TEXTILE FABRIC GAS FADING IN COMBINATION WITH OTHER DETERIORATING AGENCIES

Citation preview

The Pennsylvania State College Graduate School Department of Clothing and Textiles

TEXTILE FABRIC GAS FADING IN COMBINATION WITH OTHER DETERIORATING AGENCIES

A dissertation by Jane Werden

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy September, 1950

Approved Director, m±j.en u. iticnaras Institute

Head ,Departn^ht of^yClo thing and Textiles Date

A C K N O W L E D G M E N T S The author wishes to express her sincere apprecia­ tion to Pauline Beery Mack for help in formulating the prob­ lem and for direction throughout the study; To Marian Krape Knight for invaluable assistance with the mechanics of the many tests concerned with the problem on which this dissertation is based; To James D. Lemley, who helped with the changes made in the gas fading equipment, and with the standardization of the gas fading procedure; To Charles Brouse and Robert Slegal for assistance throughout the study on repair and maintenance of the equip­ ment used; To The American Viscose Corporation for supplying the fabrics used in the study; To The Calco Chemical Divi­ sion of The American Cyanamid Company for permission to use the spectrophotometer 5 To the members of the Ellen H. Richards Institute staff for help in many ways during the period of study.

S.4?S€8

T A B L E

O F

C O N T E N T S

Page INTRODUCTION............................................... 1 OBJECT IVES............................................3 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND................................ 5 METHOD OF PROCEDURE........................................8 Fabrics.......................................... .... 8 Analysis of Fabrics.........................

.8

Construction of Fabrics............................. .9 Strength of Fabrics Shrinkage of Fabrics

......................... ...10 ......

.11

Colorfastness of Fabrics................

11

Dye Identification..............

12

Deteriorating Agencies Used in theStudy............. 12 Methods of Determining Changes During Application of Degrading Agencies................ .. .16 Combinations of Single Agencies Used for Composite Laboratory Test............................ 18 PRESENTATION OF DATA, including a list of tables and figures.........................22 DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS.................................... 162 Initial

Description of Fabrics........... .......... 162

Results

of

the Separate Deteriorating Agencies.... .167

Results

of

Two Deteriorating Agencies............. 176

Results

of

Three Deteriorating Agencies.............178

The Effect of Moist Heat in Combination With Other Agencies........................

....179

Page The Effect of Drycleaning in Combination With Other Agencies.................................. 181 Results Showing Reason for Choice of Alkaline Perspiration................................182 Results Showing Relative Unimportance of Dry Heat

............... .............

I83

Tests Chosen and Order Established for Composite Trial Series............................ ..185 Results of Keeping Three Agencies Constant and Varying the Fourth Agency....... ............. .. .189 Further Tests Used to Determine Small UnitTest

191

Results of Twenty Repetition of the Small Unit Test Assembly................................ ...191 Exposure of Samples to IndustrialAtmosphere SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS............

...196 206

The problem of gas fading, particularly on acetate fabrics, continues to annoy the consumer, even though inhibitors have been developed which— when applied as finishes on textile fabrics colored with dyes which are amenable to gas fading--reduce the time re­ quired for gas fading color changes to develop.

Such

inhibitors seemingly are effective only until they be­ come saturated with atmospheric gases, after which sus­ ceptible dyes begin to show their characteristic gas fading change. Gas fading also is a problem for the drycleaner.

A. rayon textile article may come into the

plant for cleaning, the person responsible for checking may examine the article for all signs of damage, but may find none.

She then may send the article into the plant

to be cleaned.

When the garment is returned to the con­

sumer, she then may register a complaint that a color change has taken place.

Sometimes this change is rather

complete, taking place over the entire article.

More

frequently the change is heterogeneous, resulting in a streaked unattractive article.

Since the textile article

apparently was in good condition when it went to be cleaned, the consumer naturally assumes that the dry-

2. cleaner is at fault. problem of gas fading.

This is not the case, however, in the The fault lies with the manufacturer

who used a dye that will change color when exposed to certain components of an industrial gas or smoke-laden atmosphere. There are perhaps two reasons why the atmospheric gas color change does not become evident until a drycleaning treatment has been applied.

If the change was rather complete,

the checker at the drycleaning plant, not knowing the original color of the garment, could not be expected to detect a color change.

On the other hand if the change was less complete

when the article came into the plant, it may have been over­ laid with soil with the change not becoming visible until the article had been cleaned.

The consumer, in such a case,

did not notice the color change before cleaning because the article was heavily soiled. A still more likely explanation may be found in the possibility that some heat agency such as dry or moist heat, acting in combination with the atmospheric gas with which the fabric was saturated, might cause a marked color change not effectuated by the gas alone.

Another possible

circumstance is the fact that the destructive atmospheric gas may have caused some intermediate change in a gas fading susceptible dye which was completed when the fabric was in contact with another agency. As a person wears a garment or a household fabric is exposed during use, it is not subjected to gas fading alone, but to a combination of deteriorating agencies.

3. As has been pointed out by Mack (3 ) "When a fabric is ex­ posed alternately or simultaneously to more than one agency, performance differs from that which may be expected when one agency alone is involved." OBJECTIVES The current study then was undertaken for two major reasons as follows: I. To study gas fading further, when gas fading is combined with other agencies in order to find out what effect the combination of various agencies will have on gas fading. IX. To find the result of laboratory exposure of fabrics amenable to gas fading with respect to agencies with which fabrics commonly come in contact and which probably will produce drastic results to the fabric.

Then to modify

that combination in such a way as to predict the changes which may be expected when exposed to an atmosphere laden with destructive gases. The six different agencies used were:

a) gas

fading, b) alkaline perspiration, c) acid perspiration, d) moist heat, e) dry heat and f) light. After studying various combinations of these agencies it was the ultimate objective of the study to recommend a standard procedure which might be used to pre­ dict gas fading results in textile fabrics, which would be

more effective than the application of the gas fading test alone.

Moreover, such a combination could be used in com­

bination -with still other destructive agencies such as abrasion, laundering, and wet drycleaning. Color change, although more readily visible than other changes in a textile fabric, may also be accompanied by strength changes, which also are considered in this in­ vestigation.

5. HISTORIC AX BACKGROUND In working on a combination of various factors which may contribute jointly to the color change charac­ teristics of gas fading, the work of previous

investi­

gators in the Ellen H. Richards Institute on the separate agencies to be studied in this connection is reviewed. Each of these workers, in turn, has presented the litera­ ture of the separate fields leading up to their suggestion of a unit of application of the particular degrading agency with which work was done. Ray ( b ) developed an acclerated gas fading test in which temperature and humidity were controlled and pure oxides of nitorgen were used as the gas mixture.

As a part

of her work, she established a tenative test for gas fading which would be approximately comparable to 13 months of ex­ posure of a garment during wear. As a basis for her work, Ray built a gas fading cabinet according to the A.A.T.C.C. standards, and then added various features for the controls which her pre­ liminary work indicated as desirable.

Her study was

fundamental in character, in which basic equipment was developed ready to be used for further studies. As a preliminary suggestion concerning a possible unit of exposure to gas fading with the equipment which she developed, Ray proposed the following:

an exposure period

6. of

80 minutes in the gas fading oven with a temperature of

55 ^2.5°C., a humidity of 15 - 5 per cent, using oxides of nitrogen as the gas? with a rate of air flow of 11 cubic feet per hour and a rate of gas flow of

loo cubic centimeters

per hour. •Jones ( 2 ) conducted an extensive program of re­ search on a comparison of artificial acid and alkaline per­ spiration, on a comparison of a capillary and a standardized immersion method of applying artificial perspiration, and on different combinations of perspiration and light treatments. As a result of this work, she recommended that one dip of perspiration according to immersion method which she de­ scribed in detail followed by 60 hours of light exposure in a Fade-Ometer would constitute an effective unit of per­ spiration-light treatment for purposes of predicting the strength and color changes due to these combined agencies. Rock ( 5), in a study of the effect of dry and moist heat on the acclerated aging of rayon fabrics, used an Emerson conditioning oven for applying dry heat.

As a result

of her work she chose 75 hours of exposure to dry heat at 250°F. as a unit that would give proper predictions of the performance of rayon fabrics with

respect to this agency.

For the work with moist

heat? Rock used a 20-

gallon pressure cooker.

Thirty minutes at 15 pounds of

pressure and a temperature of 250°F. was chosen as the unit that would give a satisfactory prediction of the moist heat on textile fabrics.

effect of

Rock ( 5 ) also worked with light in combination «

both with moist and dry heat.

She found that a period of

exposure of 60 hours in a Fade-Ometer in combination with the above mentioned units of dry and moist heat, res­ pectively, would give the basis for a satisfactory pre­ diction of the effect of moist and dry heat in combina­ tion with light.

FABRICS Four rayon fabrics used in this study were ob­ tained through the American Viscose Corporation.

The fabrics

may be described as follows: Fabric A. Blue cellulose acetate rayon satin with no finish; Fabric B. Blue cellulose acetate rayon satin with a finish developed to prevent or delay gas fading. Fabric C. Blue cellulose acetate rayon taffeta with no finish; and Fabric D. Blue cellulose acetate rayon taffeta with a finish developed to prevent or delay gas fading. The same finish was used on fabrics B and D.

All four fabrics were the same

shade of blue, a typical blue of a chemical composition known to be amenable to gas fading* ANALYSIS OF FABRICS Preliminary tests were made on the original fabrics ■according to the accepted Commercial Standards procedure on Textiles— Testing and Reporting. CS59“J+1+ ( 6 )*

9. CONSTRUCTION OF FABRICS

Fiber Identification The fiber content of the four fabrics was de­ termined by the use of a compound microscope.

Solubility

in acetone served as a chemical test. Weight -per square yard Two-inch squares were cut from each fabric, and the squares were v:eighed on an automatic chain balance. An average

of five weights was taken for each

Weight per

square yard in ounces was calculated.

fabric.

