Introduction To Uster Statistics

Contents
Fiber Quality
Roving Quality Contents 1
Yarn Quality
1 About the Origin and the Significance
of the USTER® STATISTICS 4
1.1 Introduction 4
1.2 USTER STATISTICS as Benchmarks
®
5
1.3 USTER STATISTICS for Yarn Contracts and Product Specifications 5
®
1.4 USTER® STATISTICS for Textile Machinery Manufacturers 6

1.5 Users’ Contributions Towards Improving the USTER STATISTICS
®
6
2 Quality Characteristics of the USTER® STATISTICS 2007

and Their Significance 7
3 Restrictions 14
3.1 Restrictions Imposed by the Raw Material 14
3.2 Restrictions Imposed by the Final Product 15
3.3 Restrictions Imposed by the Yarn Design 15
3.4 Missing Correlation Between Different Quality Characteristics 15
3.5 Outliers and Frequent Defects in a Spinning Mill 16
3.6 Restrictions in Guarantee Agreements 16
3.7 Reproducibility and Variability of Measurements 16
4 The Making of the USTER® STATISTICS 18
5 Interpreting and Applying the USTER® STATISTICS 19

5.1 Elements of the USTER STATISTICS 19
®
5.2 Comparability of Practical Measurements and Data

Provided in the USTER® STATISTICS 20
6 Changes and Improvements 21

6.1 New Fiber Quality Characteristics 21
6.2 Distinction Between Knitting and Weaving Yarns 21
6.3 New Yarn Quality Characteristics 21
NEW 6.4 New: Yarn Twist Characteristics 22

6.5 The USTER CLASSIMAT QUANTUM System
®
22
7 Validity 24
© Copyright 2006 Uster Technologies AG
8 Disclaimer 25
9 Testing Conditions and Sample Sizes 26

10 Appendix 29
10.1 Fiber Properties 29
10.1.1 Fiber Bundle Testing 29
10.1.2 Single Fiber Testing 30
10.1.3 Ambient Laboratory Conditions for Fiber Testing 31
10.2 Fiber Processing 32
10.3 Roving Testing 33
10.4 Yarn Testing 34
10.4.1 Count Variation Testing 35
10.4.2 Mass Variation Testing 36
10.4.3 Yarn Hairiness Testing 36
10.4.4 Imperfections Testing 37
10.4.5 Yarn Diameter, Cross-sectional Shape and Density Testing 38
10.4.6 Yarn Trash and Yarn Dust Testing 38
10.4.7 Twist Testing 39
10.4.8 Tensile Properties Testing 39
10.4.9 HV Tensile Properties Testing 41
10.4.10 Ambient Laboratory Conditions for Yarn Testing 42
10.5 Useful Conversions 43
10.5.1 English/Metric Conversions 43
10.5.2 Count Conversions 44
10.5.3 Staple Conversion Chart 44
10.5.4 Special Conversions 44

Slivers NEW
Contents 1
1 Introduction 2
2 Restrictions 4
3 The Making of the USTER® STATISTICS 6
4 Interpreting and Applying the USTER® STATISTICS 7
5 Sliver Quality 8
5.1 Mass Variations 8
5.2 Testing Conditions 8
6 Validity 9
7 Disclaimer 10
Yarns Made Out of Man-

Made Cellulosic Fibers
NE W Introduction 1
Fiber
to Yarn Introduction 1

1 About the Origin and the
Significance of the USTER® STATISTICS
1.1 Introduction
The USTER® STATISTICS are quality reference figures which permit a classifica-
tion of fibers, slivers, rovings and yarns with regard to world production. The last
USTER® STATISTICS for cotton fibers and yarns were published in 2001. The
USTER® STATISTICS 2007 again address cotton fibers, rovings and yarns. We
will later turn to the restrictions regarding the use of the USTER® STATISTICS.
We recommend to read these restrictions carefully and adhere to them. When
used properly the USTER® STATISTICS will continue to be appreciated as refer-
ence figures by all groups of interested people.
The USTER® STATISTICS are first and foremost a practical guide to «good textile
practices» in the field of yarn manufacturing. The evidence of specific defects or
shortcomings in overall yarn quality, which may become apparent through using
the STATISTICS as a comparative standard, can be translated into immediate
corrective action in the manufacturing process. Reliable and unequivocal cause/
effect relationships have been established over the years and documented in
the application literature. Legions of textile technologists and USTER® instrument
users in mills around the world put that experience into action in their daily rou-
tine. In the previous edition of the USTER® STATISTICS, we introduced a graph
which illustrated the improvement in yarn evenness between 1957 and 2001.
Now, six years later, we publish the same diagram again (Fig. 1). Two additional
data points were added to the curves, i.e. the evenness values of the 50% line of
the USTER® STATISTICS 2007. A further improvement in yarn evenness can be
recognized in Fig. 1 for combed cotton yarns.
Fig. 1 Improvement in Yarn Evenness between 1957 – 2007


As described in the USTER® STATISTICS 2001, the USTER® STATISTICS 2007
also distinguish between knitting yarns and weaving yarns for ring-spun yarns.
Of course, quality is multi-faceted, and while evenness has improved, other

parameters have deteriorated to some degree. However, more than other qual-
ity parameters, yarn evenness is closely associated with both the design and
management of the entire manufacturing process. Thus, besides being a result
of technological advancements, evenness has also improved as a result of more
elaborate quality control and quality management practices. It is of paramount
importance for the spinning industry to closely monitor these trends and to pre-
pare for a timely and appropriate response. Once lagging behind, a mill will have
to invest heavily to move on and catch up and to eventually keep pace with the
global development of yarn quality.
1.2 USTER® STATISTICS as Benchmarks

The USTER® STATISTICS have been made for quality benchmarking on the cor-
porate level. Benchmarking is a total quality management tool and denotes the
procedure of identifying and quantifying topnotch or world-class performance
(benchmarks) in a particular business or product category and comparing the data
with the performance of the own company or product. Established benchmarks
and quality standards substantiate the feasibility of attaining greater proficiency
and of narrowing the performance gap. They legitimize the implementation of
strategies to enhance the manufacturing process as a result of hard facts rather
than management intuition. In other industries, the availability of reliable compet-
itor information for comparative analyses in benchmarking is a major obstacle.
Thanks to the USTER® STATISTICS, data on the quality levels achieved by the top
manufacturers in the textile industry are public domain and easily accessible.
1.3 USTER® STATISTICS for Yarn Contracts and

Product Specifications
The USTER® STATISTICS regularly serve as the platform for yarn contracts and
product specifications in the framework of commercial transactions. This prac-
tice is commonly accepted by the manufacturers, merchants, and processors of
yarns. Many sales yarn spinners, weavers, knitters, and retailers have formulated
quality requirements based on the USTER® STATISTICS. By experience they have
determined what quality levels are appropriate for what application. As a more
general guideline to the prevailing quality requirements, literature is available
which addresses the subject of yarn specifications for an array of applications
and end uses in both knitting and weaving. Much of the experience disclosed
through these publications emanated from applying the USTER® STATISTICS.
Buyers and salesmen involved in the traditional commodity type trade or in direct
purchasing and sales are certainly among the most enthusiastic users of the
USTER® STATISTICS. They appreciate the STATISTICS as a means of categoriz-
ing many different qualities by face value. An indistinct yet popular belief prevails
in the international markets for reasonably priced yarns that largely correspond
to the 25th percentile of the USTER® STATISTICS to be in high demand. Every
now and then, such a belief manifests an utter quality overkill with regard to the
actual processing and end use requirements; in other cases, such specifications
may well be justified.
In the long run, however, the market as a whole is and will continue to be driven
by the rule of supply and demand, irrespective of where, when, and by whom
the STATISTICS are referred to in order to advertise or bargain. Good grades on
the overall quality, though, will always serve as a passport to both the domestic
and international markets.

1.4 USTER® STATISTICS for Textile Machinery
Manufacturers
Textile machinery manufacturers as well as manufacturers of accessories for tex-
tile machines have frequently been using the USTER® STATISTICS to appraise
the impact on quality of their new developments in the field of machine tech-
nology or monitoring and control systems. While machine performance in
terms of productivity or efficiency is easily expressed in absolute numbers, the
STATISTICS are frequently referred to when it comes to quality aspects. The
other side of the coin is that the machinery manufacturers have also been
forced into the routine of giving performance guarantees based on the USTER®
STATISTICS. Again, this particular issue falls into the category of restrictive uses
and will be addressed later.
1.5 Users’ Contributions Towards Improving

the USTER® STATISTICS
Because of the constructive criticism that we received from among the industry,
the USTER® STATISTICS for fiber and yarn quality have substantially improved
over the years. We are invariably grateful for constructive contributions.

2 Quality Characteristics of the USTER®
STATISTICS 2007 and Their Significance
The USTER® STATISTICS 2007 include all the quality characteristics which were
published already in the USTER® STATISTICS 2001. In addition to this, we were
able to contribute with some more quality characteristics of fibers and yarns
in the USTER® STATISTICS 2007. For the first time we publish Foreign Fiber
STATISTICS for the USTER® CLASSIMAT QUANTUM.
The following list encompasses all quality characteristics featured in the USTER®
STATISTICS 2007. It is subdivided into tables for fibers and tables for yarns.
All definitions of fiber quality characteristics which require an explanation are

described in detail in Fig. 2 through 5.
Description of cotton fiber quality characteristics

(USTER® HVI)
Quality Abbreviation Description Unit

characteristics
Micronaire Mic Indicates fiber fineness —-
Upper Half UHML Corresponds to the classer's staple. mm

Mean Length Definition according to Fig. 2
Uniformity Index UI Measure for variations of %

fiber length, length uniformity
Bundle tenacity Strength Breaking tenacity g/tex

measured on fiber bundle
Reflexion Rd Degree of reflexion of the cotton. %

The higher this value, the better the
cotton is rated.
Yellowness +b Assessment of color, %

degree of yellowness
Trash CNT Number of trash particles —-

per defined area
Trash Area Percentage of trash %

per defined area
Short Fiber Index SFI Amount of short fibers %

calculated from the fibrogram
Spinning Consistency SCI Calculated value based on —-

Index a regression equation that takes
into account all HVI properties
Maturity Index Mat Maturity of the cotton fibers —-

(HVI method)

Description of cotton fiber quality characteristics
(USTER® AFIS)

characteristics
Neps Neps/g Number of neps 1/g
per gram
Seed-coat neps SCN/g Number of seed-coat neps 1/g

per gram
Short fiber content SFC(n) Short fiber content %

SFC(w) by number (n)
and by weight (w).
Definition according to Fig. 3
Upper Quartile UQL(w) Corresponds to the classer's staple. mm

Length Definition according to Fig. 3
Fiber fineness Fine Fineness of fibers mtex
Immature fibers IFC Immature fiber content. %

Percentage of immature fibers.
Definition according to Fig. 4, Fig. 5
Maturity Mat Ratio of mature to immature fibers. —-

Definition according to Fig. 5
Trash particles Trash/g Number of trash particles 1/g

per gram
Dust particles Dust/g Number of dust particles 1/g

per gram
Visible foreign matter VFM Visible foreign matter %


The fiber length diagram determined by means of the USTER® HVI instrument is
not an end-aligned staple diagram and is called fibrogram. Fig. 2 is a schematic
fibrogram of cotton.
Fig. 2 Fibrogram
The USTER® AFIS instrument measures each fiber separately and, therefore, all
the information for an end-aligned staple diagram is available. Fig. 3 illustrates
how the «Upper Quartile Length» (UQL) and the short fiber content are deter-
mined using the USTER® AFIS. The UQL is the fiber length at 25%. The term
«upper quartile» indicates that the value is calculated at the upper quarter of the
staple diagram.
Fig. 3 Staple diagram


Fig. 4 and Fig. 5 show the definition of the measured values in relation to the
maturity characteristics. The respective parameters can be explained using
Fig. 4. Fig. 4 shows the cross-section of a cotton fiber.
Fig. 4 Cotton fiber, cross-section
To compute the mean degree of thickening theta, a circular cross-section of the

measured fiber having a perimeter P is calculated, and subsequently area A1 is
divided by area A2.
Fig. 5 shows a maturity measurement using the USTER® AFIS as well as the val-
ues computed for theta.
Fig. 5 Maturity Histogram
For this example, the following apply:
Mature fiber content R = 37.6%

