1.

Introduction:
An appropriate amount of sun bath promotes the circulation of blood, invigorates the metabolism and improves resistance to various pathogens. Penetration of UVR into the top layer of the skin leads to damage in the lower layer and produces premature ageing of skin and other effects including roughening, blotches, sagging, wrinkles, squamous cells and basal cell cancer. Many people love sunbathing, thereby extending the long term risk to their health. Persons working in the open atmosphere are also prone to keratose, the precursor of skin cancer. Australia has high levels of solar UV radiation, mainly because of its geographical position; New Zealand, USA, Switzerland, Norway, Scotland, Britain and Scandinavian countries also have high melanoma rates. The principal role of ultraviolet (UV) protective clothing is to protect the skin against the harmful effects of the sun, notably skin cancer. This is one of the most prevalent forms of cancer but, fortunately, it is also one of the most preventable. Public awareness about the dangers of excessive exposure to the sun has grown considerably in recent years. However, large sections of the public remain unaware that UV protective clothing exists or that UV resistance in conventional clothing can be increased. Consequently, they rely on sunscreen for UV protection. The slow and limited adoption of UV protection in clothing by mainstream consumers may be partly due to the fact that it can not be seen or felt unlike other performance features such as moisture management and stretch.

2. UV radiation:
Ultraviolet radiation is electromagnetic radiation or light having a wavelength greater than 10 nm but less than 400 nm. Ultraviolet radiation has a wavelength longer than that of x-rays but shorter than that of visible light. Ultraviolet is energetic enough to break some chemical bonds. Unravelling the mysteries related to ultraviolet rays, their properties, and their effects on various living creatures has been a gradual process spanning to the duration of almost three centuries starting from the seventeenth century. Terms such as near UV (290 400 nm), far UV (180 290 nm) and vacuum UV (below 180 nm) have been coined by physicists based on the properties of the radiation. The term UVA represents the region 320 400 nm, the term UVB represents the region between UVC and UVA, i.e. 290 320 nm, and UVC region represents the region below 290 m . The order of potency has been decided as UVC > UVB >UVA >. The proportion of the UV region is about 5 6 % of the total incident radiation, and the quantum energy of UVR is similar to the bond energies of organic molecules.

Fig (1): Electromagnetic radiation. Page | 1

Fig (2): Different types of UV radiation and their potency.

Light comparison:
Electromagnetic radiation as well as the light can be classified in to different sections according to their wavelength. In that classification only visible light (wavelength 380nm-750nm) we can observe in open eyes. Except visible light other light are invisible, to see those light or observe their presence we need to follow some special procedure.

Name Gamma ray X-Ray Ultraviolet Visible Infrared Microwave Radio

Wavelength less than 0.01 nm 0.01 nm to 10 nm 10 nm - 400 nm 380 nm - 750 nm 750 nm - 1 mm 1 mm - 1 meter 1 mm - 100,000 km

Frequency (Hz) more than 10 EHz 30 EHz - 30 PHz 30 PHz - 790 THz 790 THz - 405 THz 405 THz - 300 GHz 300 GHz - 300 MHz 300 GHz - 3 Hz

Photon Energy (eV) 124 keV - 300+ GeV 124 eV to 124 keV 3.3 eV to 124 eV 1.7 eV - 3.3 eV 1.24 meV - 1.7 eV 1.24 eV - 1.24 meV 12.4 feV - 1.24 meV

Table (1): Light comparison.

Page | 2

 Visible light:
Visible light waves are the only electromagnetic waves we can see. We see these waves as the colors of the rainbow. Each color has a different wavelength. Red has the longest wavelength and violet has the shortest wavelength. When all the waves are seen together, they make white light.

Fig(3): Visible light region.

When white light shines through a prism, the white light is broken apart into the colors of the visible light spectrum. Water vapor in the atmosphere can also break apart wavelengths creating a rainbow. Each color in a rainbow corresponds to a different wavelength of electromagnetic spectrum.

Fig(4): Wavelength of different visible light

Infared light:
Infrared (IR) light is electromagnetic radiation with longer wavelengths than those of visible light, extending from the nominal red edge of the visible spectrum at 0.74 micrometres (m) to Page | 3

300 m. This range of wavelengths corresponds to a frequency range of approximately 1 to 400 THz,and includes most of the thermal radiation emitted by objects near room temperature. Infrared light is emitted or absorbed by molecules when they change their rotational-vibrational movements. The existence of infrared radiation was first discovered in 1800 by astronomer William Herschel.

Fig(5): An image of two people in mid-infrared thermal light (false-color). Much of the energy from the Sun arrives on Earth in the form of infrared radiation. Sunlight at zenith provides an irradiance of just over 1 kilowatt per square meter at sea level. Of this energy, 527 watts is infrared radiation, 445 watts is visible light, and 32 watts is ultraviolet radiation. The balance between absorbed and emitted infrared radiation has a critical effect on the Earth's climate. Infrared light is used in industrial, scientific, and medical applications. Night-vision devices using infrared illumination allow people or animals to be observed without the observer being detected. In astronomy, imaging at infrared wavelengths allows observation of objects obscured by interstellar dust. Infrared imaging cameras are used to detect heat loss in insulated systems, to observe changing blood flow in the skin, and to detect overheating of electrical apparatus.