Thread count The thread count in each fabric was determined by the use number of

of an Alfred Suter thread counter. The actual threads in one inch of the warp and one inch of

the filling direction were counted at five different places in the fabric and the average number of yarns per inch in each direction was calculated. Weave The type of weave was determined by the use of a Bausch and Lomb Widefield, Binocular Microscope, number 257609. Twists per Inch in the Yarn Average twist per inch was determined by the use of the United States Testing Company Twist Counter, number 226 A, Ten readings were made in the warp direction and 10 in the

10* filling.

All the yarns proved to be single yarns. Filaments per Yarn The number of filaments per yarn in the fabrics

was obtained by recording the average found in 10 longi­ tudinal microscopic slides on which untwisted yarn both in the warp and filling direction

was mounted.

They were

counted in two to three different places on each slide. Denier. or Yarn Size Yarn numbers were counted on the Universal Yarn Number Balance, number l8h-5lO, manufactured by Alfred Suter* Ten readings were recorded within a 10 per cent range.

Yarn

numbers and denier were converted to the Typp system (total number of 100 yard hanks required to make a pound.)

STRENGTH OF FABRICS Breaking Strength Determinations of breaking strength were made according to the standard raveled strip method of the Ameri­ can Society for Testing Materials ( 1 ) and the accepted Commercial Standards.

The tests on the dry samples were

made under standard conditions of temperature and humidity, 70°F. and 65 per cent relative humidity.

Averages of 10

warp and 10 filling were taken. The wet breaking strength values were determined by immersing the test strips in distilled water for two hours at room temperature, and breaking them while wet.

An average of

10 tests both in the warp and filling direction was taken.

11. Bursting Strength A five-inch square sample was used for the bursting strength tests.

A motor-driven Mullen tester was used.

The

dry bursting strengths were made under the same conditions of temperature and humidity as the dry breaking strength tests. Wet bursting strength tests were made on samples which had

been immersed in distilled water at room tempera­

ture for two hours.

An average of five bursts was recorded

both in the wet and dry specimens.

The strength of the fabric

was determined by subtracting the pressure required to raise the diaphragm alone from the pressure required to raise both the diaphragm and the fabric. SHRINKAGE OF FABRICS Measurements of shrinkage during drycleaning and wetdrycleaning were made according to the

procedure out­

lined in Commercial Standards CS59-J+1t. COLORFASTNESS OF FABRICS The following colorfastness tests were made in accordance with the accepted procedure for each test as found In Commercial Standards CS^-^i-£ I. II. III.

Colorfastness to light; Colorfastness to crocking, wet and dry; Colorfastness to drycleaning and wet cleaning.

dry-

12. DYE IDENTIFICATION Dye identification information was obtained from the American Viscose Corporation, which had had the fabrics manufactured according to specification. DETERIORATING AGENCIES USED IN TIE STUDY Gas Fading Initial Gas Fading Conditons The starting point for the application of gas fading was the one set up by Ray (U- ) which was as follows: Oven temperature : ^

^ 2.5°C.

Relative Humidity : 15 - 5 per cent Gas : oxides of nitrogen Rate of Gas Flow : about 100 cc. per hour (room conditions) Rate of Air Flow : 11 cubic feet per hour Equipment : as developed and described by Ray (!+ ). This test was tried out using the control fabric supplied by the American Association of Textile Chemists and Colorists, known as Gas Fading Control Sample.

'It was found

that the test was not fully reproducible, and hence the following changes were made in the Ray ( b ) technique. I. A variac was used instead of the thermo-regu­ lator for purposes of temperature regulation. This gave much better control of temperature and as a result of controlled temperature better results with humidity were obtained.

13. II. A suction pump replaced the technique of ob­ taining suction by means of water.

This gave

a very regular and even control of suction, which was used to evacuate the gas from the oven* III. The trap for checking the flow of gas was changed to a two-way stopcock, so that the flow of gas and pressure in the bottle containing the gas could be checked before the flow of gas was started through the system.

This enabled the

flow of gas to be regulated carefully, IV. A diffusion plug containing glass wool was placed in the system just before the gas en­ tered the oven.

This brought about an even

flow of the gas into the oven, V, A non-reactive tubing known as tygon was used to make the connection between the diffusion plug and the entrance of the gas into the oven. As a result of these changes, the gas fading unit of application for all parts of the study except the pre­ liminary part previously described was under the following conditions: Oven Temperature : 55° - 1,0°C. Relative Humidity : 20 - 1.0 per cent Gas : oxides of nitrogen Rate of Gas Flow : about 125 cc. per hour (room conditions) Rate of Air Flow : 11 cubic feet per hour.

lb9 The time of the test was changed from the one hour and twenty minutes recommended by Ray ( b ) to two hours.

It

was found that the two-hour period with the new conditions corresponded very closely to the end point set up by Ray, which was Munsell designation 7*5 between 7/*+ and 6/bm As recommended by Ray, the time from the end of the test and determination of color change by Reflectometer readings was kept between zero and six hours. Perspiration The perspiration test developed by Jones (2 ) and known as the dip method was used in this study.

A few minor

modifications were made simply for ease in handling the test swatches.

It was found that immersing the samples in a

beaker and removing excess between the fingers and the edge of the beaker caused wrinkling of the fabric.

Since readings

were to be made without pressing of the fabric, it was found easier, to place the fabric samples flat in a shallow pan and then to add the perspiration.

The excess perspiration was

not removed, but the samples were allowed to drip dry. Artificial perspiration was made according to the method given in .Commercial Standards CS59-1+J+, and was as follows: Acid Perspiration

Alkaline Perspiration

10 g. sodium chloride 1 g. lactic acid. U.S.P. 85 per cent 1 g. disodium orthophosphate anhydrous Make up to one liter with distilled water.

10 g, sodium chloride if g. ammonium carbonsfp tt c p x g. phosphate anhydrous Make up to one liter with distilled water.

15. Moist Heat For the moist heat test, a two-quart Mirro-matic ■pressure cooker was used.

A rack of stainless steel was

built to hold four samples.

This cooker was used instead

of the larger model employed by Rock, because the small number of samples to be done at one time could be handled more conveniently in a smaller device. In the large cooker used by Rock, with a pressure of 15 pounds, the temperature was approximately 250°F.

In

this study, when the moist heat test was used alone on the fabrics, it was found that the fabrics became quite stiff at the higher temperature.

For this reason a pressure of

10 pounds and a temperature of 2*+0°F. was used.

The time

used was that recommended by Ray, namely 30 minutes. Dry Heat For the dry heat test an Emerson conditioning oven, number 00332 was used.

The temperature employed was 250°F.

The time was four hours instead of the 75 hours recommended by Rock.

It was felt that the 75 hours recommended by Rock

was the length of time necessary to bring about a drastic change and not the amount of time that was more consistent with actual use conditions.

For this reason^ a period of

four hours was chosen.

ki£.ht The FDA-R type of Fade-Ometer was used to determine changes brought about by light.

A unit of 60 hours was used

16, because that unit had been recommended both by Hock (5 ) and by Jones (2 ). METHODS OF DETERMINING CHANGES DURING APPLICATION OF DEGRADING AGENCIES Color Spectrophotometer The final color changes in each combination of agencies was read on the Calco modification of the General Electric Spectrophotometer, VS7.

This machine gave a graph

showing the exact spectral reflectancy before and after the exposure treatment or treatments* The graphs were made on a logarithmic scale with Scale Reflectance on the X axis and Constant Resolution Units on the Y axis. units (C.R.U.)

The octaval in constant resolution

332 Log

A

Reflectometer Readings Readings on the Reflectometer (calculated as units of color difference) served to check the reproducibility of the test and the end point.

Preliminary trials showed that

more sensitive measurements could be made by the Spectropho­ tometer as described above than by the Reflectometer, and the former instrument was used therefore for numerical re­ sults as presented in this report. Strength Because of the limited size of the textile samples which could be exposed in the gas fading apparatus, wet burst­ ing strength was the only means used of determining strength changes. report.

The method used has been described previously in this

Visual Judgment As the work progressed and it was noted what color changes were taking place a set of visual standards was set up and numbered.

As each test was carried out the samples

were then judged by the visual standards and each given a series of numerical values that could be interpreted to de­ scribe the changes that had taken place. This visual judgment was done in a black cabinet under a light having a color temperature of 2780°K.

The

standards and exposed samples were placed on a gray mounting board 0+50° angle).

In this arrangement the eyes of the ob­

server were approximately at right angles to the specimen, and the light shone from one side at an angle of about 30° from the line of vision of the observer.

The samples were

judged for color change by visual inspection at each step in any one series of treatments,

EXPOSURE OF SAMPLES IN AN INDUSTRIAL ATMOSPHERE For comparison purposes, samples of each of the four experimental fabrics were exposed in Youngstown, Ohio, for eight months.

Samples were removed at the end of one

week, two weeks and each month thereafter throughout the

18. period.

These samples then were drycleaned.

The samples

were evaluated for color change by visual judgment and by spectrophotometric readings.

In some cases alkaline perspi­

ration was added to one-half of the samples to ascertain whether a greater change would take place with the combina­ tion of two agencies than with exposure to atmospheric gases alone. COMBINATIONS OF SINGLE AGENCIES USED FOR COMPOSITE LABORATORY TEST The following tests were made in order to find what combination of tests should be used to produce the most drastic results.

Then the selected combination was

reduced to a smaller, less intense unit test, which was repeated 20 times. I. Each test alone on the four fabrics. a. Gas fading b. Acid perspiration c. Alkaline perspiration d. Light (Fade-Ometer) e. Dry heat f. Moist heat II. Some of the possible combinations of two factors which seemed to simulate practical conditions were used in the order hereinafter designated. III. Some of the combinations of three factors which seemed to simulate practical conditions again were used as shown below.

IV, The combination of all six factors was applied in the order given above; then moist heat and then dry heat were eliminated. V. A. combination of all six factors in the order given above was followed with drycleaning added after the Fade-Ometer exposure.

This then was repeated without

moist heat, and then without dry heat. The drycleaning treatment was applied in a small tumb­ ler according to the procedure as recommended in CS59-1+^.

