Model 2

Yarn Evenness
Overview
Yarn evenness is a measure of the level of variation in yarn linear density or
mass per unit length of yarn. In other words, it refers to the variation in yarn
count along its length. It is the evenness of staple spun yarn that is of concern
here. Continuously filament yarns have virtually no variation in linear density so
evenness is not an issue for those yarns. A yarn with poor evenness will have
thick and thin places along yarn length, while an even yarn will have little
variation in mass or thickness along length. While a yarn may vary in many
properties, evenness is the most important quality aspect of a yarn, because
variations in other yarn properties are often a direct result of yarn count
irregularity. We already know that twist tends to accumulate in the thin places in
yarn, so irregularity in yarn linear density will cause variations in twist along yarn
length. This preferential concentration of twist in thin places along a yarn also
exacerbates the variations in yarn diameter or thickness, which often adversely
affects the appearance of the resultant fabrics. An irregular yarn will also vary in
strength along the yarn. The weakest link theory says a chain is only as
strong as its weakest link. Similarly a yarn is only as strong as its weakest spot.
When there are large variations in yarn linear density, there will be many thin
spots in the yarn, which are often the weak spots (despite its relatively high twist
concentration).
This brief overview highlights the importance of yarn evenness. But what makes
an even yarn then? Can we make a spun yarn as even as a continuously
filament yarn? If not, how do we measure and control yarn evenness? These
questions will be answered in this module. The first topic addresses the
theoretical aspects of evenness. This is followed by the 2 nd topic discussing the
measurement of evenness.

Topic 1

Theoretical aspects of evenness

Introduction
The foundations for the study of yarn evenness were laid in a 1945 classical
paper by Martindale, entitled "a new method of measuring the irregularity of
yarns with some observations on the origin of irregularities in worsted slivers
and yarns" (Martindale 1945). For this reason, the evenness theory has often
been refereed to as the Martindale theory.
This topic introduces the basic concepts of evenness, the theoretical limit of
evenness of a fibre assembly, and the different ways of describing evenness.

Objectives
At the end of this topic you should be able to:

Understand the statistical limit of evenness (limiting irregularity)

Appreciate the effect of fibre fineness on yarn evenness
Know the evenness-related calculations
Understand the effect of fibre processing on sliver and yarn evenness

Perfectly even yarn

For a spun yarn (or any other fibre assembly) to be perfect even, we need two
conditions:
(1)
(2)

The constituent fibres are uniform in thickness

The yarn has the same number of fibres in all cross sections along its
length

Figure 1.1 depicts such an ideal fibre assembly with perfect evenness.

Fig. 1.1: A perfectly even fibre assembly with uniform fibres and butted fibre
ends

While the first condition may be achievable with manufactured staple fibres,
natural fibres such as cotton and wool always exhibit variations in thickness
along fibre length.
To satisfy condition (2) would mean that the fibre ends are butted together
(Figure 1.1). In other words, as one fibre terminates, another must be
introduced to take its place. This would require control and manipulation of each
fibre in the fibre assembly by the processing machinery. This is not possible with
current processing technology.
Because of the variable nature of fibres, particularly natural fibres, and the
difficulty with individual fibre placement in the fibre assembly using current
technology, a perfectly even yarn is unattainable in practice. Therefore, a real
yarn (or any other fibre assembly) would always have some irregularity in linear
density, because the way fibres are arranged deviates from whats required to
make a perfectly even yarn. The question then is how does the current fibre
processing machinery arrange fibres? Without this knowledge, we can not
possibly know what would be the likely irregularity for such an arrangement.
To answer this question, we need to look at the whole fibre to yarn processes
and examine what each process does to the fibres. In the Introduction to Fibre
Science and Textile Technology unit, we have discussed, separately, the
processes involved in manufacturing cotton and worsted yarns. Let us now
briefly recap the key processes, from the perspective of fibre arrangement,
before we move onto the theoretical aspects of evenness.

Fibre arrangements during fibre to yarn processing

Fibres arrive at textile mills in large bales. It is a statement of fact that fibres
vary in properties, both within a bale and between different bales. We can
certainly not persuade a sheep to produce identical wool or make a cotton plant
to grow identical cotton. In addition, wool and cotton grown in different regions
exhibit considerable variations in properties. To produce a large quantity of
uniform yarns from variable fibres, blending and mixing is essential. There are
two fundamental requirements of the blended product:

The blend is homogenous, and

The blend is intimate

These two requirements have different but complementary connotations. A

homogenous blend means that the blend components are in the right
proportion, while an intimate blend means the blend components lie side by
side without regions of concentration of just one component. If a blend satisfy
these requirements, then fibres in the blend are thoroughly mixed up, in the
right proportions throughout the bulk (the whole lot or population). In other
words, within such an ideal blend, all different fibres are arranged in a
completely random way, and all the fibres have the same chance of being found
at any selected place in the bulk. Achieving this task is a major objective in fibre
to yarn conversion. But it is not an easy task, and has to be carried out
3

gradually. In the initial blending of fibres from bales, small tufts of fibres are
picked up and combined to make a homogenous blend first. For intimate blend,
the fibre tufts need to be opened out into individual fibres, in the carding
process that follows.
A key objective of carding is fibre opening. Only when fibres are opened out into
individual fibres can different fibres lie side by side to achieve an intimate blend.
After blending and carding, fibres are more or less randomized. Preserving this
randomness is a key objective of the subsequent drawing process.
During gilling of wool or drawing of cotton, several slivers are doubled together
first and drafted to reduce its thickness. Doubling is a random operation
because no deliberate attempt is made to compensate for thick places by
doubling them against selected thin places. If the fibre ends in the individual
slivers are randomly distributed, they will still be randomly distributed after
doubling. If drafting is done properly, this randomness will persist into the
drafted sliver. One problem with maintaining the random fibre ends distribution
is the fibre length variation. If fibre length is very variable or if there are many
short fibres in the slivers before drafting, the short fibres tend to be drafted in
tufts rather than individually, and a drafting wave appears in the drafted sliver.
Since a drafting wave is a practically periodic variation in the number of fibres
in the cross sections along the sliver, it defeats the randomness of fibre ends
distribution. For this reason, some fibre control devices, such as pressure bars
in drawing and faller bars in gilling, are often used to minimize the drafting
waves and improve the random distribution of fibre ends. Similarly, in the roving
process and during the drafting stage of spinning, fibres are also controlled
during drafting.
From this brief discussion of the fibre to yarn conversion, we can see that
throughout the different processes involved, random fibre distribution is a key
objective. If all processes perform perfectly, we will end up with a completely
random distribution of fibre ends in the resultant yarn. We call this yarn an ideal
yarn, and the irregularity of this yarn the limiting irregularity.. Limiting
irregularity is therefore the minimum irregularity that we must expect from any
real yarn or other fibre assemblies. A thorough understanding of the concept of
limiting irregularity is essential for the understanding of yarn evenness in
particular, and yarn quality in general.

