Journal of the Textile Institute

ISSN: 0040-5000 (Print) 1754-2340 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tjti20

Fabric Loss during Spreading: A Comparative Study

of the Actual Loss in Manufacturing Men's Shirts

S. F. Ng , C. L. Hui , T. Y. Lo & S. H. Chan

To cite this article: S. F. Ng , C. L. Hui , T. Y. Lo & S. H. Chan (2001) Fabric Loss during
Spreading: A Comparative Study of the Actual Loss in Manufacturing Men's Shirts, Journal of the
Textile Institute, 92:3, 269-279, DOI: 10.1080/00405000108659576

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/00405000108659576

Published online: 30 Mar 2009.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 77

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tjti20
Fabric Loss during Spreading:
A Comparative Study of the Actual
Loss in Manufacturing Men's Shirts
S.R Ng, CL. Hui, T.Y. Lo, and S.H. Chan
Institute of Textiles and Clothing, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University,
Hung Horn, Kowloon, Hong Kong

Received 15.2.2000 Accepted for publication 15.12.2001

A theoretical model has been developed for describing the spreading process in a cutting
room. Verification work Tor this model is described in this study, the aim of which was to
determine whether the model could accurately calculate the total spreading losses in a real
situation. The results presented in this paper address the difference in total fahric loss during
spreading that was obtained hetween actual performance and theoretical calculation.
Through a further investigation, the difference is highly negatively correlated with the
number of completed plies lying on the cutting table, and there is no treatment of the number
of turns in the theoretical model when Vo is equal to zero. Ultimately, the equation for
calculating the total fabric loss by the theoretical model is refined to improve its precision.
The result of this refinement is better than the original theoretical performance.

1. INTRODUCTION
Garment production can roughly be broken down into three major operations, which are
cutting, sewing, and pressing {Solinger, 1988). Before performing the sewing and finishing
operations, the main role of the cutting process is to transform fabric rolls into garment
panels, and the cut panels are usually sorted by different sizes and colours for the pre-
paration of subsequent sewing operations. In garment-manufacturing, material utilisation
is an important issue in controlling the production costs. To control the material utilisation
and wastage, fabric losses due to cutting are particularly important, since this process has
a great impact on actual fabric consumption.
As illustrated in Fig. 1, when we examine the fabric loss in an ordinary cutting process,
two main sources of fabric loss exist. The first is called marking toss or marker fallout,
which occurs because of the gaps and other non-usable areas at places between the garment
panels of a marker. The amount of marking loss is determined by comparing the total area
of the marker with the perimeter area of the pattern pieces; the area not used by garment
pieces is the wastage (Ruth and Kunz, 1990). The second source is generally termed the
spreading losses. Tyler (1991) stated that spreading losses were those fabric losses that
exist outside the marker. During the spreading process, end loss, width loss, splicing loss,
splicing allowance, and remnant loss are all factors contributing to spreading losses.
Many previous studies (Cole and Sanbom, \995a.b\ Kallman, 1979; Kush, 1990;
Magowan. 1982; Milokhina tVfl/., 1986; Ng e/«/., 1990; Roberts, 1981; Wing, 1995) have
been conducted with the aim of improving material utilisation. However, most of them
focus mainly on practical guidelines or procedures in fabric-saving. In fact, there is a lack
of systematic approach and fundamental analysis to evaluate fabric loss during spreading.
Although the work of Milokhina et al. (1986) has allowed a regression model to be
developed to compute fabric loss along tbe length of the overlays, its approach is not

./. Te.\t. In.Ki.. 2001. 92 Part I. No. 3 © Textile Institute 269

 Ng, Hui. Lo, and Chan

End Loss
^; Remnont Loss
Spreoding Losses! width Loss
^ ^ ^ Splicing Ailowonce
Fabric Loss in Cutting g ^ splice LOSS

Marldng Loss

Fig. 1 Sources of fabric loss in the cutting room

considered capable of generalisation, The recent work of Ng et al (1998) has constructed a

mathematical model for the computation of fabric loss during spreading in a systematic
manner. With reference to the mathematical model, the whole spreading process was
analysed and expressed in the form of equations. Theoretically, the amount of material
wastage for a particular cut stack can be calculated from the input variables of the equation,
such as fabric-roll length and width, marker length and width, etc., but there is a need to
verify the analysis in real industrial situations. This paper describes an attempt to compare
the theoretical fabric loss with the actual loss incurred in practice in a men's-shirt factory in
Hong Kong.