One and one-half liters of Stoddard solvent

was used together with 116 cubic centimeters of liquid drycleaning soap.

The can was hand turned for twenty-

five minutes, changing the direction of the turning frequently. The drycleaning treatment proper was followed by threefive-minute rinses, using the same amount of solvent as in the solvent and soap cleaning.

The samples were

spread on a wire screen and allowed to dry for one hour. They then were pressed for 10 seconds on the steam press. VI. A series of combinations was used in order to determine the difference in response of the fabrics to the two separate types of perspiration, for the purpose of finding whether or not both types needed to be used. VII. A series of combinations was employed which was de­ signed to show &t what place in the series of treatments with the combination of agencies under observation dry

20, heat should be placed. VIII. The agencies chosen from the foregoing trials, and their order of application were the following: a. Alkaline perspiration b. Gas fading c. Fade-Ometer d. Moist heat IX. A series of trials was run, keeping three agencies con­ stant and varying only one of the agents as follows: a. 1 dip of alkaline perspiration; 2 hours of gas fading; 60 hours of light treatment in the Fade-Ometer; 5 minutes of exposure to moist heat at 10 pounds pressure; b. 1 dip of alkaline perspiration; 2 hours of gas fading; 60 hours of light exposure (Fade-Ometer) 10 minutes of 10 pounds pressure of moist heat; c. 1 dip of alkaline perspiration; 2 hours of gas fading; 60 hours of light exposure ( Fade-Ometer); 20 minutes of 10 pounds pressure of moist heat; d. 1 dip of alkaline perspiration; 2 hours of gas fading; 10 hours of light exposure (Fade-Ometer); 30 minutes of 10 pounds pressure of moist heat;

21. e. 1 dip of alkaline perspiration; 2 hours of gas fading; 20 hours of light exposure (Fade-Ometer); 30 minutes, 10 pounds pressure of moist heat; f. 1 dip of alkaline perspiration; 2 hours of gas fading; *+0 hours of light exposure (Fade-Ometer); 30 minutes, 10 pounds pressure of moist heat; g. 1 dip of alkaline perspiration; •jr hour of gas fading; 60 hours of light exposure (Fade-Ometer); 30 minutes, 10 pounds pressure of moist heat; h. 1 dip of alkaline perspiration; 1 hour of gas fading; 60 hours of light exposure (Fade-Ometer); 30 minutes, 10 pounds pressure of moist heat; i. 1 dip of alkaline perspiration; 1-g- hours of gas fading; 60 hours of light exposure (Fade-Ometer); 30 minutes, 10 pounds pressure of moist heat. X* Experimental trials to establish less intense exposure units preliminary to making a series of applications of these units for comparison with the results of the prac­ tical atmospheric gas exposures. XI, Application of the abbreviated unit test procedure 20 succesive times.

22. ? R S S E R T A T ION

0 F

D A T A

The data from the preliminary tests on the four rayon fabrics according to the accepted procedures of Com­ mercial Standards

are presented in the following

tables: Table I, A and 3

Fiber Content and Construction of Experimental Fabrics.

Table

II

Strength Tests on Experimental Fabrics

Table

III

Percentage shrinkage by Measurement of Experimental Fabrics

Table

IV, A and 3

Classification of Results of Color­ fastness Tests

The reproducibility of the gas fading test, using oxides of nitrogen, made three different times, is shown in the following table : Table

V

Reflectometer Results to Prove Re­ producibility of C-as Fading Test

The results showing the shift in color change in the four fabrics with various treatments are shown in the tables and figures as follows: Table

VI

Spectrophotometric Data on the Four Original Fabrics

Table

VII

Spectrophotometric Data Showing the Effect of the Separate Deteriorating Agencies

23 Table VIII

Spectrophotometric Data Showing the Effect of Two Deteriorating Agencies•

Table IX

Spectrophotometric Data Showing the Effect of Three Deteriorating Agen­ cies •

Table X

Spectrophotometric Data Showing the Effect of Moist Heat in Combination With Other Deteriorating Agencies.

Table XI

Spectrophotometric Data Showing the Effect of Drycleaning in Combination With Other Deteriorating Agencies.

Table XII

Spectrophotometric Data Showing Why Alkaline Perspiration Was Chosen.

Table XIII

Spectrophotometric Data Showing the Unimportance of Dry Heat.

Table XIV

Spectrophotometric Data -Giving the Order Finally Chosen.

Table XV

A. Spectrophotometric Data Keeping Three Agencies Constant and Varying Gas Fading. B. Varying Light C. Varying Moist Heat

Table XVI

Spectrophotometric Data Showing the Choice of the Small Unit Test.

Table XVII

Spectrophotometric Data Showing Re­ petition of Unit Test 20 Times.

2b. Table XVIII

A. Spectrophotometric Data Showing Results on Youngstown, Ohio Samples• B. Spectrophotometric Data Showing Effect of Alkaline Perspiration on Samples Exposed in Youngstown, Ohio. C. Spectrophotometric Data Showing Effect of Air Drying and Cabinet Drying Followed by Steam Pressing on Youngstown, Ohio Samples. D. Spectrophotometric Data Showing Effect of Air Drying and Cabinet Drying With Ro Steam Pressing on Youngstown, Ohio Samples.

The results showing the spectrophotometric curves for the different treatments are given in the following figures: Figure 1

Spectrophotometric Curves on the Four Experimental Fabrics.

Figure 2

Spectrophotometric Curves Showing the Effect of Separate Deteriorating Agencies•

25

*

Figure 3

Spectrophotometric

Curves Showing the

Effect of Two Deteriorating Agencies. Figure b

Spectrophotometric

Curves Showing the

Effect of Three Deteriorating Agen­ cies. Figure 5

Spectrophotometric

Curves Showing the

Effect of Moist Heat in Combination With Other Deteriorating Agencies. Figure 6

Spectrophotometric

Curves Showing the

Effect of Drycleaning in Combination With Other Deteriorating Agencies. Figure 7

Spectrophotometric

Curves Showing why

Alkaline Perspiration Was Chosen. Figure 3

Spectrophotometric

Curves Showing the

Unimportance of Dry Heat. Figure 9

Spectrophotometric

Curves Giving the

Order Finally Chosen. Figure 10 A

Spectrophotometric

Curves Keeping

Three Agencies Constant and Varying Gas Fading. Figure 10 B

Spectrophotometric

Curves Keeping

Three Agencies Constant and Varying Light. Figure 10 C

Spectrophotometric

Curves Keeping

Three Agencies Constant and Varying Moist Heat.

26. Figure 11

Spectrophotometric Curves Showing the Choice of the Small Unit Test.

'igure 12

Spectrophotometric Curves Showing Repetition of Unit Test 20 Times.

Figure 13 A

Spectrophotometric Curves Showing Results on Youngstown, Ohio Samples•

Figure 13 B

Spectrophotometric Curves Showing the Effect of Alkaline Perspiration on Samples exposed in Youngstown, Ohio.

Figure 13 C

Spectrophotometric Curves Showing the Effect of Air Drying and Cabi­ net Drying Followed by Steam Pres­ sing in Youngstown, Ohio Samples.

Figure 13 D

Spectrophotometric Curves Showing the Effect of Air Drying and Cabi­ net Drying, with no Steam Pressing on Youngstown, Ohio Samples.

The bursting strength data are given in the fol­ lowing tables and figures: Table XIX

Wet

Bursting Strength in Pounds of

the Four Original Fabrics. Table XX

Wet Bursting Strength in Pounds Showing the Effect of the Separate Deteriorating Agencies.

27

.

Table XXI

Percentage Change in Wet Bursting Strength Showing the Effect of the Separate Deteriorating Agencies.

Table XXII

Wet Bursting Strength in Pounds Showing the Effect of Two Deteriora­ ting Agencies.

Table XXIII

Percentage Change in Wet Bursting Strength Showing the Effects of Two Deteriorating Agencies.

Table XXIV

Wet Bursting Strength in Pounds Showing the Effect of Three Deteriora­ ting Agencies.

Table XXV

Percentage Change in Wet Bursting Strength Showing the Effect of Three Deteriorating Agencies.

Table XXVI

Wet Bursting Strength in Pounds Showing the Effect of Moist Heat in Combination With Other Deteriorating Agencies.

Table XXVII

Percentage change in Wet Bursting Strength Shewing the Effect of Moist Heat in Combination With Other De­ teriorating Agencies.

Table XXVIII

Wet Bursting Strength in Pounds Showing the Effect of Drycleaning in Combination with other Deteriora-

28.

ting Agencies. Table XXIX

Percentage Change in Wet Bursting Strength Showing the Effect of Drycleaning in Combination with Other Deteriorating Agencies.

Table XXX

Wet Bursting Strength in Pounds Showing why Alkaline Perspiration Was Chosen.

Table XXXI

Percentage Change in

Wet

Bursting

Strength Showing why Alkaline Per­ spiration was Used. Table XXXII

Wet Bursting Strength in Pounds Showing the Unimportance of Dry Heat.

Table XXXIII

Percentage Change in Wet Bursting Strength Showing the Unimportance of Dry Heat.

Table XXXIV

Wet Bursting Strength in Pounds Giving Order Finally Chosen.

Table XXXV

Percentage change in Wet Bursting Strength Giving Order Finally Chosen.

Table XXXVI

A. Wet Bursting Strength in Pounds Keeping Three Agencies constant and varying Gas Fading.

29. Table XXXVII

A, Percentage Change in Wet Burst­ ing Strength Keeping Three Agen­ cies Constant and Varying Gas Fading,

Table XXXVI

B. Wet Bursting Strength in Pounds Keeping Three Agencies Constant and Varying Light,

Table XXXVII

B, Percentage Change in Wet Burst­ ing Strength Keeping Three Agen­ cies Constant and Varying Light*

Table XXXVI

C. Wet Bursting Strength in Pounds Keeping Three Agencies Constant and Varying Moist Heat,

Table XXXVII

C. Percentage Change in Wet Burst­ ing Strength Keeping Three Agen­ cies Constant and Varying Moist Heat,

Table XXXVIII

Wet Bursting Strength in Pounds Showing the Choice of the Small Unit Test,

Table XXXIX

Percentage Change in Wet Bursting Strength Showing the Choice of the Small Unit Test,

Table XL

Wet Bursting Strength in Pounds Showing Repetition of Unit Test 20 Times,

30. Table XLI

Percentage Change in Wet Bursting Strength Showing Repetition of Unit Test 20 Times.