Limiting irregularity (CVlim)

A common method of expressing the irregularity of a yarn is to use the statistical
term CV or coefficient of variation. Obviously the higher the CV value, the more
irregular the yarn is. The traditional way of obtaining the CV value is to dissect a
length of yarn into many short sections of equal length, say 1 cm, and then
weigh each of the short sections. Assuming we have dissected a yarn into n
short sections, and the weights of these sections are: x 1, x2, x3 ..... xn
respectively. From these readings we can easily calculate the following statistics
regarding the yarn:

The mean or average:

___

x1 x 2 x 3 ....... x n x i

n
n

(1.1)

The standard deviation:

__

__

__

( x1 x) 2 ( x2 x) 2 ..... ( xn x) 2
n 1

__

( x x)

n 1

(1.2)

The coefficient of variation:

CV

s
__

(1.3)

100%

The percentage mean deviation (known as the U% value in textiles)

| xi

__

x|

100 %

__

(1.3a)

The CV thus calculated will be the measured CV, or effective CV. It is the actual
CV of the yarn concerned. The U% value is listed here for completeness.
Increasingly, it is the CV or CV% value that gets used for this purpose. For a
fault-free yarn with random variations in thickness or linear density, the following
relationship exists between the U value and the CV value.
CV 1.25 U

(1.3b)
Modern instrument, such as the Uster Evenness Tester, can measure the U and
CV values of a fibre assembly at a high speed. More on evenness
measurement will be discussed later.
Coming back to the concept of limiting irregularity, we have said before this is
the minimum irregularity that must be expected from even an ideal yarn with
random fibre ends distribution. The limiting irregularity is also expressed as a
CV value, denoted as CVlim here. Early works in this area have derived the
following very important expressions for the limiting irregularity of various yarns
with random fibre ends distribution.
(1)

Limiting irregularity of an ideal yarn without fibre variability:

CVlim

100
n

(1.4)
where n is the average number of fibres in yarn cross section.
(2)

Limiting irregularity for an ideal yarn with fibre variability:

CV lim

100 1 0.0001 CV A

(1.5)

where CVA is the coefficient of variation of fibre cross sectional area.

These expressions indicate that the number of fibres in yarn cross section is
overwhelmingly the most important factor that determines the irregularity of a
yarn. Irregularity increases with a reduction in the number of fibres in yarn cross
section. The fibre variability also has some effect on the irregularity value. But
different fibre types vary considerably in terms of fibre variability.
Cotton and synthetics (staple fibre)
Synthetic staple fibres have very little fibre variability, and cotton fibres have
some small fibre variability. For these fibres, the number of fibres in yarn cross
section can be worked as below:
No of fibres in yarn cross sec tion

Yarn linear density (tex )

Fibre linear density (tex )

(1.6)
The fibre variability of synthetic staples may be ignored and we can simply use
equation (1.4) to calculate the limiting irregularity of a assembly of synthetic
staple fibres.
CVlim ( synthetic staple)

100
n

(1.6a)

Because of the small fibre variability in cotton, we can not simply use equation
(1.4) to work out the limiting iregularity. Instead, the following equation is used
to calculate the limiting irregularity of cotton fibre assemblies.
CVlim

106
n

(1.6b)

Worked example:
A cotton yarn of 25s English cotton count (Ne) consists of cotton with a
micronaire value of 4.1 ( g inch ). What is the limiting irregularity of this cotton
yarn?
Firstly we need to work out the number of fibres in yarn cross section using
formula (1.6). To do that we need to use the same count unit, tex, for both fibres
and yarns.

From the first module, we already know the conversion between English cotton
and tex count systems ( tex

590.5
). Therefore, the yarn count in tex is
Ne

590.5
23.62 tex .
25

The following shows how fibre fineness is converted into tex:

4 .1 g
4.110 6 g
10 6 g
10 6 g
10 6 g
g

1.61
1.61

1
.
61
0.161
0 .1
2
5
inch
2.54 cm
cm
1000 m
10 m
10 1000 m

Using equation (1.6), the average number of fibres in yarn cross section is:
n

23.62 tex
146.7
0.161 tex

Applying equation (1.6b), we get the limiting irregularity for this yarn:
CV lim

106
n

106
146.7

8.75 (%)

This would be the minimum irregularity that must be expected of this yarn. The
actual measured irregularity of the yarn would be slightly higher than this ideal
figure.
Wool fibres
For wool fibre, it is the fibre diameter and diameter CV that get measured, not
the fibre cross section area and its CV. In addition, the average number of fibres
in yarn cross section is not as easy to get as the yarn count. The following
equation has been derived to calculate the average number of fibres in the
cross section of worsted yarns consisting of 100% wool fibres, assuming a fibre
density of 1.31 g/cm3.
n

972 tex
2

D (1 0.0001 CV D )
2

(1.7)
where:

tex = yarn count in tex

D = mean fibre diameter of wool (in micron)
CVD = coefficient of variation of fibre diameter

Since the bulk of the merino wool fibres has a CV D of about 24.5%, the above
equation is often simplified to:
n

917 tex
D2

(1.7a)

It should be noted though this simplified equation is based on the assumption

that CVD = 24.5%.
If we put equation (1.7) into equation (1.5) and note that CV A 2CV D for wool,
we have the following expression for the limiting irregularity of wool assemblies:
CVlim ( wool )

3.2 D 1 0.0005 CV D

tex

(1.8)

This equation has the following important implications:

For a given yarn count (tex), the finer the fibre in the yarn, the less the yarn
irregularity. This is the main reason why fine fibres are more expensive than
coarse fibres.