2. N O M E N C L A T U R E
The following notation is used in the development of a model in order to calculate the
fabric toss during spreading.

tn Marker length
w Marker width
n Number of splicing intervals
I Number of fabric roll, ranging from 1 to a positive integer
} Number of splicing interval, ranging from I to a positive integer
Sn Length of the nth splicing interval
7} Length of marker from the left-hand to the right-hand end of the jth
splicing interval
7)' Length of marker from the right-hand to the left-hand end of the /th
splicing interval
Li Length of the /th fabric roll
W Width of the fabric roll
h Length of overlap during spreading
p, Number of complete plies laid by the /th fabric roll
Ri Length of remnant laid by the /th fabric roll
V, Distance from the end of the marker to the cut edge laid by the /th
fabric roil
Xi Cut-off length of the /th fabric roll
g Length of allowance made for the fabric in turn between one ply and the next ply
A^, Total number of turns from the first fabric roll lo the /th fabric roll
Xk Proportion of the fabric loss in the ^th splicing interval
Bi Length of 'internal' loss for each lay of the /th fabric roll
Ai Area of fabric loss in the /th roll

270 3. Text. Inst.. 2001. 92 Part I. No. 3 ® Textile Institute

Fabric Loss during Spreading

A Total area of fabric for all fabric rolls

Aw Total area of fabric loss for all fabric rolls
fli Proportion of fabric loss for all fabric rolls
F Total number of rolls
Ll Total length of fabric rolls being laid

3. THEORETICAL MODEL FOR CALCULATING FABRIC LOSS

DURING SPREADING

In the theoretical model for calculating total fabric loss during spreading (Ng et al., 1998), it
is assumed that the spreading process is handled in a controlled manner and that there are no
flaws in the fabric being spread. Since the total area of fabric isA=WLt, the proportion of
waste area over all rolls is expressed by Equation (1):

4. COMPARISON OF THE THEORETICAL MODEL

WITH ACTUAL PERFORMANCE
4.1 Outline
With reference to the model (Ng et al., 1998), the actual industrial data of fabric loss
during spreading were collected from a local men's-shirt factory in order to compare and
analyse the difference between the actual performance of fabric-spreading and the results
of a theoretical calculation made by using Equation (1).

4.2 Data Collection

A leading local men's-shirt-manufacturing company was selected for data collection.
This was carried out over a period of three months and 30 individual cutting lays. In
order to cover various types of fabric loss during spreading in an industrial environment,
the methods of measuring various types of fabric loss during spreading described in
Section 4.3 were devised.

4.3 Methods for Measuring Various Types of Fabric Loss during Spreading
in an Industrial Environment
4.3.1 Scope
The fabric loss during spreading consists of marking loss, width loss, end loss, splicing
allowance, splicing loss, and remnant loss. Different methods were designed to measure
these types of fabric loss in an industrial environment. Details of each measuring method
are given below.

4.3.2 Marking Loss

This type of loss consists of the proportion of the fabric layout that has been wasted when
all pattem blocks are placed in the marking area of each cutting lay. The marker-fallout
area of each fabric lay is measured according to the area of the marker and the value of

J. Text. Inst.. 2001. 92 Part I. No. 3 © Textile Institute 271

 Ng, Hui. Lo. and Oian

the marker efficiency of each cutting lay that is available in the computerised marking
system of the factory. The marking loss is obtained by multiplication of the area of the
marker, the value of the marker efficiency, and the number of plies spread on a cutting
table. It is expressed in terms of the marker-fallout area.

