1

Relationship among subjective fabric volume, mechanical properties, and structural parameters of fusible interlining in

interlined fabrics

Sachiko Sukigara, Chiaki Nishiyama Graduate school of Science and Technology, Kyoto Institute of Technology, Japan, sukigara@kit.ac.jp

Abstract: The fabric volume is a subjective measure used by designers when choosing a suitable

interlining for the face fabric of a garment. We have investigated the relationship among the

structural parameters of fusible interlinings, the mechanical properties of the fabric, and the fabric

volume of composite materials. The fabric volume was subjectively evaluated and then described in

terms of the mechanical properties. The relationship between the subjective fabric volume and the

ratio of the bending rigidities, DB = B (composite)/B (face fabric), was investigated. The bending

rigidities were found to be the most useful parameters, and were strongly related to the fabric

volume. The fabric volume increased with the DB value of the bending rigidity. This relationship

was used to predict the fabric volume in terms of the interlining parameters, such as dot number and

dot diameter, by using the response surface methodology. Finally, we constructed an indication

chart to allow interlining producers to provide designers with the correct interlining to achieve a

particular fabric volume.

Key words: Interlining, bending rigidity, hand, Response surface methodology

1. Introduction

Fusible i n t e r l i n ing i s necessary t o create the shape of jackets. However, i n t e r l i n i n g p r o d u c e r s

a n d clothing designers describe the properties of interlining in different ways. Interlining producers define their

products in terms of structural parameters; such as the base fabric weave structure, yarn count, and the amount

of adhesion. However, garment designers evaluate a fabric subjectively, with verbal, tactile, and visual

descriptions. The compatibility of face fabrics and fusible interlining has been studied [1] and the flexibility of

composite fabrics has also been reported [2, 4]. However, the parameters for producing a specific fabric hand are

still unknown. Experienced designers in interlining companies often use the term ‘volume’ to judge

the quality of a composite fabric reinforced with fusible interlining. However, interlining producers do not

understand this term. Thus, it is desirable to relate the fabric volume to the mechanical properties of the fabric, to

allow interlining producers to understand better which materials the designers require. In this study, we have

determined the key characteristic parameters for describing the perceived fabric volume according to the

designer’s evaluation. Samples of the face and interlining fabrics were selected according to their characteristic

parameters, particularly the fabric stiffness. The perceived fabric volume was subjectively e v a l u a t e d f o r

these samples and the data were described i n terms of mechanical properties. This may allow designers and

interlining producers to communicate more easily.

2

2. Experimental

2.1 Subjective evaluation of fabric volume

(1) Sample

Three face fabrics commonly used for jackets were chosen for this assessment and their details are listed in Table

1. Ten plain weave fusible interlinings made from polyester wooly yarn were used and shown in Table 2.

Table 1 Face fabric samples

Weave Fiber Contents Yarn Count (tex) Weight Thickness Symbol (%) warp weft Weave Density

ends/cm, picks/cm g/m2 mm Fa Twill Wool 100 33×2 33×2 39.8 21.1 220.0 0.64

Fb Twill Wool

Polyester Cashmere

15 80 5

17×2 17×2 47.3 35.0 162.5 0.50

Fc Plain Wool 100 28x2 28x2 25.4 22.3 141.0 0.42

Table 2 Interlining fabrics

Symbol Yarn Count (tex/filament)

Amount of Adhesive Weight Thickness*

warp weft (g/m2) (g/m2) (mm) I101 22/24 22/24 3.0 24.5 0.33

I105 33/24 83/72 8.0 42.0 0.29

I106 33/36 33/36 6.0 33.5 0.32

I108 56/36 56/36 10.0 49.0 0.37

I109 56/36 56/36 12.0 50.0 0.38

I110 56/36 56/36 30.0 72.0 0.39

N1 33/36 33/36 4.9 35.3 0.36

N12 33/36 33/36 11.7 44.0 0.38

U1 33/36 33/36 9.2 42.5 0.37

U11 33/36 33/36 14.8 49.5 0.36

The adhesive points were placed on the base cloth as shown in Figure.1. The number of adhesive points controlled

the fusible interlining properties.

Figure 1 Adhesive points on the base fabric

3

The fusible interlinings were fused to the face fabric, Fa, Fb and Fc, using a press machine (Kobe Denki

Kogyosyo, BP-V4812D ) at 150oC, 29.4kPa for 10 seconds. The bending property of the fabric was measured

using a KES-FB2 bending tester (Kato Tech Co., Ltd., Japan, ) [3]. Five groups, which contained f a c e

a n d five composite samples each, were prepared according to their bending rigidity (B). The bending rigidity

is shown in Figure 2. The following experiments were conducted using this set of samples.

Figure 2 Bending rigidity of fabrics for five groups of samples. Samples Fa, Fb, and Fc are the face fabrics used for reference.