For fibres of a given fineness (D), the finer the yarn, the more irregular it is.
This explains why for a given fibre fineness, there is a limit on the finest yarn
count. It is worth noting that the concept of irregularity applies to not just
yarns, but fibre assemblies in general. Therefore, for a given fibre fineness,
the irregularity of sliver will be less than that of roving, and rovings
irregularity will be less than yarn irregularity. This can also be explained by
considering the different number of fibres in those fibre assemblies.

If you reduce the CV of fibre diameter, the irregularity of the yarn decreases.
Put differently, if you reduce the fibre diameter CV by 5, you may increase
the fibre diameter by 1 micron without significantly affecting the yarn
irregularity. This is the so-called 5-to-1 rule of thumb.

The equations for wool appear rather complex. A simpler equation for wool is
given below:
CVlim ( wool )

112
n

(1.8a)

However, this equation should be used with caution, because it is based on

assumption that the CV of fibre diameter is 25%. If the diameter CV deviates
significantly from 25%, the above formula will lead to error.
Fibre blends
Blends of different fibres are common and their popularity is increasing. How do
we work out the limiting irregularity of blend yarns then? This can be tackled by
considering the blend yarn as a ply yarn consisting of two or more single yarns,
each having one fibre component. If fibres in the blend yarn are randomly
distributed, it is reasonable to assume the fibres in each component are also
random. Therefore, we can treat each single yarn the same as we have treated
the 100 cotton or 100% wool yarns.

Given the count of the blend yarn Tb, and the blend ratio of fibre component Pi,
the count of each component Ti can be worked out according to the formula
below:
Ti

Tb Pi
100

(1.9)
Once we know the count of each component yarn, the limiting irregularity of the
blend yarn of n fibre components is given as follows,
CVlim (blend )

(CV1 lim T 1) 2 (CV 2 lim T 2) 2 ..... (CVn lim Tn) 2

Tb

(1.10)
The following example brings what we have discussed together.
Worked Example:

A wool/polyester blend yarn is manufactured on the worsted processing system.

The yarn has a count of 30 tex and contains 45% wool and 55% polyester. The
fibre fineness for the polyester staple is 2.5 dtex. The mean diameter of the
wool fibres is 22 micron, with a CV of 25%. What is the limiting irregularity of
this blend yarn?
Solution Assuming the blend yarn is a ply of two single yarns, or 100 wool and 100%
polyester respectively, we can work out the count of the wool component (Tw)
and the polyester component (Tp) according to equation (1.9):
Tb Pw 30 45

13.5 (tex)
100
100
Tb Pp 30 55
Tp

16.5 (tex )
100
100
Tw

Using equation (1.6), the average number of fibres in the polyester component
(np) can be worked out as:
np

16.5 tex 165 dtex

66
2.5 dtex
2.5 dtex

Since polyester staple has little variability in fineness, we can then use equation
(2.4) to work out the limiting irregularity of the polyester component:
CV p lim

100
n

100
66

12.3 (%)

For the wool component, we can use equation (2.8),

9

CV w lim

3.2 D 1 0.0005 CV D
tex

3.2 22 1 0.0005 25 2
13.5

21.95 (%)

Finally, we can use equation (2.10) to work out the limiting irregularity of the
blend yarn,
CVlim (blend )

(CV w lim Tw ) 2 (CV p lim Tp ) 2

Tb

( 21.95 13.5) 2 (12.3 16.5) 2

30

So, the blend yarn has a limiting irregularity of 12%.

Finally, since some textile mills still use the U% value discussed earlier, the
limiting U value can be worked using the simple equation below:
U lim

CVlim
1.25

(1.11)

Index of Irregularity (I)

After the proceeding discussions on limiting irregularity, we should be very clear
in our minds that the number of fibres in yarn cross section has a decisive effect
on yarn evenness. Because of this, a coarse yarn would always be more even
than a thinner yarn made from similar fibres and under similar processing
conditions. Does this mean the coarse yarn is intrinsically better, in evenness,
than the finer yarn then? The answer is no. The limiting irregularity provides a
reference point. But this reference point is not fixed, it changes with yarn count.
A fair comparison of yarn quality in terms of evenness between similar yarns of
different counts is to see how close the actual CV of each yarn is to its
respective limit (the limiting irregularity). This would be a measure of the degree
to which the mass variations of a yarn deviates from the ideal yarn with random
fibre ends distribution. The index of irregularity provides such a measure. It is
defined as the ratio between the actual (measured, effective) irregularity and the
limiting irregularity for the yarn (or other fibre assemblies).
I

CV

eff

CVlim

(2.12)

where I = Index of irregulaity

CVeff = Effective (actual, measured) irregularity
CVlim = Limiting irregularity
The index of irregularity is a dimensionless parameter. In the ideal case, I = 1.
Since the actual CV of a yarn is almost always higher than its limiting CV, the I
value is usually greater than 1. The higher the I, the worse the yarn is in
evenness, regardless of the yarn count. Of course, as for limiting irregularity, the
index of irregularity also applies to fibre assemblies other than yarns.