Immature fiber content IFC = 10.3%
R - IFC 37.6 - 10.3

Maturity (according to Lord): M= +0.7 = +0.7 = 0.8
200 200

10
Description of yarn quality characteristics
(USTER® TESTER)

characteristics
Count variations CVcb Count variations between packages %
Mass variations CVm Coefficient of variation of mass %
Mass variations CVmb Coefficient of variation of mass %

between packages
Imperfections Thin Number of thin places, 1/1000 m

Thick thick places and neps
Neps
Hairiness H Absolute value of hairiness. —-

Measurement of the entire fiber length.
Standard deviation sH Standard deviation of hairiness —-

of hairiness within a package
Coefficient of variation CVHb Variation of hairiness %

of hairiness between packages
Trash Dust Dust and trash in yarns. 1/1000 m

Trash Counts refer to 1000 m of yarn.
Coefficient of variation CVd Variation of the yarn diameter %

of the diameter
Shape Shape Shape of the yarn cross-section. —-

Ratio of the axes of an ellipse.
Density D Density of the yarn g/cm3
Description of yarn quality characteristics of rovings

(USTER® TESTER)

characteristics
Count variation CVcb Count variations between %
roving bobbins
Mass variation CVm Coefficient of variation of mass, %

cut length 1 cm
Mass variation CVm3m Coefficient of variation of mass, %

cut length 3 m
11
(USTER® TENSORAPID)

characteristics
Strength FH Breaking force cN
Tenacity RH Breaking force referred cN/tex

to the yarn count
Coefficient of variation CVRH Variation of the individual values %

of tenacity of the tenacity
Elongation εH Yarn elongation at breaking force %
Coefficient of variation CVεH Variation of the individual %

of elongation elongation values
Work done to break WH Work performed during tensile cNcm

testing of yarns at breaking force
Coefficient of variation CVWH Variation of the individual values %

of work done of work done to break
12
(USTER® TENSOJET)

characteristics
Strength (Force) FH Breaking force cN
Tenacity RH Breaking force referred cN/tex

to the yarn count
Coefficient of variation CVRH Variation of the individual values %

of tenacity of the tenacity
Elongation εH Yarn elongation at breaking force %
Coefficient of variation CVεH Variation of the individual %

of elongation elongation values
Work done to break WH Work performed during tensile cNcm

testing of yarns at breaking force
Coefficient of variation CVWH Variation of the individual values %

of work done of work done to break
Weak places FHP=0.1 0.1% of all tests cN

in the yarn/strength have a strength below this value
Weak places εHP=0.1 0.1% of all tests %

in the yarn/elongation have an elongation below this value
Weak places FHP=0.01 0.01% of all tests cN

in the yarn/strength have a strength below this value
Weak places εHP=0.01 0.01% of all tests %

in the yarn/elongation have an elongation below this value
13
3 Restrictions
This section addresses the restrictions that apply to the use of the USTER®
STATISTICS and we would like to repeat our advice that this be read carefully and
adhered to. Both deliberate and unintentional misuse of the STATISTICS have
in some instances in the past resulted in lengthy and costly disputes – all of
which could have been avoided if all parties involved would have had the same
clear understanding of the concept underlying the STATISTICS. The reading of
this section is a must for those who are not familiar with that concept, with the
STATISTICS as such, or with the proper interpretation of the data.
3.1 Restrictions Imposed by the Raw Material

Four primary variables have a decisive impact on corporate success in our textile
environment as well as in any other industrial venture: man, machine, material,
and know-how or information in general. Among these four key elements, the
raw material is the crucial component which largely dictates quality but also pro-
ductivity and cost in yarn manufacturing. By virtue of their design, the USTER®
STATISTICS for spun yarns do not provide direct access to information about
the raw material used for spinning. However, those differences in raw material
usage are indirectly reflected in the data. A high-quality yarn can only be spun
from high-quality raw materials and since the raw material frequently accounts
for more than 50% of the total manufacturing costs in the medium to fine count
range, the utilization of high-quality, high-priced raw materials will be proportion-
ally reflected in the yarn price. Any measures taken in the field of raw materials
will not only have a considerable impact on quality but also on a mill’s competi-
tiveness and bottom-line profitability.
In those rare cases where the STATISTICS have been corrupted, the motives
have always been related to what evidently is the single most important driving
force in the global textile scenario: price. The USTER® STATISTICS, however, pro-
vide a dependable indication of quality, exclusively. Although quality is a some-
what elusive term, it is nevertheless a result of tangible assets and thus to a
certain degree interrelated with the sales price of a product.
The USTER® STATISTICS should not be interpreted as saying 5% is «good». In

contrary, the 5% line might be indicative of high cost, high price, luxuriousness
– even a tendency to price oneself out of the market. By the same token, 95%
should not imply «poor» – it might be indicative of a very attractive price and
just the right quality for the target markets. A «good» spinner is actually one
who is in a position to achieve an acceptable quality level from a less expensive
fiber – the genuine mastery of spinning. The trouble starts when the USTER®
STATISTICS are referred to in order to corroborate complaints about a low rat-
ing in certain quality categories. This complaint may be directed at the «good»
spinner who produces a reasonably priced yarn from a reasonably priced fiber.
Yarn price, however, is directly proportional to fiber quality and fiber quality in
turn dictates yarn quality to a great extent. Consequently, pushing yarn quality
towards better values would simply cannibalize the price advantage. The USTER®
STATISTICS should be employed as what they really are: a global survey of yarn
quality as produced in every part of the world. Whether or not these qualities are
produced economically from adequate raw materials and offered at a legitimate
price is certainly beyond the scope of the STATISTICS.
14
3.2 Restrictions Imposed by the Final Product
It lies in the nature of the matter that end uses remain somewhat vague when
yarns are marketed via merchants or importers. It is rare for any merchant to
have firm orders before entering into a contract. Consequently, the focus is on
obtaining qualities that are likely to meet the requirements of any potential cus-
tomer and which can be successfully marketed in many places and at any given
point in time. In the current buyer’s market, merchants have a large number of
alternative sources to choose from. Yet, to minimize risk, commodity type yarns
with high volume of trade are preferred. Under these circumstances, specified
and actual quality requirements seem to have very little in common.
3.3 Restrictions Imposed by the Yarn Design

When properly tailored to the anticipated end use, yarns will exhibit inherent
strengths and weaknesses: As opposed to weaving yarns, for instance, knit-
ting yarns produced from cotton, man-made fibers, or blends thereof are spun
at low twist multipliers. They will rarely display a high breaking tenacity. If they
did, they would probably result in stiff, harsh fabrics. A somewhat lower breaking
tenacity must also be expected from knitting yarns spun from low-tenacity or pill-
resistant man-made fibers which are specifically designed for that purpose. Such
low-tenacity fibers, however, usually result in excellent yarn elongation. Knitting
yarns also possess a higher hairiness. While this would be detrimental to weav-
ing yarns, the knitted fabric enjoys a greater cover and a softer hand. To make it
clear: It is technically impossible and fatal with respect to the end use to demand
that a yarn be perfect in all categories, say above the 25% line of the USTER®
STATISTICS. The proper way out of this dilemma is for the yarn producer and the
yarn processor to jointly develop detailed specifications or requirement profiles
for specific end uses. Many good examples of this partnership approach have
become known and the USTER® STATISTICS can be of tremendous help in real-
izing such projects.
3.4 Missing Correlation Between Different

Quality Characteristics
Unfortunately, the USTER® STATISTICS still mislead some people into thinking
in causal relationships that do not exist in reality. Several quality parameters
displayed in the STATISTICS are believed to be highly correlated but the fact is
that they are not. High breaking tenacity, for instance, is not necessarily linked
to high breaking elongation; rather, yarn elongation is determined by spinning
speed, spinning geometry, and the resultant specific spinning tension. Likewise,
a very even yarn may well have a high nep count. End uses calling for a relative
freedom of neps cannot be satisfied by using yarns with a good USTER® CV. The
opposite is sometimes the case: Few neps in a very uniform yarn tend to visu-
ally stick out like a black sheep. Yarns with a little higher CVm or greater hairiness
tend to conceal neps in the overall irregularity, much like the often quoted needle
in a haystack. If there is a problem with neppy appearance and no way to reduce
nep counts, try to go a little higher with the CVm.
15
3.5 Outliers and Frequent Defects in a
Spinning Mill
It is a popular illusion that yarns with a high rating according to the USTER®
STATISTICS are always above and beyond suspicion. A good overall quality does
not only encompass excellent mean values but also low variability of the qual-
ity attributes as well as unconditional consistency. Only one bad package in the
creel of a knitting machine or in warping is bound to ruin several hundred yards
of greige fabric. We have come a long way in gaining control over sporadic yarn
defects by on-line quality monitoring and over scattered weak places by applying
the USTER® TENSOJET. Every now and then, however, various off-quality situa-
tions tend to recur with malicious persistence in spite of the blind faith often put
in the USTER® STATISTICS ratings. These include outliers, mix-ups, overlength/
underlength or damaged packages, problems with package unwinding behavior,
missing transfer tails, improper waxing, shedding and fly, dye streaks (barré),
white specks, contamination with foreign fibers – just to name a few. Quality in
a broader sense has many dimensions: A truckload of 5% USTER® STATISTICS
yarn that arrives too late at the weaver’s loading ramp will not be considered a
quality product. Timing is vital due to the seasonal characteristic of the textile
business with its frequent peak demands and, of course, due to the increasing
popularity of just-in-time and quick response production.
3.6 Restrictions in Guarantee Agreements

The issue of performance guarantees negotiated between yarn producers and
machinery manufacturers has already been briefly touched upon. Such perfor-
mance guarantees based on the USTER® STATISTICS must be considered a dubi-
ous practice when the effect of raw material, machine settings, maintenance,
ambient conditions, and operator proficiency is neglected. A legitimate perfor-
mance guarantee should include references to in-depth technological trials con-
ducted prior to preparing such a document. It should also embrace technically
sound prohibitive clauses that serve to preclude misunderstandings – or even
worse – litigation between machinery manufacturers and yarn producers. In the
majority of all cases, it is not the machine that produces poor quality. If it would
not have to process a capricious material like textile fibers, the average textile
machine would probably run uninterruptedly for ten, fifteen years or more with-
out any major problems at all. Before making claims against machinery manufac-
turers, the potential source of the quality problem as well as its true nature and
extent should be investigated thoroughly and objectively.
3.7 Reproducibility and Variability of

Measurements
Last but not least, a few comments on reproducibility and variability of mea-
surements. No matter what measuring instrument is used – from yardstick to
atomic clock – there will always be a certain measurement error. This is also
true for textile testing. There are three types of measurement errors: avoidable
error, systematic error (bias), and random error. Avoidable error encompasses
the failure to choose an appropriate measurement method or to properly oper-
ate a measuring instrument. In the textile laboratory, this is of little significance
but selecting instrument settings and sample conditioning present a potential

source of avoidable error. Systematic error includes calibration error, instrument
tolerances, and the fluctuation of ambient conditions. This type of error can be
quantified fairly accurately. Random error is the most critical component in textile
testing. It is predominantly caused by the variability of the tested material itself.
Its magnitude can be approximated by statistical calculations – the confidence
interval of the mean. The absolute error of a measurement is the total of all three
types of errors. A measurement should therefore always be reported as x±Dx,
i.e. the mean value plus/minus the total error to indicate that the true measure-
16
ment value is located somewhere within that interval. All USTER® instruments
calculate the confidence intervals automatically and they are part of the test
report. The confidence interval covers the random error component; information
on the systematic error, i.e. instrument tolerances, is provided in our application
handbooks.
When comparing actual measurements with the data illustrated in the USTER®
STATISTICS, it is of utmost importance that the total measurement error is kept
to an absolute minimum to warrant compatibility. If this is not the case, false
conclusions may be drawn from such a comparison.
There are four items that can be done to minimize the measurement error:
• proper conditioning under constant standard atmospheric conditions