4.3.3 End Loss

End loss occurs when the spreader reaches the end of the marker, and the fabric has to be
cut from the roll or folded back for the return lap. The measurement of end loss is carried
out after the spreading of the cutting lay is completed. For this experimental study, a
small portion of end loss (of width 10 cm) was cut from the two ends of the cutting lay,
and the total end loss was calculated from the small portion proportionately.
The steps for measuring the end loss were:
(1) a piece of fabric (10 cm x 10 cm) was cut from the cutting lay;
(ii) by using an electronic balance, the weight of cut fabric was measured under
standard atmospheric conditions;
(iii) a portion of fabric of 10-cm width was cut from each end of the cutting lays; and
(iv) the total area of end loss of the cutting lay (cm") was calculated by using the
following equation and multiplying the result by 10:
Weight of fabric cut from end of cutting lay (in grams)
Weight of the fabric piece in area of 10 cm x 10 cm (in grams)

Marker width (cm) = Total area of end loss (cm")

4.3.4 Width Loss

Since the width of marker has to be drafted to be narrower than the actual width of the
fabric, width loss is the amount of fabric wastage that lies between the selvedge edges of
the fabric roll and the edges of the marker.
In a similar manner to the measuring method for the end loss described in the previous
section, the measurement of width loss is carried out after the spreading of the cutting lay
is completed. Again, only a .small portion of width loss (of width 10 cm) is taken from the
cutting lay, and the total area of width loss (cm^) is converted to the full scale by the
following equation, with the result multiplied by 10:
Weight of fahric cut from the selvedge edge of cutting lay (in grams)
Weight of the fabric piece in 10 cm x 10 cm (in grams)

Length of the cutting lay (cm) = Total area of width loss (cm^)

4.3.5 Splicing Loss

Splicing loss is the amount of fabric waste in terms of area that occurs in the last ply of
each fabric roll. It is obtained by multiplication of the distance between the neighbouring
splice line and the end of the remnanl by die marker width.

4.3.6 Splicing Allowance

The splicing allowance is the amount of fabric waste in terms of area that occurs in the
first ply of each roll. It is obtained by multiplication of the distance between the start of
the first ply and the neighbouring splice line by the marker width.

272 / Te.xt. Inst.. 2001. 92 Part 1. No. 3 © Textile Institute

Fabric Loss during Spreading

A finished cutting lay

The break down of various types of fabric loss

incurred during spreading

Number of complete
pliss laid by a single

Width Loss

Fig. 2 Illustration of all types of fabric loss incurred in spreading

4.3.7 Remnant Lo.ss

A remnant is the remaining length of fabric left by the last fabric roll on tbe completion of
spreading. The remnant would not be wasted if it could be used for another cutting lay.
Otherwise, the remnant would be considered as a remnant loss. In this study, all remnants
were used for other cutting lays, and thus there was no remnant loss measured.

4.3.8 Locations of Measurements

Fig. 2 shows the locations for measuring all types of fabric loss in a cutting lay.

4.3.9 Elimination of Measurement Error

To ensure that there is no measurement error in using the above-mentioned methods, a
comparison between the total area of fabric wastage recorded by the factory management
and that measured by these methods was made for all selected cutting lays. We found

