9876543210987654321098765432121098765432109876543210987654321210987654321098765432109876543212109876543210987654321098765432121098765432109876543210987654321 9876543210987654321098765432121098765432109876543210987654321210987654321098765432109876543212109876543210987654321098765432121098765432109876543210987654321 9876543210987654321098765432121098765432109876543210987654321210987654321098765432109876543212109876543210987654321098765432121098765432109876543210987654321

QUALITY CONTROL

MEASUREMENT OF TRASH BY SHIRLEY TRASH ANALYSER AND HVI SYSTEM

Mr.K.B. Rajagopal, Miss. I.K.P. Iyer and Mrs. Mangla Srinivasan* CIRCOT, Matunga, Bombay - 400 019.

Analysis of trash and its quantitative estimation need not be overemphasised. The present paper deals with the performance evaluation of two types of trash measuring systems mainly Shirley Trash Analyser and HVI system. Authors conclude that their existed poor agreement in parameters obtained from two systems for Indian cotton. The paper discusses these findings in more detail. The measurement of trash or n o n- l i n t c o n t e n t i s v e r y important in assessing the lint quality of cotton samples. The cotton Classer or Grader estimates visually the trash content of a cotton sample, hence, his classification is subjective. For quantitative estimation of the trash or nonlint content in a sample, u s u a l l y t h e S h i r l e y Tr a s h Analyser is used. 1.2 In the Laboratory technique, a carefully weighed quantity of 100 gms of the material is passed through the Analyser. 3 The separated lint and trash are weighed and the percentage of trash or non-lint content is determined. One drawback of Shirley Analyser method is that it cannot provide information relating to the number or size of non-lint particles. This has prompted the development of various optical - electronic techniques for measuring the number and physical features of non-lint particles found on the surface of raw cotton samples. Donald and Barker 4 adopted an instrument which employs a television camera to view the sample to be
Journal of the Textile Association - May 1994

analysed and a specialised computer-based signal analysis system to analyse the signal from the camera. The signal analyser can determine and display information concerning the number, size distribution, length and area of particles viewed by the camera. The working group on "Dust and Trash" at the International cotton conference in Bremen (1990) recommended Shirley Analyser Mark II, Microdust and Trash Monitor (MTM) from Uster Technologies, USA and ITV Dust and Trash Tester from Hollingworth as standard instruments. 5 The old Shirley Analyser was not recommended as it does not offer a possibility of measuring dust. The High Volume Instrument was developed by the SPINLAB during the early eighties. A rapid measure of trash content which is compatible with HVI system was needed. The trash determination method in the HVI system is based on image data analysis technology. The optical scanning method (video camera) is used in the

measurement of trash, providing a measure of the sample surface area (% AREA) covered by trash and the number (COUNT) of particles. The two HVI system (Spinlab HVI system and the Motion Control HVI system) measure trash in a similar way, although using different pixel spacing. A video camera optically scans a sample compressed against a viewing window above the camera. In the Motion Control HVI systems the viewing area is divided into a matrix of 59500 raster points (pixels) or 248 x 240 raster lines. Dark trash particles (i.e. those whose colour value is 30% darker than the light cotton colour of the environment) are counted. The Area is calculated by the relationship, Area = 40 (Nx), where Nx is the number of pixels darkened by trash. relationship,
* M/s Makhanlal Rajkumar Cotton Ginning and Trading Pvt. Ltd., Bombay. 15

