Professional Documents
Culture Documents
1.1 Introduction
The USTER STATISTICS are quality reference figures which permit a classification of fibers, slivers, rovings and yarns with regard to world production. The last USTER STATISTICS for cotton fibers and yarns were published in 2001. The USTER STATISTICS 2007 again address cotton fibers, rovings and yarns. We will later turn to the restrictions regarding the use of the USTER STATISTICS. We recommend to read these restrictions carefully and adhere to them. When used properly the USTER STATISTICS will continue to be appreciated as reference figures by all groups of interested people. The USTER STATISTICS are first and foremost a practical guide to good textile practices in the field of yarn manufacturing. The evidence of specific defects or shortcomings in overall yarn quality, which may become apparent through using the STATISTICS as a comparative standard, can be translated into immediate corrective action in the manufacturing process. Reliable and unequivocal cause/ effect relationships have been established over the years and documented in the application literature. Legions of textile technologists and USTER instrument users in mills around the world put that experience into action in their daily routine. In the previous edition of the USTER STATISTICS, we introduced a graph which illustrated the improvement in yarn evenness between 1957 and 2001. Now, six years later, we publish the same diagram again (Fig. 1). Two additional data points were added to the curves, i.e. the evenness values of the 50% line of the USTER STATISTICS 2007. A further improvement in yarn evenness can be recognized in Fig. 1 for combed cotton yarns.
Copyright 2006 Uster Technologies AG
Fig. 1
0.5 As described in the USTER STATISTICS 2001, the USTER STATISTICS 2007 also distinguish between knitting yarns and weaving yarns for ring-spun yarns. Of course, quality is multi-faceted, and while evenness has improved, other parameters have deteriorated to some degree. However, more than other quality parameters, yarn evenness is closely associated with both the design and management of the entire manufacturing process. Thus, besides being a result of technological advancements, evenness has also improved as a result of more elaborate quality control and quality management practices. It is of paramount importance for the spinning industry to closely monitor these trends and to prepare for a timely and appropriate response. Once lagging behind, a mill will have to invest heavily to move on and catch up and to eventually keep pace with the global development of yarn quality.
0.
1.4
Textile machinery manufacturers as well as manufacturers of accessories for textile machines have frequently been using the USTER STATISTICS to appraise the impact on quality of their new developments in the field of machine technology or monitoring and control systems. While machine performance in terms of productivity or efficiency is easily expressed in absolute numbers, the STATISTICS are frequently referred to when it comes to quality aspects. The other side of the coin is that the machinery manufacturers have also been forced into the routine of giving performance guarantees based on the USTER STATISTICS. Again, this particular issue falls into the category of restrictive uses and will be addressed later.
UI Strength Rd
% g/tex %
Yellowness Trash Trash Short Fiber Index Spinnig Consistency Index Maturity Index
Copyright 2006 Uster Technologies AG
% % %
SCI
Mat
0.
Abbreviation Description
Neps/g SCN/g SFC(n) SFC(w) Number of neps per gram Number of seed-coat neps per gram Short fiber content by number (n) and by weight (w). Definition according to Fig. 3 Corresponds to the classer's staple. Definition according to Fig. 3 Fineness of fibers Immature fiber content. Percentage of immature fibers. Definition according to Fig. , Fig. 5 Ratio of mature to immature fibers. Definition according to Fig. 5 Number of trash particles per gram Number of dust particles per gram Visible foreign matter
Unit
1/g 1/g %
Upper Quartile Length Fiber fineness Immature fibers Maturity Trash particles Dust particles Visible foreign matter
UQL(w)
mm
Fine IFC
mtex %
1/g 1/g %
0.9 The fiber length diagram determined by means of the USTER HVI instrument is not an end-aligned staple diagram and is called fibrogram. Fig. 2 is a schematic fibrogram of cotton.
Fig. 2
Fibrogram
The USTER AFIS instrument measures each fiber separately and, therefore, all the information for an end-aligned staple diagram is available. Fig. 3 illustrates how the Upper Quartile Length (UQL) and the short fiber content are determined using the USTER AFIS. The UQL is the fiber length at 25%. The term upper quartile indicates that the value is calculated at the upper quarter of the staple diagram.