.1. Text. Inst., 2001. 92 Part I. No. 3 © Textile Institute 273

 A'^, Hui, Lo, and Chan

Table I
Comparison of Actual Fabrie Loss during Spreading and Theoretical Calculation by Using Equation (1)
Sample Percenlage of Tolal Fabric Loss Percentage of Total Fabric Loss Difference
during Spreading Collected during Spreading Computed (A)-(B) {=^D)
from the Factory (A) by Equation {1) (B)
1 14.05% 14.12% -0.07%
2 6.17% 2.65% 3.52%
3 9.79% SJ51% 4.27%
4 1L62% 7.99% 3.63%
5 13.74% 9.68% 4.06%
6 16.65% 13.47% 3.18%
7 12.82% 9.02% 3.80%
8 11.89% 10.26% 1.63%
9 13.80% 9.44% 4.36%
10 11.12% 7.92% 3.20%
u 13.10% 7.80% 5.30%
12 14.17% 4.68% 9.49%
13 15.76% 13.03% 2.73%
14 14.87% 5.05% 9.82%
15 13.34% 7.43% 5.91%
16 14.75% 8.64% 6.11%
17 14.58% 12.56% 2.02%
18 12.38% 7.84% 4.54%
19 12.73% 12.77% -0.04%
20 12.72% 12.16% 0.56%
21 U.49% 8.64% 2.85%
22 11.86% 3.78% 8.08%
23 13.00% 10.23% 2.77%
24 11.13% 10.56% 0.57%
25 13.61% 14.06% -0.45%
26 14.22% 9.74% 4.48%
27 12.94% 10.20% 2.74%
28 10.65% 9.89% 0.76%
29 14.09% 8.33% 5.76%
30 11.67% 9.47% 2.20%

that the difference between these two sets of data was very close to zero. We believe that,
if a difference between actual measurement and theoretical calculation exists, such a
difference will not be caused by the measurement error.

4.4 Data Analysis and Interpretation

Based on a data set of 30 cutting lays collected in the Hong Kong men's-shirt factory, the
results of the actual performance of total fabric loss during spreading and a theoretical
calculation made by using Equation (1) were compared and are summarised in Table I.
Details of each measured value and theoretical calculations for all samples are shown
in the Appendix.
The difference (AD) between actual performance and theoretical calculation is shown
in Table I. The range of AD lies between - 0 . 4 5 % and 9,82%. In order to understand
which attribute of Equation (1) is a critical factor contributing to the difference between
the actual performance and theoretical calculation of the model (Ng et ai, 1998), further
analysis of AD is necessary.

4.5 F u r t h e r Analysis of AZ> with Each Attribute of the Theoretical Model

By using regression analysis, the correlation coefficient (/?) of each individual plot is
ohtained and summarised as shown in Table II.

274 / Text. Inst.. 2001. 92 Part I. No. 3 © Textile Institute

Fabric Loss during Spreading

Table 11
Summary of Correlation Results
w W m P P D
w 1
W 0.996 1
0.045 0.049 1
m -0.273 -0.266 0.289 1
P 0,091 0.081 0.274 -0.777 1
P 0.406 0.424 0.534 -0.007 o.ni 1
^r -0.104 -0.095 0.129 0.063 0.034 -0.201 1
0.328 0.345 0.185 0.687 -0.661 0.244 -0.080 1
«i 0.236 0.278 0.030 -0.311 0.266 -0.101 0.071 0.0671 1
D -0.258 -0-276 -0.197 0.352 -0.431 0.188 -0.285 0.2220 -0.813 1

As illustrated in Table II. the number of completed plies, p, is highly negatively

correlated with AD. This implies that the number of completed plies is a critical factor
contributing to the difference between the actual fabric loss during spreading and the
theoretical calculation by the model (Ng et at., 1998).
However, in the analysis of the theoretical model, the numerical treatment of the total
number of complete plies {N^) is only feasible when it is assumed VQ is not equal to zero.
There is no treatment of A',, on the model when VQ is zero. In this case, on the basis of
Equation (1), the refined component of the theoretical model should be expressed by
Equation (2):

w
(2)

where, if VQ > 0, then

1=1

Otherwise, if VQ = 0, then

5. COMPARISON OF ACTUAL PERFORMANCE WITH REFINED

THEORETICAL MODEL
By using the same data set that was previously collected from the factory, the theoretical
result of the refined theoretical model was recomputed. The difference hetween the actual
performance and the new theoretical calculation of the refined model is summarised in
Table III. Details of theoretical computations based on Equation (2) are shown in the
Appendix.
Table III shows that the range of AD lies between -2.85% and 3.25%. The refined
model expre.ssed hy Equation (2) gives a better prediction performance of fabric loss
during spreading, as shown in Eig. 3. This is because the difference computed by
Equation (2) is closer to zero than that computed hy Equation (I).

