Men s Underwear Knitted Material Properties Test and Analysis

Transcription

1 2016 International Conference on Advanced Materials Science and Technology (AMST 2016) ISBN: Men s Underwear Knitted Material Properties Test and Analysis V.E. KUZMICHEV 1, Zhe CHENG 2,* and D.C. ADOLPHE 3 1 Ivanovo State Polytechnic University, Textile Institute, 21, Sheremetev Av., Ivanovo, Russian Federation 2 Wuhan Textile University, Institute of Clothing, Minzu Av., Wuhan, Hubei, China 3 University of Haute Alsace, ENSISA, 11, rue Alfred Werner, Mulhouse, France *Corresponding author Keywords: Knitted material, KES, Material physical property, Men s underwear. Abstract. With the improvement of life quality of male underwear wearing comfort, functionality and fashion requirements continuously increasing, but in today's market of many types of men's underwear, the performance is also different, and thus the performance of underwear materials, will directly affect men's underwear design, production and sales. In this study, six different men's underwear knitted materials samples for performance testing based on KES-FB fabric style tester, the main performance test extending, shear, compression and friction properties, after further mechanical properties of materials data analysis and evaluating, to clearly show the advantages and disadvantages of the mechanical properties of materials by parameterized perspective, to provide men's underwear materials evaluation and selected a valuable reference and methods. Introduction Underwear as the body's second skin, has a unique feature in the choice of material is also particularly important. Material style effect is a feeling, a comprehensive reflection of the fabric appearance, wearing comfort and beauty [1]. In early 1930, F Peirce's article of The Handle of cloth as a measurable quantity, first proposed the relationship between material mechanical properties and feel, and to express the data and make it [2]; to 70s, Japan's S. Kawabata began to study the mechanical properties of the material feel evaluation and KES system [3, 4]. Taking KES evaluation system can fully reflect the material mechanical properties, test material tensile, shear, bending, compression and recovery process, focusing on research of materials quality and suitability for certain types of clothing [5]. This study for the material under low load mechanical testing, since the initial modulus characteristics of the material fibers, yarns of different processes, so that the performance of the material has a great difference, but after finishing materials and fabric structure also affects its mechanical properties at low load. But the same kind of material mechanical data applications commonly found close to a data value, if a material has a different evaluation value, can be directly observed to see which index is out of range. Materials for Experiment The compressibility of knitted materials is not only affecting the pressure comfort, but also other physics properties such as thickness, density, etc. which also have closely relations with compressibility [6]. So compression pressure is one of important properties of knitted materials to explore and the compressibility can be a crucial property to evaluate the comfort of underwear. Nowadays, a designer not very concern on this issue, but with the growing needs it must be become increasingly for best underwear. 134

2 Selected knitted materials are from I d company (Wuhan, China), they are used for the production of underwear for domestic and European markets. The characteristics of chosen materials are shown in Table 1. Table 1. Material properties. Sample Content, % Density, g/m 2 Structure М1 40 Cotton, 30 Linen, 30 Lyocell+Spandex Thickness, mm Rib knit М2 50 Acrylic, 50 Spandex 360 Interlock, Doubleknit М3 98 Modal, 2 Spandex 300 Interlock, Doubleknit М4 30 Linen, 65 Cotton, 5 Spandex Rib knit М5 45 Modal, 55 Cotton 170 Ribknit, weft mesh knitting M6 47 Cotton, 47 Modal, 6 Spandex 110 Rib knit Table 2. Indexes of materials tested by KES-FB. Properties, device Property Unit Directions Result for different materials M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 G 2HG, Φ =0.5 cn/[cm ( )] сn/cm warp weft warp weft Tensile and shear test, KES FB1 2HG5, Φ =5 сn/cm LT - warp weft warp weft WT gf.cm/cm 2 weft warp RT % warp weft EMT 500 cn/cm warp weft LC Compression test, KES FB3 WC gf.cm/cm RC % T 0, 0.5 cn/cm 2 mm T m, 50 cn/cm 2 mm Surface test, KES FB4 MIU - MMD - SMD µ warp weft warp weft warp weft

3 Figure 1. Photos of knitted materials chosen. Results and Discussion To grasp the material wear comfortable wear ability, etc., is to control the material tensile and shear properties at low load, compression and surface friction properties [7]. People undergoing a variety of body movements in daily life, parts of the body skin occur in different deformation. If the material can be deformed and can adapt to these resiliencies, it will make people feel comfortable; on the contrary, it will hinder the body material activity, bring some pressure, people feel discomfort. Results of Tensile and Shear Test Tensile properties test indexes: LT is tensile rigidity, values closer to 1 mean firmer tensility, higher value, more difficult recovery tensile deformation occurs, feel hard; WT is tension energy, cn cm/cm 2, higher value, greater stretchability; RT is recoverability, %, higher value, stronger recoverability, good elasticity; EMT is material for maximum elongation under the same low tensile stress, %, higher value, better performance of the material can be extended [8]. Experiment maximum tensile load 500 gf/cm (500 cn/cm), a tensile speed of 0.2mm/s. By KES-FB1 tensile test results, and the maximum elongation of six kinds of materials that in warp: %; weft: %. And from tensile properties of the data: 1) tensile linearity samples M1 and M2 LT values are smaller, M1, M6 softness better, feel soft; 2) M2 RT value has maximum tensile recovery rate, reaching 48 %, M6 reaching 42 %, relatively good. M1 M6 meet the human skin resilience (between 0 to %) [9]. After experimental study, six kinds of material samples for human comfort stretch at about 17% or less, due to the KES-FB1 maximum tensile load is 500 gf/cm for experiment, for knitted underwear materials is too large, so only need to consider a lower load (tensile stress of about 200 gf/cm or less) and elongation (tensile strain within 20 %), in which data is made within the skin, better able to adapt to such variations, and make people comfortable [10]. Results of Tensile and Shear Test Shear properties test indexes: G is shear rigidity, cn/[cm ( )], higher value, more difficult stretch deformation, feel hard; 2HG shear angle θ = 0.5 elasticity for minute shear, 2HG5 shear angle θ = 5 elasticity for large shear, cn/cm, smaller value, better deformation and recovery ability, more flexibility and soft. Experiment shear angle between ± 8, the rate of /s. By KES-FB1 shear test results: 1) M3 shear stiffness value maximum, shear deformation is difficult to occur, feel harder as compared to other materials; 2) M2, M4, M5 shear stiffness similar, M2, M6 shear hysteresis 2HG, 2HG5 values are smaller, M2 has the most soft feel. Due to the different mutual friction and material density structure, affected the moving between the yarn, the shear properties are different. Results of Compression Test Compression properties test indexes: WC is work of compression, cn cm/cm 2, higher value, more fluffy, thick; LC is linearity of compression, values closer to 1 mean firmer compression, higher value, more easy to occur compression deformation, feel more thick; RC is recoverability of compression, %, higher value, better compression recovery ability, better thickness persistence, feel fullness [11, 12]. 136