Fig. 3
Staple diagram
0.10 Fig. and Fig. 5 show the definition of the measured values in relation to the maturity characteristics. The respective parameters can be explained using Fig. . Fig. shows the cross-section of a cotton fiber.
Fig. 4
To compute the mean degree of thickening theta, a circular cross-section of the measured fiber having a perimeter P is calculated, and subsequently area A1 is divided by area A2. Fig. 5 shows a maturity measurement using the USTER AFIS as well as the values computed for theta.
Fig. 5
Maturity Histogram
Mature fiber content R Immature fiber content IFC Maturity (according to Lord):
= = M=
37.% 10.3% R - IFC 37. - 10.3 +0.7 = 0. +0.7 = 200 200
0.11
Abbreviation Description
CVcb CVm CVmb Thin Thick Neps H Count variations between packages Coefficient of variation of mass Coefficient of variation of mass between packages Number of thin places, thick places and neps Absolute value of hairiness. Measurement of the entire fiber length. Standard deviation of hairiness within a package Variation of hairiness between packages Dust and trash in yarns. Counts refer to 1000 m of yarn. Variation of the yarn diameter Shape of the yarn cross-section. Ratio of the axes of an ellipse. Density of the yarn
Unit
% % % 1/1000 m
Hairiness
Standard deviation of hairiness Coefficient of variation of hairiness Trash Coefficient of variation of the diameter Shape Density
sH CVHb
1/1000 m %
Shape D
g/cm3
Abbreviation Description
CVcb CVm CVm3m Count variations between roving bobbins Coefficient of variation of mass, cut length 1 cm Coefficient of variation of mass, cut length 3 m
Unit
% % %
0.12
Abbreviation Description
CVm CVm100m Coefficient of variation of mass, cut length 2 cm Coefficient of variation of mass, cut length 100 m
Unit
% %
As various trials have shown, no improvements could be detected between the 2001 SLIVER STATISTICS and the unevenness of slivers we measure today. One explanation for this observation may be the increase of productivity in spinning preparation. For this reason we have taken over the sliver quality characteristics we have collected for the 2001 STATISTICS. There exists a high correlation between the sliver measurement on the machines (SLIVERDATA, SLIVER EXPERT) and with the measurements in the laboratory (USTER TESTER).
Abbreviation Description
FH RH CVRH Breaking force Breaking force referred to the yarn count Variation of the individual values of the tenacity Yarn elongation at breaking force Variation of the individual elongation values Work performed during tensile testing of yarns at breaking force Variation of the individual values of work done to break
Unit
cN cN/tex %
H
CVH
% %
WH
cNcm
CVWH
0.13
Abbreviation Description
FH RH CVRH Breaking force Breaking force referred to the yarn count Variation of the individual values of the tenacity Yarn elongation at breaking force Variation of the individual elongation values Work performed during tensile testing of yarns at breaking force Variation of the individual values of work done to break 0.1% of all tests have a strength below this value 0.1% of all tests have an elongation below this value 0.01% of all tests have a strength below this value 0.01% of all tests have an elongation below this value
Unit
cN cN/tex %
H
CVH
% %
WH
cNcm
CVWH
FHP=0.1
cN
HP=0.1
FHP=0.01
cN
HP=0.01
3 Restrictions
0.1 This section addresses the restrictions that apply to the use of the USTER STATISTICS and we would like to repeat our advice that this be read carefully and adhered to. Both deliberate and unintentional misuse of the STATISTICS have in some instances in the past resulted in lengthy and costly disputes all of which could have been avoided if all parties involved would have had the same clear understanding of the concept underlying the STATISTICS. The reading of this section is a must for those who are not familiar with that concept, with the STATISTICS as such, or with the proper interpretation of the data.
