Yarn: Yarn is a product of substantial length and relatively small cross-section consi sting of fibers or filaments with

or without twist. It is the long fine structur es capable of being assembled or interlaced into such textile products as woven and knitted fabrics, braids, ropes, and cords. Assumption of idealized helical yarn geometry: 1. Yarn is circular in X-section and uniform along it length. 2. It is composed of a series of superimposed concentrated cylindrical laye rs of different radius in each of which the follow a uniform helical path. So it is distance from the center remain constant. 3. The axis of the circular cylinder considers with the yarn axis. 4. A fiber at the center will flow the straight line of the yarn axis but g oing out from the center of the helix angle, the helix angle will gradually incr ease. Since the twist per unit length in all the layers are constant. 5. Densities of the packing in the yarn remain constant throughout the mode l. 6. The structure is assumed to be constructed of a large no. of filaments i n the x-section .this will avoid any complication a rises due to the special way of packing a limited no. of fiber length. Yarn geometry: Geometry and deformation of yarn in fabrics can be given and influenced by set o f factors: process of weaving, thread count, weave, yarn properties (fineness, t wist, type) and finishing of the fabrics. On technology, the yarn is exposed to stress what leads to its deformation. Defo rmation of yarn is usually combination of bend, torsion and lateral compression and tensile axial elongation. It leads to compression, flattening and increasing of packing density of the yarns, what results in modification of internal struc ture of yarns. Significant impact on yarn cross-section deformation has first of all yarn bend and lateral stress. Originally idealized circular cross-section of threads is deformed on elliptical or Kemp‘s cross-section. Flattening of yarn’s cross-section influences for example in thickness, bending rigidity, areal covering, hand evaluation, air permeabilit y and it is one of criteria of construction and designing of fabrics.

Figure: Examples of yarn’s arrangement in plane of f abric It is possible to monitor separately three-dimensional geometry and deformation of yarn, namely in cut of binding wave of fabric or in projection into plane of fabric. In this contribution deal with influence of weft sett, fabrics finishing and yarn type on spatial arrangement and yarn‘s deformation in fabrics using main geometrical characteristics. Experiments were carried out on twelve fabrics: B1 6, B20, B24, A14, A16,5, A19, R16, R20, R24, R14, R16,5 and R19. The First six are treated “applying of fin ishing agent” and rest is gray. The warp yarns were sized. Fabrics were washed and dried on fixation frame. Numbers behind letters

A, B and R mean the warp threads per cm on machine. Experiment is done on cotton fabrics in plain weave In two ways: a) By monitoring of arrangement of yarn binding wave (procedure of soft sections, measurement dates by use image analyses) b. By monitoring yarn geometry in plain of fabrics (scanning of pictures of fabr ics, modification of pictures and measurement dates by use of image analyses). Both of procedures are compared. Yarn’s geometry in binding wave: Yarn’s geometry in binding wave is monitoring by sett of geometrical parameters. T hese parameters describe yarn waviness in fabric’s cut and yarn s deformation in b inding point. a. Yarn’s deformation in binding point: In contact point of two yarns, consequently in binding point, there is compress ion and enlargement of yarn. Inner structure of yarn changes is depending on thi s deformation. The yarn cross section is deformed by the bending and compression . Original circular cross-sectional shape changes to Kemp’s cross-section. This sh ape may be changed to elliptical cross section, with general axes A, B. Where A is enlargement, B is Compression, see figure Figure nt Geometrical parameters were measured from the images of textile cross sections. Warp thread spacing p1 [µm], weft thread spacing p2 [µm], warp enlargement A1 [µm], we ft enlargement A2 [µm], warp compressionB1 [µm], weft compression B2 [µm] an d amplitudes of warp and weft binding waves h1and h2. Were measured by mea ns of image analysis on figure 3. From the measured data of enlargement and Compression are calculated values of flattening of yarn in binding point γ = A/B Fi ure: Cut of warp bindin Deformed cross section of yarn in binding poi

The influence of weft sett, of finishin of fabric and type of yarn on yarn’s eom etry in bindin point is discussed with reference to flattenin parameter. It is plotted in fi ure. Fi ure: Dependence of yarn’s flattenin in fabric’s bindin point on weft thread cou nt and finish of fabrics: a) fabrics from sin le yarn, b) fabrics from ply yarn Yarn’s eometry in plane of fabric: Laboratory classification procedure was developed to measure of yarn’s eometry in plane of fabric ima e analysis Lucia G to use (optimal size of sample and zoom, scannin of fabric’s picture, modification and transformation of fabric’s picture t o the same scannin dates from picture). Every unloaded picture was processed in the same way to be like each other to de tect boundary-line between body yarn and aps between separate yarns. Scanned co loured ima es were transformed independently in RGB components. These RGB compon ents (red, reen and blue) are the same for all ima es. Colour picture was then transformed on so-called overlay picture. Another modification was morpholo ical erosion and dilation of ima e. Erosion re moves a layer of pixels all around an object. An object with thinner sections co mpared to matrix structurin element breaks into two parts. Dilation expands obj ects and structures in a binary ima e. Nei hborin objects are connected and sma ll holes are filled. Overlay ima e was transformed to binary ima e. Examples of binary ima es are showed in fi ure .

