Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 7

Indian Journal of Fibre & Textile Research

Vol. 27, June 2002, pp. 135-141

\\
Apron slippage in ring frame: Part II-Factors affecting apron slippage and their
- - --- effect on yam qualit
e.\basj & l p ' adav ')
r- Northern India Textile Research Association, Sector-23, Raj Nagar, Ghaziabad 201 002, ndia
and

\ S M Ishtiaque

1-.

"

Department of Textile Technology, Indian Institute of Technology, New Delhi I IO 016, India

'-

Received 6 September 2000; revised received and accepted 22 February 2001

LThe effect of various roving and drafting parameters like roving hank, roving TM, top arm pressure, spacer size and
break draft on apron slippage has been studied. It is observed that both bollom apron slippage and apron-to-apron slippage
change with the change in the above parameters. With the change in these parameters, when the apron slippage increases the
yarn quality in general deteriorates and vice versa.
Keywords: Apron slippage. Break draft, Roving T M, Spacer size, Top arm pressure

1 Introduction

has also been studied.

A detailed study on apron-to-apron slippage in ring


frame has already been reported I. The phenomenon of
apron-to-apron slippage and its effect on yarn properties has also been studied. It has been established that
the slippage between bottom apron to top apron disturbs the movement of fibres in the apron zone which
results in deterioration of yarn quality . Apart from the
apron-to-apron slippage, another apron slippage i.e.
slippage between middle bottom roller to bottom
apron, termed as bottom apron slippage, has also been
reported. The bottom apron faces friction from the
bottom apron bridge, the tension bracket and the top
2
apron unit, giving rise to considerable slippage The
slippage between bottom roller and bottom apron results in the change in draft distribution which affects
the yarn quality.
Both apron-to-apron and bottom apron slippages
depend on various factors and it is very important to
know the effect of these factors on apron slippage to
improve the yarn quality. In the present work, the effect of various factors, like roving hank, roving TM,
lap arm pressure, size of spacer and break draft, on
bottom apron and apron-to-apron slippages has been
studied. The effect of these factors on yarn properties

2 Materials and Methods

'To whom all the correspondence should be addressed.


Phone : 4783586; Fax: 0091 -0120-4783596;
E-mail: nitra @ndc. vsnl.n eLin

2.1 Preparation of Yarn Samples

All the carded yarns (24 Ne) were spun from 100%
cotton (134 SG) with 4.2 TM at a spindle speed of
10,500 rpm. The details of sampling plan along with
the yarn reference number are given in Table I. The
yarn samples were prepared by changing one parameter at a time, keeping all the other parameters constant. Ten ring bobbins were prepared for each sample
and tested afterwards for different properties.
2.2 Measurement of Apron Slippage

The apron-to-apron and bottom apron slippages


were observed with and without roving in the drafting
zone. In the present study, ten spindles were selected
in such a way that their apron slippage values were
very close to each other so that the mean of these ten
spindles could be taken as representative slippage
value. The details of slippage values both with and
without materials are given in Table 2.
2.2.1 Bottom Apron Slippage

To measure the slippage between bottom roller and


bottom apron, a mark was put on the bottom apron
and another reference mark was put on the frame. The
surface speed of the bottom roller was calculated from
roller rpm and diameter. The time taken to make five
complete revolutions by the bottom aprons was measured with the help of stop watch. The process was

136

INDIAN J. FIBRE TEXT. RES., JUNE 2002

repeated for five times to get the average time. Then,


the length of the bottom apron was measured. From
the values of time and length, the surface speed of
bottom apron was calculated. The bottom apron slippage (Sb) was calculated by the following formula:
Table I -

Sample details

Roving
hank

Roving
TM

Middle
top roller
pressure
kg

Spacer
size
mm

Break
draft

SH I
SH 2
SH J

0.80"
1.10"
1.40"

1.5
1.5
1.5

15
15
15

3.5
3.5
3.5

1.4
1.4
1.4

ST I
ST 2
ST)