0.15
0.1
0.17 value is located somewhere within that interval. All USTER instruments calculate the confidence intervals automatically and they are part of the test report. The confidence interval covers the random error component; information on the systematic error, i.e. instrument tolerances, is provided in our application handbooks. When comparing actual measurements with the data illustrated in the USTER STATISTICS, it is of utmost importance that the total measurement error is kept to an absolute minimum to warrant compatibility. If this is not the case, false conclusions may be drawn from such a comparison. There are four items that can be done to minimize the measurement error: proper conditioning under constant standard atmospheric conditions exact calibration of the instrument correct settings of the instrument adequate sample size
When actual measurements are then compared with the USTER STATISTICS, they would appear in the nomogram as a short vertical line not as a dot. The top and bottom ends of that line represent the upper and lower limits of the confidence interval with the mean exactly in the middle. We cannot eliminate the random error; however, the confidence interval quickly becomes smaller when the sample size is increased. For detailed information on recommended sample sizes and testing conditions, please refer to section 9. In the context of commercial agreements via yarn contracts and product specifications, it frequently transpires that disputes result from discrepancies between measurements performed by the purchaser and by the supplier and from the subsequent comparison of disparate measurements with the USTER STATISTICS. When such incidents are examined more closely, the result often is that the basic conditions listed above have been ignored or have simply not been identical in both testing locations. In other cases, the problem could be quickly resolved by applying the t-test procedure. It proved that the differences were not statistically significant but strictly random due to a pronounced sample variability. The t-test procedure along with further detailed explanations is outlined in our application handbooks. A simplified t-test can be performed by comparing the confidence intervals: If the confidence intervals of two means overlap, then the observed difference between the two means is random or statistically insignificant; if they are separated, the difference is considered statistically significant. Applying the concept of the confidence interval can be both very helpful and revealing. It pinpoints the highly variable characteristic of textile materials which should always be taken into consideration.
Europe
20%
Asia & Oceania
51%
North & South America
17%
Africa
12%
Fig. 6 Geographical distribution of the origin of all samples procured for the USTER STATISTICS 2007
All data were entered into a databank and application software specifically developed for this purpose was employed to compute the percentile curves and to plot the graphical representations. The lions share of the total time spent was definitely devoted to thoroughly testing the samples in the laboratory. Our databank has grown to an enormous size and consists of far more quality parameters than have been published in this edition of the USTER STATISTICS.
Yarns with twist multipliers below these values have been classified as knitting yarns.
0.21
Copyright 2006 Uster Technologies AG
Fig. 7
Disturbing thick and thin places up to Ne 0 were measured with the capacitive clearer USTER QUANTUM C20. The thick and thin places from Ne 1 to Ne 170 were measured with the clearer USTER QUANTUM C15. However, it is not required that the CLASSIMAT operator has to switch over to a different measuring head at Ne 0.
0.22 The USTER CLASSIMAT QUANTUM is also in a position to classify foreign fibers. Therefore, this instrument cannot only detect the remaining and disturbing thick and thin places but also the remaining foreign fibers.
Intensity A4 30% A3 20% A2 10% 7% 5% 0 no counts B13 B14 B11 B12 1.0 1.4 2.0 C12 C11 3.0 D12 D11 5.0 E12 E11 7.0 cm Length B21 B22 C2 D2 E2 B3 C3 D3 E3 F B4 C4 D4 E4
Fig. 8
7 Validity
0.23 The information provided with this edition supersedes all the descriptions pertaining to yarn quality published in previous editions of the USTER STATISTICS. The quality of industrially manufactured goods is a moving target. It depends on a multitude of factors, most of which are an intrinsic function of time. The dependence on time is predominantly related to the state of technology of the productive assets and the technological know-how prevalent in the industry. Time is also a factor in determining the overall economic environment, the supply and demand situation, as well as general consumer attitudes and behavior. All of the above, acting jointly or separately, may have an effect on the quality of raw materials, semi-processed, or finished textile goods. Consequently, the validity of the information provided in the USTER STATISTICS 2007 is confined to the period of time actually covered by the data. The data are essentially of historical nature by the time this document is published. Naturally, such information will not sustain its initial significance as time progresses and eventually become obsolete unless it is updated at some point in the future. Therefore, the information presented in this document in either verbal, numerical, or graphical form is subject to change at any time without prior or public notice. Conventional wisdom proves, however, that the USTER STATISTICS maintain their significance over an extended period of five years or more. With no exceptions, all the information provided in the USTER STATISTICS 2007 relates to data which have been established using USTER products. USTER products are designed, manufactured, and distributed by Uster Technologies, Switzerland, and Uster Technologies Inc., USA, or authorized licensees, exclusively. Any attempt to utilize the information provided in this document in conjunction with data originating from sources other than USTER instruments may result in some form of failure or damage. The USTER STATISTICS are intended for use as a manual of comparative STATISTICS complementing the operational installations of USTER products at the customer site. For technical details on how to ensure proper agreement between the data presented in this document and data established with other USTER instruments, please refer to the appendix.