./. Text. Inst., 2001. 92 Part 1. No. 3 © Textile Institute 275

 Ng, Hui. Lo. and Chan

Table m
Comparison of Actual Fabric Loss during Spreading and Tbeoretitat Calculation by Using Kqualion <2)
Sample Percentage of Total Fabric Loss Percentage of Toial Fabric Loss Difference
during Spreading Collected during Spreading Computed (A>-(B)(=AD)
from the Factory (A I by Equation (2) (B>
1 14.05% 15.69% 1.64%
2 16.17% 19.02% 2.85%
3 9.79% 9.28% 0.51%
4 n.62% 13.23% 1.61%
5 13.74% 11.52% 2.22%
6 16.65% 15.35% 1.30%
7 12.82% 11.82% 1.00%
8 n.89% 12.28% 0.39%
9 13.80% 12.46% 1.34%
10 11.12% 9.75% 1,37%
11 13.10% 11.56% 1.54%
12 14.17% 11.95% 2.22%
13 15.76% 15.90% 0.14%
14 14.87% 15.62% 0.75%
15 13.34% 14.06% 0.72%
16 14.75% 14.71% 0.04%
17 14.58% 16.41% 1.83%
IS 12.38% 10.71% L67%
19 12.73% Ll.85% 1.12%
20 12.72% 14.32% 1.60%
21 11.49% 12.90% 1.41%
22 11.86% 9.32% 2.54%
23 13.00% 12.67% 0.33%
24 11.13% 11.34% 0.21%
25 13.61% 15.51% L90%
26 14.22% IL90% 2..12%
27 12.94% 12.62% 0.32%
28 10.65% 1L63% 0.98%
29 14.09% tO.84% 3.25%
30 11.67% 12.94% 1.27%

12.00%

8.00%

600%

4,00%

2,00%

0 00%
1 2 'S'.*' 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14-1fi 1©J7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24.25 26 27 ^ 29 30

•2.00% •

-4.00%

I Equ3t]on|1) - - - • Equation(2)[

Fig. 3 Comparison of the computational performance by using Equations (1) and (2)

276 /. Text. Inst.. 2001. 92 Part I. No. 3 © TexTile Institute

Fabric Loss during Spreading

6. CONCLUSION
The results of our analysis reveal that there is a difference between the actual performance
and theoretical calculation of the model (Ng et ai, 1998). This difference is highly
negatively correlated with the number of completed plies lying on a cutting table. On the
basis of the analysis of the theoretical model, we identify that Vo is closely associated with
the number of completed plies of a cutting lay and there is no treatment in the model when
VQ is equal to zero. Thus, we refined the theoretical model and recomputed it by using the
same data set collected from the factory. After comparison with actual performance again,
the performance of the refined model is found to be better than that of the original model
derived by Ng et al. (1998). This implies that the refined model would be able to calculate
the total fabric loss during spreading more accurately.