• exact calibration of the instrument
• correct settings of the instrument
• adequate sample size
When actual measurements are then compared with the USTER® STATISTICS,
they would appear in the nomogram as a short vertical line – not as a dot. The
top and bottom ends of that line represent the upper and lower limits of the
confidence interval with the mean exactly in the middle. We cannot eliminate the
random error; however, the confidence interval quickly becomes smaller when
the sample size is increased. For detailed information on recommended sample
sizes and testing conditions, please refer to section 9.
In the context of commercial agreements via yarn contracts and product

specifications, it frequently transpires that disputes result from discrepancies
between measurements performed by the purchaser and by the supplier and
from the subsequent comparison of disparate measurements with the USTER®
STATISTICS. When such incidents are examined more closely, the result often is
that the basic conditions listed above have been ignored or have simply not been
identical in both testing locations. In other cases, the problem could be quickly
resolved by applying the t-test procedure. It proved that the differences were not
statistically significant but strictly random due to a pronounced sample variability.
The t-test procedure along with further detailed explanations is outlined in our
application handbooks. A simplified t-test can be performed by comparing the
confidence intervals: If the confidence intervals of two means overlap, then the
observed difference between the two means is random or statistically insignifi-
cant; if they are separated, the difference is considered statistically significant.
Applying the concept of the confidence interval can be both very helpful and
revealing. It pinpoints the highly variable characteristic of textile materials which
should always be taken into consideration.
17
4 The Making of the USTER® STATISTICS
The USTER® STATISTICS are not established by merely collecting data. They are
established by testing actual yarn and fiber samples that we procure on a truly
global scale via our agents, overseas partners, or direct contacts with our inter-
national clientele. Several thousand samples have been tested in our ISO 9001
certified textile laboratory in Uster, Switzerland. The geographical distribution of
the origin of all samples procured for the USTER® STATISTICS is illustrated in
Fig. 6. The total volume of samples was tested between spring 2002 and 2006.
Europe
20%
Asia & Oceania
51%
North & South
Africa
America
17% 12%
Fig. 6 Geographical distribution of the origin of all samples procured for the USTER®
STATISTICS 2007
All data were entered into a databank and application software specifically devel-
oped for this purpose was employed to compute the percentile curves and to
plot the graphical representations. The lion’s share of the total time spent was
definitely devoted to thoroughly testing the samples in the laboratory. Our data-
bank has grown to an enormous size and consists of far more quality parameters
than have been published in this edition of the USTER® STATISTICS.
18
5 Interpreting and Applying the
USTER® STATISTICS
5.1 Elements of the USTER® STATISTICS

The USTER® STATISTICS manual consists of several parts, each addressing a
specific quality aspect in the sequence from fiber to yarn. The different sections
are arranged according to spinning system and raw material composition or yarn
style. Each section is subdivided into distinct quality attributes (e.g. mass varia-
tion, tensile properties, etc.) which are measured with different USTER® instru-
ments. A measurement can consist of several individual parameters. Mass varia-
tion, for instance, includes CVm and the between-sample variation CVmb. These
parameters are presented in graphical form. The origin of the samples processed
to establish the raw data is illustrated by a pie chart. These pie charts are pro-
vided with each quality attribute but not with each parameter because the mea-
surements were performed simultaneously on the same samples.
The most important element of the USTER® STATISTICS are the nomograms with
the percentile curves. The width of the percentile curves intentionally imposes
certain restrictions on accuracy – a subtle reminder of the pronounced variability
of most textile measurements. Depending on the quality parameter displayed
on the ordinate (vertical or y-axis), the curves are plotted over staple length, pro-
cess stage, yarn count, or defect category and the abscissa (horizontal or x-axis)
is calibrated accordingly. The x-axis should be the starting point of any analysis.
The percentile curves refer to the percentage of the total world production which
equals or exceeds the measurement value given for a particular yarn or fiber
description. An example:
The coefficient of variation of the yarn mass of an Ne 30 (Nm 50, 20 tex) 100%
combed cotton ring-spun yarn for knitted fabrics has an evenness of CVm = 13%.
A vertical line drawn from the x-axis at Ne 30 intersects with the horizontal line
drawn from the y-axis at 13% right at the 75th percentile line. Hence, 75% of all
Ne 30 combed cotton ring-spun yarns produced worldwide have a CVm of 13.0%
or better. Vice versa, 25% of the total world production of comparable Ne 30
yarns exhibit a CVm higher than 13%.
The 50th percentile curve, commonly referred to as the 50% line, corresponds to
the median. In general terms, the median is the middle number when the mea-
surements in a data set are arranged in ascending (or descending) order, i.e. 50%
of all observations exceed this value and the other 50% lie below. Depending on
whether the frequency distribution of a given quality parameter is symmetric or
skewed, the median may or may not be different from the mean.
In some instances, adjacent percentile curves fell very close together. To avoid
the formation of a solid red block, both the 25% line and 75% line were omitted,
thus maintaining the clarity of the illustration.
The nomograms in the fiber properties section as well as the ones in the fiber-to-
yarn and yarn quality sections for combed cotton ring-spun yarns comprise two
independent sets of percentile curves. The two sets of curves each characterize
a distinct cluster or isolated population within the same graph. We will look at
the cotton fiber properties first to explain the reasons for this differentiation: The
horizontal position of the split point at a staple length of 30...31 mm marks the
approximate center of the transition zone from both short and medium-staple
cottons on one hand to long and extra long-staple cottons on the other. With that
transition, several factors change fundamentally. These factors include genetic,
botanical, and physiological differences, agricultural methods, environmental
influences, harvesting and ginning practices, all of which have a decisive impact
on fiber properties. On the yarn side, things are much simpler. Here, the divi-
sion between Ne 41 (Nm 70, 14 tex) and Ne 47 (Nm 80, 12.5 tex) indicates the
yarn count threshold for using longer staple, high-grade cottons with an over-
all superior fiber quality, for increasing comber noil extraction, and for modify-
ing the overall processing conditions accordingly. Selecting higher quality cotton
fibers and adjusting the processing conditions is necessary to raise the spin limit
towards the finer counts. Naturally, in the fiber-to-yarn nomograms for combed
roving, the two clusters occur as well. The curves had to be split at exactly the
same position on the yarn count axis. The graphs provide an opportunity to study
these effects of raw material selection and processing.
19
5.2 Comparability of Practical Measurements
and Data Provided in the USTER® STATISTICS
When comparisons are made between practical measurements and the data
provided in the USTER® STATISTICS, it is important to consider all aspects that
may impair compatibility. Please make sure that the instruments are in proper
technical condition and calibrated correctly. Periodic maintenance through autho-
rized Uster Technologies service personnel is a guarantee for trouble-free per-
formance and accurate measurement results. Instrument settings and testing
speeds should be identical to those used for testing in the framework of the
USTER® STATISTICS. These settings and speeds are listed in the appendix along
with recommendations concerning an adequate sample size, which is equally
important. Please refer to the operating instructions of the instruments for fur-
ther technical details. Testing must be carried out under constant standard atmo-
spheric conditions. The standard atmosphere for textile testing involves a tem-
perature of 20±2 °C (68±4 °F) and 65±2% relative humidity (ISO 139). Prior to
testing, samples must be conditioned to moisture equilibrium under constant
standard atmospheric conditions. To attain the moisture equilibrium, a condition-
ing time of at least 24 hours is required, 48 hours is preferred. For samples with
a high moisture content, conditioning time should be at least 48 hours unless the
samples are preconditioned, so that the moisture equilibrium is later approached
from the dry side.
20
6 Changes and Improvements
6.1 New Fiber Quality Characteristics

Three new quality characteristics were introduced with the USTER® STATISTICS
2007: The Short Fiber Index, the Spinning Consistency Index for USTER® HVI
Systems, and the Fiber Fineness for USTER® AFIS Systems.
6.2 Distinction Between Knitting and

Weaving Yarns
In the USTER® STATISTICS 2007 a distinction was made again between weaving
and knitting yarns. The threshold between weaving and knitting yarn has been
determined to be the following twist multipliers:
• Combed cotton yarn ae = 3.7 (am = 112)

• Carded cotton yarn ae = 3.9 (am = 119)
Yarns with twist multipliers below these values have been classified as knitting
yarns.
6.3 New Yarn Quality Characteristics

The two optical sensors OM and OI were used in the tests using the USTER®
TESTER 4. They record the following quality characteristics: Variation of the yarn
diameter, shape of the yarn cross-section, yarn density and the number of dust
and trash particles in the yarn.
When the first USTER® STATISTICS for imperfections were published in 1957,
a decision was taken after prolonged testing to define the following thresholds:
thins –50%, thicks +50%, neps +200%. These values refer to the mean number
of fibers in a cross-section of a yarn.
As explained in Fig. 1, the mass unevenness improved to such an extent in the

past 40 years that often no imperfection counts can be found in combed cot-
ton yarns in the middle and coarse range. Therefore, a decision was taken to
include the next lower thresholds, i.e. the settings: thins –40%, thicks +35%,
neps +140% and for rotor yarns and airjet yarns +200%.
In addition, not only the tenacity but also the strength of yarns were determined
during the tensile tests for the USTER® STATISTICS.
Nowadays, variations of quality characteristics are increasingly determined using

the coefficient of variation CV. Therefore, the unevenness U is not published in
the USTER® STATISTICS 2007 anymore. The conversion factor CV = 1.25 U can
be used here for mass variations with normal distribution.
21
6.4 New: Yarn Twist Characteristics
The amount of twist placed in a staple spun yarn is important from a technical
viewpoint because of its effect on physical properties and performance and on
finished product appearance. It is of course also important from a production
standpoint because with every turn of twist there is an accompanying loss in pro-
ductivity and an increase in cost. Twist also impacts fabric appearance, fullness,
hand, weight, and strength.
With the integration of a twist tester in the product range of Uster Technologies,
we are now able to provide USTER® STATISTICS also for the important quality
parameter of the twist. Besides the absolute twist of the yarn, which is usually
given by the end use, the variation of the twist plays a more important role in the
evaluation of the yarn quality. Therefore, the absolute twist should not be inter-
preted as a quality parameter of the yarn, but as a guideline, which twist levels
are used in the textile industry.
In this first edition of the USTER® STATISTICS for twist, we can present bench-
marks for 14 different materials:
• 100% CO, ring yarn, combed & carded, knitting and weaving, bobbins
• 50/50%, PES/CO, ring yarn, bobbins
• 50/50%, 67/33%, 65/35% PES/CO, ring yarn, carded & combed, bobbins
• 100% PES, ring yarn, bobbins
• 100% WO, ring yarns, worsted, bobbins
• 55/45% PES/WO, worsted, bobbins
• 100% CV, ring yarn, bobbins
• 50/50%, 70/30%, PES/CV, ring yarn, bobbins
6.5 The USTER® CLASSIMAT QUANTUM System

The appearance of a fault in the finished product, i.e. a woven or knitted fabric,
is largely determined by its size. A yarn fault classification according to cross-
section and length is therefore the basis for the assessment of yarn faults. By
classification we understand the arrangement of yarn faults within a schematic
(CLASSIMAT matrix) according to the fault data.
Tried and tested for many years, the classification matrix consists of 23 classes
for the classification of "normal" thick and thin places. For a better assessment of
yarn types with different structures, such as ply yarns or compact yarns, the clas-
sification matrix was extended by 4 additional classes. Of course, the extended
classes can also be used for conventional yarns and can even provide additional
helpful information.
Seldom-occurring yarn faults are categorized in the classification matrix of the

USTER® CLASSIMAT QUANTUM (Fig. 7). The classification begins at a length of
0.1 cm and is basically open in length.
Thick places are counted if the mean mass of a yarn is exceeded by at least
100% in the case of short faults or by 45% in the case of faults over 8 cm. With
thin places, however, the actual value must be at least –30% below the mean
value. The positive and the negative range of the top and bottom classes are
open as well.
In the yarn fault classification, the yarn faults are entered in the CLASSIMAT
matrix according to the fault length and fault cross-section. The faults are identi-
fied with a letter and a number. The letters stand for the fault length and the num-
ber indicates the deviation of the cross-section in comparison to the perfect yarn.
Fig. 7 shows the standard matrix with 23 classes. For ply yarns and compact
yarns there exist classes between +75% and +100%.
22
Fig. 7 Classification matrix for disturbing thick and thin places
Disturbing thick and thin places up to Ne 60 were measured with the capaci-
tive clearer USTER® QUANTUM C20. The thick and thin places from Ne 61 to
Ne 170 were measured with the clearer USTER® QUANTUM C15. However, it
is not required that the CLASSIMAT operator has to switch over to a different
measuring head at Ne 60.
The USTER® CLASSIMAT QUANTUM is also in a position to classify foreign

fibers. Therefore, this instrument cannot only detect the remaining and disturb-
ing thick and thin places but also the remaining foreign fibers.
Fig. 8 Classification matrix for disturbing foreign fibers