12 (%)

Figure 1.2 shows changes in CV and I of the fibre assemblies at different stages
of the fibre to yarn conversion. It is worth noting that the trends for CV and I are
quite different. The index of irregularity (I) gradually decreases with further
processing. This indicates that the fibre assembly is increasingly approaching
an ideal one. In other words, with further processing, the fibre ends distribution
is getting more and more random. As mentioned early, promoting random fibre
ends distribution is a key objective of fibre to yarn processing. At the yarn stage,
the index of irregularity is approaching one, suggesting that the yarn is
approaching an ideal yarn.
On the other hand, there is a general trend for the effective (or actual) CV of the
fibre assemblies to increase during fibre to yarn processing, with the CV of the
resultant yarn higher than the rovings and the slivers. This is a reflection of the
decreasing thickness of the fibre assemblies, and reducing number of fibres in
the cross section of the fibre assemblies. At the yarn stage, the number of fibres
in the cross section is the lowest, hence the CV of the yarn is the highest.
This example again demonstrates the difference between the CV value and the
I value. The I value provides a good indication of how close a fibre assembly is
to an idea one with random fibre ends distribution. Because of this, the I value is
often used as a quality control parameter for assessing the performance of
drawing and spinning. For instance, if the I value is obtained at every
processing stage, and an increase in I value is found after the 2 nd drawing as
indicated by the broken line in Figure 1.2, that immediately tells us that the 2 nd
drawing is a defective one and should be fixed. If all processing stages are
under control, the I values should progressively decrease from start to the end
of the processing as indicated by the solid line for I values in Figure 1.2.

CVeff

Defective passage

CVeff

I
1
Carded
sliver

Combed Drawn slivers

sliver
1st & 2nd

Roving Yarn

Fig. 1.2: Changes in CV and I values in a combed cotton yarn production

11

Unlike the CV% and U% values, the index of irregularity (I) is independent of
the count of the fibre assembly. This makes it an ideal tool for use in the control
chart. For instance, if the I value is obtained at the roving stage for every
processing lot and plotted on a control chart, abnormalities may be easily
identified before the final spinning stage.

Reduction and addition of irregularities

Figure 1.2 shows that the measured CV (CVeff) of the cotton sliver gradually
reduces from carding to 2nd drawing, and then the CV increases again after the
roving and spinning stages. Why is this the case then? What is causing the
increase and decrease in yarn irregularity. To answer this question, we need to
learn the law of doubling and addition of irregularity.
Law of doubling
During drawing, many slivers are combined (doubled) on the input side to feed
the drawframe. The law of doubling says that if you combine (double) n slivers
together, the overall irregularity of the combined (doubled) sliver will reduce
according to the following law:
______

CVI

where:

CV

(1.13)

CVI = CV of all n slivers at the input to the drawframe

CV = Mean value of the CV values of all the single slivers
____

( CV CV1 CV2 .... CVn )

___

n = number of doubled slivers.

Therefore, doubling always reduces the overall irregularity. This is not difficult to
comprehend if you consider the large increase in the number of fibres in the
cross section of the doubled material. The doubled material is then subject to
drafting, which reduces its thickness. As long as the drawframe is functioning
properly, and the output sliver is thicker than, or as think as, the average
thickness of the input slivers, the CV of the output sliver will be lower than the
average CV of the input slivers. This explains the decrease in measured CV
from carding to drawing in Figure 1.2.
Addition of irregularity
At the roving and spinning stage, there is no doubling. A sliver is drafted into a
thinner roving, and a roving is drafted to yarn thickness during spinning. The net
result is a reduction in the number of fibres in yarn cross section. In addition, the
process itself may introduce additional irregularities to the drafted material.
Mathematically, if a fibre assembly enters a drafting process (roving, spinning)
with an irregularity of CVin, and emerges from that process with an irregularity of
CVout, then the additional irregularity due to the process itself (CV add) can be
worked out using the following formula:
1

CV 2 out CV 2 in CV 2 add

CV add CV 2 out CV 2 in

or

(1.14)

The added irregularity comes from two sources reduction in the number of
fibres in cross section and imperfect drafting.
The following example will help understand the concepts here.
Worked example
Eight slivers, with an average irregularity CV of 4%, were fed to a drawframe.
The drawn sliver has a CV value of 3%. What is the total irregularity introduced
during the drawing process?
Solution
The above problem can be graphically represented as:

Sliver 1

CVadd = ?
CVout = 3%

Sliver 8
CVave = 4%

First of all, we need to know the CV of the input material (CVin). According to
the law of doubling (equation 1.13), this can be easily calculated:
___

CVin CV
n

4
8

1.4 (%)

Now that we know CVin and CVout is already given as 3%, we can calculate the
CV introduced during drawing (CVadd) using equation 1.14.
CVadd

CV 2 out CV 2 in

3 2 1.4 2 2.65 (%)

As mentioned before, this added CV is due to two factors reduction in the

number of fibres in cross section and imperfect drafting caused by material
and/or machine related reasons.
The reading material, 'Making yarn random-wise' by Noguera gives a brief but
excellent account of what we have discussed so far.

Review questions
1. In the calculation of limiting irregularity, information on fibre length is not
used. This implies that fibre length has noting to do with the theoretical yarn
evenness. Yet in practice, fibres with shorter length and higher length
variations usually make less even yarns, other things being equal. How do
you explain this 'discrepancy'?
2. A yarn is composed of 40/60 wool/cotton blend and has a linear density of
20 Nec (cotton count). The cotton has a fineness of 3.8 micronaire ( g / inch
) and the wool has an average diameter of 19 m (1 m = 10 -6 m) and a
diameter CV of 25%. What is the limiting irregularity of this wool/cotton yarn?
If the blend ratio is changed to 20/80 wool/cotton, is the yarn evenness likely
to improve or deteriorate, compared with the 40/60 wool/cotton blend ratio?
(you need to show your workings).
3. In his classical book "Studies of quality in cotton", published by Macmillan
and Co., Limited in 1928, W. Lawrence Balls described such a paradox - the
weaker the fibre, the stronger the yarn! Please explain this paradox, using
the information provided in this topic.

Topic 2

Measurement and benchmarking of yarn

evenness
Introduction
The following quote highlights the importance of measurement:
I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about
and express it in numbers, you know something about it. But when you
cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your
knowledge is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind; it may be the
beginning of knowledge, but you have scarcely in your thoughts
advanced to the stage of science, whatever that matter may be
- attributed to Lord Kelvin, 1883
Up till now we have used the term effective CV, actual or measured CV of
yarns. But how do we measure the CV of a yarn or a fibre assembly and what
do we do with the measured results?
This topic discusses evenness measurement and making use of the measured
results.