Table XLII

A. Wet Bursting Strength in Pounds Showing Results on Youngstown, Ohio Samples.

Table XLIII

A. Percentage Change in Wet Burst­ ing Strength Showing Results on Youngstown, Ohio Samples.

Table XLII

B. Wet Bursting Strength in Pounds Showing Effect of Alkaline Per­ spiration on Samples Exposed in Youngstown, Ohio.

Table XLIII

B. Percentage Change in Wet Burst­ ing Strength Showing Effect of Alkaline Perspiration on Samples Exposed in Youngstown, Ohio.

Table XLII

C. Wet Bursting Strength in Pounds Showing Effect of Air Drying and Cabinet Drying Followed by Pres­ sing with Steam on Youngstown, Ohio Samples.

Table XLIII

C. Percentage Change in Wet Burst­ ing Strength Showing Effect of Air Drying and Cabinet Drying Followed by Pressing with Steam on Youngstown, Ohio Samples.

31. Table XLII

D. Wet Bursting Strength in Pounds Showing the Effect of Air Drying and Cabinet Drying Without Pressing With Steam on Youngstown, Ohio Samples,

Table XLIII

D. Percentage Change in Wet Burst­ ing Strength Showing the Effect of Air Drying and Cabinet Drying Without Steam Pressing on Youngs­ town, Ohio Samples,

Figure l1}-

Percentage Change in Wet Bursting Strength Showing the Effect of the Separate Deteriorating Agencies.

Figure 15

Percentage Change in Wet Bursting •Strength Showing the Effect of Two Deteriorating Agencies,

Figure 16

Percentage Change in Wet Bursting Strength Showing the Effect of Three Deteriorating Agencies.

Figure 17

Percentage Change in Wet Bursting Strength Showing the Effect of Moist Heat in Combination With Other De ­ teriorating Agencies.

Figure 13

Percentage Change in Wet Bursting Strength Showing the Effect of Drycleaning in Combination With Other Deteriorating Agencies.

32.

Figure 19

Percentage Change in Wet Bursting Strength Showing Why Alkaline Per­ spiration Was Chosen.

Figure 20

Percentage Change in Wet Bursting Strength Showing the Unimportance of Dry Heat.

Figure 21

Percentage Change in Wet Bursting Strength Giving the Order Finally Chosen.

Figure 22 A, B, C

Percentage Change in Wet Bursting Strength Keeping Three Agencies Constant and Varying Gas Fading (A), Light

Figure 23

(B)-, and Moist Heat (C).

Percentage Change in Wet Bursting Strength Showing the Choice of the Small Unit Test.

Figure 2b- A

Percentage Change in Wet Bursting Strength Showing Repetition of Unit Test 20 times on Fabric A.

Figure 2b- B

Percentage Change in Wet Bursting Strength Showing Repetition of Unit Test 20 times on Fabric B.

Figure 2b- C

Percentage Change in Wet Bursting Strength Showing Repetition of Unit Test 20 times on Fabric C.

Figure

2.b

D

Percentage Change in Wet Bursting Strength Showing Repetition of Unit Test 20 times 011 Fabric D.

Figure 25 A

Percentage Change in Wet Bursting Strength Showing Results on Youngs­ town, Ohio Samples.

Figure 25 B

Percentage Change in Wet Bursting Strength Showing the Effect of Al­ kaline Perspiration on Samples E x ­ posed in Youngstown, Ohio.

Figure 25 C and D

Percentage Change in Wet Bursting Strength Showing the Effect of Air Drying and Cabinet Drying Followed by Steam Pressing and Air Drying and Cabinet Drying with no Steam Pressing on Youngstown, Ohio Sample

The results of visual judgment are given in the following figures and tables: Table XLIV

Spectrophotometric Data Showing Standards set up for Visual Judg­ ment .

Figure 26

Spectrophotometric Curves Showing Standards set up for Visual Judg­ ment .

Table XLV

Visual Judgment Showing Effect of the Separate Deteriorating Agencies

3^. Table XLVI

Visual judgment Showing Effect of Two Deteriorating Agencies.

Table XLVII

Visual Judgment Showing Effect of Three Deteriorating Agencies.

Table XLVIII

Visual Judgment Showing the Effect of Moist Heat in Combination With Other Deteriorating Agencies.

Table XLIX

Visual Judgment Showing the Effect of Drycleaning in Combination With Other Deteriorating Agencies.

Table L

Visual Judgment Showing Why Alka­ line Perspiration Was Chosen.

Table LI

Visual Judgment Showing the Unim­ portance of Dry Heat.

Table LII

Visual Judgment Giving the Order Finally Chosen.

Table LIII

A. Visual Judgment Shoving the E f ­ fect of Keeping Three Agencies Constant and Varying Gas Fading. B. Visual Judgment Showing the E f ­ fect of Keeping Three Agencies Constant and Varying Light. C. Visual Judgment Showing the E f ­ fect of Keeping Three Agencies Constant and Varying Moist Heat.

Table LIV

Visual Judgment Showing the Choice of the Small Unit Test.

35 Table LV

.

Visual Judgment Showing Repetition of Unit Test 20 times.

Table LVI

A. Visual Judgment Showing Results on Youngstown, Ohio Samples. B. Visual Judgment Showing the E f ­ fect of Alkaline Perspiration on Samples Exposed in Youngstown, Ohio C. Visual Judgment Showing the E f ­ fect of Air 'Drying and Cabinet Drying Followed by Steam Pres­ sing on Youngstown, Ohio Samples. D. Visual Judgment Showing the Ef­ fect of Air Drying and Cabinet Drying with no Steam Pressing on Youngstown, Ohio Samples.

TABLE I A

FIBER CONTENT AND CONSTRUCTION OF EXPERIMENTAL FABRICS

Fabric

Type Fiber

Blue Satin— no finish

Cellulose acetate

Blue Satin— with llnish Blue Taffeta— no finish Blue Taffeta— with finish

Weight per square yard in ounces

Weave

Thread Count Warp Filling

2.75

Satin 5 shaft

202

72

Cellulose acetate

2.65

Satin 5 shaft

202

69

Cellulose acetate

2.71

Plain rib variatioi l

178

57

2.69

Plain rib variatioi i

177

58

Cellulose acetate

0>

TABLE I B

FIBER COKT ENT AND ■CONS .TRTJCTION OF EXPERIT.'iENTAL FABRICS

Fabric

Average Twists per yarn per inch Warp

Filling

Filamoits per yarn Warp Filling

Denier Warp Filling

Thousand Yards per pound Warp Filling

Blue Satin-no finish

no measure- no measureable twist able twist

is

38

69.5

101.4

64.0

44.4

Blue Satin-with finish

no measure- no.measureable tv/ist able twist

15

38

70.7

101.9

63.0

43.7

Blue Taffeta-no finish

no measure- no measureable twist able twist

18

30

71.8

155.0

62.4

28.8

Blue Taffota-with finish

no measure- no measureable twist able twist

18

30

66.6

154.0

66.1

29.0

TABLE II

STRENGTH TESTS ON EXPERIMENTAL FABRICS

Fabric

Dry Breaking Strength in Pounds per Inch

Wet breaking Strength in Pounds per Inch

Dry Bursting Strength in Pounds

Wet Bursting Strength in Pounds

Warp

Filling

Warp

Filling

Blue Satin— no finish

42.0

14.7

21.0

7.2

77.2

39.8

Blue Satin— with, finish

43.3

15.8

21.9

7.7

79.3

40.4

Blue Taffeta— no finish

38.3

25.6

16.9

13.3

79.0

40.0

Blue Taffeta— with finish

36.3

24.6

16.6

12.9

76.3

39.2

TABLE III PERCENTAGE SHRINKAGE BY MEASUREMENT OF EXPERIMENTAL FABRICS

■n

Fabric

One JDrycleaning Filling Warp

One Wet Cleaning Filling Warp

Blue Satin— no finish

0.0

0.6

2.0

1.7

Blue Satin— with finish

0.0

0.4

1.5

1.2

Blue Acetate— no finish

0.5

0.0

3.0

1.0

Blue Acetate— uith finish

0.5

0.0

3.0

1.0

TABLE IV A CLASSIFICATION OF RESULTS OF COLORFASTNESS TESTS

Fabric

Commercial Standards Procedure in C 35 9-44

Crocking Dry

Wet

A

III

40 hours

IV-

IV

B

IV

80 hours

IV

IV

C

III

40 hours

IV

IV

D

IV

80 hours

IV

IV

TABLE IV B

COLORFASTNESS TO DRYC ISA NINO AND WET DRYCIEANINGj LABORATORY METHOD

Fabric A - Class Dry Cleaning

Wet DryCleaning

Fabric B - Class Dry Cleaning

Fabric C - Class

Wet DryCleaning

Dry Cleaning

Wet DryCleaning

Fabric D - Class Dry Clean ing

Wet DryCleaning

Cotton

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

Viscose rayon

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

Cupraimnonium rayon

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

Nylon

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

Cellulose Acetate rayon

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

Wool

II

II

II

n

II

II

II

II

.