23
7 Validity
The information provided with this edition supersedes all the descriptions per-
taining to yarn quality published in previous editions of the USTER® STATISTICS.
The quality of industrially manufactured goods is a moving target. It depends on
a multitude of factors, most of which are an intrinsic function of time. The depen-
dence on time is predominantly related to the state of technology of the produc-
tive assets and the technological know-how prevalent in the industry. Time is
also a factor in determining the overall economic environment, the supply and
demand situation, as well as general consumer attitudes and behavior. All of the
above, acting jointly or separately, may have an effect on the quality of raw mate-
rials, semi-processed, or finished textile goods. Consequently, the validity of the
information provided in the USTER® STATISTICS 2007 is confined to the period of
time actually covered by the data. The data are essentially of historical nature by
the time this document is published. Naturally, such information will not sustain
its initial significance as time progresses and eventually become obsolete unless
it is updated at some point in the future. Therefore, the information presented in
this document in either verbal, numerical, or graphical form is subject to change
at any time without prior or public notice. Conventional wisdom proves, how-
ever, that the USTER® STATISTICS maintain their significance over an extended
period of five years or more.
With no exceptions, all the information provided in the USTER® STATISTICS 2007
relates to data which have been established using USTER® products. USTER®
products are designed, manufactured, and distributed by Uster Technologies,
Switzerland, and Uster Technologies Inc., USA, or authorized licensees, exclu-
sively. Any attempt to utilize the information provided in this document in con-
junction with data originating from sources other than USTER® instruments may
result in some form of failure or damage. The USTER® STATISTICS are intended
for use as a manual of comparative STATISTICS complementing the operational
installations of USTER® products at the customer site. For technical details on
how to ensure proper agreement between the data presented in this document
and data established with other USTER® instruments, please refer to the appen-
dix.
24
8 Disclaimer
This publication and the information provided therein is for intended use only
and subject to change at any time without prior or public notice. Uster Tech-
nologies will not assume liability for any direct or indirect damage resulting from
unintended use of this publication or the information provided therein. The use
of this information for product specifications in commercial contracts is discour-
aged unless clear reference is made to this publication or parts thereof and clear
numerical specifications and tolerances are provided in the contract. The use of
this information for arbitration purposes is discouraged unless clear reference is
made to this publication or specified parts thereof and clear numerical specifica-
tions and tolerances are provided in legally valid contractual documents pertain-
ing to the characteristics of the goods in question. The use of this information for
performance guarantees relating to textile plants, textile machines, or parts or
accessories thereof is discouraged unless clear reference is made to this publica-
tion or parts thereof and clear numerical specifications, tolerances, and restric-
tive clauses pertaining to other known influences on the specified performance
are provided in the guarantee documents.
25
9 Testing Conditions and Sample Sizes
All tests in relation to the USTER® STATISTICS 2007 were carried out under con-
stant climatic conditions. The temperature was 20 °C, the relative humidity 65%.
The following table lists the testing conditions and the sample sizes.
Fiber Testing
Parameter Abbreviation Unit Instrument No. of Tests

samples within
Micronaire Mic --- USTER® HVI 1 10
Upper Half UHML mm USTER® HVI 1 10

Mean Length UI % 1 10
Bundle tenacity Strength g/tex USTER® HVI 1 10
Color Rd % USTER® HVI 1 10

+b --- 1 10
Trash CNT --- USTER® HVI 1 10

Area % 1 10
Short Fiber Index SFI % USTER® HVI 1 10
Spinning Consistency SCI --- USTER® HVI 1 10

Index
Maturity Index Mat --- USTER® HVI 1 10
Neps Neps/g 1/g USTER® AFIS 1 10

SCN/g 1/g 1 10
Length SFC(n) % USTER® AFIS 1 10

SFC(w) % 1 10
UQL(w) mm 1 10
Maturity Fine mtex USTER® AFIS 1 10

IFC % 1 10
Mat --- 1 10
Trash Trash/g 1/g USTER® AFIS 1 10

Dust/g 1/g 1 10
VFM % 1 10
26
Yarn Testing
Parameter Abbrevia- Unit Instrument No. of Tests

tion samples within
Count CVcb % USTER® 10 1
variations TESTER 4
FA Sensor
Mass CVm % USTER® 10 1

variations CVmb % TESTER 4 10 1
CS Sensor

Testing speed: 400 m/min
Duration of test: 2.5 min
Hairiness H --- USTER® 10 1

sH --- TESTER 4 10 1
CVHb % OH Sensor 10 1

Imper- Thin places 1/1000 m USTER® 10 1

fections Thick places 1/1000 m TESTER 4 10 1
Neps 1/1000 m CS Sensor 10 1

Trash Dust 1/1000 m USTER® 10 1

Trash 1/1000 m TESTER 4 10 1
OI Sensor

Diameter CVd % USTER® 10 1

variation Shape --- TESTER 4 10 1
Density g/cm3 OM Sensor 10 1

Twist T 1/m USTER® ZWEIGLE 10 10

CVT % TWIST TESTER 5 10 10
Test method: 1
Tensile FH cN USTER® 10 20
properties RH cN/tex TENSORAPID 4 10 20
CVRH % 10 20
ε
H % 10 20
CVεH % 10 20
WH cNcm 10 20
CVWH % 10 20

27
Parameter Abbrevia- Unit Instrument No. of Tests
tion samples within
HV tensile FH cN USTER® 10 1000
properties RH cN/tex TENSOJET 4 10 1000
CVRH % 10 1000
ε
H % 10 1000
CVεH % 10 1000
WH cNcm 10 1000
CVWH % 10 1000
FHP=0.1 cN 10 1000
ε
HP=0.1 % 10 1000
FHP=0.01 cN 10 10,000
ε
HP=0.01 % 10 10,000

Testing of Rovings
Parameter Abbreviation Unit Instrument No. of Tests

samples within
Count variation CVcb % USTER® 10 1
TESTER 4 Length 10 m
FA Sensor
Count variation CVm % USTER® 10 1

TESTER 4
CS Sensor

Duration of test: 5 min.
Count variation CVm3m % USTER® 10 1

TESTER 4
CS Sensor

Duration of test: 5 min.
28
10 Appendix
The following paragraphs provide useful background information on the different

measurements. It is not our intention to give detailed explanations of the instru-
ments, measurement methods, or the technological significance of each mea-
surement, since they have been described in chapter 2. Many instrument users
are well acquainted with these aspects to begin with and specialized literature
which focuses on these topics is readily available. This appendix primarily serves
to clarify certain questions that may arise when studying the USTER® STATISTICS
and it gives valuable, practical hints as to the origin, interpretation, and use of
certain data. Needless to say that if you have any specific needs, please do not
hesitate to contact us or your nearest Uster Technologies representative office.
10.1 Fiber Properties

The USTER® STATISTICS on raw cotton fiber properties have been established
with USTER® HVI and USTER® AFIS instruments. The corresponding nomograms
have been developed from a representative cross-section of nearly 1,200 dif-
ferent international cottons. All percentile curves are plotted over staple length.
Staple length is the fundamental characteristic of cotton as a textile fiber. In the
USTER® STATISTICS nomograms, HVI and AFIS parameters or the percentiles
indicating a certain share of the world cotton production can be determined for a
given staple length. Staple length is usually specified in the contract as classer’s
or trade staple. Upper half mean length (UHML) describes the equivalent staple
length of cottons classified by HVI. An alternative is to use the 25% staple length
by weight (UQL(w)) measured with AFIS. This measurement also closely corre-
sponds to the classer’s staple.
The pie charts indicating the distribution of sample origins are missing in the
fiber properties section. The reason for that is very simple: The source of each
sample is known to us, of course, but in many cases, the true geographic origin
of the cottons was not. A sample may have been furnished by a German mill,
for instance, but the respective cotton bale may have come from Central Asia or
somewhere else and these details have not always been disclosed to us.
Please note that the data in the USTER® STATISTICS cover several crop years.
The average fiber quality of cottons from a certain growing region changes from
one year to another as a result of the prevalent environmental conditions during
the growing season. With the consideration of more than one crop year, how-
ever, these differences are leveled out.
10.1.1 Fiber Bundle Testing

The USTER® HVI (High-Volume Instrument) system is designed to measure large
quantities of bale cotton samples within a minimum time frame. This exclusive
feature offers the possibility of classing entire cotton crops on an annual basis,
the activities of the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) being an outstanding
example for such an immense project. HVI systems are also utilized to class
complete warehouse inventories or commercial bale shipments at either the cot-
ton producer’s, merchant’s, or spinner’s end of the business. Determining cotton
fiber properties on a per-bale basis is a necessary prerequisite for computerized
bale management in the spinning mill. Some 1,950 HVI systems are installed
in over 65 countries worldwide, serving the purposes outlined above. Typical
HVI measurements include Micronaire, fibrogram length and length uniformity,

1/8 inch gauge length bundle tenacity, reflectance and yellowness on Hunter’s
scale as well as optical trash particle counts and trash area.
29
There is still some confusion about the use of calibration cottons. However, since
1998 only HVI Calibration Cotton is available from the US Department of Agricul-
ture, Agricultural Marketing Service (USDA-AMS) in Memphis, Tennessee, USA.
The USDA discontinued the provision of ICC. Using HVI-CC and ICC for calibra-
tion results in different test results which are not comparable with each other
and do not correlate with each other in any way. If the system is calibrated using
HVI-CC, the upper half mean length (UHML), the mean length (ML) and the uni-
formity index (UI) are obtained. Strength results with this calibration are on a
higher level than with ICC calibration cotton. Nowadays, Uster Technologies rec-
ommends to use only HVI-CC for calibration, and all tests within the framework
of the USTER® STATISTICS were conducted using an HVI-CC calibrated system.
The USDA supplies special cottons for Micronaire calibration, since the Micro-
naire range provided by HVI-CC cottons is not nearly large enough. Special cali-
bration tiles are available to calibrate the colorimeter and the grade boxes along
with a dot matrix tile are used for trash meter calibration (USTER® HVI SPEC-
TRUM only dot matrix tile and self-defined cottons). The calibration tiles men-
tioned are part of a USTER® HVI SPECTRUM shipment.
Both the United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing Ser-

vices in Memphis, Tennessee, and the Fiber Institute in Bremen, Germany,
conduct regular HVI round tests on an international basis. Participation in such
programs is highly recommended for the monitoring of service personnel and
instrument performance, i.e. the consistency of the measurements and the com-
patibility with other laboratories.
Cotton fiber testing with USTER® HVI systems is a standardized procedure and
is described in detail in ASTM D-4605. Further explanations of the individual
functional elements of the system, the significance of the measurements, and
the proper calibration and operation of the instrument are given in the operating
instructions. Adequate sample conditioning and maintaining constant standard
atmospheric conditions in the laboratory during testing is of extreme importance
because of the hygroscopic nature of cotton fibers. Please refer to section 10.1.3
of this appendix for more information on ambient laboratory conditions for fiber
testing.
References to fiber testing standards:
ISO 2403, ASTM D-1448: Micronaire reading of cotton fibers

ASTM D-1447: Fibrograph measurement of length and
length uniformity
ASTM D-1445: Breaking strength and elongation
(flat bundle method)
ASTM D-2253: Nickerson/Hunter colorimeter
ASTM D-2812: Non-lint content of cotton
ASTM D-4605: High-volume instrument testing (SPINLAB system)
10.1.2 Single Fiber Testing

The USTER® AFIS (Advanced Fiber Information System) is a sophisticated and
versatile laboratory instrument for single fiber testing. A pair of pin-type opening
rollers, partially surrounded by carding segments, individualize the fibers and sep-
arate non-fibrous components. The fiber individualizer unit utilizes the principle of
aero-mechanical separation to extract trash particles, large seed coat fragments,

and other types of foreign matter from the original fiber specimen. These objects
are conveyed through the trash channel. Individual fibers, neps, and small seed
coat fragments (seed coat neps) pass through the fiber channel. Electro-optical
sensors are installed in both the trash and the fiber channel and advanced signal
processing technology is applied to identify and characterize several thousand
individual cotton fibers, fiber entanglements, and foreign matter. The modular
concept of the USTER® AFIS system provides comprehensive information on the
frequency distribution of pertinent dimensional parameters: single fiber length
30
and the size of neps, trash, and dust particles. The novel features of the AFIS
instrument comprise the assessment of single fiber fineness and maturity dis-
tributions as well as the discriminative detection of seed coat fragments. The
USTER® AFIS has gained international recognition as the most sensible answer
to process control and quality monitoring needs in yarn manufacturing. Some
800 USTER® AFIS units are installed in over 50 countries.
The abundance of information provided by the USTER® AFIS is a result of deter-

mining the complete frequency distribution of each measurement. Such distribu-
tions include information on the mean values, standard deviations, the number
of observations, and several other parameters that can be calculated using these
few basic characteristics of a frequency distribution. However, in the USTER®
STATISTICS on fiber quality of cotton in bale form, only the mean values of the
following measurements are considered: The number of neps and of seed coat
neps per gram of cotton, the percentage of fibers shorter than ½ inch (12.7 mm)
by number and by weight (short fiber content, SFC(n),(w)), trash and dust particle
counts per gram, visible foreign matter (VFM), the number of immature fibers,
fiber count and maturity.
Proper calibration of the instrument is a necessary prerequisite to make correct

comparisons between the actual USTER® AFIS measurements and the USTER®
STATISTICS. The calibration of an USTER® AFIS should be left to authorized Uster
Technologies service personnel. We recommend that reference samples, e.g.
round test samples, be used to monitor the consistency of the measurements
and to contact the nearest Uster Technologies service station if unexpected
changes or long-term drift should occur. The Fiber Institute in Bremen, Germany,
conducts AFIS round tests on an international basis. Participation in such pro-
grams is highly recommended for closely monitoring the performance of service
personnel and of the instrument, i.e. the consistency of the measurements and
the compatibility with other laboratories. This, of course, includes compatibility
with the USTER® STATISTICS as well.
Nep testing with the USTER® AFIS system is a standardized procedure and is
described in detail in ASTM D-5866. Further explanations of the individual func-
tional elements of the system, the significance of the measurements, and the
proper calibration and operation of the instrument are given in the operating
atmospheric conditions in the laboratory during testing is important. Please refer
to section 10.1.3 of this appendix for more information on ambient laboratory
conditions for fiber testing.
ASTM D-5866: AFIS nep testing
10.1.3 Ambient Laboratory Conditions for Fiber Testing