REFERENCES
Cole. W. R., jun., and Sanbom. C. H.. 1995a. Cui Your Losses: Practical Tips to Improve Fabric Yield in the
Cutting Room—Part One. Bobbin. 37. No. 1. 146-151.
Cole. W. R.. jun., and Sanbom. C. H.. \995b. Cut Your Losses; Practical Tips to Improve Fabric Yield in the
Cutting Room—Pun Two. Bobbin. 37, No. 2, 76-83.
Kallman, R. M., 1979. Material Uiilization Control in ihe Cutting Room. JSN Int.. June, 26-32.
Ko.sh. K., 1990. Pattern Qualily. MU and CAD/CAM Systems, Apparel Mfr. 72. No. 8, 11, 12, 14, 16.
Magowan, J.. 1982. Optimising Material Utilisation. Ready-wear. No. II. 28-31.
Milokhina, V. A., Burlakin, A. I., and Skututa, M. A., 1986. Use of a Regression Model to Calculate Fabric Loss
along the Length of the Overlays. Tekhnol. Legkoi Prom., No. 1 (169), 90-91.
Ng, S. F.. Hui, C. L., and Leaf, G. A. V., 1998. Fabric Loss during Spreading: A Theoretical Analysis and its
Implications. J. Text. Inst.. 89, Part 1. 686-695.
Ng. T. S.. Choi. Y. H. C Lee. C , and Lau, C. C , 1990. A Study of Material Utilization for Jeans Production
(Final Report ITC). The Hong Kong Polytechnic University. Hong Kong.
Robers, F,. 1981. The Width of Shirtings as an Influence on Material Con.sumption. JSN Int.. Sept., 39-44.
Ruth. E. G., and Kunz, G. I., \99Q. Apparel Manufacturing—Sewn Product Analysis. Macmillan, New York, NY,
USA, p. 392.
Soiinger, J., 1988. Apparel Manufacturing Handbook—Analysis, Principles and Practice, Bobbin Blenheim,
Columbia. SC, USA, pp. 3-5.
Tyler, D. J., 1991. Material Management in Clothing Production. BSP Professional Books, Oxford, UK. p. 69.
Wing, B.. 1995. Cutting for Profit. World Clothing Mfr. 76. No. 6, 52-53.

APPENDIX: ACTUAL FIGURES COLLECTED FROM A MEN'S-SHIRT

FACTORY AND COMPARATIVE RESULTS OF EQUATIONS (1) AND (2)

Table AI
Sample Total Total Number Fabric Marker Marker Marker Total Total Length
Number of Number of of Rolls Width Length Width Efficiency Remnant of intemal'
Completed Spread Plies (m) (m) fm) Length Fabric Loss
Plies for for a (m) (m)
all Rolls Cutting Lay
1 47 60 14 1.502 19.98 1.467 11.31% 28,50 3.315
2 51 61 14 L487 20.21 1.455 13.65% 0,00 4.013
3 65 78 16 1.128 23.01 1.124 8.48% 14.81 2.193
4 59 73 18 1.521 20.98 1.480 8,52% 15.88 2.645
5 36 52 17 1.152 34.87 1.118 10.37% 11.27 4.042
6 41 51 11 1.145 23.85 1.118 13,67% 7.13 3.644
7 54 68 16 1.15 23.27 1.118 9.59% 18.40 2.495
8 34 48 15 1.509 25,87 1.473 9.01% 0.00 3.434
9 45 60 17 1,164 29,57 1.118 10.48% 92.00 3,463
10 36 50 15 1.147 30.25 1.124 8.46% 86.00 2,877
11 36 49 15 1.152 28.42 1.118 9.96% 56.10 3.164

.f. Text. Inst., 2001. 92 Part I. No. 3 © Textile Institute 277

 Ng. Hui. Lo. and Chan

Table AT (Continued)
Sample Total Toial Number Fabric Marker Marker Marker Total Total Length
Number of Number of of Rolls Width Length Width Efficiency Remnant of 'Internal'
Completed Spread Plies (m) (m) (m) Length Fabric Loss
Plies tor for a (m) (m)
all Rolls Culling Lay
12 27 39 15 1.155 33.17 1.118 10.65% 18.47 3.949
13 45 64 21 1.479 26.52 1.422 12.23% 67.45 4.612
14 48 64 23 1.459 23.19 1.422 11.88% 0.00 3.919
13 55 73 23 1.452 22.62 1.422 10.64% 4.07 3.422
16 44 63 23 1.459 16.86 1.422 11.46% 6.56 2.748
17 81 100 23 1.475 16.63 1.441 11.45% 0.83 2.744
18 49 67 20 1.144 28.51 .118 9.52% 12.80 3.036
19 67 89 23 1.516 25.09 .480 9.98% 3.99 3,706
20 70 89 21 1.515 25.09 .480 9.98% 16.49 3.706
21 51 66 18 1.500 25.09 .480 9.98% 73.00 3.706
22 43 55 15 i.452 25.67 .486 9.28% 2.92 3.540
23 68 78 12 1.135 16.91 .102 9.97% 19.50 1.858
24 106 119 14 1.151 11.79 .134 11.31% 89.00 1.333
25 52 65 14 1.501 19.98 .467 10.31% 38.30 3.315
26 30 44 15 1.158 34.87 .118 10.37% 10.57 4.042
27 68 79 13 1.155 14.47 .118 9.10% 4.77 1.472
28 38 51 14 1.507 25.87 .473 9.01% 126.00 3.434
29 23 38 16 1.149 33.17 1.U8 10.65% 8.05 3.949
30 43 56 15 1.513 25.67 1.486 9.28% 0.00 3.540