TABLE V REFLECTOMETER RESULTS TO PROVE REPRODUCIBILITY OP GAS FADING TEST

Units of Color 1 Difference

Units of Color ^ Difference

Units of Color 3 Difference

1

57.1

58,2

60.0

2

51.6

53.1

56.4

3

58.5

57.5

58.2

4

56.9

57.2

57.6

5

57.9

X

X

6

59.4

X

X

7

57.0

X

X

8

59.5

X

X

9

48,8

X

X

10

59.9

X

X

Standard deviation = 2.89

SPECTROPHOTOMETRIC DATA OTT THE FOUR CRICtIA'AL FABRICS

Reflec­ tance

Resolution Units

Fabric C

Fabric 3

Fabric A

Reflec­ tance

Resolution Units

Reflec­ tance

Resolution Units

1 abr ic D Reflec­ tance

Resolution Units

High

71.5

225

!U »u

225

5 o ,5

Q O-1 *

O e0

224

Mediur

39,5

250

'Z.Q ^

250

33,0

250

58,5

250

Low

17.0

278

15,0

278

17,0

279

16.0

279

TABXj E SFBCTRQPHOTOMETRXO

Fabric Reflec­ tance Ga 3

DATA

SHOWING

A

Res oluti on XJnits

THE

vxx

EFFECT

OP1 THE

Fabric B Reflectance

Resolution Units

SEPARATE

Fabric Reflectanoe

IXETSRXORATXISrG- AGENCIES

G

Resolution Units

Fabrio X) Reflectance

Resolution Units

Fad ing

HigU

47.0

215

44.0

2 23

45.0

218

38.0

223

Medium

34. 5

250

34.0

250

37.5

250

34.0

250

Low

33.0

243

25.5

268

35.0

240

33.5

242

Acid Perspiration Hig 3 3 l

65.0

223

64.0

225

65.5

223

68.0

223

Medium

3*7.0

250

38.0

250

35.0

250

38.0

250

Low

16.0

279

15.0

278

17 .O

279

17.5

279

Alka. 1±ne

F er sp irati on

Hig3a

6*7.0

225

67.0

227

65.0

225

65.0

226

Medium

37.0

250

33.0

250

38.0

250

39.0

250

Low

15.0

279

14.0

280

17.0

278

16.0

280

Ligpa-t High.

65.0

223

62.0

225

70.0

225

65.0

227

Medium

42.0

250

34.0

250

45.0

250

48.0

250

Low

20.0 *

258

19.0

268

28.0

270

22.5

270

Dry Heat High

63.0

225

63.0

225

66 .5

225

63 •5

225

Medium

40.0

250

38.0

250

42. O

250

40.0

250

Low

18.5

279

16.0

278

20 -O

277

17.0

280

Moist Heat High

65.0

225

62.5

225

72.0

223

67.5

223

Medium

36.0

250

32.0

250

43.0

250

45.0

250

Lew

16.5

278

15 .O

280

26.0

270

16.5

278

TAB PS VIII SPECTROPHOTOMETRIC DATA SHOWING THE EFFECT OF TWO DETERIORATING: AGENCIES

Fabric A Reflectance

Resolution Units

Fabric B Reflectance

Resolution Units

Fabric C Reflectance

Resolution Units

Fabric D Reflectance

Resolution Units

Light - Moist Heat High

44.0

218

43.0

223

44.0

218

42.0

225

Medium 33.0

250

32.0

250

34.0

250

32.5

250

Low

258

25.0

268

33.5

258

29.0

268

32.5

Dry Heat - Moist Heat High

44.0

217

41.5

225

41.0

220

37.0

225

Medium

33.0

250

31.5

250

33.0

250

30.0

250

Lew

32.0

245

24.0

267

32.5

245

29.5

267

Acid Perspiration - Moist Heat High

39.5

225

44.0

220

44.0

220

40.5

225

Medium

34.0

250

37.0

250

34.0

250

35.0

250

Low

33.0

257

36.5

240

33.0

260

35.0

253

Alkaline Perspiration - Moist Heat High

42.5

218

42.0

225

41.0

220

37.5

225

Medium

32.0

250

32.0

250

34.0

250

30.5

250

Low

31.5

247

25.5

268

33.0

245

30.5

253

Gas Fading - Moi3t Heat

Low

31.5

247

25.5

268

33.0

245

30.5

253

Gas Fading - Moist Heat High

64.0

227

62.0

227

68.5

225

67.0

227

Medium

36.0

250

34.0

250

40.0

2 50

40.0

250

Low

16.5

280

15.5

280

18.0

280

16.5

280

Gas Fading - Acid Perspiratial High

68.5

225

64.0

226

70.0

225

70.0

225

Medium

36.0

250

45.0

250

41.0

250

42.0

250

Low

15.0

278

15.0

279

18.5

279

16.5

279

Gas Fading - Alkaline Perspiraticn High

59.5

225

48.5

230

51.0

220

47.0

228

Medium

30.0

250

33.0

250

31.0

250

31.0

250

Low

14.5

268

13.5

279

23.5

270

16.5

278

Acid Perspiration - Gas Fading High

68.0

224

68.0

225

64.0

227

59.5

226

Medium

39.0

250

45.0

250

42.0

250

38.0

250

Low

21.5

267

26.5

268

21.0

278

20.5

278

Alkaline Perspiration - Gas Fading High

69.5

225

63.0

225

67.0

225

64.0

225

Medium

41.0

250

38.0

250

40.0

250

39.0

250

Low

17.0

279

16.0

279

18.5

279

16.0

279

TABLE IX SPECTROPHOTOMETRIC DATA SHOWING THE EFFECT OF THREE DETERIORATING AGENCIES

Fabric A Reflec­ tance

Resolution Units

Fabric B Reflectance

Resolution Units

Fabric C Reflec­ tance

Resolution Units

Fabric D Reflectan ce

Resolution Units

Gas Fading - Light - Moist Heat High

48.0

220

32.5

225

48.5

218

40.0

225

Medium

40.0

250

30.5

250

46.0

250

39.5

250

Low

40.0

250

30.0

245

44.0

240

39.5

245

Gas Fading - Dry Heat - Moist Heat High

54.0

220

50.0

223

48.0

217

46.0

223

Medium

31.5

250

32.0

250

40.0

250

38.5

250

Low

30.0

267

21.0

267

40.0

250

28.5

267

Light - Gas Fading - Moist Heat High

53.0

218

52.5

223

55.0

218

54.0

222

Medium

31#0

250

31.0

250

37.0

250

34.0

250

Low

29.0

257

21.0

267

37.0

250

29.0

265

225

55.0

218

51.5

223

Light - Moist Heat - Gas Fading High

52.0

220

51.0

Low

29,0

257

21.0

267

37.0

250

29.0

265

Light - Moist Heat - Gas Fading High

52.0

220

51.0

225

55.0

218

51.5

223

Medium

31.0

250

28.0

250

36.0

250

31.0

250

Low

29.0

258

23.0

268

35.0

255

27.0

262

Moist Heat - Light - Gas Fading High

51.5

220

42.0

220

55.0

220

47.0

225

Medium

34.5

250

32.0

250

38.5

250

36.0

250

Low

31.0

267

@4.0

268

37.0

260

32.0

268

Gas Fading - Moist Heat - Light High

44.0

220

37.5

228

40.0

220

35.0

230

Medium

28.0

250

26.5

250

27.5

250

28.0

250

Low

26.0

260

18.0

268

27.0

255

26.5

260

Alkaline Perspiration - Gas Fading - Moist Heat High

46.5

220

45.5

223

55.5

220

49.0

225

Medium

32.0

250

34.5

250

40.0

250

38.0

250

Low

31.5

257

33.5

251

39.5

253

37.5

257

TABLE X SPECTROPHOTOMETRIC DATA SHOWING THE EFFECT OF MOIST HEAT IN COMBINATION WITH OTHER DETERIORATING AGENCIES Fabric A Reflec­ tance

Resolution Units

----- Eabrio B' " " Reflec­ tance

Fabric "C

'

Resolution Units

Reflectance

Fabric ! d

‘

Resolution Units

Reflectance

Resolution Units

Gas Fading - Acid Perspiration - Alkaline Perspiration - Light - Dry Heat - Moist heat High

43*5

227

59.0

227

59.0

225

59.0

225

Medium

34.5

250

39.0

250

42.0

250

45.0

250

Low

29.5

265

27.5

268

39.0

258

34.0

268

Gas Fading - Acid Perspiration - Alkaline Perspiration - Light - Moist Heat High

57.0

223

54.5

225

66.0

223

63.5

225

Medium

44.0

250

38.0

250

52.0

250

51.5

250

Low

42.0

258

26.0

268

51.0

258

48.0

258

Gas Fading - Acid Perspiration - Alkaline Perspiration - Light - Dry Heat a 223 52.0 54.5 50.0 227 225 High 50.0

225

Medium

34.0

250

35.0

250

37.0

250

35.0

250

Low

27.0

266

24.0

258

34.0

260

25.5

268

TABLE XI SPECTROPHOTOMETRIC DATA SHOWING THE EFEECT OF DRYCLEANING II COMBINATION WITH OTHER DETERIORATING AGENCIES

Fabric A Reflec­ tance

Resolution Units

Fabric B Reflec­ tance

Resolution Unit s

Fabric 0 Reflectance

Resolution Unit s

Fabric D Reflectance

Resolution Units

Gas Fading - Acid Perspiration - Alkaline Perspiration - light - Dryclean ing Dry Heat - Moist Heat High

58.0

225

61.5

226

63.0

224

62.0

225

Medium

45*0

250

45.5

250

47.5

250

47.5

250

Low

42.5

258

34.0

268

46.0

257

42.0

265

Gas Fading - Acid Perspiration - Alkaline Perspiration - Light - Drycleaning Moist Heat High

50.0

223

52.0

225

52.0

223

51.0

223

Medium

32.0

250

32.5

250

35.5

250

34.5

250

Low

29.0

263

22.0

268

34.0

255

29.0

257

Gas Fading - Acid Perspiration - Alkaline Perspiration ■- Light - Drycleaning Dry Heat High

65.0

223

59.0

225

62.0

223

58.0

225

Medium

46.5

250

41.0

250

49.0

250

43.0

250

Low

43.0

257

29.0

268

48.0

258

34.0

268

a

w ffi H * b

5

p

5

«

Q

w 0 * 0

CO 05

w p • 0

01 00 « 01

M 01

$ p p t?

to 05

CO to

oo

0 0 0

£ p 01 • 0

80

!