Cotton fibers are highly hygroscopic and their properties change notably as a
function of the moisture content. This is particularly critical in the case of dyna-
mometric properties, e.g. cotton fiber strength. As a result, conditioning and
testing must be carried out under constant standard atmospheric conditions.
The standard temperate atmosphere for textile testing involves a temperature of
20±2 °C (68±4 °F) and 65±2% relative humidity. In tropical regions, maintaining
a temperature of 27±2 °C (81±4 °F) at 65±2% relative humidity is legitimate, but

then the absolute moisture content of the conditioned air is different. Modern air
conditioning systems, however, are capable of achieving 20±2 °C (68±4 °F) and
65±2% relative humidity in most any location in the world and in the interest of
international harmonization, these ambient conditions should be realized when-
ever possible. Prior to testing, the samples must be conditioned under constant
standard atmospheric conditions until in moisture equilibrium with the surround-
ing air. To attain the moisture equilibrium, a conditioning time of at least 24 hours
is required, 48 hours is preferred. For samples with a high moisture content,
31
conditioning time should be at least 48 hours unless the samples are precondi-
tioned, so that the moisture equilibrium is later approached from the dry side.
During conditioning, samples should be arranged in single layers in perforated
trays to allow conditioned air to circulate freely. The moisture content of the sam-
ples to be tested should not differ from that of the cottons used for calibrating
the measuring instrument. Therefore, calibration cottons should be subjected to
the same conditioning procedures or, alternatively, stored permanently inside the
conditioned laboratory. Laboratory conditions should be monitored by appropri-
ate devices that record both short-term fluctuation and long-term drift.
ISO 139, EN 20 139, DIN 53 802: Standard atmosphere for conditioning

and testing
10.2 Fiber Processing

In cotton yarn manufacturing, the AFIS length, nep, and trash modules have been
successfully employed to determine raw material properties, to monitor and opti-
mize production machinery, and to replace static, periodic overhaul schedules
by flexible, targeted maintenance. The performance of the opening and cleaning
line, of cards, and combers can be substantially enhanced by analyzing the input/
output relationship of fiber length and short fiber content, neps, and trash. This
is accomplished by a modification of the corresponding machine configurations,
settings, and speeds. Statistical process control techniques provide an oppor-
tunity for the proper timing of maintenance interventions when the parameters
monitored by the AFIS exceed the established control limits. The effects of these
measures include a substantial improvement of the yarn and fabric quality and a
concurrent reduction of operating cost and waste. By identifying and selecting
the most suitable cottons for the processing into yarns with the desired quality
levels, further savings in the field of raw materials can be generated.
The cotton fiber processing section of the USTER® STATISTICS represents a sta-
tistical analysis of in-process AFIS measurements which have been performed
on a large number of samples drawn at important intermediate processing
stages: Bale, card mat, card sliver, comber sliver, finisher drawing, and roving.
The through-the-mill processing sequences in carded and combed ring spinning
are labeled A...G and A...H, in carded open-end spinning A...F and A...H. They are
identified by a legend. At trash/g and dust/g the values for yarns, measured with
the OI sensor of the USTER® TESTER 4, are indicated as well. Since the samples
came from specific mills, a distribution of the sample sources is provided in the
form of a pie chart. This distribution does not relate to fiber origin, i.e. cotton
growing area, but to the locations of the mills that furnished the samples. The
cotton growing area is unknown.
The following is of utmost importance when making a comparison between

the results obtained in actual mill processing and the USTER® STATISTICS: The
percentile curves in the fiber processing nomograms connect independent data
points. Each data point represents one of the five percentiles (5th, 25th, 50th, 75th,
and 95th percentile) which have been calculated from all samples from the same
processing stage. Therefore, the 50% curve, for instance, does not represent
the typical behavior of an average spinning process; rather, it indicates the theo
retical process curve that would be obtained if the parameters measured at each
processing stage would always correspond to the 50th percentile. In practice,

we will rarely encounter a spinning process that will exactly track one of the
percentile curves. In addition, the confidence intervals must be taken into con-
sideration. An example relating to AFIS neps: A mill processes a raw material
with an average of 175±∆x neps/g. This would correspond to the 50th percentile.
After opening and cleaning, we find 230±∆x neps/g in the card mat, which repre-
sents a point between the 25th and 50th percentile curve. Carding removes 78%
of the neps and leaves 50±∆x neps/g in the card sliver. Again, this nep count
is positioned in close vicinity to the 50th percentile curve. Our mill ends up with
32
28±∆x neps/g in the combed sliver and is back on the 50% curve. The USTER®
STATISTICS on through-the-mill nep levels can also be used in conjunction with a
USTER® LVI 720 stand-alone nep tester.
When making an assessment of the manufacturing process, it is equally impor-

tant to consider the overriding influence of the raw material. Machine perfor-
mance is not independent of the raw material. Experience proves that in the
majority of all cases, poor processing results are to some extent related to the
fibrous material processed. Textile machines are meticulously engineered prod-
ucts. If they are well maintained, operated at moderate speeds and with appro-
priate settings, they will deliver excellent quality provided sufficient know-how
has also been put into the selection of adequate raw materials. The effect of raw
materials is also indirectly represented in the USTER® STATISTICS nomograms
on fiber processing. It is a well-known fact, for example, that some cottons or
cotton mixes are more prone to nep formation in opening and cleaning than oth-
ers. The tendency towards nep formation is particularly critical with very fine or
immature fibers, i.e. fibers with lower bending rigidity. Likewise, there are cot-
tons which have a tendency to more strongly resist nep removal in carding. Less
mature cottons will also suffer more pronounced fiber damage during mechani-
cal processing and exhibit a higher short fiber content. The absolute breaking
strength of such fibers is much lower due to the lack of cellulose in the fiber cell
wall. The actual reduction of the short fiber content in combing is clearly depen-
dent on the percentage of short fibers present in the raw material and thus in
the lap prior to combing. Furthermore, trash removal efficiency in mill process-
ing is not only a function of the absolute amount of trash in the raw material but
also of the general cleanability of a cotton mix, which is related to both the fiber
properties and the post-harvest processing history of the cottons. These factors
should be thoroughly investigated before making adjustments in the process or
at individual machines.

comparisons between the actual AFIS measurements and the USTER® STATIS-
TICS on fiber processing. The calibration of an AFIS should be left to authorized
Uster Technologies service personnel. We recommend that reference samples,
e.g. round test samples, be used to monitor the consistency of the measure-
ments and to contact the nearest Uster Technologies service station if unex-
pected changes or long-term drift should occur. The Fiber Institute in Bremen,
Germany, conducts AFIS round tests on an international basis. Participation in
such programs is highly recommended for closely monitoring the performance of
the instrument, i.e. the consistency of the measurements and the compatibility
with other laboratories. This, of course, includes compatibility with the USTER®
STATISTICS as well.
Nep testing with the USTER® AFIS system is a standardized procedure and is
described in detail in ASTM D-5866. Further explanations of the individual func-
tional elements of the system, the significance of the measurements, and the
proper calibration and operation of the instrument are given in the operating
atmospheric conditions in the laboratory during testing is important.
ASTM D-5866: AFIS nep testing

10.3 Roving Testing

The USTER® STATISTICS 2007 again include measurements of rovings from
cotton and worsted mills which were made in our textile laboratory using the
USTER® TESTER 4.
33
10.4 Yarn Testing
A new aspect which frequently led to disagreements and uncertainties concerns
different quality requirements in relation to subsequent use of yarns in process-
ing, which are manufactured and traded world wide. Hitherto, no distinction has
been made in the USTER® STATISTICS. This deficiency has been remedied in
the USTER® STATISTICS 2001 edition. Therefore, yarns are shown in different
nomograms according to their subsequent processing purpose, i.e. weaving yarn
or knitting yarn.
As in the USTER® STATISTICS 1997 edition, a distinction has been made between
cotton qualities on bobbins and on packages. Again, reference measurements
of yarn mass variations, hairiness and imperfections on bobbins and on cross-
wound packages are available for 100% carded and combed ring-spun cotton
yarns. Hereinafter, you will find the considerations at that time that led to this
distinction particularly in the cotton segment.
Practical experience has proven time and time again that winding alters the
yarn surface structure. The impact on yarn evenness (CVm) is very limited but
changes in imperfection counts (thin places, thick places, and neps), hairiness
(H), and standard deviation of hairiness (sH) are much more pronounced. Under
normal circumstances, the tensile properties, i.e. tenacity, elongation, and work-
to-break are not affected unless yarns are subjected to excessive winding ten-
sion, which is very rarely the case and certainly not a prudent practice. A clear
statement must be made concerning the role of the winding machine: Changes
in the yarn surface structure due to winding cannot be avoided. Nobody would
honestly expect a yarn to become better after it has been accelerated from zero
to 1200 m/min or more in a few milliseconds while being pulled off the bobbin,
dragged across several deflection bars and eyelets, forced into a traverse motion
at speeds that make it invisible, and finally rolled up into a firm construction called
package or cone. The factors that affect the yarn structure during winding include
the frictional properties of the yarn itself, the bobbin geometry and the bobbin
unwinding behavior, winding speed, winding geometry as well as the number
and design of the yarn/machine contact points. However, much as the bobbin
unwinding behavior today is the limiting factor for winding speed, it is also the
main reason for these changes in yarn structure. Most of the damage occurs at
the moment when the end is detached and removed from the tight assembly of
yarn layers on the bobbin and dragged along the tube at very high speeds.
High-speed, automatic winders have frequently been blamed for causing higher
nep counts but this is not a correct statement. Typical nep-type imperfections,
i.e. short mass defects, can be identified as tight fiber entanglements, clumps of
immature or dead cotton fibers, or seed coat fragments. Naturally, such defects
are not produced by the winding machine. The increase in nep counts after wind-
ing is related to the formation of loose fiber accumulations. These fiber accumu-
lations represent a true mass defect, yet their appearance in the yarn and in the
final fabric is clearly different from that of typical fiber entanglements or seed
coat fragments.
When testing 100% cotton yarns in package form for evenness, imperfections,
and hairiness with the USTER® TESTER, some very fine and delicate yarns will
again respond with marginal structural changes. This is not a result of mechani-
cal stress like in winding but a natural reaction caused by the reversal of the
yarn running direction. Directional influences are omnipresent; they become
apparent in all subsequent processing stages. The evidence of changes in the
yarn surface structure due to the winding process or as a result of reversing the
yarn running direction is confined to a few very delicate 100% man-made fiber
yarns, core yarns, and 100% cotton yarns finer than Ne 60 (Nm 100, 10 tex).
We recommend, however, that the USTER® STATISTICS on 100% carded and
combed cotton ring-spun yarns on cross-wound packages be referred to when-
ever mass variation, hairiness, and imperfections of cotton yarns in package form
are of interest. Since the tensile properties are not affected by the phenomena
described above, the USTER® STATISTICS on ring-spun bobbins should be used
for packages as well. The STATISTICS on count variation and the between-sample
34
coefficients of variation of evenness and hairiness are only useful when testing
bobbins. Testing packages of ring-spun yarns always involves the risk of catch-
ing the top end of one bobbin and the bottom end of another (plus the splice in
between), which may distort the measurements.
Incorrect comparisons with the USTER® STATISTICS may also result from test-
ing actively conditioned yarns. Active thermal conditioning is performed at the
very end of the manufacturing process to suppress the twist liveliness or the
yarn torque. This is normally accomplished by treating bobbins or packages with
high-temperature water vapor in a conditioning chamber or in a vacuum environ-
ment with low-temperature saturated steam in the gaseous phase. In any case,
the moisture regain of the fibers may alter their physical properties and affect
capacitive yarn testing. In addition, the moisture is not always homogeneously
distributed within a thermally conditioned bobbin or package. Therefore, changes
in tenacity, elongation, and work-to-break as well as evenness, imperfections,
and defect levels must be expected. The bobbin and package samples tested
within the framework of the USTER® STATISTICS have been cleared of all pack-
ing material upon receipt, preconditioned in a dry atmosphere for several days or
weeks, and conditioned to moisture equilibrium under constant standard atmo-
spheric conditions. By doing so, any adverse effects on testing caused by ther-
mal conditioning are completely eliminated. Please refer to section 10.4.10 of
this appendix for more information on proper sample conditioning and ambient
laboratory conditions for yarn testing.
The influence of the raw material on the quality of spun yarns has been exten-
sively covered on the first pages of these USTER® STATISTICS. It is a true fact of
life that nobody can spin a world-class yarn from coarse wool or short and weak
cotton fibers even if the latest and best machinery is employed. The quality sta-
tus achieved by a spinner always represents the compound effect of the skills
of the work force and the management, the performance of the machines, the
quality of the raw material, and the know-how in processing technology.
10.4.1 Count Variation Testing