(2) Assessment of the fabric volume

Five experts, who choose interlinings for garments in an interlining company, participated in this

assessment. They have extensive experience in selecting the interlining of garments and knowledge of

interlinings. They consider that the fabric volume is created by the interlining and is important in

producing good quality and silhouette. We asked these experts how they manipulate fabrics to judge the

fabric volume. They described two main ways of handling the fabric (Figure 3): pinching the folded fabric

(Figure 3 (a)), and grasping the fabric in the hand (Figure 3 (b)). They said that the fabric volume is created by

the “thickness”, “stiffness”, and “elasticity” of the fabric. They also observed the height and shape of the

loop that the folded fabric creates (Figure 4). Therefore, they evaluated the fabric volume using both its

tactile and visual properties. The relationships between tactile and v i sua l a s s e s s m e n t s a n d the t ex t i l e

q u a l i t y a n d f ab r i c h a n d h a v e b e e n r e p o r t e d [2]. The visual assessment is influenced by the

fabric color and pattern. However, the height and shape created by the fabric should be independent of the

color and depend on the mechanical properties of the fabric.

Figure. 3 Methods of evaluating

fabric volume. (a) Pinching the

folded fabric and (b) grasping the

fabric.

(a) pinch the folded fabric (b) grasp the fabric

4

Figure 4 Shape of the folded fabric

Visual fabric volume assessment

Sample groups 1, 2, and 3 as shown in Figure 2 were used for this experiment. Five samples in each group

were folded into a loop as shown in Figure 4, and then presented to the participants at the same time. They were

asked to compare the volume of the composite fabric with the face fabric in the group using a seven point scale

(Figure 5). Zero on the scale indicated the perception of the fabric volume was the same as the reference face

fabric. Participants were not allowed to touch the sample.

Fabric volume

Weak Face fabric Strong

-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

Figure. 5 The scale for fabric volume. Tactile fabric volume assessment

The tactile volume for all the sample groups in Figure 2 was evaluated. Participants were asked to handle the

fabric as shown in Figure 3, and then judge the volume according to the scale in Figure 5. Each sample group was

evaluated accordingly. In the case of group 4 and 5, the difference between the bending rigidities was small.

Therefore when the participants were a l s o asked to rank the five samples in order of s t r o n g volume.

F a b r i c p r o p e r t y

The parameters relating to the visual volume were the height of loop (h) and the curvature of the loop (1/r)

(Figure 4).The stiffness and elasticity, which are the main parameters for the fabric volume, can be determined by

using the shape of the folded fabric shown in Figure 4. The specimen (100 × 100 mm) was compressed with a

stainless plate (15 × 100 mm) until the value of h was reduced by half with a compression tester (Kato Tech Co.,

Ltd., Japan, KES-G5s). The compression force at 0.5h was taken as the maximum compression

force (P1). This property was used to represent the elasticity of the folded samples. Three face fabric in Table

1 were fused to 10 interlinings in Table 2 and total 30 composite samples were used to obtain h and P1.

2.2 Estimation of fabric volume

(1) Samples

Twenty-four fusible interlinings with different amounts of adhesive on the same polyester plain

5

weave base cloth ( w e a v e d e n s i t y ; 4 0 . 8 – 4 1 . 5 e n d s / c m , 2 7 . 3 – 2 8 . 0 p i c k s / c m ) m a d e f r o m yarn

(33tex/36filaments) were used for this model. T h e n u m b e r o f d o t s w e r e d e s i g n e d a s 8 2 . 0 , 1 0 4 . 8 ,

1 2 5 p o i n t s / c m 2 a n d d o t d i a m e t e r i s i n t h e r a n g e o f 1 1 0 – 3 4 0µm f o r t h e s e i n t e r l i n i n g .

The interlinings were fused to fabrics Fa and Fc, and the bending properties of fabrics were measured. The data

were used to construct the response-surface domain.

(2) Response surface methodology

The response surface methodology [5] was used to identify the optimum combination of dot density and dot

diameter for generating the required fabric volume. During the procedure, the dot number ( ξ1) and dot diameter

(ξ2) were used as coded variables, x1 and x2, in equation (1), respectively.

xi = ξi-[max(ξi)+min(ξi)]/2ξi-[max(ξi)-min(ξi)]/2 ･･･(1)

(i = 1,2)

Figure 6 shows the relationship between x1; number of dots and x2; diameter by equation (1).

Figure 6 Relationship between x1; number of dots and x2; diameter .

These corded variables and the mechanical properties (y) for DB value was used to fit the second-ordered model by

multiple regression analysis and the following equation was obtained:

y = β0+β1x1+β2x2+β11x12+β22x2

2+β12x1x2+ε (2)

where β is a coefficient, ε is the random error term, and y (response) corresponds to DB calculated by

equation (3).