H P

05 H • 0

B to 09 CO 3*

^ •

to •

w •

O

O

01

CO 05

to 01

CO CO

< 0 M

'6f

CO CO 01 CO 0 o

H* Pi 43

to

to

05

01

00

o

H

B

ffi

®

4

43

« P 4 P ct P 0 3

4

1 ffi w 0 < •

ffi w

4] P pi

> to 01 *3

M p

0}

5

*

0

o

P 00 • 0

o

•

ft P

0

a.

01

to CO w

P 3

o

W

-o m *• a

CO 01 0

w H *

I

3

ffi CO 0) co

to 05 •

o

£

ffi

8pi

05

< • 0

• 01

o

W

B 0 P CO ct _

p 05

B

4

Q p

l

£

®

to 05

01 » 0

H

0 ffi

pi P

I

to CO P w £

43

ll

a

P

a

03

10

ffi

S p?

t o

CO t

p

%

>

>

p

M p

s

I

CO

B ®

Q P CO

pi P 3 03

p

P

0 p

B

w < • 01

S

H*

0) CO 0

w

to

01


/ t

|i J

/

J r

r

-

r

..

r

i |- ’ ■I

■*.

*•-•

1.

i! ! ! 1 i"! - i

1r

-

!

....

jj i;

-

;

i . . I j ; f ...

:

' 1

!

' 1 . . . . ,

'

.!

38.

:r.t 4

-

o o o o

vfl m

o

ornm

o

o

o o o o o in ^ o co n —co cp

ro (S—p ip N* ino'^i

omo o o o o o

09 09—

w

ui 0*

-si

ommooooo o

09 09

Q 01

95.

K

E

Y

T O

F

I

G

U

R

E

1

3

D

Figure 13 D SPECTROPHOTOMETRIC CURVES SH OWING THE EFFECT OF AIR DRYING AND CABINET DRYING WITH N O STEAM PRESSING ON YOUNGSTOWN* OHIO SAMPLES 1.

Four

montlis Air D r i e d No S t e a m P r e s s i n g

2,

Five

montlis A i r D r i e d N o S t e a m P ressing

3*

Four

montlis C a b i n e t D r i e d No S t e a m Pressing

4*

Five

m o n t h s C a b i n e t D r i e d N o S t e a m Pressing

SCALE. 00 0 0 0 0 0

REFLECTANCE

0 poo 0 0 0 0 0 o p

00 000 0 0 0 0-00 00 oo-o o o

-io tu £ ui 0s -j o> o>-jo oj ^ in O' -J b> o#

-ro 0) > Ul O' -4 09 © -jo (aJ * (Ji

'J

00 CO

ocno o o o o o O ^ u i o o o o o o o u>

I

i

•96

TABLE XIX

WET BURSTING STRENGTH IN POUNDS OF THE FOUR ORIGINAL FABRICS

Fabric A

Fabric B

Fabric C

Fabric D

39.8

ifO.lf

ifO.O

39.2

TABLE XX MET BURSTING STRENGTH IN POUNDS SHOWING THE EFFECT OF THE SEPARATE DETERIORATING AGENCIES

Fabric A

Fabric B

Fabric C

Fabric D

1*0.7

to .3

•*0.0

**1.7

to.9

to.3

1*1.2

1*0.8

1*0.1

36.0

31.3

33.2

39.5

to.9

39.9

16.1

17.1

16.9

Gas Fading to.l Acid Perspiration k2 .if

Alkaline Perspiration kl.l Light 35.6

Dry Heat 1*0,2 Moist Heat 25.2

TABLE XXI

Fabric A

Fabric B

Fabric C

Fabric D

3.7

3.7

1 .0

2*5

k.S

5.5

2.0

2.0

0.5

-10.8

-21.7

-15.3

i to . vn

PERCENTAGE CHANGE IN VET BURSTING STRENGTH SHOWING THE EFFECT OF THE SEPARATE DETERIORATING AGENCIES

- 2.5

1 .8

-59.0

-57.1

-^9.3

Gas Fading 0*8

Acid Perspiration 6 .5

Alkaline Perspiration **••9

Light -10.5

Dry Heat 1 .0

Moist Heat -36*7

TABLE XXII WET BURSTING STRENGTH IN POUNDS SHOWING THE EFFECT OF TWO DETERIORATING AGENCIES

Fabric A

Fabric B

Fabric C

Fabric D

15.5

15.3

15.3

19.2

18.6

20.5

19.2

20.1

19.7

19.*f

18.7

39.8

39*3

*f0.8

39.7

^0.0

39.1

*f0.7

37.*f

Light - Moist Heat

15.7

Dry Heat - Moist Heat

20.1

17.9

Acid Perspiration - Moist Heat

20.9

19.6

Alkaline Perspiration - Moist Heat

21.*f

19.9

Gas Fading - Moist Heat

21.2

18.3

Gas Fading - Acid Perspiration

*f0.8

If0.9

Gas Fading - Alkaline Perspiration

*f-1.2

lj-1.1

Acid Perspiration - Gas Fading

*fl.2

*1-1.7

Alkaline Perspiration - Gas Fading

39.1

*fl.*f

TABLE XXIII PERCENTAGE CHANGE IN MET BURSTING STRENGTH SHOWING THE EFFECT OF TWO DETERIORATING AGENCIES

Fabric A

Fabric

B

Fabric C

Fabric D

-6l.6

-61.0

-52.0

-53.0

-3*8.8

-51.0

-3+8.8

-^9.7

-51.5

-52.3+

+ 0.5

+0.3

+2.0

+1.3

0.0

+ 0.3

+ 1.7

- b 06

Light - Moist Heat -60.5

-61.8

Dry Heat - Moist Heat -3*9.5

-55.6

Acid Perspiration - Moist Heat -**7.5

-51.5

Alkaline Perspiration - Moist Heat -3*6.3

—50.3

Gas Fading - Moist Heat —H6.8

—5^*.3

Gas Fading - Acid Perspiration +2.5

+1.2

Gas Fading - Alkaline Perspiration + 3.5

+3.5

Acid Perspiration - Gas Fading + 3.5

-#-0.8

Alkaline Perspiration - Gas Fading — 1.7

+ 3 ®0

TABLE XXIV WET BURSTING STRENGTH IN POUNDS SHOWING-THE EFFECT OF THREE DETERIORATING AGENCIES

Fabric A

Fabric B

Fabric C

Fabric D

Ib.b

15.3

17.^

l*f.8

15.8

15.8

lU-.O

l*f.3

13.8

16.2

3.3

6.8

Gas Fading - Light - Moist Heat 15.1 Gas Fading - Dry Heat - Moist Heat 17.7

17.5

Light - Gas Fading - Moist Heat 16.0

15.2

Light - Moist Heat - Gas Fading 13.8

13.6

Moist Heat - Light - Gas Fading 15.0

l*f.O

Gas Fading - Moist Heat - Light 9.6

l*f.3

Alkaline Perspiration - Gas Fading - Moist Heat 16.9

16.6

17.1

SOI

17.6

TABLE XXV PERCENTAGE CHANGE IN WET BURSTING STRENGTH SHOWING THE EFFECT OF THREE DETERIORATING AGENCIES

Fabric A

Fabric B

Fabric C

Fabric D

Gas Fading - Light - Moist Heat -62.0

-65.0

-6^.0

-61.0

-56.?

-62.2

-60.6

-59.7

—65.0

-63.5

-65.5

-58.8

-91.8

-82.8

Gas Fading - Dry Heat - Moist Heat -55.5

-51.8

Light - Gas Fading - Moist Heat -59.8

-62.5

Light - Moist Heat - Gas Fading -65.1*

-66.5

Moist Heat - Light — -Gas Fading -62.2

-65.3

Gas Fading - Moist Heat - Light -76.0

-6*f.7

Alkaline Perspiration - Gas Fading - Moist Heat -55.8

-58.2

-58.5

-56.5

TABLE XXVI WET BURSTING STRENGTH IN POUNDS SHOWING THE EFFECT OF MOIST HEAT IN COMBINATION WITH OTHER DETERIORATING AGENCIES

Fabric A

Fabric B

Fabric C

Fabric D

Gas Fading - Acid Perspiration - Alkaline Perspiration - Light Dry Heat - Moist Heat 1.7

k.l

8.3

Gas Fading - Acid Perspiration - Alkaline Perspiration - Light Moist Heat 3.9

3.6

2.8

2.7

Gas Fading - Acid Perspiration - Alkaline Perspiration - Light Dry Heat

27.0

31.0

27.6

31.6

TABLE XXVII PERCENTAGE CHANGE IN WET BURSTING STRENGTH SHOWING THE EFFECT OF MOIST HEAT IN COMBINATION WITH OTHER DETERIORATING AGENCIES

Fabric A

Fabric B

Fabric C

Fabric D

Gas Fading - Acid Perspiration - Alkaline Perspiration - Light Dry Heat - Moist Heat -

89.6

-86.5

- 96.6

-77.8

Gas Fading - Acid Perspiration - Alkaline Perspiration - Light Moist Heat -

90.2

-91.2

-93.2

-93.1

Gas Fading - Acid Perspiration - Alkaline Perspiration - Light Dry Heat -23.1

-31.1

-

21.8

S O I

-32.2

TABLE m i l l

MET BURSTING STRENGTH IN POUNDS SHOWING THE EFFECT OF DRYCLEANING IN COMBINATION WITH OTHER DETERIORATING AGENCIES

Fabric A

Fabric B

Fabric C

Fabric D

Gas Fading - Acid Perspiration - Alkaline Perspiration - Light Drycleaning - Dry Heat - Moist Heat 3*3

5.0

5.0

3.1

Gas Fading - Acid Perspiration - Alkaline Perspiration - Light Drycleaning - Moist Heat 3.8

5.1

3.8

5.0

Gas Fading - Acid Perspiration - Alkaline Perspiration - Light Drycleaning - Dry Heat