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

 

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

wave

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡ ¡

¡ ¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

Fi ure: Binary ima e of a) fabrics from ply yarn; b) fabrics from sin l e yarn From binary ima es were measured data on function interactive len th measurement . The influence of weft sett and finishin and yarn’s type on fabric’s eometry is d iscussed with reference to aps (distance between two nei hbours yarns) and to y arn’s diameter D1 a D2between two bindin points. These parameters are chan ed una mbi uously with weft thread count. Comparison of diameters D1, D2 a D is showed in the fi ure D is diameter of free yarn. Difference between parameters values is statistically si nificant for ray and f inished fabrics. Finishin of fabric influences shape of bindin wave in plane o f fabric. In accordance with yarn’s diameter measured between bindin points it is possible to find: Weft yarns are more deformed in the finished fabric. Warp yar ns are more deformed in the ray fabric by contrast. Yarn Geometry of knit fabric: For a iven knit fabric construction, if mesh size and overall wei ht (GSM) are essentially the same, then the sin le overridin factor in fabric properties wil l be yarn eometry. In some instances, this can trump fiber chemistry. The old a da e of makin sure to compare “apples to apples” is very true with re ard to yarn eometry. In eneral, for a specified yarn denier (were denier is equal to the we i ht in rams of 9000 meters of a material), a continuous filament yarn will be stron er than a staple yarn of t he same fiber type. The reason for this is a simple physics problem. When stress is applied to a component, that component will fail at the point least able to sustain that force: the “Weak Link” Theory. Once failure occurs, the totality of the stress is now supported by the remainin structural elements of that component, each of which is now supportin a proportionally lar er amount of stress [5]. T hese incremental failures are observed as “noise” in a stress/strain curve for a mat erial under laboratory test conditions. With respect to yarns produced from stap le (short) fibers, the tensile properties are established by both the mechanical properties of the fibers and by the radial position and packin density of thos e fibers alon the len th of the yarn [6]. In the same way, continuous filament yarn properties are affected by fiber type, and by packin density. However, the short fibers in a staple yarn are held in place by a combination of frictional forces and mechanical entan lement. Where that packin density enerally increas es in response to a lon itudinal stress. This is because the fibers are not free to slip a ainst one another in the direction of the stress, and so will not pul l out of the yarn construction. So, for yarns of the same denier and a iven fib er type, a continuous filament yarn will be stron er (hi her tenacity) than a st aple fiber yarn [7].Turnin attention specifically to the continuous filament ya rns that are used to produce warp knit mosquito net fabric, the issue of yarn e ometry becomes paramount if one wishes to compare two fabric constructions. Yarn size must be considered first if such a comparison is to be valid. For various reasons, it is not correct to compare fabric properties if those fabrics are mad e with different wei hts of yarn, even if the fabrics are manufactured in the sa me manner. For example, if one warp knit fabric is produced with a 100 denier ya rn and a second with a 75 denier yarn of the same fiber type, there will be 25% less fiber content in the second fabric (assumin the mesh counts are the same) because denier is a wei ht per unit len th value. Next one must consider the fil ament count in the yarn. Once a ain, for a iven fiber type and yarn denier, the size of the filaments in that yarn have a si nificant impact on the yarn proper ties. Smaller diameter filaments mean more filaments per yarn denier, which in t urn impacts the packin density in the yarn. Because there are multi axial stres ses in a yarn under load– such as lon itudinal stress, lon itudinal strain, latera l compression, torsion, and surface friction – the proximity of filaments within t he yarn cross-section will impact the overall yarn properties. Accordin to the theory of fra mentation, each filament within the yarn essentially behaves mecha

¡

¡ ¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡ ¡ ¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡ ¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

nically as an independent entity [5]. Therefore, for a selected fiber type, at a iven level of twist and a iven denier, a yarn with fewer filaments will have stren th properties that are hi her than those of a similar yarn with more filam ents (notin that as the number of filaments increases each of those filaments w ill have a smaller diameter).This consideration of yarn eometry is equally impo rtant when comparin yarns made from different polymer types. For example, a 100 denier monofilament yarn would be expected to have a hi her tenacity value than a 100 denier multifilament yarn with a filament count of 50 or even 25. This wo uld be true even if the monofilament yarn in question was produced from a lower tenacity polymer type. If the uneven filament counts were balanced, the monofila ment yarn from the hi her tenacity polymer would demonstrate hi her stren th pro perties.

¡

¡

¡ ¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡

¡