Objectives
At the end of this topic you should be able to:

Understand the principle of evenness testing

Appreciate the importance of spectrograms as a diagnostic tool
Know the difference between Uster Statistics and Yarnspec

Principle of evenness testing

As mentioned before, the traditional way of evenness testing is to dissect the
fibre assembly into many short sections and weigh each section, and then
calculate the CV of the fibre assembly from the weights of the individual
sections. This is still a reference method, by which the accuracy of other
methods is judged. Such cutting and weighing method is a very tedious process
as you can imagine, considering that a sufficiently long length of yarn should be
measured to get a CV value representative of the bulk material.
Zellweger Uster AG, a textile instrument manufacturer based in Switzerland,
has produced generations of evenness testing instrument for rapid
1

measurement of the evenness of various fibre assemblies. The latest is the

Uster Evenness Tester 4, although its predecessor (Uster Evenness Tester 3) is
still widely used. A photo of the Uster tester 3 is given in Figure 2.1.

Fig. 2.1: A photo of Uster evenness tester 3 (Zellweger Uster AG)

The Uster Evenness Tester measures mass variations along the length of a
fibre assembly. It is based on the capacitance principle as depicted in Figure
2.2. The two capacitors detect the mass variations or weight per unit length
variations of the fibre assembly running between them. These variations are
transformed into a proportional electrical signal. The signal processing unit will
process this signal, and work out the U% and CV% value, as well as other
useful information concerning the mass variations. All the details can be
displayed or printed out.

Fibre
assembly

Capacitor
Electronic
signal
Processing

Display

Printing

Fig. 2.2: Principle of Uster Evenness Tester

It is worth noting that the accuracy of this method, and other evenness
measuring methods, is usually evaluated against results obtained traditionally,
i.e. by cutting and weighing.

Evenness test results

The Uster evenness tester provides a considerable amount of information on
the evenness of a fibre assembly, including:

Single overall results

Diagram
Spectrogram

Single overall results

These include the U% and CV% values, the index of irregularity (I), as well as
the number of imperfections (thin place, thick place, and neps). All those
parameters are expressed as single numbers, which are easy to use,
particularly in a mill situation. These single values provide an overall picture of
yarn evenness. However, if the results are bad, the causes of the poor results
can not be identified from these single values.
The following print-out is an example of the single overall results for a 100%
cotton yarn, tested 10 times at 400 m/min for 5 minutes.
The meanings of different single value results are explained in the following
page.

Fig. 2.3: The single overall results for a 100% cotton yarn (Uster News Bulletin
No 35, October 1988, p14).

Um

Irregularity U of the mass with a cut length of approximately 1 cm

(measuring field length). In other words, this is the U value you
would have got from cutting the yarn into approximately 1 cm
sections and weighing those short sections.

CVm

Coefficient of variation of mass with a cut length of approximately

1 cm. This is the CV most often quoted in yarn specification and
commercial transactions. It is the effective CV used for calculating
the index of irregularity.

CVm(1m)

Coefficient of variation of mass with a cut length of 1 m, simulating

the CV you would have got from cutting the yarn into 1 m sections
and weighing those sections. The same applies to CVm(10m) and
CVm(100m). It should be noted that as the cut length increases,
the irregularity reduces.

Index

The index of irregularity (I) value, which is always greater than one
as indicated in the print-out.

Thin places (-50%)

Number of places that have mass reductions of 50% or more with
respect to the mean value. Note that (-50%) is the standard
sensitivity level used in the test. If a different sensitivity level (40%, -40%, -60%) is used, the result would have been different.
The number of thin places has a significant impact on yarn
strength.
Thick palces (+50%)
Number of places that have mass increases of 50% or more with
respect to the mean value. Note that (+50%) is the standard
sensitivity level used in the test. If a different sensitivity level
(+35%, +70%, +100%) is used, the result would have been
different. The number of thin places has a significant impact on
yarn strength.
Neps (+280%)
Number of places that have mass increases of +280% or more
with respect to the mean value and a reference length of 1mm.
Note that +200% is the sensitivity level normally used in the test.
The results would have been dThese short thick places in a yarn
are often the results of vegetable matter or entangled fibres.
S

Standard deviation of results

Q95%

95% confidence interval of the mean value

Please note that the thin places, thick places, and neps are called the
imperfections.

Diagram
A diagram is simply a trace of mass (linear density) variation along a fibre
assembly. For instance, if you dissect a long length of yarn into many very short
sections and then weigh each section, you will get many mass readings (x i) as
shown in Figure 2.4.
Mass
xi (individual mass readings)

Mean
mass

Length

Fig. 2.4: A manually constructed diagram of mass variation

From this diagram, many useful statistics (mean, CV etc) can be obtained as
shown in the Limiting Irregularity section.
A diagram obtained from the Uster evenness tester is given in Figure 2.5. The
dip in the middle of this diagram was actually caused by a missing sliver, of
about 120 m, in the input material for a drawframe. This example demonstrates
the usefulness of diagrams in identifying certain faults in the fibre assembly.
Basically, the diagrams can help identify extreme thin and thick places, slow
changes in the mean mass value, step changes in the mean value, periodic
mass variations of long wave length etc.