18.7

2^.5

17.8

25.0

TABLE XXIX PERCENTAGE CHANGE IN JET BURSTING STRENGTH SB3WING THE EFFECT OF DRYCLEANING IN COMBINATION WITH OTHER DETERIORATING AGENCIES

Fabric A

Fabric B

Fabric C

Fabric D

Gas Fading - Acid Perspiration - Allsaline Perspiration - light Drycleaning - Dry Heat - Moist Heat -92.0

-87.6

-87.4

-92*0

Gas Fading - Acid Perspiration - Alkaline Perspiration - Light Drycleaning - Moist Heat ~ -90.5

-87.4

-93.0

-87.2

Gas Fading - Acid Perspiration - Alkaline Perspiration - light Drycleaning - Dry Heat -46.1

-39.4

-55.5

-36.3

T O BURSTING STRENGTH IN POUNDS SHOWING WHY ALKALINE PERSPIRATION WAS OHOSEN

Fabric A

Fabric B

Fabric C

Fabric D

Gas Fading - Acid Perspiration - Moist Heat 19.6

18.8

18.0

18.9

Gas Fading - Alkaline Perspiration - Moist Heat 20.0

17.8

17.6

17.1

Gas Fading * Acid Perspiration - Light - Moist Heat 3.0

4.6

3.3

2.8

Gas Fading - Alkaline Perspiration - light - Moist Heat 4.1

5.4

2.8

3.0

Gas Fading - Light - Alkaline Perspiration - Moist Heat 12.4

14.0

05.0

12.3

Gas Fading - Light - Acid Perspiration - Moist Heat 14.2

15.0

11.5

14.3

TABLE XXXI

PERCENTAGE ORANGE IN WET BURSTING STRENGTH SHOWING WHY ALKALINE PERSPIRATION WAS CHOSEN

Fabric A

Fabric B

Fabric C

Fabric D

Gas Fading - Acid Perspiration - Moist Heat -51.2

-53.5

-55.0

-51.8

Gas Fading - Alkaline Perspiration - Moist Heat -49.7

-56.0

-51.5

-56.5

Gas Fading - Acid Perspiration - Light - Moist Heat -92.5

-88.8

—91.6

-90.4

Gas Fading - Alkaline Perspiration - Light - Moist Heat -89.9

-81.5

-92.8

-92.5

Gas Fading - Light - Alkaline Perspiration - Moist Heat -69.0

-65.5

-62.5

-71.2

Gas Fading - Light - Acid Perspiration - Moist Heat -64.4

-63. 0

-71.2

-63.6

TABLE XXXII

WET BURSTING STRENGTH IN POUNDS SHOWING THE UNIMPORTANCE OP DJff HEAT

Fabric B

Fabric A

Gas Fading 15,6

- Dry

Fabric C

Fabric D

Heat - Light - Moist Heat 13.9

14.4

11.4

Gas Fading - Light - Dry Heat - Moist Heat 15.3

13.7

13.1

12.4

TABLE XXXIII

PERCENTAGE CHANGE IN WET BURSTING STRENGTH SHOWING THE UNIMPORTANCE OP DRY HEAT

Fabric A

Fabric B

Fabric 0

Fabric D

Gas Fading - Dry Heat - Light - Moist Heat -60.8 Gas Fading - Light -66.5

-65.6

-64.0

-71.0

«• Dry Heat - Moist Heat —66.2

-67.4

-68.4

TABIE XXXIV

WET BURST ING STRENGTH IN POUNDS GIVING THE ORDER FINALLY OH)SEN

Fabric A

Fabric B

Fabric G

Fabric D

Alkaline Perspiration - GasFading - Light - Moist Heat

0.0

0.0

0.0

Alkaline Perspiration - Light -Gas Fading 15.3

9.6

16.1

1.1 - Moist Heat 13.9

TABLE XXXV PERCENTAGE CHANGE IN WET BURSTING STRENGTH GIVING ORDER FINALLY CHOSEN

Fabric A

Fabric B

Fabric C

Fabric D

Alkaline Perspiration - Gas Fading - Light - Moist Heat

-100.0

-100.0

-100.0

-97.4

Alkaline Perspiration - Light - Gas Fading - Moist Heat

-61.5

-76.2

-59.8

-64.4

TABLE XXXVI A. B. AND C WET BURSTING STRENGTH IN POUNDS KEEPING THREE AGENCIES CONSTANT AND VARYING GAS FADING TA). LIGHT Tb TTMOIST HEAT (C)

Fabric A

Fabric B

Fabric C

Fabric D

A. Alkaline Perspiration - 30 Minutes Gas Fading - 60 Hours Light 30 Minutes Moist Heat at 10 Pounds Pressure 0.0

1.8

0.0

Alkaline Perspiration - 60 Minutes Gas Fading30 Minutes Mfbist Heat at 10 Pounds Pressure 2.7

b,7

0.8

1.2

60

Hours

b.k

Alkaline Perspiration - 90 MinutesGas Fading - 60 Hours Light 30 Minutes Moist Heat at 10 Pounds Pressure 0.0

0.3

0.0

1.2

B. Alkaline Perspiration - 120 Minutes Gas Fading- 10 Hours Light 30 Minutes Moist Heat at 10 Pounds Pressure **■•8

7A

10.1

12.1

Alkaline Perspiration - 120 Minutes Gas Fading- 20 Hours Light 30 Minutes Moist Heat at 10 Pounds Pressure **■•9

10.3

5.7

11*1

Alkaline Perspiration - 120 Minutes Gas Fading- *f0 Hours Light 30 Minutes Moist Heat at 10 Pounds Pressure

Light

V.9

10,3

5.7

11*1

Alkaline Perspiration - 120 Minutes Gas Fading - *f0 Hours Light 30 Minutes Moist Heat at 10 Pounds Pressure 0.0

1.1

2.5

2.1

C. Alkaline Perspiration - 120 Minutes Gas Fading - 60 Hours Light Five Minutes Moist Heat at 10 Pounds Pressure 0.5

3.7

0.2

1 .1*

Alkaline Perspiration - 120 Minutes Gas Fading - 60 Hours Light 10 Minutes Moist Heat at 10 Pounds Pressure 0.0

1.2

0.0

0.0

Alkaline Perspiration - 120 Minutes Gas Fading - 60 Hours Light 20 Minutes Moist Heat at 10 Pounds Pressure 0.0

0.1

0.0

1.2

Alkaline Perspiration - 120 Minutes Gas Fading - 60 Hours Light Five Minutes Moist Heat at Five Pounds Pressure 17.5

27.0

16.1*

22.8

Alkaline Perspiration - 120 Minutes Gas Fading - 60 Hours Light .'3D' Minutes Moist Heat at Five Pounds Pressure 12.1*

17.8 f'TT

9.6

TABLE XXXVII A. B. AND C PERCENTAGE CHANGE IN WET BURSTING STRENGTH KEEPING THREE AGENCIES CONSTANT AND VARYING GAS FADING iAl> LIGHT (B), AND MOIST BEAT (C)

Fabric

A

A

Fabric

Alkaline Perspiration 30 minutes Moist Heat at

-100.0

B -

10

Fabric

C

30

-100.0

Alkaline Perspiration - 60 minutes Gas Fading 30 minutes Moist Heat at 10 pounds pressure

-88.6

—

B

■

■ I ^MJ

r

'—

* iI

-81.8

iso

hours Light -

10

-74.8

-74.8 ^ _

60

■— ^

20

-85.5 mimi tea

Gas Fading

hours Light

-

-69.2

Alkaline Perspiration - 120 minutes Gas Fading 30 minutes Moist Heat at 10pounds pressure

- -87.8

-

-97.0

Alkaline Perspiration- 120 minutes Gas Fading 30 minutes Moist Heat at 10 pounds pressure

-88.0

light-

-89.0

-100,0 — ~*—

hours

- 60 hours light

-96.8

-99.4

D

-97.0

Alkaline Perspiration - 90 minutes Gas Fading 30 minutes Moist Heat at 10pounds pressure

-100.0

60

minutes Gas Fadingpounds pressure

-98.6

-98.2

Fabric

hours light -

-71.8 - 40

hours Light

-

30 minutes Moist neat at jlu pounua prooaujL-o -88.0

-81.8

-74.8

-69.2

Alkaline Perspiration - 120 minutes Gas Fading - 20 hours light 30 minutes Moist Heat at 10 pounds pressure - -87.8

-74.8

-85.5

-71.8

Alkaline Perspiration - 120 minutes Gas Fading - 40 hours Light 30 minutes Moist Heat at 10 pounds pressure -100.0

-97.5

-93.6

-94.6

C Alkaline Perspiration - 120 minutes Gas Fading - 60 hours Light five minutes Moist Heat at 10 pounds pressure -98.8

-91.0

-99.5

-96,5

Alkaline Perspiration - 120 minutes Gas Fading - 60 hours Light 10 minutes Moist Heat at 10 pounds pressure -100.0

-97.0

-100.0

-100.0

Alkaline Perspiration - 120 minutes Gas Fading - 60 hours Light 20 minutes Moist Heat at 10 pounds pressure -100.0

-99.9

-100.0

-97.0

Alkaline Perspiration - 120 minutes Gas Fading - 60 hours ^ight five minutes Moist Heat at five: pounds pressure -56.2

-33.2

-59.0

-41.4

Alkaline Perspiration - 120 minutes Gas Fading * 60 hours light 10 minutes M0iat Heat at five pounds pressure

-75.8

-69.2

-60,8

-54.6

TABLE XXXVIII WET BURSTING STRENGTH IN POUNDS SHOWING THE CHOICE OP THE SMALL UNIT TEST

Fabric A

Fabric B

Fabric C

Fabric D

Alkaline Perspiration - 30 minutes Gas Fading - 10 hours five minutes Moist Heat at five pounds pressure 25,2

29.1

28.9

Alkaline Perspiration - 30 minutes Gas Fading - 10 hours five minutes Moist Heat at 10 pounds pressure 23.1