Table All

Sample Total Length Marker Fallout Area of Splice Area of Splice Area of
of All Fabric Area Loss Allowance End Loss
Rolls
(m) (m-) (m^) <m^
I 1241.280 198.90 10.67% 10.891 0.58% 4.601 0.25% 5.193 0.28%
2 1242.264 244.79 13.25% 6.913 0.37% 2.047 0.11% 5.237 0.28%
3 1831.019 171.05 8.28% 16.506 0.80% .703 0.08% 5-611 0.27%
4 1560.237 193.09 8.14% 9.491 0.40% .920 0.08% 7.887 0.33%
5 1841.562 210.18 9.91% 13.287 0.63% ^521 0.12% 3.372 0.16%
6 1238.895 185.84 13.10% 13.036 0.92% ,174 0,08% 2.851 0.20%
7 1616.262 169.66 9.13% 12.565 0.68% .041 0,06% 3.801 0.20%
8 1251.828 164-83 8.73% 8.956 0.47% .561 0.08% 4.172 0.22%
9 1876.683 207.78 9.51% 7.094 0.32% ().973 0,04% 3.452 0.16%
10 1623.210 143.85 7.73% 23.133 1.24% .100 0.06% 3.541 0.19%
U 1464.767 155.04 9.19% 13.964 0.83% .118 0.07% 3.068 0.18%
12 1325.258 154.01 10.06% 11.577 0.76% ,124 0.07% 1.831 0.12%
13 1780.134 295.17 11.21% 10.041 0.38% 1.402 0.09% 9.829 0.37%
14 1496.950 250.82 11.48% 8.081 0.37% .460 0.07% 9.010 0.41%
15 1671.818 249.81 10.29% 15.144 0.62% ,664 0.07% 7.059 0,29%
16 1083.106 173.12 10.96% 9,990 0.63% 3.178 0.20% 6.988 0,44%
17 1684.903 274-40 11.04% 17.840 0.72% 0-994 0.04% 11.823 0,48%
18 1941.904 203.41 9.16% 14.601 0.66% 2.029 0.09% 4.912 0.22%
19 2253.728 329.83 9.65% 12.025 0.35% 2.716 0.08% 9.484 0.28%
20 2269.113 329.83 9.59% 14.825 0.43% 3.527 0,10% 10.142 0.30%
2! 1744.442 244.60 9,35% 12.988 0.50% 1.945 0.07% 7.619 0,29%
22 1424.844 194.70 9,41% 10.580 0.51% 1,040 0.05% 3.433 0,17%
23 1347.650 144.92 9.47% 4.265 0.28% 0.683 0.04% 5.157 0.34%
24 1500.919 158.63 9.18^ 3.600 0.21% 0.970 0-06% 5,128 0.30%
25 1344.930 215.48 10.67% 6.710 0.33% 2.327 0.12% 5.721 0.28%
26 1580.096 177-85 9,84% 12.309 0.68% 1.934 0.11% 2.902 0.16%

278 J. Text. In.1t.. 2001. 92 Part I. No. 3 © Textile Institute

Fabric Loss during Spreading

Table All {Continued)