Fig. 2.5: A diagram showing an extreme thin place in the sliver (Furter 1982,
p.12)

Spectrograms
The single overall results are very useful in that they provide evenness
information in concise single values. These single values are easy to use for
comparison purpose in particular. For instance, the CV% or index of irregularity
of one yarn is higher than another similar yarn, we can say one yarn is better
than the other in terms of yarn evenness. But that is often not sufficient for
quality control purpose. Suppose we now know from the single overall results
(eg. CV, I) that a yarn is not good in evenness, and we want to find out what has
caused the irregularity in the yarn. Once we know what has caused the
irregularity, we can then try to rectify the problem. For this, we need the
spectrograms.
Before we discuss the spectrogram, it is necessary to say a few words about
the nature of mass variations in a fibre assembly. We already know that random
fibre arrangements lead to mass variation, and this variation can be precisely
calculated as discussed in the limiting irregularity section. If that is all the
variation we get, then we have nothing more to worry about, because that is
exactly what we aim for in a yarn. Unfortunately we often get more than just the
random variations, for two common reasons:
(a) Variability in fibre length and the presence of short fibres make fibre control
during drafting difficult, this leads to non-random variations in a fibre
assembly. Such non-random variation is called a drafting wave. It is called
a drafting wave because the mass variation occurs in a more or less periodic
manner in the drafted material, much like a wave of variations along the
length of the fibre assembly.
(b) There may be machine defects or mechanical faults in the drafting systems,
which causes changes in drafting speed and the actual draft periodically,
leading to rather strictly periodic mass variations in the drafted fibre
assembly.
Here we need to reflect upon what has been discussed on Roller Drafting in the
Introduction to Fibre Science and Textile Technology unit. For roller drafting, as
depicted in Figure 2.6, the most important concept is the concept of perfect
roller drafting.
Front rollers

Back rollers

Slower

Faster

Ratch setting

Fig. 2.6: A simple roller drafting system

The concept of perfect roller drafting is: every fibre in the drafting zone should
travel at the speed of back rollers until its leading end reaches the front roller

nip. Then the fibre gets instantly accelerated to the front roller speed. If this is
what actually happens in roller drafting, we will get a drafted fibre assembly with
random variation of fibre ends only. However, when there are many short fibres
in the drafting zone, these short fibres will not move according to the
requirements of roller drafting. They float and swim together in the drafting
zone, the speed at which they travel depends on the speed of their
neighbouring fibres. The end result is some practically (i.e. not strictly) periodic
mass variation in the drafted material. Such practically periodic mass variation
caused by floating short fibres is called a drafting wave, and its wave length is
approximately 2.5 to 3 times the average fibre length of the fibre assembly.
With good fibre control, using pressure bars (on cotton drawframe) and pinned
faller basr (on worsted gillbox), drafting waves can be significantly reduced or
eliminated.
A common machine defect or mechanical fault of drafting elements is roller
eccentricity, as indicated in Figure 2.7.

Eccentric front
bottom roller

Drafted material

Speed varies
with radius
R
Wave length
(Roller circumference)

Eccentric back
bottom roller

Drafted material

R
r
Wave length
(Roller circumference x draft)

Fig. 2.7: Eccentric rollers cause periodic mass variations

Because of roller eccentricity, the surface speed (v) of the eccentric roller varies
as the radius of rotation (r) varies ( v 2 r n, where n is the roller rpm). If the
front bottom roller is eccentric, a larger radius of rotation (R) will lead to higher
roller surface speed, which means increased drafting, resulting in over draft or a
thin section in the drafted material. The opposite happens with the smaller
radius of rotation, and this cycle repeats for every complete revolution of the
eccentric roller. As a result the wave length of the periodic variation is exactly
the same as the circumference of the offending roller. On the other hand, if the
back bottom roller is eccentric and front rollers are fine, then at the larger radius
of rotation R), the back roller surface speed will be faster, leading to a

reduction in draft and hence a thicker section in the drafted material. The
opposite is the case at the smaller radius of rotation (r). Not only that, the
periodic mass variation caused by the back eccentric roller will be lengthened
by a factor of the draft used. In other words, the wave length of the periodic
mass variation caused by a back eccentric roller will be equal to the roller
circumference multiplied by a factor of draft, as indicated in Figure 2.7.
Periodic mass variations in a yarn often result in unwanted patterning in fabrics
made from such yarns. They also lead to increased ends down during spinning
and subsequent processing. It is essential in yarn manufacture to prevent the
occurrence of such mass variations in slivers, rovings or yarns. Furthermore,
the presence of periodic or practically periodic mass variations in a fibre
assembly does not necessarily result in significant increases in the CV% value
or in the index of irregularity. So the CV% value or index of irregularity will not
indicate the presence of those mass variations. But how do we know if a fibre
assembly has a drafting wave or periodic mass variation then? This question
leads us back to discussion on spectrograms.
Hypothetically, if a yarn has mass variations that resemble a sinusoidal wave as
shown in Figure 2.8(a), then a mathematical (Fourier) transformation of such a
mass variation signal will reveal the frequency (f) of such variation as a sharp
peak shown in Figure 2.8(b). For a signal that is not as simple as just a
sinusoidal wave, it has been proven mathematically that it can be constructed
by superimposing a series of sinusoidal waves of varying frequencies.
Therefore, if the original mass variation in the yarn is of a more complex shape
as shown in Figure 2.8(c), then the same mathematical transformation will
reveal the frequency of each of its sinusoidal components as shown Figure
2.8(d). The different amplitude reflects the different share of the respective
component in the original signal.
Amplitude

Amplitude
(a)

(b)
Transformation

Time

(c)

Frequency
(d)

Transformation

Time

f1

f2

f3 Frequency

Fig. 2.8: Transformation of time domain signal to frequency domain

If the original mass variation is of a random nature, then after transformation,
there will be many frequencies of similar amplitude. Further, if there is a periodic
2

mass variation in addition to the random variation, then the frequency of that
periodic mass variation will show up as a sharp peak after the transformation.
Put differently, if a mass variation signal is subjected to a transformation and a
sharp peak (chimney) appears in the transformed signal, then we know there
is a periodic mass variation in the fibre assembly. This is basically how
spectrogram works. Since wave length is more useful than frequency for textile
purposes, the spectrogram indicates the different wave lengths (on a
logarithmic scale) versus their amplitude. Modern evenness testing
instruments, such as the Uster Evenness Tester, provide diagrams as well as
spectrograms for the fibre assembly tested. The diagram is a time domain mass
variation signal, while the spectrogram represents the same mass variation in
the frequency domain. Figure 2.9 shows the diagrams and spectrograms of 3
different yarns normal yarn with random variation only, faulty yarn with
additional periodic mass variation, and faulty yarn with additional drafting wave.

