:1977 -0.4 Satisfactory

16041 11.6 IS 1383:1977 -0.5 Satisfactory




Maximum 16.2

Minimum 11.4

Mean 12.4

Std Deviation 1.08

Median 12.2

SUMMARY

Robust Average = 12.19%

Robust SD for all valid participants (1) = 0.70%

Between sample SD of Homogeneity testing (SS) = 0.9042%

SD for PT Scheme with allowance for the heterogeneity if any () = 1.14%

Heterogeneity Accounted

Assigned Value (X) = 12.2%

SD of PT Scheme () = 1.1%

Remarks: As sufficient number of accredited participant laboratories is not available, the Robust mean of all participants is taken as Assigned Value

Participant Code Reported Value Method Adopted Reason for Rejection

16044 0.10 IS 1383:1977(RA 2004) Gross Error


-1.0

-0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0 16001

16004

16008

16010

16011

16013

16017

16019

16020

16023

16027

16029

16031

16032

16033

16034

16035

16037

16041

16042

16043

Z-S

co

re

Participant Code

SCOURING LOSS(%)


6. WATER REPELLANCY RATING

Participant Code

Reported value (Rating & Grading)

Test method adopted Reported

value (Rating)

Performance Remark

16001 90 IS 390 90 Satisfactory

16002 95 AATCC D 22 95 Satisfactory

16003 5 ISO 4920 100 Satisfactory



16008 ISO-3 ISO 4920 80 Satisfactory

16009 4-5 ISO 4920-2012 95 Satisfactory


16013 ISO-4 ISO 4920:1992 90 Satisfactory

16014 ISO-5 ISO 4920 100 Satisfactory





16027 90 IS 390:1970 (RA 2003) 90 Satisfactory

16028 4-5 AATCC D 22:2010 95 Satisfactory


16033 90 IS 390-1975 (RA 2004) 90 Satisfactory

16036 4-5 ISO 4920 95 Satisfactory

16038 85 ISO 4920 85 Satisfactory

16039 ISO 5 ISO 4920 100 Satisfactory



16044 90 IS 390-1983 (RA 2004) 90 Satisfactory


Maximum 100.0

Minimum 80.0

Mode 90.0

Frequency Distribution

Rating Frequency

80 2

85 1

90 10

95 7

100 4

Total 24

Remark:

The Spray Ratings are assigned against standard photographs and hence the Spray Rating Scale is discrete and discontinuous. But results are based on averages which tend to become intermediate ratings. The ordinal rating also converted into numerical rating and performance is evaluated. Mode ± 10 is considered as ‘Satisfactory’ range.


7. Colour Fastness to Laundering

(a) Change in Colour Assigned Value: Change in Colour : 4

Participant Code Test method

Reported Rating Performance

16002 AATCC 61-1A-2013 4.5 Satisfactory

16003 AATCC 61-1A-2013 4 Satisfactory

16004 AATCC 61-1A:2010 4.5 Satisfactory

16007 AATCC 61-1A 3 Outlier

16008 AATCC 61-1A 4 Satisfactory


16010 AATCC 61-1A-2013 3.5 Satisfactory

16011 AATCC 61-1A:2010 4 Satisfactory
























16042 AATCC 61-1A 4.5 Satisfactory


16044 AATCC 61-1A 4.5 Satisfactory


Mode 4

Minimum 3

Maximum 4.5


Frequency Distribution

Value Frequency

3 1

3.5 1

4 29

4.5 4

Total 35


(b) Staining on Adjacent fabrics

Assigned Value

Acetate Cotton Nylon Polyester Acrylic Wool

3.5 3 3 4 4.5 4

Participant Code

Test method

Staining on Adjacent fabrics

Acetate Performance Cotton Performance Nylon Performance Polyester Performance Acrylic Performance Wool Performance

16002 AATCC 61-1A-2013 3 Satisfactory 3 Satisfactory 3 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory

16003 AATCC 61-2013 3.5 Satisfactory 3 Satisfactory 3.5 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory

16004 AATCC 61-1A:2010 NR* NR* NR* NR* NR* NR*

16007 AATCC 61-1A 4 Satisfactory 4.5 Outlier 4 Outlier 4.5 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory

16008 AATCC 61-1A 3.5 Satisfactory 3 Satisfactory 3 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory

16009 AATCC 61-1A-2013 3.5 Satisfactory 3 Satisfactory 3.5 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory

16010 AATCC 61-1A-2013 3.5 Satisfactory 2.5 Satisfactory 3 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory

16011 AATCC 61-1A:2010 3 Satisfactory 2.5 Satisfactory 3 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory

16012 AATCC 61-1A 3.5 Satisfactory 3 Satisfactory 3 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory 3.5 Satisfactory

16013 AATCC 61-1A-2013 3.5 Satisfactory 3.5 Satisfactory 3 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory

16014 AATCC 61-1A 3.5 Satisfactory 3.5 Satisfactory 3.5 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory

16015 AATCC 61-1A:2010 3 Satisfactory 2.5 Satisfactory 3 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory 3.5 Satisfactory