1.10
1.10
1.10

1.2"
1.5"
1.8"

15
15
15

3.5
3.5
3.5

1.4
1.4
1.4

SPI
SP 2
SP3

1.10
1.10
1.10

1.5
1.5
1.5

13"
15"
17"

3.5
3.5
3.5

1.4
1.4
1.4

SSI
SS2
SS)

1.10
1.10
1.10

1.5
1.5
1.5

15
15
15

3.0"
3.5"
4.0"

1.4
1.4
1.4

SOl
S02
SO)

1.10
1.10
1.10

1.5
1.5
1.5

15
15
15

3.5
3.5
3.5

1.1 "
1.25"
1.4"

Sample
re f. no.

Sample codes SH , ST, SP, SS and SO arc the samples prepared by


changing roving hank, roving TM, top arm pressure, spacer size
and break draft respecti vel y.
"Yariable parameter.
Table 2 Sample
ref. no.

Middle
bOllom roller
surface
speed
mrnls

Apron speed
without roving
mrnls
BOllom
Top
apron
apron

Bollom apron slippage (Sb), % =


Surface speed of
- Surface speed of
middle bOllom roller bOllom apron
Surface speed of middle bOllom roller

x 100

2.2.2 Apron-to-Apron Slippage

The slippage between bottom and top aprons was


measured by the method described earli er' . The
apron -to-apron slippage (Sa) was calcu lated using the
following equation:
Apron-to-apron slippage (Sa), % =
BOllom apron surface speed - Top apron surface speed x 100
BOllom apron surface speed

2.2.3 Backward and Forward Slip

In the backward slip, the rovings in the roller nip


are held by the back roller, causing the bottom and the
top apron to run more slower than [he bottom roller.
On the other hand, the fibre strand in the front roller
nip tries to pull the aprons at a faster speed, causing
forward slip of apron. In the present study, alway s
backward slippage of aprons is observed which is due
to the fact that the number of fibres in the back roller
nip are much higher than that in the front roller nip.
2.3 Measurement of Yarn Characteristics

The irregularity and imperfections of all the yarns


were tested on Uster Tester-3 at speed of 400 m/min
for I min. The thin places, thick places and neps per

Effect of different factors on apron slippage


Apron slippage
without roving, %

Apron speed wilh


roving, mmls

Apro n slippage with


rovi ng, %

BOllom roller
to boltom
apron (Sb)

Boltom apron
to lOp apron
(Sa)

BOllom
apron

Top
apron

Bottom roller
to bOllom
apron (S b)

BOllom apron
10 top apron
(S a)

SH I
SH 2
SH 3

10.08
13.86
17.65

9.85
13.53
17.23

9.73
13.37
17.02

2.34
2.39
2.36

1.23
1.19
1.21

9.51
12.59
16.98

9.06
12.17
16.55

5.67
9 .1 8
3.77

4 .71
3.35
2 .54

ST I
ST 2
ST)

13.86
13.86
13.86

13.53
13.53
13.53

13.37
13.37
13.37

2.39
2.39
2.39

1.19
1.19
1.19

13.38
12.59
12. 14

12.98
12. 17
11.6 1

3.49
9. 18
12.46

3.03
3.35
4.34

SPI
SP 2
SP 3

13.86
13.86
13.86

13.32
13.53
13.45

13.17
13 .37
13.31

3.92
2.39
2.97

1.14
1.19
1.10

12.06
12.59
12.93

11.59
12. 17
12.56

13 .01
9. 18
6.72

3.92
3.35
2.85

SSI
SS2
SS3

13.86
13.86
13.86

13.40
13.53
13.59

13.28
13.37
13.38

3.32
2.39
1.97

0.96
1.19
1.57

12.66
12.59
12.72

12.33
12. 17
12. 15

8.68
9 . 18
8.28

2.62
3.35
4.49

SOl
S02
SO)