Fig.2.9: Diagrams (left) and spectrograms (right) of 3 yarns (Uster

Spectrograph, Zelleger Uster, PE404)
With respect to interpreting a spectrogram, the following simple rules can be
used as a guide:
(a) A fault-free fibre assembly will give a typical normal spectrogram (with
neither chimnies nor humps)
(b) A chimney on top of a normal spectrogram indicates the presence of a
periodic mass variation in the fibre assembly. The wave length of this
periodic mass variation can be read off the horizontal axis (noting the
logarithmic scale)
(c) A hump on top of a normal spectrogram indicates the presence of a drafting
wave in the fibre assembly. The wave length of the drafting wave is equal to
2.5 to 3 times the mean fibre length.
Once we get the wave length of a periodic mass variation from the spectrogram,
and we know this wave length is related to the circumference of the offending
roller, we can then identify the roller and replace it with a good one to solve the
problem. For drafting waves, the use of more uniform fibres and proper fibre
control during drafting will usually solve the problem.
Spectrogram is therefore a very useful quality control tool in a spinning mill.

Benchmarking yarn evenness

In management jargon, benchmarking is a total quality management tool and
denotes the procedure of identifying and quantifying topnotch or world-class
performance (benchmarks) in a particular business or product category and
comparing the data with the performance of the own company or product.
Lets assume we have already produced some yarns and we have tested the
yarns for evenness. Now we want to know how good our yarns are. In other
words, we want to benchmark a product - our yarns.
There are several ways of benchmarking yarn evenness, including:

Index of irregularity
Uster Statistics
Yarnspec (for worsted yarn only)

Index of irregularity
Table 2.1 shows a classification of worsted yarns based on the index of
irregularity of the yarn.
Table 2.1: Classification of worsted yarns based on the index of irregularity
(Source: Textile Quality, M. Bona, p253, 1994)
Index of irregularity (I)
Bornet Classification
Monfort Classification
1.1
Excellent
Very even
1.2
1.3
Very good
Even
1.4
Good
1.5
Mediocre
Irregular quality
1.6
Poor
1.7
1.8
Very irregular
Since processing technology is improving and so is yarn quality, the data in this
table may not reflect the quality of worsted yarns in the future. Generally
speaking, a good quality worsted yarn should not have an index of irregularity
greater than 1.2 by todays standard.
Uster statistics
While the evenness index value is of use to the yarn manufacturers for internal
quality control purpose, what matters to the users of yarn (i.e the weavers and
knitters) is the actual irregularity in the yarn they are going to use. For this
reason, the Uster Statistics is of great practical importance.
So what is the Uster Statistics then? The following excerpts from the 1997 Uster
Statistics Book (produced by Zellweger Uster) answer this question briefly:
Almost half a century ago, in 1949, the first Uster Standards were
presented to the textile public in numerical form. This started a new era in
2

the assessment of the technological and commercial value of spun yarns.

Over the years, the Uster Standards have developed into the Uster
Statistics, which have been regularly updated until today and additional
quality parameters for sliver, roving, and yarns have been introduced
progressively. Simultaneously, the methods and procedures applied to
establish the Uster Statistics have been gradually enhanced. (Uster
Statistics 1997, p2)
Today, the Uster Statistics represent the only truly comprehensive
survey of the quality of textile materials produced in the major textile
hubs around the world and they constitute the mainstay of global market
intelligence related to textile quality. (Uster Statistics 1997, p2)
The Uster Statistics are first and foremost a practical guide to good
textile practices in the field of yarn manufacturing. (Uster Statistics
1997, p3)
The Uster Statistics just seem to have been made for quality
benchmarking on the corporate level. (Uster Statistics 1997, p4)
Uster Statistics 1997 provide data on the following major types of yarn:

100% CO, carded, ring spinning 100% carded cotton (ring spun)
100% CO, carded, rotor spinning 100% carded cotton (rotor spun)
100% CO, combed, ring spinning 100% combed cotton (ring spun)
100% CO, combed, rotor spinning 100% combed cotton (rotor spun)
100% CO, carded, rotor spinning 100$ carded cotton (rotor spun)
100% WO, worsted spinning 100% wool yarn (worsted ring spun)

Provisional data is also provided for the following types of yarn:

100% PES, ring spinning 100% polyester (ring spun)

100% CV, ring spinning - 100% Rayon (ring spun)
100% CV, rotor spinning 100% Rayon (rotor spun)
65/35, 67/33 PES/CO, combed, ring spinning 65% polyester/35% cotton
blend, combed (ring spun) and 67% polyester/33% cotton blend, combed
(ring spun)
65/35, 67/33 PES/CV, ring spinning 65% polyester/35% Rayon blend (ring
spun) and 67% polyester/33% Rayon blend (ring spun)
50/50 PES/CO, rotor spinning 50% polyester/50% cotton blend (rotor
spun)
50/50 PES/CO, air-jet spinning 50% polyester/50% cotton blend (air-jet
spun)
65/35 PES/CO, air-jet spinning 65% polyester/35% cotton blend (air-jet
spun)
55/45 PES/WO, worsted spinning 55% polyester/45% wool blend (worsted
ring spun)

The key quality attributes listed for these yarns are:

Yarn count variation (between bobbins or packages)

Mass variation (U% and CV%)
Imperfections (thick and thin places, neps)
Uster Hairiness Index
Tensile properties (strength and elongation)

Figure 2.10 shows selected charts for mass variation and imperfections from
the 1997 Uster statistics book. The nomograms or percentile lines refer to the
total world production that equals or exceeds the measurement value given for
a particular yarn description.