8 Disclaimer
0.2 This publication and the information provided therein is for intended use only and subject to change at any time without prior or public notice. Uster Technologies will not assume liability for any direct or indirect damage resulting from unintended use of this publication or the information provided therein. The use of this information for product specifications in commercial contracts is discouraged unless clear reference is made to this publication or parts thereof and clear numerical specifications and tolerances are provided in the contract. The use of this information for arbitration purposes is discouraged unless clear reference is made to this publication or specified parts thereof and clear numerical specifications and tolerances are provided in legally valid contractual documents pertaining to the characteristics of the goods in question. The use of this information for performance guarantees relating to textile plants, textile machines, or parts or accessories thereof is discouraged unless clear reference is made to this publication or parts thereof and clear numerical specifications, tolerances, and restrictive clauses pertaining to other known influences on the specified performance are provided in the guarantee documents.
Fiber Testing
Parameter
Micronaire Upper Half Mean Length Bundle tenacity Color Trash Short Fiber Index Spinning Consistency Index Maturity Index Neps Length
Abbreviation Unit
Mic UHML UI Strength Rd +b CNT Area SFI SCI --mm % g/tex % ----% % ---
Instrument
USTER HVI USTER HVI
No. of samples
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Tests within
10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
Mat Neps/g SCN/g SFC(n) SFC(w) UQL(w) Fine IFC Mat Trash/g Dust/g VFM
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10
USTER AFIS
Maturity
USTER AFIS
Trash
USTER AFIS
0.2
Yarn Testing
Parameter
Count variations Mass variations
Abbrevia- tion
CVcb
Unit
%
Instrument
USTER TESTER 4 FA Sensor USTER TESTER 4 CS Sensor Testing speed: Duration of test:
CVm CVmb
% %
10 10 00 m/min 2.5 min 10 10 10 00 m/min 2.5 min 10 10 10 00 m/min 2.5 min 10 10 00 m/min 2.5 min 10 10 10 00 m/min 2.5 min 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 5 m/min 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 00 m/min
1 1
Hairiness
H sH CVHb
----%
1 1 1
Imperfections
1 1 1
Trash
Dust Trash
1/1000 m 1/1000 m
1 1
Diameter variation
% --g/cm3
1 1 1
Tensile properties
cN cN/tex % % % cNcm %
USTER TENSORAPID 4
20 20 20 20 20 20 20
Testing speed: HV tensile properties FH RH CVRH CVH WH CVWH FHP=0.1 cN cN/tex % % % cNcm % cN % cN % USTER TENSOJET 4
FHP=0.01
HP=0.1
HP=0.01
1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 10,000 10,000
Testing speed:
0.27
Testing of Rovings
Parameter
Count variation
Abbreviation Unit
CVcb %
Instrument
USTER TESTER 4 FA Sensor USTER TESTER 4 CS Sensor Testing speed: Duration of test:
No. of samples
10 Length 10 m 10
Tests within
1
Count variation
CVm
50 m/min 5 min. 10 1
Count variation
CVm3m
50 m/min 5 min.