10.89
12.38
13.86

10.63
12.09
13.53

10.51
11.96
13.37

2.45
2.30
2.39

1.15
1.10
1.19

10 .20
11.56
12.59

9.90
11.17
12. 17

6 .33
6 .63
9.18

2 .96
3.38
3. 35

DAS

el

al.: APRON SLIPPAGE IN RING FRAME: PART II

kilometer were measured at -50%, +50% and +200%


levels. Yarn tenacity and breaking extension were
measured on SOL Universal Tensile Tester using 50
cm test length and 10 cm/min extension rate. Average
100 readings were taken for tensile testing from each
sample (10 readings from each bobbin x 10 bobbins/sample). Hairiness index and diameter U% were
measured in Keisokki Hairiness Tester, LASERS POT
Model LST at a speed of 25 m/min. The details of the
test results are given in Table 3.

3 Results and Discussion


3.1 EO'eet of Roving Hank on Apron Slippage

Table 2 and Fig. 1 show that as the hank of the roving increases the bottom apron slippage (Sb) increases
initially and after 1.1 hank it decreases, whereas the
apron-to-apron slippage (Sa) always decreases. At
lower hank, i.e. for coarser rovings, the thickness of
the fibre strand at middle roller nip point is higher
which increases the effective pressure at that point.
The higher pressure at nip point causes more friction
of bottom apron with bottom roller, which results in
lower bottom apron slippage at roving hank of 0.8 .
When the roving hank becomes finer (1 . 1), the effective pressure on bottom apron decreases. This leads to
the increase in bottom apron slippage. But, further
increase in roving hank to 1.4 results in the reduction

$.

>:
""Iii

'"a.

-g,

,g. 6

<{

17.2 . , - - - - --

........ So
- '- Sa

4>
rn

'"c:
e
a.

in slippage. This is due to the reduction in drafting


force at back zone which acts as retarding force on
aprons for finer hank roving. Coarser the roving the
higher will be the drafting force 3 . The apron-to-apron
slippage depends on the thickness of the fibre strand
in the apron zone. For coarser roving, more number of
fibres are in between the aprons, causing less transmission of motion from bottom apron to top apron,
resulting in higher apron-to-apron slippage and vice
versa. The effect of roving hank on yarn quality is
shown in Table 3 and Fig. 1. Keeping the break draft
constant at 1.4, as the roving hank becomes finer the
total front zone draft required to spin 24 Ne yam remains lower.
With the increase in roving hank, as the apron-toapron slippage gets reduced, the yarn quality in terms
of irregularity, imperfections and tenacity improves
(Fig. 1). As the apron-to-apron slippage decreases, the
fibre movement gets more and more smooth which
results in improvement in yarn quality. Keeping the
break draft same, as the roving hank becomes finer,
the draft at the main draft region gets reduced to produce same count of yarn. At lower level of draft, the
control over the floating fibres improves which also
results in improvement in yarn quality. The similar
findings have also been observed by earlier workers4.5. Breaking elongation and hairiness have not
been found affected by roving hank (Table 3).

,--~---------~

10

16.4

16
15.6 ' - - - -_ _ --'_ _ _ _ _--.J
11 .2 r - - - - - - -- - - --,

)("10.8

<!: 775

'"0
c

Zo
550 -

;::104 .

........ Thin places (-50%)

<Il

a.

1i
m

--- Thick places (+50%j

S
c
(;j

16.8

c:

Iii
>-

1000

"t:

- - - - ' - - ---,

.~

13(!)

137

Gl

......... Ncps (+200%)

--

325

>-

....

---..- - - -

100
0. 8

1.1

10

9 .6 ..- 1.4

Roving hank
Fig. I -

0 .8

- - - _-'-_ _ _ _---1
1.1

1.4

Effec t of roving hank on apron slippage and yarn irregularity, imperfec tion s and tenacity

138

INDIAN J. FIBRE TEXT. RES ., JUNE 2002

Table 3 Sample
ref.
no.