(a) Evenness and imperfection statistics for 100% cotton, carded rotor spoun
yarns
(b) Evenness and imperfection statistics for 100% cotton, combed ring spun
yarns
(c) Evenness and imperfection statistics for 100% wool, worsted ring spun yarns

Figure 2.10: Uster statistics for selected yarns - (a) Carded cotton yarn; (b)
Combed cotton yarn; (c) Worsted wool yarns (Uster Statistics 1997, p. 118,
p.120, p.74, p.168, p.170).
Example:
You have an 60 Ne (Nm 100, or 10 tex) 100% combed cotton yarn with a
measured CV of 13.9+0.2%, and you want to know how good the yarn is in
terms of its evenness.
First of all, you need to find the statistics for the right type of yarn from the Uster
Statistics book, then you need to identify from the x-axis the yarn count. In this
example, a vertical line drawn from the x-axis at 60 Ne (Nm 100 or 10 tex)
intersects with the two horizontal lines drawn from the y-axis at 13.7% and
14.1% CV (lower and upper confidence limits for this yarn) right at the 25% line.
This means only 25% of all Ne60 combed cotton ring spun yarns produced
worldwide have a CV of 13.9% or better. In other words, this particular yarn is
better than 75% of the total world production of comparable Ne60 combed
cotton yarns in terms of yarn evenness.
Using a similar approach, we can interpret other Uster statistics.
2

For the Imperfections listed in Figure 2.10, it should be noted that the standard
sensitivity levels (-50%, +50%, +200%) are indicated for the thin places, thick
places, and neps respectively. If the yarn is not tested at these sensitivity levels
on the Uster Evenness Tester, we can not use these Uster Statistics for
comparison.
Finally, it should be stressed that there are restrictions on the interpretation
and application of Uster Statistics. These restrictions include:

Uster Statistics do not provide direct access to information about the raw
materials used in spinning. Good quality, more expensive fibres are usually
spun into good quality yarns. Therefore, a yarn with a CV% below the 5%
line on the Uster Statistics chart may be indicative of a high cost yarn.
Similarly, a yarn with a CV% value above the 75% line may not be all that
good in terms of evenness, but it may be indicative of a very attractive price
and just the right quality for the target markets. The Uster Statistics is merely
a global survey of yarn quality as produced in every part of the world.
Whether or not these qualities are produced economically from adequate
raw materials and offered at a legitimate price is beyond the scope of the
Uster Statistics.
Yarns intended for different end uses have different quality requirements.
For example the requirements of weaving and knitting yarns are often
different. Therefore, yarn quality should be judged in the context of its end
use.
The quality of yarns is a moving target. As technology improves quality
standards also change. Figure 2.11 shows the improvement in yarn
evenness (U%) over a period of almost 50 years.

Figure 2.11 Improvement in yarn evenness (U%) over a period of almost 50

years according to the 50% line of the Uster Statistics (Uster Statistics 1997, p.
3)

Therefore, the validity of the information provided in the 1997 Uster Statistics
is confined to the period of time covered by the data, although it can usually
serve as a quality guide over an extended period of 5 years or more.
The yarn quality data refer to ecru yarns. In the worsted industry, top dyeing
is common to produce coloured yarns. In such case, the Uster Statistics
should be used with caution.

Yarnspec (for worsted yarns)

Yarnspec is a computer program developed by Scientists at CSIRO Textile and
Fibre Technology in Geelong. Since the work was funded by Australian wool
growers, the program has been specifically designed for the prediction of
properties of worsted yarns and the performance of worsted spinning, based on
the properties of worsted tops and the spinning conditions. The predicted
results are what a worsted spinner can expect in terms of spinning performance
and yarn quality if the operation follows best commercial practice. In other
2

words, Yarnspec can be used to benchmark the performance of worsted

spinners.
For single worsted yarns, the program requires the following details as the
input:
(a) Wool properties (from tops)
Fibre diameter (micron) and diameter CV
Hauteur length (mm), CV of Hauteur and
Fibre bundle tenacity (cN/tex)
(b) Processing details (spinning)
Spinning draft
Spindle speed (rpm)
Ring size (mm)
Traveller number
(c)

Yarn details
Yarn count
Yarn twist
Dyed or undyed

The predicted outcome includes the following details:

Yarn evenness (I, CV%, U%)
Yarn Imperfections (Thin places/km, thick places/km, and neps/km)
Yarn tenacity and breaking elongation%
Spinning ends-down per 1,000 spindle hours
For a worsted spinner, Yarnspec is a step ahead of Uster Statistics for
performance benchmarking, because it takes into consideration of the fibre
properties used in spinning the yarn. In addition, it provides information on yarn
strength as well as on the critical spinning performance in terms of ends-down
per 1,000 spindle hours. Yarnspec can also be used to predict the properties of
two folded yarns.
An example of the Yarnspec print-out is given in figure 2.12.
Fig. 2.12: Yarnspec print-out (Lamb and Yang 1996)
The reading material "choosing the right top for spinning" by Lamb and Yang
gives more details on yarn performance prediction.
Review questions
1. An ideal sliver of 70 mm mean fibre length is roller drafted with a draft of 10
under the following three conditions:

(a) Perfect roller drafting

(b) Presence of a large number of uncontrolled short fibres
(c) An eccentric back drafting roller with a diameter of 3 cm.
Explain how drafting under each condition will affect the evenness of the
drafted sliver, and sketch and label the spectrogram for each drafting
condition.
2. A 50 tex worsted yarn of 100% wool is measured for its evenness on the
Uster evenness tester. If the CV of this yarn is 15%, how good is this yarn in
relation to world production of similar yarns?
References
Bona, M. 1994, Textile Quality, Texilia, Italy.
Furter, R. 1982, Evenness Testing in Yarn Production: Part 1, The Textile
Institute, Manchester.
Lamb, P.R. and Yang, S. 1996, Choosing the Right Top for Spinning, TopTech'96, CSIRO, Geelong.
Martindale, J.G. 1945, A new method of measuring the irregularity of yarns with
some observations on the origin of irregularities in worsted slivers and yarns,
Journal of the Textile Institute, 36, T35-47.
Uster News Bulletin No 35, 1988, The Third generation of Evenness Testers,
Zellweger Uster AG, Switzerland.
Uster Spectrograph, PE404, Zellweger Uster AG, Switerland.
Uster Statistics, 1997, Zellweger Uster AG, Switzerland.