DB = XcXf

(3)

6

where Xc and Xf were the bending rigidity of the composite and face fabrics, respectively. We used this

empirical model to guide our experiments and to estimate the fabric volume.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1 Elements of perceived fabric volume in terms of mechanical properties Visual fabric volume assessment

In Figure 7, the a v e r a g e v a l u e s o b t a i n e d f r o m visual volume assessment is plotted against h.

The volume increased with h; therefore, the shape of the loop was a parameter for the visual volume. Figure

8 shows the relationships between h, the curvature, and the bending rigidity(B) of the warp direction of the

composite fabric. The value of h increased with B, and thus h is reflected by the bending rigidity of the fabric. We

identified h as a possible parameter for describing the visual volume through the bending rigidity.

Figure 7. Plots of volume against h. Figure 8. Relationships of h and curvature with B Fabric volume in terms of the bending rigidity

In Figure 8, the relationships between the volume and B are shown for each group. I t i s s e e n t h a t t h e

v o l u m e i n c r e a s e s w i t h B f o r a l l g r o u p s . The results of the rank assessment were statistically

analyzed and were significant for both group 4 and group 5 at a level of 1%. The volume rank was the same as

the order of B, although the difference in B between the samples was small. Therefore, B was also a useful

parameter for the tactile estimation of fabric volume.

Figure.8 Relationship between B and volume

7

2

The elasticity experienced by the participant when they compressed the looped fabric is reflected by parameter

P1. Figure 9 shows that the fabric volume increased with P1. Figure 10 shows the relationship between

P1 and B. Because P1 and h are strongly related to B, the fabric volume was estimated by using B.

Figure. 9 Plots of the fabric volume against P1. Figure. 10 Relationship between P1 and B.

3.2 Estimation of “Volume” in terms of interlining variables Response function

The numerical values for coefficients were obtained from the linear regression analysis of equation (2). The

fitted second-order equation for DB is given by

y = 2.00+0.24x1+0.22x2 – 0.13x12+ 0.15x2

2 – 0.00061x1x2 for fabric Fc R2 = 0.970

y = 1.67+0.12x1+0.19x2+0.051x12+0.080x2

2+0.017x1x2+ε for fabric Fa R2 =0.954

Figure 11 (a) shows the contour plot of the dot diameter and number for the DB value of bending when

the face fabric Fc was fused to the interlining. The corresponding experimental values are also included in the

contour plot (indicated by +). In Figure 11(b), the volumes are plotted as DB. The plots in Figure 11 show the

values of the density and diameter of the adhesive dots and values of DB for which various fabric volumes

were obtained. For example, when face fabric Fc is used, and the designer requires a fabric volume of 2,

Figure 11(b) shows the corresponding DB is 2.3. Figure 11(a) then shows that the response line for DB =

2.3 corresponds to a particular group of adhesive dot diameters and densities.

8

(a) (b) Figure 11 (a) The contour plot of the dot diameter and the DB value for bending. (b) The plot of the fabric

volume in terms of DB. Face fabric Fc was used.

4. Conclusions

In this case study, the fabric volume used by designers to judge the quality of

a composite fabric was investigated. The fabric volume was described in terms of the

bending rigidity, P1 and h, and the volume increased with the bending rigidity. The volume was

predicted in terms of the dot number and dot diameters of the interlining by using the response surface

methodology. We constructed a chart to allow interlining producers to relate the fabric volume required by

designers to an appropriate interlining design, by using the bending rigidity of the composite material. Acknowledgement

We would like to thank Mr.Naoki Takarada and Mr.Toshio Arai in NITTOBO Co.,LTD to supply

experimental samples.

5. References

[1] Fan, J., Leeuwner W. and Hunter, L. (1997) Compatibility of outer and fusible interlining fabrics in tailored garment Part 2: Relationship between mechanical properties of fused composites and those of outer and fusible interlining fabrics, Textile Res. J. 67(3), pp194-197.

[2] Hollies, N.R.S (1989) Visual and Tactile Perceptions of Textile Quality, J. Text. Inst, 80(1), pp1-17. [3] Kanayama, M and Niwa, M. (1981) Bending properties of composite fabrics reinforced with fusible

interlinings, J Textil Mach Soc Jpn, 35, pp 102-112. [4] Kawabata,S. (1980) The standardization and analysis of hand evaluation, 2nd ed. Textile Machinery Soc

Japan. [5] Kim, KO., Inui, S .and Takatera,M. (2012) Prediction of bending rigidity for laminated fabric with

adhesive interlining by a laminate model considering tensile and in-plane compressive moduli, Textile Res J. 82(4), pp385-399.

[6] Myeres,R.H, and Montgomery,D.C.(2002) Response Surface Methodology, 2nd Ed., John Wiley & Sons, New York.pp56-6