Apron slippage
with roving. %
Sa
Sb

Irregulari ty
U%

Effect of apron slippage on yarn quality


Tensile ero~rties
Breaking
Tenacity
eN/tex
elongation. %

Imeerfections/km
Th in
Thiek
Neps
(+200%)
places
places
(-50%) (+50%)

Hairiness
index
(HI)

Diam.
U%

SH I
SH 2
SH}

5.67
9. 18
3.77

4.71
3.35
2.54

16.77
15.93
15.67

242
167
131

826
82 1
607

779
644
536

9.62
10.24
10.88

4.65
4.93
4.88

711
704
708

16.92
15.66
15.41

ST I
ST2
STJ

3.49
9.18
12.46

3.03
3.35
4.34

15.03
15.93
16.22

159
167
165

785
82 1
830

589
644
674

11.06
10.24
9.92

4.84
4.93
5.03

720
704
697

14.94
15 .66
15.89

SPI
SP 2
SP J

13.01
9. 18
6.72

3.92
3.35
2.85

17. 12
15.93
15.71

275
167
151

945
821
824

657
644
520

9.43
10.24
10. 19

4.62
4.93
5.15

682
704
695

17 .0 1
15.66
14.92

SSI
SS2
SS}

8.68
9.18
8.28

2.62
3.35
4.49

15.96
15.93
17.20

102
167
236

833
821
897

659
644
731

10.99
10.24
10.28

5.27
4.93
5.22

660
704
688

15.82
15 .66
17. 11

SDI
SD 2
SD}

6.33
6.63
9. 18

2.96
3.38
3.35

15.80
15.82
15.93

175
146
167

736
793
821

682
704
644

10.07
10.44
10.24

4.46
4.72
4.93

752
686
704

15.70
15.63
15.66

17

14
~ Sb

'ii

11

~16.5

___ Sa

Q)

.~

(J)

'a."

n.
Vi

iii

:;

(J)

VI

iii 15.5
>-

16

.~

L -_ _ _ _ _

_ _ _ _ __

15

900

11.2

700

~ 10 . 85

c
o

:u

)(

QJ
~

r-

~ 500

Z
~
~

-+- Thin placs (-50%)

4l

a.

.~

--- Thick places (+50%)

~ 300
>-

__._Neps

10.5

5
c

'"
QJ

I-

(+200%)

10.15
9.8

100
1.2

1.5

1.8

L -_ _ _ _ _--'-_ _ _ _ __

1.2

1.5

1. 8

RovingTM
Fig. 2 -

Effec t of roving TM on apron sl ippage and yarn irregularity . imperfections and tenacit y

3.2 Effect of Roving 'I'M on Apron Slippage

With the increase in roving TM , both apron-toapron slippage and bottom apron slippage increase
(Table 2 and Fig. 2). As the roving TM increases, the
6
drafting force also increases and thi s acts as retarding
force on the aprons which results in red uction in their

surface speed. The increase in bottom apron slippage


with the increase in roving TM causes decrease in
break draft and increase in front zone draft, so that th e
comp lete re mov al of roving twist in th e break draft
zone may not be possi ble. At th e sa me time, th e increase in roving TM results in turbulent movement of

DAS

el

139

al.: APRON SLIPPAGE IN RING FRAME: PART II

fibres in the apron zone du e to the increase in apronto-apron slippage. The increase in roving TM also
increases the inter-fibre friction due to the more interfibre contact force which creates probl e m during
smooth drafting and ultimately deteriorates yarn quality. Both the above factors are responsibl e for the deterioration in yarn quality (Table 3 and Fig. 2). For 24
Ne cotton yarn, the TM of 1.2 is normally on the
lower side, but our repeated experimentation shows
that in the present set-up it gives the optimum results.

apron zone, which avoids fibre slippage during drafting . These factors result in improve ment in yarn quality in terms of evenness, imperfections and tenacity
(Table 3 and Fig. 3).
3.4 Effect of Spacer Size on Apron Slippage