The

COUNT is given by the

Table-1
SR . VARIETY NO . SHIRLEY HVI 900 SYSTEM TRASH% AREA% TRASH (TRASH COUNT COUNT X AREA%) 3.50 2.70 2.50 4.60 5.10 4.30 5.00 2.70 5.00 3.40 3.00 3.20 3.80 4.40 5.00 4.80 1.90 2.40 4.90 4.10 3.00 3.20 4.00 1.20 1.40 0.70 1.10 0.90 1.40 1.10 1.30 0.60 0.30 0.80 1.00 1.80 1.30 1.40 1.10 1.00 1.30 1.60 1.50 1.20 0.60 1.80 29.00 23.00 32.00 48.00 30.00 34.00 36.00 30.00 34.00 28.00 44.00 26.00 26.00 27.00 66.00 26.00 26.00 27.00 42.00 45.00 26.00 25.00 66.00 34.80 32.00 22.40 52.80 27.00 47.60 39.60 39.00 20.40 8.40 35.20 26.00 46.80 35.10 92.40 28.60 26.00 35.10 67.20 67.50 31.20 15.00 118.80

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

LRA 5166 " " " " " " MECH 1 J. 34 J. 34 S/G DIGVIJAY F 414 . " AHH. 44 G. COT 12 " DCH. 32 DCH. 32 S. 6 S. 6 NHH. 44 MCU. 5 JAYADHAR

subjectively assigned by a cotton classer for American upland cottons and found a curvelinear dependence between the objective and subjective trash rankings. Hunter8 noted that even though HVI Trashmeters are easy to calibrate and are stable,inter-laboratory reproducibility of results does not appear to be acceptable. Recently the same window size, image area and reference tile have been adopted by the two manufacturers of HVI systems. The reason for the poor agreement between the trash parameters obtained from Shirley Trash Analyser and HVI systems, for Indian cottons, is proposed to be analysed in greater detail. Acknowledgement The Authors are thankful to Dr.N.B Patil, Director, CIRCOT. for the necessary guidance and permission to publish this note. REFERENCES
1. ANON., Text Mfr., 60, 111 (1934) 2. Pfeiffenberger, G.W., Text. Res J., 14, 50(1944) 3. Gupte, V. V., and Iyengar, R. L. N., Indian Cotton Gr.Rev.,13, 101(1959 ) 4. Donald W. Lyons and Roger.L Barker, "Optical Measurement of Non-lint particles in Various Grades of Cotton", P No. 135, Text. Res J., February . 1976. 5. International Cotton Conference, Bremen, 1990 (Chapter 13/1) 6. Dr. P E. Sassar, " High Volume . Instrument Test System : a total tool for textile manufacturing" ; International Cotton Conference, Bremen 1984. 7. Roger L. Barker and Donald W.Lyons, "Instrument Analysis fo the influence of Non-lint trash and Lint colour on the Grading of cotton; P. 289, Text. Res J., April, 1977. 8. Dr.Lawrance Hunter, "HVI Technology : Its Use and Misuse" , ICAC Recorder, 9, No. 3, September 1991. Journal of the Textile Association - May 1994

Count - (10) Nc, where Nc is number of times the video signal switches from light to dark. The Area and Count are used to calculate the LEAF number. In order to assess the comparative performance between the Shirley Analyser, which measures the absolute trash and the HVI transmeter which measures the surface trash, a study was undertaken a t C I R C O T. Tw e n t y t h re e cotton samples of various varieties were chosen for this purpose. Initially, the trash percentage was determined using the Shirley Analyser in CIRCOT. The trash analysis for the same samples was done on HVI - 900 system installed in the cotton testing laboratory of M/s.Makhanlal Rajkumar Cotton Ginning and Trading Pvt. Ltd., Bombay. Maximum care was taken to minimise the loss of trash while handling the
16

samples. Table 1 gives the test data of all the samples. The trash percentage obtained from Shirley Analyser is found to be very poorly correlated with Area percentage and Trashcount obtained from HVI. The correlation coefficients were 0.1512 and 0.4624,respectively. Similarly, the product of Area percentage and Trashcount, which gives an idea of the Leaf number was also poorly correlated with Trash percentage(corelation coefficient: 0.3748). However, the work carried out by Sasser 6 indicates that the HVI trash parameters are comparable with Shirley Analyser visible waste. Among the systems, Motion Control trash parameters were more correlated with Shirley Analyser visible waste. Barker and Donald 7 compared the optically measured non-lint content with grade as