16016 AATCC 61-1A 3 Satisfactory 3 Satisfactory 3 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory 3.5 Satisfactory

16017 AATCC 61-1A 3.5 Satisfactory 3.5 Satisfactory 3 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory 3.5 Satisfactory

16018 AATCC 61-1A-2013 2.5 Outlier 2.5 Satisfactory 2.5 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory 3.5 Satisfactory

16021 AATCC 61-1A:2010 3.5 Satisfactory 3 Satisfactory 3 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory

16022 AATCC 61-1A 3 Satisfactory 3 Satisfactory 3 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory

16024 AATCC 61-1A-2013 4 Satisfactory 3.5 Satisfactory 3.5 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory

16025 AATCC 61-1A:2010 3 Satisfactory 2.5 Satisfactory 3 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory

16026 AATCC 61-1A 3.5 Satisfactory 3 Satisfactory 3 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory

16027 AATCC 61-A:2010 3 Satisfactory 3 Satisfactory 3 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory

16028 AATCC 61-1A-2013 3.5 Satisfactory 3.5 Satisfactory 3.5 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory


16031 AATCC 61-1A:2010 3.5 Satisfactory 2.5 Satisfactory 3.5 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory


16034 AATCC 61-1A:2010 3 Satisfactory 3 Satisfactory 3.5 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory

16035 AATCC 61-1A:2010 3.5 Satisfactory 3 Satisfactory 3.5 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory


Participant Code

Test method

Staining on Adjacent fabrics

Acetate Performance Cotton Performance Nylon Performance Polyester Performance Acrylic Performance Wool Performance

16036 AATCC 61A 3.5 Satisfactory 3 Satisfactory 3 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory

16037 AATCC 61-1A:2010 3 Satisfactory 3 Satisfactory 3 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory

16038 AATCC 61-1A:2010 3 Satisfactory 3 Satisfactory 3 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory

16039 AATCC 61-1A 3.5 Satisfactory 3 Satisfactory 3.5 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory 3.5 Satisfactory

16042 AATCC 61-1A 4.5 Outlier 4 Outlier 4 Outlier 4.5 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory

16043 AATCC 61-1A-2013 3 Satisfactory 3 Satisfactory 3 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory

16044 AATCC 61-1A 3.5 Satisfactory 3.5 Satisfactory 4 Outlier 4 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory

16045 AATCC 61-1A:2013 3.5 Satisfactory 3 Satisfactory 3.5 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory 4.5 Satisfactory

Remark: (NR*): Participant 16004, reported change in colour but not reported staining on adjacent fabrics. Frequency Distributions

Staining on

Acetate Cotton Nylon Polyester Acrylic Wool

Value Frequency Value Frequency Value Frequency Value Frequency Value Frequency Value Frequency

2.5 1 2.5 6 2.5 1 2.5 0 2.5 0 2.5 0

3 11 3 18 3 18 3 0 3 0 3 0

3.5 19 3.5 8 3.5 12 3.5 0 3.5 0 3.5 6

4 2 4 1 4 3 4 20 4 4 4 21

4.5 1 4.5 1 4.5 0 4.5 14 4.5 30 4.5 7

Total 34 34 34 34 34 34

Mode 3.5 3 3 4 4.5 4

Minimum 2.5 2.5 2.5 4 4 3.5

Maximum 4.5 4.5 4 4.5 4.5 4.5


8. Identification of Class of Dye

Assigned Value: REACTIVE & DISPERSE

Participant Code

Reported Value Test Method

Performance Remark

16001

REACTIVE IS 4472

Satisfactory

DISPERSE Satisfactory

16003

REACTIVE IS 4472

Satisfactory


16004

REACTIVE IS 4472

Satisfactory


16007

BASIC IS 4472

Outlier


16008

REACTIVE IS 4472

Satisfactory


16013

REACTIVE IS 4472

Satisfactory


16017

REACTIVE IS 4472

Satisfactory


16019

REACTIVE IS 4472:1973 (RA 2006)

Satisfactory


16023

REACTIVE IS 4472:1967 (RA 2010)

Satisfactory


16027

REACTIVE IS 4472

Satisfactory


16029

REACTIVE IS 4472

Satisfactory


16032

REACTIVE NOT MENTIONED

Satisfactory


16033

REACTIVE IS 4472:1967 (RA 2001)

Satisfactory


16035

REACTIVE IS 4472

Satisfactory


16043 REACTIVE

IS 4472 Satisfactory


No. of participants: 15

Documents

INTER LABORATORY TESTING SCHEME - …textilescommittee.nic.in/writereaddata/files/ilpt16c.pdfINTER LABORATORY TESTING SCHEME ON “Testing of Chemical parameters in Textile Material”