The term count variation (CVcb) denotes the between-sample coefficient of varia-
tion of yarn count in percent. Count variation can be determined semi-automati-
cally with the USTER® AUTOSORTER by reeling 100 m or 120 yards of yarn off
each bobbin or package and placing each skein on the balance. The calculation is
performed by the instrument. The F/A module of the USTER® TESTER 4 provides
a fully automatic determination of the yarn count and count variation.
Count variation is no longer as critical as it used to be some years ago. It is a well-

documented fact that a count variation of CVcb>3.0% can impair fabric appear-
ance, primarily in knitting. However, the application of feed control systems from
the bale opener to the card, short-term and long-term card autoleveling, and
drawframe autoleveling at ever shorter lengths, in particular, has improved the
situation appreciably.

comparisons between the actual AUTOSORTER or USTER® TESTER 4 measure-
ments and the USTER® STATISTICS on count variation. The calibration of an
AUTOSORTER or USTER® TESTER should be left to authorized Uster Technolo-
gies service personnel. Please contact the nearest Uster Technologies service
station if unexpected changes or long-term drift should occur. TESTEX AG in

Zurich, Switzerland, conducts yarn quality round tests on an international basis.
Participation in such a program is highly recommended for closely monitoring
the performance of the serivce personnel and of the instrument, i.e. the consis-
tency of the measurements and the compatibility with other laboratories. This, of
course, includes compatibility with the USTER® STATISTICS as well.
The determination of the yarn count is a standardized procedure and is described

in detail in ISO 2060. Further explanations of the individual functional elements
of the USTER® AUTOSORTER or the USTER® TESTER 4, the significance of the
35
measurements, and the proper calibration and operation of the instruments are
given in the operating instructions. Adequate sample conditioning and maintain-
ing constant standard atmospheric conditions in the laboratory during testing is
important. Please refer to section 10.4.10 of this appendix for more information
on ambient laboratory conditions for yarn testing.
References to count variation testing:
ISO 2060, DIN 53 830: Determination of yarn count
10.4.2 Mass Variation Testing

The assessment of mass variation with the USTER® TESTER needs no intro-
duction. The USTER® STATISTICS on mass variation include nomograms on the
coefficient of variation of yarn mass (CVm) and the between-sample coefficient
of variation of the CVm (CVmb). A USTER® TESTER 4 has been used for testing
of all yarn samples that have been procured for the USTER® STATISTICS 2007.
However, the STATISTICS on mass variation are fully compatible with the data
provided by the preceding product generations, i.e. USTER® TESTER 1, USTER®
TESTER 2, and USTER® TESTER 3.
Proper calibration of the instrument is a necessary prerequisite to make cor-

rect comparisons between the actual USTER® TESTER measurements and the
USTER® STATISTICS on mass variation. The calibration of a USTER® TESTER
should be left to authorized Uster Technologies service personnel. Please con-
tact the nearest Uster Technologies service station if unexpected changes or
long-term drift should occur. TESTEX AG in Zurich, Switzerland, conducts yarn
quality round tests on an international basis. Participation in such a program is
highly recommended for closely monitoring the performance of the service per-
sonnel and of the instrument, i.e. the consistency of the measurements and the
compatibility with other laboratories. This, of course, includes compatibility with
the USTER® STATISTICS as well.
The determination of yarn unevenness by electronic yarn testing instruments

with capacitive sensors is a standardized procedure and is described in detail
in ISO 2649. Further explanations of the individual functional elements of the
USTER® TESTER, the significance of the measurements, and the proper calibra-
tion and operation of the instrument are given in the operating instructions and
in the application handbook on evenness testing. Adequate sample conditioning
and maintaining constant standard atmospheric conditions in the laboratory dur-
ing testing is important. Please refer to section 10.4.10 of this appendix for more
information on ambient laboratory conditions for yarn testing.
References to yarn mass variation standards:
ISO 2649, DIN 53 817: Determination of yarn evenness
10.4.3 Yarn Hairiness Testing

The first statistical information on yarn hairiness was presented in the 1989 edi-
tion of the USTER® STATISTICS. In the following years, the hairiness measure-
ment has become firmly established in the industry. The hairiness module of
the USTER® TESTER 4 consists of an electro-optical sensor which converts the
scattered light reflections of the peripheral fibers into a corresponding electri-
cal signal while the solid yarn body is eclipsed. The hairiness measurement is
performed simultaneously with the measurement of yarn evenness and imper-
fections. Yarn hairiness is expressed in the form of the hairiness value H, which
is an indirect measure for the number and the cumulative length of all fibers
protruding from the yarn surface. This value, along with the within-sample stan-
dard deviation of hairiness (sH) and the between-sample coefficient of variation
of hairiness (CVHb), is covered by the USTER® STATISTICS.
36
High or low hairiness, even when going to the extremes, is not necessarily a
quality deficiency. The yarn hairiness requirements are strictly governed by the
end use. Yarns with higher hairiness are usually produced for end uses in knitting,
such as underwear, knitted outerwear, and sportswear. Most weaving applica-
tions call for a smooth yarn surface, especially with warp yarns. A typical excep-
tion are pile yarns for terry fabrics, which often exhibit a high hairiness. Greater
hairiness can also improve the filling insertion behavior (air friendliness) of certain
yarns processed on high-speed air-jet weaving machines.
One aspect that is not reflected in the USTER® STATISTICS on yarn hairiness
is the occurrence of periodic hairiness defects. While modern yarn monitoring
systems detect mass periodicities with a high degree of accuracy and reliability,
there is no on-line monitoring system for hairiness. Consequently, knowledge of
the average hairiness of a yarn does not preclude the existence of periodic hairi-
ness defects, which adversely affect fabric appearance. In some cases, a high
standard deviation of hairiness is at least an indication of the presence of hairi-
ness periodicities.

comparisons between the actual USTER® TESTER 4 measurements and the
USTER® STATISTICS on yarn hairiness. The calibration of a USTER® TESTER 4
hairiness module should be left to authorized Uster Technologies service person-
nel. Please contact the nearest Uster Technologies service station if unexpected
changes or long-term drift should occur. TESTEX AG in Zurich, Switzerland, con-
ducts yarn quality round tests on an international basis. Participation in such a
program is highly recommended for closely monitoring the performance of the
service personnel and of the instrument, i.e. the consistency of the measure-
ments and the compatibility with other laboratories. This, of course, includes
compatibility with the USTER® STATISTICS as well.
Further explanations of the individual functional elements of the hairiness module

of the USTER® TESTER 4, the significance of the measurements, and the proper
calibration and operation of the module are given in the operating instructions
and in the application handbook on hairiness testing. Adequate sample condition-
ing and maintaining constant standard atmospheric conditions in the laboratory
during testing is important. Please refer to section 10.4.10 of this appendix for
more information on ambient laboratory conditions for yarn testing.
10.4.4 Imperfections Testing

The USTER® STATISTICS on imperfections include nomograms on the number
of thick places, thin places, and neps per 1,000 m of yarn as determined with
the USTER® TESTER. The sensitivity settings for the detection of imperfec-
tions are –50% for thin places, +50% for thick places, and +200% for neps. As
mentioned under 6.3, the next lower thresholds –40%, +35% and +140% have
been included in USTER® STATISTICS for the first time. These settings are com-
monly used for all yarn types except rotor-spun yarns. The structure of rotor-spun
yarns is intrinsically different from that of conventional ring-spun yarns. Neps in
rotor-spun yarns tend to be spun into the solid yarn body rather than remaining
on the yarn surface, which is typical for ring-spun yarns. Although embedded
in the yarn core, these neps still represent a short mass defect and they will
therefore trigger the imperfection counter upon exceeding the preset threshold
value. However, compared to neps that are attached to the yarn surface, fully
embedded neps are barely perceptible for the human eye. In order to balance the
typical visual appearance of rotor-spun yarns with the imperfection counts of the
USTER® TESTER, the +280% sensitivity setting for neps has become a common
convention for the testing of rotor-spun yarns. In addition to the 280% neps, nep
class +200% has been included for the first time as an additional nomogram for
OE rotor-spun yarns and airjet yarns.
A USTER® TESTER 4 has been used for the testing of all yarn samples that have
been procured for the USTER® STATISTICS 2007. However, the STATISTICS on
yarn imperfections are compatible with the data provided by the preceding product
37
generations, i.e. USTER® TESTER 1, USTER® TESTER 2, and USTER® TESTER 3.
rect comparisons between the actual USTER® TESTER measurements and
the USTER® STATISTICS on yarn imperfections. The calibration of a USTER®
TESTER should be left to authorized Uster Technologies service personnel. Please
contact the nearest Uster Technologies service station if unexpected changes or
long-term drift should occur. TESTEX AG in Zurich, Switzerland, conducts yarn
quality round tests on an international basis. Participation in such a program is
highly recommended for closely monitoring the performance of the service per-
sonnel and of the instrument, i.e. the consistency of the measurements and the
compatibility with other laboratories. This, of course, includes compatibility with
the USTER® STATISTICS as well.
Further explanations of the individual functional elements of the imperfection
counter of the USTER® TESTER, the significance of the measurements, and
the proper calibration and operation of the instrument are given in the operat-
ing instructions and in the application handbook on evenness testing. Adequate
sample conditioning and maintaining constant standard atmospheric conditions in
the laboratory during testing is important. Please refer to section 10.4.10 of this
appendix for more information on ambient laboratory conditions for yarn testing.
10.4.5 Yarn Diameter, Cross-sectional Shape

and Density Testing
The USTER® STATISTICS 2007 include the coefficient of variation of the yarn
diameter, the cross-sectional shape and density. Increasing experience in using
textile measuring instruments resulted in ever-growing demands on yarns and
the appearance of woven and knitted fabrics. Time and again it was noticed that
textile measuring sensors which have been known for a long time can explain a
great deal, but there are still defects in textile formations which are difficult to
interpret. Moreover, quality losses occur during process control which are invari-
ably difficult to explain.
Therefore, Uster Technologies decided some years ago to develop two more
sensors in addition to the well-known sensors used to determine mass variation
and the sensors used to analyze hairiness:
• Optical sensor to measure yarn diameter, cross-sectional shape of yarns, den-
sity and surface structure.
• Optical sensor to determine any remaining yarn trash and yarn dust.
The optical sensor to measure the yarn diameter uses two light sources arranged
at a 90 degree angle to examine the yarn. This arrangement guarantees a high
stability of the measurement, and at the same time it is possible to measure the
roundness of the yarns, since the roundness of yarns also influences the appear-
ance of textile fabrics.
10.4.6 Yarn Trash and Yarn Dust Testing

The sensor to determine yarn trash and yarn dust is used to detect remaining
trash and dust in the yarn. It is therefore possible to monitor the reduction of
the trash and dust content during the entire spinning process. Trash and dust
contained in the yarn is of particular significance for processing yarns on weaving
looms and knitting machines. The two quality characteristics, trash and dust in
yarns, have also been included in the USTER® STATISTICS 2007.
38
10.4.7 Twist Testing
The twist of a yarn can be described by the twist per unit length (per meter or
per inch) and by the twist multiplier.
For the twist character of a yarn only the twist multiplier is decisive, as it
describes the angle of the twist in the yarn. A fine yarn needs more twist than
a coarse yarn in order to have the same twist character. Therefore, the twist of
a yarn is usually given as the coefficient of twist, also called twist multiplier in
order to be able to compare different yarn counts.
The twist measuring method used is the untwist-retwist method. This method is
based on the premise that the contraction of a specified length of singles yarns is
the same for any amount of twist. A 50-cm length is untwisted under pretension,
and then is retwisted in the same direction. The retwisting is continued until the
contracted length is the same as the original specimen length. The total twist
is the sum of the untwisted and retwisted turns. Since the specimen length is
0.5 m, the number of rotations with the untwist-retwist method is equivalent to
the yarn twist per meter.
The measurement of the twist for the USTER® STATISTICS is done according to
the standard ISO 17202:2002.
10.4.8 Tensile Properties Testing