Tabl e 2 and Fi g. 4 show the effect of apron spacer


size on bottom apron and apron -to-apron slippages.
With the increase in apron spacer size, the pressure
between aprons in the drafting zone dec reases whi ch
results in increase in apron-to-apron slippage, but no
clear trend is observed in bottom apron slippage. As
the apron-to-apron slippage increases with the increase in apron spacer size, there appears uncontroll ed
moveme nt of fibres in the apron zone. The wider
apron spacer size also results in uncontrolled fibre
movement in the mai n draft zone due to the improper
co ntrol over the fibres at th e apron ex it point. Both
th ese factors res ult in deteriorat ion in yarn qu ality
which is evident from T able 3 and Fig. 4 . The simil ar
tre nd was also reported by earli e r workers 7.8

3.3 ElTect of Top Arm Pressure on Apron Slippage

The effect of top arm press ure on bottom apron and


apron-to-apron slippage is shown in Table 2 and Fig. 3.
With the increase in top arm pressure, the frictional
contact between bottom roller to bottom apron and
bottom apron to top apron in c reases, which res ults in
better transmi ss ion of mot ion from bottom ro ller to
bottom apron and from bottom apron to top apron.
Due to the better motion tran smiss io n, th e bottom
apron and apro n-to-apron slippages dec rease with the
increase in top arm pressure when there is mate ri al in
drafting zo ne. No clear tre nd is observed in apro n slip
when there is no mate ri al. At th e hi gher top arm pressure, the bottom apro n and apron-to-apron s lippages
get reduced and at the same time the re will be better
gripping of fibres at roller nip as well as within the

3.5 Effect of Break D.aft on Apron Slippage

Tabl e 2 and Fig . 5 show the effect o f break draft on


bottom and apron-to- apron s li ppages. As the break
draft increases, the botto m apro n s lippage inc reases .
This may be due to th e inc rease in draftin g force with

14

17

'i

11

Q)

'"
ro

--Sb

--- Sa

.~

'E-

Q.

.9-

:;

.~

16.2

L -_ _ _ _ _ __ _

950 'F.::::=-- --

~~

_ _ _ __ __ _

- - - -- --,

E
~ 750
c
.2
U
~ 550

15.4

'---------'---------~

10.4

r-------------~

2!

Zu

OJ

'Eo

- - Thin places (50%)

S
~ 350

>150

15.8

-x 10.15

Q.

- - Thick place (+50%)

'"cOJ

- - Neps

I--

(+200%)

L -_ __ _ _ _--=:!===~

13

15

__!

9.9

9.65

9.4

17

Top ann
Fig. 3 -

16.6

13
prcss ur~

15

17

(kg)

Effec t of top a nn press ure o n apro n s lippage a nd yarn irregul a rity, impe rfec ti o ns and te nac ity

140

INDIAN J. FIBRE TEXT. RES. , JUNE 2002

17.5 , - - - - - - - - - -_ _-:-_

10
~

0>

co
a.
.Q-

~
;;;

--Sb

Ui
c

17

:!!.
::J

Q) 8

---Sa

~ 16.5

.~

Q.

<t:

16 f-.- --

15.5 ' - - - - -- - - - 4 ._

_ __

---.l

11.2 ,--------------~

1000

~ 775
-;;;

10.9

)(

<I>

.Q

~
u

13
OJ

~ 550

a.

.!:'

1S

Thin places (-50%)

'u
co

- - Neps

325

100

10.6

---- Thick places (+50%)

<:

-----<I

'"

I-- 10.3

(+200%)

k=========-____-.J

3.0

3.5

10

L -_ _ __ _ _ _ _ _

3.0

4. 0

_ _ _ _ __ _ _ _

3.5

4 .0

Spacer size (mm)


Fig. 4 -

Effect of spacer size on apron slippage and yarn irreg ulari ty, imperfections and tenaci ty
10 ,----

--Sb
----- Sa

.,

;j 8

.9"iii

- - - - -- - - - - - - - ,

;;;

L---

;;;

>-

2 '-------~-------.J

775

U
<I>

550

a.