Sample Total Length Marker Fallout Area of Splice Area of Splice Area of
of All Fabric Area Loss Allowance End Loss
Rolls
(m) (m-) (m-) (m^)
27 1160.663 116,29 8.67% 8.597 0.64% 0.727 0.05% 5.034 0.38%
28 1454.412 175,13 7.99% 6.222 0.28% 2.439 0.11% 4.507 0.21%
29 1285.178 150.06 10.16% 14.607 0.99% 1.437 0.10% 2.422 0.16%
30 1450.068 198.24 9.04% 12.482 0.57% 1.337 0.06% 4.910 0.22%

Table Am
Sample Area of Width Total Area Computed by Computed by
Loss of Wastage Equation (1) Equation (2)

(m') A, ax A,-a, A,-fl,

1 42,447 2.28% 262.032 14.05% 14.12% -0.06% 15.69% -L64%

2 39.752 2.15% 298.742 16.17% 12.65% 3,52% 19.02% -2.84%
3 7.265 0.35% 202.139 9,79% 5.52% 4,27% 9.28% 0.51%
4 63.319 2.67% 275.702 11.62% 7.99% 3.62% 13.23% -1.61%
5 62,230 2.93% 291.594 13,74% 9.68% 4,06% 11.52% 2.23%
6 33.259 2.34% 236.164 16,65% 13.47% 3.18% 15.35% 1.30%
7 51,132 2.75% 238.199 12.82% 9.02% 3.80% 11.82% 1.00%
8 45.066 2.39% 224.587 11,89% 10.26% 1.63% 12,28% -0.39%
9 82.095 3.76% 301,394 13.80% 9,44% 4,36% 12,46% 1.33%
10 35.356 1.90% 206,980 11.12% 7,92% 3,19% 9.75% 1.37%
11 47.895 2,84% 221.081 13.10% 7,80% 5,30% 11.56% 1.54%
12 48.351 3.16% 216,894 14.17% 4.68% 9.49% 11.95% 2.22%
13 97,623 3.71% 415,063 15.76% 13,03% 2.73% 15.90% -0.13%
14 55.387 2.54% 324,754 14.87% 5.05% 9.82% 15.62% -0.75%
15 50,033 2.06% 323.706 13.34% 7.43% 5.90% 14.06% -0.72%
16 39,832 2.52% 233.112 14,75% 8.64% 6.11% 14.71% 0.04%
17 57.259 2.30% 362.316 14,58% 12.56% 2.02% 16.41% -1.84%
18 50.157 2,26% 275.111 12.38% 7.84% 4.54% 10,71% 1.67%
19 80.990 2,37% 435.049 12,73% 12.77% -0.03% 13.85% -1.12%
20 78.842 2,29% 437.170 12,72% 12,16% 0.55% 14,32% -1,61%
21 33.429 1,28% 300,577 11.49% 8,64% 2.84% 12.90% -1.41%
22 35.548 1,72% 245.301 n.86% 3,78% 8.07% 9.32% 2.54%
23 43.829 2.87% 198.858 13.00% 10,23% 2.77% 12.67% 0.33%
24 24.003 !.39% 192,328 11.13% 10.56% 0.57% 11.34% -0.20%
25 44,493 2.20% 274,726 13.61% 14.06% -0,45% 15.51% -i.90%
26 61.981 3.43% 256.974 14.22% 9.74% 4.48% 11.90% 2.32%
27 42,768 3.19% 173,414 12.94% 10.20% 2,73% 12.62% 0.32%
28 45,166 2.06% 233,468 10,65% 9.89% 0.76% 11.63% -0.98%
29 39.591 2.68% 208.119 14,09% 8.33% 5.77% 10.84% 3.26%
30 39.152 1,78% 256.121 11.67% 9.47% 2.11% 12,94% -1.27%

J Text. Inst.. 2001, 92 Part 1. No. 3 © Textile Institute 279