The USTER® STATISTICS on tensile properties are valid for measurements per-
formed with the USTER® TENSORAPID single-end tensile testing instrument.
Nomograms are available for breaking force (FH), breaking tenacity (RH), break-
ing elongation (εH) and work-to-break (WH) as well as for the total coefficients of
variation of each one of these parameters (CVRH, CVεH, CVWH). The total coef-
ficient of variation describes the overall variability of a tested lot, i.e. the within-
sample variation plus the between-sample variation. If 20 individual single-end
tensile tests are performed on each of ten bobbins or packages in a sample lot,
the total coefficient of variation is calculated from the pooled data of the total
number of tests (200 in this example) that were carried out.
The terminology used for describing the tensile properties may raise some ques-
tions. In the USTER® STATISTICS, we have applied the same terminology that is
used in the international standards on textile testing. However, these standard-
ized denominations are not always clear. The following must be carefully consid-
ered: The breaking tenacity is calculated from the peak force which occurs any-
where between the beginning of the test and the final rupture of the specimen.
The peak force or maximum force is not identical with the force measured at the
very moment of rupture (force at rupture). The breaking elongation is calculated
from the clamp displacement at the point of peak force. The elongation at peak
force is not identical with the elongation at the very moment of rupture (elonga-
tion at rupture). The work-to-break is defined as the area below the stress/strain
curve drawn to the point of peak force and the corresponding elongation at peak
force. The work at the point of peak force is not identical with the work at the
very moment of rupture (work-to-rupture). In the USTER® STATISTICS on tensile
properties, all parameters are derived from the true peak force measurement.
However, as long as the stress/strain curve of a yarn exhibits a linear or progres-
sive characteristic, these differences are irrelevant because the maximum force
is very much the same as the force at the point of rupture. This is the case, for
instance, with 100% cotton yarns. But: When the stress/strain curve shows a
degressive characteristic, the peak force may be higher than the force at rupture
and the elongation at peak force is lower than the elongation at rupture. This is the
case with worsted yarns or yarns which are spun from certain man-made fibers.
When comparing data on tensile yarn properties with the USTER® STATISTICS,
the true meaning of these measurements must be known. Some number which
happens to be declared as yarn strength, for instance, must not necessarily be
compatible with the USTER® STATISTICS. The application handbook on tensile
39
testing with the USTER® TENSORAPID is highly recommended to those who
may wish to obtain further information on these topics.
The USTER® TENSORAPID applies the CRE principle of tensile testing. The term
CRE serves as an abbreviation for ‹constant rate of extension›. CRE describes
the simple fact that the moving clamp is displaced at a constant velocity. As a
result, the specimen between the stationary and the moving clamp is extended
by a constant distance per unit of time and the force required to do so is mea-
sured. The following details are of utmost importance in ensuring compatibility
between the data presented in the USTER® STATISTICS and the data on tensile
properties obtained in practice: To be compatible, a measurement must be per-
formed according to the CRE principle. The velocity of the moving clamp, also
referred to as the testing speed, must be exactly 5 m/min. The gauge length, i.e.
the length of the specimen or the distance between the stationary and the mov-
ing clamp should be 500 mm and a pretension of 0.5 cN/tex must be applied.
Testing conditions that deviate from this description will most certainly result in
different measurement values.
CRE single-end testing at 5 m/min is the most widely accepted practice in the
international textile industry and it has therefore been chosen as the testing
mode for the USTER® STATISTICS on tensile properties. However, other meth-
ods are still being applied but their significance is deteriorating rapidly. These
methods include CRE single-end testing with 20 s time-to-break. Textile materials
exhibit a partially viscoelastic behavior and their tensile properties change nota-
bly as a function of the time during which mechanical forces and deformations
are acting upon a fiber, yarn, or fabric. Therefore, the tensile properties of yarns
also change with the testing speed. The difference between a time-to-break of
20 s and the 0.2…0.4 s required to break a specimen made of fiber-spun yarns
at 5 m/min causes significant differences between the respective measurement
values. Similar discrepancies may occur when comparing CRL (constant rate
of load) single-end measurements from the USTER® DYNAMAT with the CRE
5 m/min TENSORAPID data provided in the USTER® STATISTICS. In general,
there are two fundamental criteria which affect the compatibility between differ-
ent measurements of tensile yarn properties: Criterion number one is the test-
ing conditions, i.e. the testing principle (CRE, CRL), testing speed, gauge length,
and pretensioning. The second criterion, which also affects the magnitude of the
differences, relates to the specific stress/strain characteristic of the yarn itself,
which is determined by the fibrous materials, the blend ratio, and the yarn con-
struction. A detailed appraisal of the various tensile testing systems and the rea-
sons for the differences between the measurements is provided in the applica-
tion handbook on tensile testing with the USTER® TENSORAPID.

rect comparisons between the actual USTER® TENSORAPID measurements
and the USTER® STATISTICS on tensile properties. The calibration of a USTER®
TENSORAPID should be left to authorized Uster Technologies service person-
nel. Please contact the nearest Uster Technologies service station if unexpected
The determination of the CRE tensile properties of yarns by means of electronic

yarn testing instruments is a standardized procedure and is described in detail
in ISO 2062. However: While the basic procedures of automatic CRE single-end
tensile testing are outlined in all applicable national and international standards,
the testing speed of 5 m/min – much to our regret – has not yet been consid-
ered. In spite of this shortcoming, it is definitely the preferred mode of tensile
testing from a global point of view.
Further explanations of the individual functional elements of the USTER®

TENSORAPID, the significance of the measurements, and the proper calibration
and operation of the instrument are given in the operating instructions and in the
40
application handbook on tensile testing. Adequate sample conditioning and main-
taining constant standard atmospheric conditions in the laboratory during testing
is important. Please refer to section 10.4.10 of this appendix for more informa-
tion on ambient laboratory conditions for yarn testing.
References to tensile testing standards:
ISO 2062, ASTM D-1578, DIN 53 834: Single-end tensile testing
10.4.9 HV Tensile Properties Testing

The term HV tensile properties is used for describing a novel method of tensile
testing. HV stands for high-volume and high-velocity. The USTER® TENSOJET is a
laboratory instrument which for the first time provides true high-volume and high-
velocity features in tensile testing. With the USTER® TENSOJET, the mechanism
which is used for applying a tensile force, to extend, and ultimately break a speci-
men consists of two pairs of cam-type rollers, arranged at a distance of 500 mm.
The top and bottom cam-type rollers are designed to allow an end to be inserted
between the rollers, to be clamped at the nip point, and to be extended just a
fraction of a second later. A force sensor is installed in the yarn channel which
connects the two pairs of rollers. The curvature of the yarn channel causes a flat
angle deflection of the yarn at the tip of the sensor so that the radial component
of the tensile force can be measured. The entire measurement cycle consists of
four phases: continuous yarn take-up and intermediate storage, insertion of the
end by a compressed air nozzle, clamping and extension to rupture by the rollers,
and removal of the broken end into the waste bin via an air flow. The USTER®
TENSOJET operates according to the CRE principle at a testing speed of 400 m/
min. The actual time-to-break is in the neighborhood of 3 ms for a 100% cot-
ton yarn. As a result, the instrument is capable of performing 30,000 individual
breaks per hour and offers the possibility of testing an enormous amount of yarn
within a very reasonable time frame. Such dramatic increases in sample size pro-
vide a suitable means for the detection and assessment of sporadic weak places
in the yarn, which dictate the yarn breakage frequency and machine efficiencies
in subsequent processing. High-performance tensile testing with the USTER®
TENSOJET is also an almost perfect simulation of the dynamic loads which affect
a yarn during filling insertion on high-speed weaving machines.
In the USTER® STATISTICS on HV tensile properties, nomograms are available for

breaking force (FH), breaking tenacity (RH), breaking elongation (εH), and work-
to-break (WH) as well as for the total coefficients of variation of these param-
eters (CVRH, CVεH, CVWH). In general terms, the TENSOJET measurements cor-
respond to those provided in the USTER® STATISTICS on tensile properties as
determined with the USTER® TENSORAPID and the previous paragraph can be
referred to for more detailed explanations. However, due to the significant dif-
ference in testing speed, TENSOJET compared to TENSORAPID measurements
show generally higher force values.
The nomograms on the percentile values of breaking force (FP=0.1) and break-
ing elongation (εP=0.1) relate to the occurrence of weak places in spun yarns.
The percentile value 0.1% of the breaking force (FP=0.1) signifies that 0.1% of all
measurements exhibit a breaking force that is equal to or lower than the specified
value. For the USTER® STATISTICS, ten samples of each lot have been selected
and 1,000 individual tensile tests have been performed on each bobbin or pack-
age. This is a total of 10,000 measurements per lot. The percentile value 0.1% of
the breaking force indicates that ten measurements (0.1% of 10,000 breaks) lie
below that value. An example:
The percentile value 0.1% of the breaking force of an Ne 20 (Nm 34, 29.5 tex),
100% carded cotton ring-spun yarn was measured at FP=0.1 = 400 cN, which
can be converted into RP=0.1 = 13.6 cN/tex. Consequently, 0.1% of all measure-
ments represent weak places with a breaking force of less than 400 cN or a
breaking tenacity of less than 13.6 cN/tex. If ten bobbins have been tested, each
with 1,000 breaks, this equates to a total of ten such weak places. The percentile
41
value 0.1% of the breaking force FP=0.1 = 400 cN corresponds to the 50th percen-
tile of the USTER® STATISTICS.
In this context, it is very important to keep in mind that a comparison with the
USTER® STATISTICS on weak places is only permissible if the total number of
breaks performed on a sample lot is exactly 10,000. Percentile values of both
the breaking force and the breaking elongation that have been determined with
fewer or more than 10,000 breaks cannot be compared with the data provided in
the USTER® STATISTICS.

rect comparisons between the actual USTER® TENSOJET measurements and
the USTER® STATISTICS on HV tensile properties. The calibration of a USTER®
TENSOJET should be left to authorized Uster Technologies service personnel.
Please contact the nearest Uster Technologies service station if unexpected
Further explanations of the individual elements of the USTER® TENSOJET, the

significance of the measurements, and the proper calibration and operation of
the instrument are given in the operating instructions. Adequate sample condi-
tioning and maintaining constant standard atmospheric conditions in the labora-
tory during testing is important. Please refer to section 10.4.10 of this appendix
for more information on ambient laboratory conditions for yarn testing.
10.4.10 Ambient Laboratory Conditions for Yarn Testing

Some textile fibers are highly hygroscopic and their properties change notably as
a function of the moisture content. Typical hygroscopic fibers are cotton, wool,
rayon, silk, flax, etc. Moisture content is particularly critical in the case of dynamo-
metric properties, i.e. yarn tenacity, elongation, and work-to-break, but yarn even-
ness, imperfections, and defect levels are also affected. As a result, conditioning
and testing must be carried out under constant standard atmospheric conditions.
The standard temperate atmosphere for textile testing involves a temperature of
20±2 °C (68±4 °F) and 65±2 % relative humidity. In tropical regions, maintaining
a temperature of 27±2 °C (81±4 °F) at 65±2% relative humidity is legitimate, but
then the absolute moisture content of the conditioned air is different. Modern
air conditioning systems, however, are capable of achieving 20±2 °C (68±4 °F)
and 65±2 % relative humidity in most any location in the world and in the inter-
est of international harmonization, these ambient conditions should be realized
whenever possible. Prior to testing, the samples must be conditioned under con-
stant standard atmospheric conditions until in moisture equilibrium with the sur-
rounding air. To attain the moisture equilibrium, a conditioning time of at least
24 hours is required, 48 hours is preferred. For samples with a high moisture
content (thermally conditioned yarns), conditioning time should be at least 48
hours. The best practice is to precondition such samples in a dry atmosphere,
so that the moisture equilibrium is later approached from the dry side. During
conditioning, the samples must be removed from any boxes or containers used
for transportation, cleared from all packing material, placed in an upright position
to expose the entire bobbin or package surface to the conditioned air, and
arranged in such a fashion that ample space is left between the samples to allow
conditioned air to circulate freely. Laboratory conditions should be monitored by
appropriate devices that record both short-term fluctuation and long-term drift.
References to standards defining the standard atmosphere for conditioning and