.!:'
c
;;;

~o

~
u
<II
c:

-+-- Thin places (-50%)

----- Thick places

325

'---------'------~

-r-

---,

10.45

Q)

15.8

10.6 ,--- - - - - - --

.~

15.75

1000
~

15.9

~ 15.85

-;;;

-,

.~

:t

15.95 ,----- -- - -- -- --

10.3

Q)

~50%)
eps
(+200%)

I-- 10.15

>-

100
1.10

10 '--- - - - ---'-- - - - - -

1.10

1AO

1.25

1.25

1.40

13reak draft

Fig. 5 -

Effect of break draft

011

apron slippage and yarn irregulari ty, imperfections and tenacity

the increase in break dra ft at reasonably low level of


draft rati0 3 , i.e. from 1. 1 to I A. But, on the other
hand , the apron-to-apro n slippage initia ll y increases
an d the n decreases after break dra ft of 1.25. The
amount of brea k draft a ffects both twist and size of
th e s lubbin g sandwiched between aprons. As the

break draft increases, the drafting force increases,


whic h is responsib le for the increase in apron-toap ron slippage in itia ll y but, at the sa me time, th e
thick ness of the fibre strand within the apron zone
reduces with th e break draft , resultin g in red uction in
apron to apron s lippage in the later stage . Al so, the

DAS et al.: APRON SLIPPAGE IN RING FRAME: PART II

optimum break draft gives both the optimum fibre


arrangement as well as minimum fibre spread at the
front roller nip. The former contributes better yarn
uniformity and strength and the latter reduces the end
breakage rate and hairiness through increased fibre
density in the cross-section of the emerging strand of
fibres at the delivery roller.
Table 3 and Fig. 5 show the effect of break draft on
yarn irregularity, imperfections and tenacity. With the
increase in break draft, the apron slippage is found to
be increased, but the changes in U% are nonsignificant. No clear trend is observed in yarn imperfections and tenaci ty .

4 Conclusions
Both the bottom apron slippage and apron-to-apron
slippage change with the change in various factors,
like roving hank, roving TM, top arm pressure, apron
spacer size and break draft, and hence the yarn quality. The observations made within the experimental
range are given below:
4.1 As the roving hank becomes finer, both the apron
slippages get reduced and hence the yarn quality, in
general, improves.
4.2 With the increase in roving TM, the bottom apron
and apron-to-apron slippages increase. The irregularity, imperfection and tenacity also get deteriorated as
the apron slippage increases with the increase in rovingTM.

141

4.3 The increase in top arm pressure results in im-

provement in yarn properties, which is due to the reduction in apron slippage with top arm pressure.
4.4 With the increase in spacer size, the apron-toapron slippage increases, but no clear trend is observed for bottom apron slippage. For wider apron
spacer, the deterioration in yarn properties has been
observed.
4.5 As the amount of break draft increases, the bottom apron slippage also increases, but the apron-toapron slippage initially increases and then decreases.
The yarn irregularity deteriorates with the increase in
break draft, but no clear trend is observed for imperfections and yarn tenacity .
4.6 Apron slippage does not have any significant effect on breaking elongation and yarn hairiness.

References
2

3
4
5
6
7
8

Das A, Ishliaque S M & Yadav P, III dian J Fibre Text Res, 26


(2002)38.
Singh A K, Effect ofspeed-J;'(//lIe aproll slippage 011 ya m qllal ity, M.Tech. lhesis, Indian Insli lule or Technology , Delhi ,
1999.
Plonsker H R & Backer S, Text Res J, 37 (1967) 673.
Audiverl R & Vidiella J E, Text Res J, 32 (1962) 652.
Newlon FE & Burlcy S T, Text World, March (1964) 42.
Hannah M, J Textillst , 41 (1950) T57.
Aucliverl R, Villaronga M & Coscolla R, Text Res}, 37 (1967) I.
Balasubramanian N, Text Res J, 39 (1969) 155 .