19.7

15.7

Light -

28.2 Light -

17.5

Alkaline Perspiration - 15 minutes Gas Fading - five hours Light five minutes Moist Heat at 10 pounds pressure 22.8

22.5

21.0

18.9

TABLE XXXIX PERCENTAGE CHANGE IN WET BURSTING STRENGTH SHOWING THE CHOICE OF THE SMALL UNIT TEST

Fabric A

Fabric B

Fabric C

Fabric D

Alkaline Perspiration - 30 minutes. Gas Fading - 10 hours Light five minutes Moist Heat at five poundspressure -36*7

-27.8

-27.6

-28.1

Alkaline Perspiration - 30 minutes Gas Fading - 10 hours Light five minutes Moist Heat at 10 pounds pressure -42.0

-51.2

-60.8

-55.5

Alkaline Perspiration - 15 minutes Gas Fading - five hours Light five minutes Moist Heat at 10 pounds pressure

42.7

-44.5

-47.5

-51.8

TABLE XL WET BURSTING STRENGTH IN POUNDS SHOWING REPETITION OF THE UNIT TEST 20 TIMES

Fabric A

Fabric B

Fabric C

Fabric D

1

25.4

23.8

21.0

21.5

2

29.2

25.1

23.4

18.5

3

15.3

14.1

16.0

15.5

4

15.2

13.9

9.3

17.6

5

19.4

17.8

17.8

17.2

6

14.4

15.0

15.6

15.3

7

14.7

14.9

14.4

14.6

8

14.7

15.5

14.9

14.6

9

11.7

13.4

12.7

12.3

10

13.2

11.3

13.3

11.3

12

5.4

7.1

10.1

11.0

15

3.7

3.4

4.9

5.6

18

5.3

4.0

11.0

9.1

20

3.6

1.6

2.2

2.9

Number refers to number of times Unit Test was repeated. Unit Test is Alkaline Perspiration — 15 minutes Gas Fading - 5 hours Light - 5 minutes Moist Heat at 10 pounds pressure.

TABLE XLI

Fabric B

Fabric C

Fabric D

1

-36.2

-41.2

-47.6

-45.3

a

-26.6

*38.0

-41.6

-54.6

3

-61.5

-65.2

O . 0 1

-57.8

4

—61.8

-65.6

-77.2

-53.6

5

-51.2

-55.0

-55.5

-56.2

6

-63.8

-63.0

-61.0

-61.0

7

-63.0

-63.2

-64.0

-65.3

8

-63.0

-61.6

I to . 00

-62.8

9

-70.6

-67.0

-67.4

-68.6

10

-67.0

-72.2

a to 1

CO

-68.6

12

-86.5

-82.5

CD

-72.0

15

-90.6

-91.6

CO . I> CO 1

-86.8

18

-86.7

-90.1

-72.5

-76.9

20

-90.9

-96.0

-94.5

-92.6

CD

It* .

05

CD

Fabric A

1

PERCENTAGE CHANGE IN WET BURSTING STRENGTH SHOWING REPETITION OP UNIT TEST 20 TIMES

Number refers to number of times unit test was repeated. Unit - 15 minutes Gas Fading - five Test is: Alkaline Perspiration ■ hours Light - five ininutes Moist Heat at 10 pounds pressure

TABLE XLII A WET BURSTING STRENGTH IN FOUNDS SHOWING RESULTS ON YOUNGSTOWN, OHIO SAMPLES

Fabric A

Fabric 0

Fabric D

43.8

42.8

41.9

44.1

43.2

41.4

42.3

43.0

42.6

42.7

41.6

40.0

42.2

41.3

39.9

40.9

40.5

40.7

41.5

40.3

39.4

43.3

41.7

38.5

Fabric B

-

One week 44.5 Two weeks 43.9 ©ne Month 43.4 Two Months 43.7 Three Months 4L.4 Six Months 41.5 Seven Months 41.7 Eight Months

120

44.3

TABLE XLII B WET BURSTING STRENGTH IN POUNDS SHOWING THE EFFECT OF ALKALINE PERSPIRATION ON SAMPLES EXPOSED IN YOUNGSTOWN, OHIO

Fabric A

Fabric B

Fabric C

Fabric D

43.4

43.5

42.3

45.1

42.6

42.3

42.8

41.0

40.8

One week 41.6 Two weeks 43.8 One month 42.4 Two months 43.1

•

43.1

42.0

42.7

41.5

40.7

41.1

42.5

42.3

41.5

Seven months 41.5 Eight months 41.9

TABLE XLII 0 WET BURSTING STRENGTH IN POUNDS SHOWING THE EFFECT OF AIR DRYING AND CABINET DRYING FOLLOWED BY STEAM PRESSING ON YOUNGSTOWN, OHIO SAMPLES

Fabric A

Fabric B

Fabric C

Fabric D

Four months Air Dried plus Steam Pressing 41.7

41.1

40.9

49.7

Five months Air Dried plus Steam Pressing 41.6

41.6

40.7

39.6

Four months Cabinet Dried plus Steam Pressing 41.5

41.3

41.0

39.9

Five months Cabinet Dried plus Steam Pressing 41.8

41.8

41.1

41.1

TABLE XLII D WET BURSTING STRENGTH IN POUNDS SHOWING THE EFFECT OF AIR DRYING AND CABINET DRYING WITH NO STEAM PRESSING ON YOUNGSTOWN, OHIO SAMPLES

Fabric A

Fabric B

Fabric C

Fabric D

Four months Air Dried - No Steam Pressing 41.7

41.1

39.4

39.6

Five months Air Dried - No Steam Pressing 41.4

42.3

40.2

39.5

Four months Cabinet Dried - No Steam Pressing 41.2

41.9

40.8

40.0

Five months Cabinet Dried - No Steam Pressing 41.7

42.2

40.3

39.9

TABLE XLIII A PERCENTAGE CHANGE IN WET BURSTING STRENGTH SHOWING RESULTS ON YOUNGSTOWN, OHIO SAMPLES

Fabric A

Fabric B

Fabric C

Fabric D

+ 8.4

+7.0

+7.9

+ 9.6

+ 8.0

+ 5.6

One week + 11.6 Two weeks + 10.6 One month. + 9.5

+ 4.7

+7.5

+8.7

Two months + 9.8

+ 5.7

+ 4.0

+ 2.0

+ 4.5

+ 3.3

+1.8

+ 1.2

+1.3

+3.8

+ 2.7

+■0.8

+0.5

+ 7.2

+4.3

-1.8

Three months + 4.0 Six months + 4.3 Seven months + 4.8

+11« 3

VST

Eight months

tabie xliii b

PERCENTAGE CHANGE IN WET BURSTING STRENGTH SHOWING THE EFFECT OF ALKALINE PERSPIRATION ON SAMPLES EXPOSED IN YOUNGSTOWN, OHIO

Fabric A

Fabric B

Fabric C

Fabric D

+ 7.4

+8.7

+7.9

+11.6

+ 6.5

+7.9

+ 6.0

+ 2.5

+4.1

+6.7

+ 5.0

+ 8.9

+ 2.7

+ 1.8

+ 4.9

+5.2

+ 5.8

+5.9

One week +4.5 Two weeks + 1.0 One month + 6.5 Two months + 8.5 Seven months +4.3 Eight mcnths + 5.3

TABLE XLIII C PERCENTAGE CHANGE IN WET BURSTING STRENGTH SHOWING THE EFFECT OF AIR DRYING AND CABINET DRYING FOLLOWED BY STEAM PRESSING ON YOUNGSTOWN, OHIO SAMPLES

Fabric A

Fabric B

Fabric C

Fabric D

Four months Air Dried plus Steam Pressing +~4 #8

+ 1.7

+2.3

+1.3

Five months Air Dried plus Steam Pressing +4*5

+ 3.0

+1.8

+ 1.0

Four months Cabinet Dried plus Steam Pressing +4.3

+ 2.2

42.5

+ 1.8

Five months Cabinet Dried plus Steam Pressing +• 5.0

+ 3.5

-f2.8

+ 4.9

TABLE XLIII D PERCENTAGE CHANGE IN WET BURSTING STRENGTH SHOWING THE EFEECT OP AIR DRYING AND CABINET DRYING WITH NO STEAM PRESSING CN YOUNGSTOWN^ OHIO SAMPLES

Fabric A

Fabric B

Fabric C

Fabric D

Four months Air Dried - No Steam Pressing

+ 4*8

+ 1.7

+ 1.5

+ 1.0

Five months Air Dried - No Steam Pressing

+ 4*0

+ 4.7

+ 0.5

+ 0.8

Four months Cabinet Dried - No Steam Pressing

+ 3.5

+

3.7

+ 2.0

+ 2,0

Five months Cabinet Dried - No Steam Pressing

+ 4.7

+ 4.5

+ 0.8

+1.8

128 e

Figure 14

PERCENTAGE CHANGE IN WET BURSTING STRENGTH SHOWING THE EFFECT OF THE SEPARATE DETERIORATING AGENCIES Fabric Fabric Fabric Fabric

+20 r

A B C D

+10 riwmv.

0 an

W 0A X-vf

i ©

JLL

Y)V

-10

U) a -20 stf

m

A

$2

o

bO *

-50

m m m

-40 -50

fi ©

0 -60 u

C

-70

C4

-80 -90 -100 T r e a t m e n t

f/A

Figure 15 PERCENTAGE CHANGE IN WET BURSTING STRENGTH:THE EFF

+ 20 +10

-

T r e a t xn e

129.

Figure 15 TRENGTH:THE EFFECT OF TWO DETERIORATING AGENCIES

Fabric Fabric Fabric Fabric

5

T r e a t m e n t

A B C ■■ D hj#

PERCENTAGE CHANGE IN NET BURSTINi SHOWING THE EFFECT OF THREE DETERIOR

130 ♦

Figure 16 NGE ITT WET BURSTING STRENGTH OF THREE DETERIORATING AGENCIES

Fabric Fabric Fabric Fabric

6

r e a t m e n t

A B gjjgj C ■■ D Ioo