testing:
ISO 139, EN 20 139, DIN 53 802: Standard atmosphere for conditioning and
testing
42
10.5 Useful Conversions
10.5.1 English/Metric Conversions
English Unit Abbreviation Metric Unit Metric Unit Abbreviation English Unit
(US) (US)
Length Length
inch in 2.54 cm centimeter cm 0.3937 in
foot (=12 in) ft 30.48 cm meter m 3.28 ft
yard (=3 ft) yd 0.9144 m meter m 1.0936 yd
mile mile 1609.344 m kilometer km 0.6241 mile
Area Area
square inch in2 6.4516 cm2 square centimeter cm2 0.155 in2
square foot ft2 929.030 cm2 square meter m 10.76 ft2
2
square yard yd2 0.836 m2 square meter m2 1.196 yd2

acre ac 0.405 ha hectare ha 2.47 ac
square mile mile2 2589.99 m2 square kilometer km2 0.386 mile2
Volume Volume
cubic inch in3 16.3871 cm3 cubic centimeter cm3 0.061 in3
cubic foot ft3 0.0283 m3 cubic meter m3 35.288 ft3
cubic yard yd3 0.7646 m3 cubic meter m3 1.308 yd3
fluid ounce fl oz 28.4 ml milliliter ml 0.0352 fl oz
pint pt 0.473 l liter l 2.11 pt
gallon gal 3.79 l liter l 0.264 gal
Mass Mass
grain gr 0.0648 g gram g 15.432 gr
ounce oz 28.3495 g gram g 0.0353 oz
pound lb 0.4536 kg kilogram kg 2.205 lb
Force Force
gram-force gf 0.9807 cN centi-Newton cN 1.02 gf
pound-force lbf 4.4483 N Newton N 0.2248 lbf
Pressure Pressure
pound-force/in2 p.s.i. 6894.76 Pa bar (=105 Pa) bar 14.5 p.s.i.
pound-force/ft2 p.s.f. 47.8803 Pa Pascal (N/m2) Pa 0.0209 p.s.f.
Tenacity Tenacity
gram-force/den gf/den 8.838 cN/tex centi-Newton/tex cN/tex 0.113 gf/den
gram-force/tex gf/tex 0.9807 cN/tex centi-Newton/tex cN/tex 1.02 gf/tex
43
10.5.2 Count Conversions
tex dtex den Nm NeC NeW NeL grains/yd

dtex den 1000 590.54 885.8 1653.5
tex = gr/yd · 70.86
10 9 Nm NeC NeW NeL
den 10000 5905.4 8858 16535
dtex = tex · 10 gr/yd · 708.6
0.9 Nm NeC NeW NeL
9000 5314.9 7972.3 14882
den = tex · 9 dtex · 0.9 gr/yd · 637.7
Nm NeC NeW NeL
Nm = 1000 10000 9000 14.1
NeC · 1.6934 NeW · 1.13 NeL · 0.6048
tex dtex den gr/yd
Ne = 590.54 5905.4 5314.9 NeW NeL 8.33

C
tex dtex Nm · 0.5905
den 1.5 2.8 gr/yd
885.8 8858 7972.3 NeL 12.5
NeW = Nm · 0.8858 NeC · 1.5
tex dtex den 1.87 gr/yd
1653.5 16535 14882 23.33
Ne
L
= tex dtex
Nm · 1.6535
den
NeC · 2.8 NeW · 1.87
gr/yd
tex tex den 14.1 8.33 12.5 23.33
grains/yd =
70.86 708.6 637.7 Nm NeC NeW NeL
Nm = metric count NeC = cotton count NeW = worsted count NeL = linen count
10.5.3 Staple Conversion Chart 10.5.4 Special Conversions
Category inches 32nds decimals mm Rkm = 1.0197 · cN/tex

cN/tex = 0.9807 · Rkm
short
13 / 16 26 0.81 20.6
27 / 32 27 0.84 21.4
7 / 8 28 0.88 22.2
29 / 32 29 0.91 23.0 Twist Multiplier αe = 0.031 · αm
15 / 16 30 0.94 23.8 Twist Multiplier αm = 30.25 · αe
medium
31 / 32 31 0.97 24.6
1 32 1.00 25.4
1 1 / 32 33 1.03 26.2 Turns per inch t.p.i. = 0.0254 · T/m
1 1 / 16 34 1.06 27.0
1 3 / 32 35 1.09 27.8 Turns per meter T/m = 39.37 · t.p.i.
medium to long
1 1 / 8 36 1.13 28.6
1 5 / 32 37 1.16 29.4
Fahrenheit °F = 1.8 · (°C+32)
1 3 / 16 38 1.19 30.2
1 7 / 32 39 1.22 31.0 Centigrade °C = 0.5556 · (°F–32)
1 1 / 4 40 1.25 31.8
long
1 9 / 32 41 1.28 32.5
1 5 / 16 42 1.31 33.3
1 11 / 32 43 1.34 34.1
1 3 / 8 44 1.38 34.9
1 13 / 32 45 1.41 35.7
extra long
1 7 / 16 46 1.44 36.5
1 15 / 32 47 1.47 37.3
1 1 / 2 48 1.50 38.1
1 17 / 32 49 1.53 38.9
1 9 / 16 50 1.56 39.7
1 19 / 32 51 1.59 40.5
1 5 / 8 52 1.63 41.3
44
USTER® STATISTICS for Yarns Made Out
of Man-Made Cellulosic Fibers
Introduction
The most recent edition of the USTER® STATISTICS was published in 2007. This
edition was the most substantial compilation of benchmarks for the textile in-
dustry in the history of the USTER® STATISTICS which goes back more than 50
years. Additional yarn parameters, the relationship between fiber and yarn data
as well as the new fiber parameters were presented in the USTER® STATISTICS
2007.
We have come to realise in recent years that the chapters of the USTER®
STATISTICS for man-made cellulosic fibers would have to be radically revised
in view of our focus to continuously adjust the USTER® STATISTICS to the re-
quirements of the textile industry. This conclusion can be attributed to the rapid
developments made in the cellulose production on the one hand, and to the di-
versification of cellulose fibers in various products with different characteristics
on the other hand.
The market share of man-made cellulose amounted to 5% of the global fiber

production in the year 2007.
Cellulosics Filament Cellulosics Staple

1% 4% Cotton
Synthetics Staple 36%
22%
Synthetics Filament Wool

35% 2%
Fig. 1 Global production, fibers and filament yarns, a total of 74 million tons
[The International Rayon & Synthetic Fibers Committee, www.cirfs.org]
The growth seen in man-made cellulose fibers in recent years is particularly im-
pressive. Production of these fibers grew by 9% from 2005 to 2007, which can
be attributed primarily to the increase in staple fibers.
1'000 tons
Fig. 2 Cellulosic Fiber Production (Staple) [Oerlikon Textile, The Fiber Year 2007/2008]

Uster Technologies has decided to break down the different product groups as
a result of the economic developments in man-made cellulose fibers and their
diversification. The present USTER® STATISTICS for man-made cellulosic fibers
have been divided into the following chapters:
• 100% viscose, ring-spun, bobbin and cone

• 100% modal, ring-spun, bobbin and cone
• 100% micromodal, ring-spun yarn, bobbin and cone
• Various blends of cotton and modal, bobbin and cone
• 100% lyocell, ring-spun yarn, bobbin and cone
• Various polyester/viscose blends, ring-spun yarn, bobbin and cone
• 100% viscose, OE-rotor yarn, cone
• 100% viscose, airjet-spun yarn, cone
• 100% micromodal, airjet-spun yarn, cone
This division reflects the fact that the different cellulosic materials have varying
characteristics and therefore, have to be treated separately.
The samples were requested specially for the USTER® STATISTICS and were col-
lected globally. They were then tested in the technology centers in Uster, Swit-
zerland, and in Suzhou, China. The distribution of the origin of the samples is
illustrated in the following graph:
Africa
4%
Asia Pacific Near & Middle East
42% 15%
Western & Eastern Europe

39%
Fig. 3 Distribution of sample origin [data base USTER® STATISTICS 2007 Version 2.0]
The USTER® STATISTICS 2007 Version 2.0 replaces all chapters of the USTER®
STATISTICS 2007 Version 1.0 where the raw material is either viscose or vis-
cose blends. These chapters become void and will be replaced by the USTER®
STATISTICS 2007 Version 2.0.
We would like to take the opportunity to thank all customers for having made
available their yarns which enabled us to compile the benchmarks at hand.
We would also like to extend our thanks to our colleagues from Marketing
and Textile Technology who also contributed to the success of the USTER®
STATISTICS 2007 Version 2.0.

Fiber to Yarn
Introduction
For the USTER® STATISTICS 2007 samples of fibers and yarns were collect-
ed throughout the world. Therefore, there is raw data available in our USTER®
STATISTICS data base which allows a correlation between the fiber characteris-
tics and the respective yarn count.
Therefore, the basic question was:

What kind of raw material was taken for a defined type of yarn?
The following graphics represent the fiber characteristics for a defined yarn count.
The relationships were calculated for carded and combed cotton yarns.
The reader will find the following relationships for ring-spun yarns:
• What kind of fiber length (roving) is used for what kind of yarn count?
• What is the amount of short fibers (roving) for what kind of yarn count?
• What is the fiber fineness (roving) for what kind of yarn count?
• What is the amount of neps in the roving for what kind of yarn count?
• What is the amount of dust and trash found in the roving for what kind of yarn
count?
• What is the amount of Visible Foreign Matter found in the roving for what kind
of yarn count?
In addition, the reader can also find relationships between the fiber characteris-
tics of slivers produced by the finisher drawframe and the open end yarn count.
There are the same relationships as mentioned above, but instead of fibers from
the rovings the samples were extracted from the finisher drawframe.

Introduction To Uster Statistics

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Introduction To Uster Statistics

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Contents

1.4 USTER® STATISTICS for Textile Machinery Manufacturers 6

2 Quality Characteristics of the USTER® STATISTICS 2007

4 The Making of the USTER® STATISTICS 18

5 Interpreting and Applying the USTER® STATISTICS 19

5.2 Comparability of Practical Measurements and Data

6 Changes and Improvements 21

NEW 6.4 New: Yarn Twist Characteristics 22

9 Testing Conditions and Sample Sizes 26

3 The Making of the USTER® STATISTICS 6

4 Interpreting and Applying the USTER® STATISTICS 7

Yarns Made Out of Man-

Fig. 1 Improvement in Yarn Evenness between 1957 – 2007

Of course, quality is multi-faceted, and while evenness has improved, other

1.2 USTER® STATISTICS as Benchmarks

1.3 USTER® STATISTICS for Yarn Contracts and

1.5 Users’ Contributions Towards Improving

All definitions of fiber quality characteristics which require an explanation are

Description of cotton fiber quality characteristics

Quality Abbreviation Description Unit

Upper Half UHML Corresponds to the classer's staple. mm

Uniformity Index UI Measure for variations of %

Bundle tenacity Strength Breaking tenacity g/tex

Reflexion Rd Degree of reflexion of the cotton. %

Yellowness +b Assessment of color, %

Trash CNT Number of trash particles —-

Trash Area Percentage of trash %

Short Fiber Index SFI Amount of short fibers %

Spinning Consistency SCI Calculated value based on —-

Maturity Index Mat Maturity of the cotton fibers —-

Quality Abbreviation Description Unit

Seed-coat neps SCN/g Number of seed-coat neps 1/g

Short fiber content SFC(n) Short fiber content %

Upper Quartile UQL(w) Corresponds to the classer's staple. mm

Fiber fineness Fine Fineness of fibers mtex

Immature fibers IFC Immature fiber content. %

Maturity Mat Ratio of mature to immature fibers. —-

Trash particles Trash/g Number of trash particles 1/g

Dust particles Dust/g Number of dust particles 1/g

Visible foreign matter VFM Visible foreign matter %

Fig. 3 Staple diagram

Fig. 4 Cotton fiber, cross-section

To compute the mean degree of thickening theta, a circular cross-section of the

Fig. 5 Maturity Histogram

For this example, the following apply:

Mature fiber content R = 37.6%

Immature fiber content IFC = 10.3%

R - IFC 37.6 - 10.3

Quality Abbreviation Description Unit

Mass variations CVm Coefficient of variation of mass %

Mass variations CVmb Coefficient of variation of mass %

Imperfections Thin Number of thin places, 1/1000 m

Hairiness H Absolute value of hairiness. —-

Standard deviation sH Standard deviation of hairiness —-

Coefficient of variation CVHb Variation of hairiness %

Trash Dust Dust and trash in yarns. 1/1000 m

Coefficient of variation CVd Variation of the yarn diameter %

Shape Shape Shape of the yarn cross-section. —-

Density D Density of the yarn g/cm3

Description of yarn quality characteristics of rovings

Quality Abbreviation Description Unit

Mass variation CVm Coefficient of variation of mass, %

Mass variation CVm3m Coefficient of variation of mass, %