4 By KES-FB3 compression test results: 1) six materials LC compression linearity value are similar, compression deformation degree of difficulty are similar; 2) M2 WC value is higher, higher compression susceptibility than others; 3) M2, M3 RC value larger, M4 RC minimum, that M2, M3 thickness persistence relatively good, feel fullness. Results of Compression Test Surface properties test indexes: SMD is surface roughness, µm, smaller value, more evenness and smooth the surface; MIU mean frictional coefficient, smaller value, better tendency to slip; MMD is fluctuation of mean frictional coefficient, smaller value, more smoothness and less roughness. By KES-FB4 surface test results (taking into consideration the wearability, so choice materials back side): 1) M4 and M5 MMD values smoothness of back side are lower, M1 and M3 MIU values smoothness of back side relatively are higher; 2) M1 and M5 SMD values are higher, the back side are more roughness, because them woven mesh structure; 3) M3 has fine fiber, yarn count is 80, while under same conditions, the finer fineness of fiber, more smoothness surface of material. Summary By contrast KES test results, and it can be reflected the characteristic of the materials to assess the merits and demerits. Because of friction and extending between underwear and body, affects the comfort of wearing underwear. It poor elongation performance and high friction, the body will have a high pressure feeling, on the contrary, will be more comfortable. But the material resilience and flexibility of the thickness will be a greater impact on underwear comfortable performance. 1) M3, M6 has good mechanical properties, M3 Tensile strength larger than others, M6 has balanced performance. Due to its composition and Lyocell, Modal fiber ratio is good, retains its original softness, drape, stiffness and other characteristics. In addition to mechanical properties, its soft, delicate, smooth outlook and feel, excellent breathability, moisture absorption and extensibility, and good in anti-wrinkle, easy to wash, high durability. 2) M1, M2, M4 also has some Spandex, so increasing the elastic portion, M5 half modal and half cotton, so the poor mechanical testing performance. But chemical composition similar between cotton and Viscose fiber, the moisture meets the physiological demands of human skin, with good breathability and humidity control function, not easy to produce electrostatic, and good stainability, color fastness, so good for product visual design. But cotton and Viscose material underwear has strong hygroscopicity, weak dehydrating (hard to dry), and the weak extensibility and resilience, wearing cotton underwear will be greatly affected on exercise, so the better choice is Combed Cotton, add Modal and Spandex or some good elasticity fibers, to improve the elasticity, enhance fittness. So far, in men s underwear market, cotton, regenerated cellulose fiber material (Viscose) as the main publicity and production material. As a functional, decorative or comfort underwear materials, all have their own characteristics, also has a good performance, which has the inalienable relations bease on the superior performance parameters. Acknowledgement This research is supported and on the instructions of I'd company (Wuhan, Hubei). Wuhan Huanghe Foundation. References [1] Weidong YU. Textile Materials, China Textile & Apparel Press, Beijing, 2006, pp [2] F. T. Peirce. The Handle of cloth as a measurable quantity, Journal of the Textile Institute Transactions, 9 (1930), pp

5 [3] S. Kawabata. Characterization method of the physical propperty of fabrics and the measuring system for hand-feeling evaluation, Journal of the Textile Machinery Society of Japan, 10 (1973), pp [4] M. Niwa. S. Kawabata. Prediction of the appearance of men's suit from fabric mechanical properties and fabric hand Part 1: Analysis of men's summer suit using fabric mechanical properties, Journal of the Textile Machinery Society of Japan 1 (1981), pp [5] Gehui Wang. KES fabric mechanical properties of low stress and FAST system test comparisons, Textile Research Journal, 6 (2002), PP [6] L.N. Flerova, G.I. Surikova. Materials Science. Light Industry, 1972, pp [7] Jianping Zhou. KES Analysis and Application of the test fabric style instrument indicators, Modern Textile Technology, 6 (2005) pp [8] B.K. Behera. Comfort and handle behavior of linen-blended fabrics, AUTEX Research Journal, 7 (2007), pp [9] Wenbin Zhang. Clothing ergonomics, Donghua University Press, Shanghai 2008, pp [10] Zhe Cheng, V.E. Kuzmichev. D.C. Adolph. Choosing of knit materials for men s compression Part 2, Sewing Industry, 5 (2014), pp [11] B.R. Gurumurthy. Prediction of fabric compressive properties using artificial neural networks. AUTEX Research Journal, 7 (2007), pp [12] Murthyguru. Novel approach to study compression properties in textiles, AUTEX Research Journal, 5 (2005), pp