The UV Component of Sunlight:

Ultraviolet (UV) radiation is part of the solar electromagnetic spectrum, with wavelengths shorter than those of visible light, but longer than X-rays. It is an essential factor for many global biological and environmental phenomena. There are three major subtypes of UV rays, namely, UVA (320400 nm), UVB (280320 nm) and UVC (100280 nm). UVA accounts for about 95% of the total UV energy that reaches the Earths surface, the remaining 5% being UVB. Seeing that the shorter the wavelength, the greater the absorption by the atmosphere, UVC, being totally absorbed by stratospheric gases, mainly oxygen and ozone, fails to reach the troposphere. Furthermore, since UVB is very effectively screened out by ozone molecules, only Page | 4

a small fraction actually reaches the surface, contrary to most of UVA. In the face of global efforts to diminish ozone-depleting substances, it can be said that, given the recent measures of increasing ozone levels worldwide, the Montreal Protocol on Substances That Deplete the Ozone Layer is really working.

Fig (6): Year-round (2009) solar UVA (blue) and UVB (red) doses measured in So PauloSP (2332'S, 4638'W), Brazil.

Furthermore, apart from the ozone-depleting gases policy, continuous efforts are under way to monitor the yearly incidence of surface UV radiation. Our research group has been dedicating special attention to the measurement of solar-UV rays in the city of So Paulo (2332'S; 4638'W), the largest in Brazil, and one of the most populous in the World. The incidence of solar UVB and UVA radiation has been measured throughout the day, over the last two years. In the year-round graph presented in Figure 1, the winter (June to August) reduction in UV levels (although lower than in higher latitudes) is more pronounced in UVB daily doses, mainly due to the solar-angle effect at this latitude, as UVB is more absorbed by the atmospheric air mass, whereas UVA practically freely passes through. Data of UVA and UVB doses for an entire day, at different latitudes in Brazil are presented in Figure 2 for comparison. The results show that the daily flow of UVA, besides being remarkably greater than UVB, is comparably more constant and detectable earlier in the day. Nevertheless, and as expected, at a lower latitude (Natal) UVB incidence is higher and can be detected earlier in the morning (around 6:00 a.m.), when compared to the other mid-latitudes (around 7:00 a.m.). Ozone concentration, although important, is not the only factor exerting an influence on the incidence of UV radiation. The solar zenith angle, which varies according to the time of day, day of the year and latitude, also contributes enormously.

Page | 5

Fig (7): Solar UVA (blue) and UVB (red) irradiation profiles at (a) So Martinho da SerraRS (2944'S, 5382'W), (b) So PauloSP (2332'S, 4638'W), and (c) NatalRN (547'S, 3512'W), Brazil.

3. UV Effects on the Biosphere and Human Health:

The biological consequences arising from increased UV irradiance are numerous. In terrestrial ecosystems, these affect plants, pathogens, herbivores, soil microbes and other basic processes. As each type of organism reacts to induced UV damage in a different manner, the eventual changes in balance can possibly lead to significant alterations in carbon and nitrogen cycling. Furthermore, apart from ozone concentration dependence, UV irradiance is also affected by climate change factors, thus complex interactions are expected to occur, thereby diversely affecting terrestrial ecosystems. The effects of UV radiation on human health are better defined. Besides producing vitamin D, UVB radiation itself is correlated with skin cancer, photo aging, immune supression and cataracts, to mention just a few of the harmful effects. It is widely known that in humans the most important benefit derives from the production of vitamin D. Nevertheless, there is a limit in this production, which, when passed, leads to the degradation of already formed vitamins, thereby attaining toxic levels, whereby the efforts concentrated on determining the optimal level of production. It has been shown that casual, and little daily UV doses are sufficient to prevent the lack of vitamin D. However, there is evidence that modern lifestyles can be held responsible for the increasing levels of melanoma among indoor-workers. It is speculated that windows and sunscreens, which block mainly UVB and facilitate UVA penetration, give rise to a reduction in cutaneous vitamin D Page | 6

levels, possibly inversely correlated to the increase in the incidence of melanoma. Mechanistically, UV irradiance is the cause of many deleterious effects, such as the induction of DNA damage, inseparable from those beneficial. Furthermore, various UV wavelengths exhibit different skin-penetration capabilities, with diversification in carcinogenesis as the outcome. Obviously, both ecosystems and the human population are always much more exposed to UVA than UVB irradiance, in absolute flow terms. Nevertheless, these values require weighting, using action spectra involving the relative biological effectiveness for various endpoints. With this in mind, knowledge on the UV pattern at different sites is of vital interest for determining the potential risks arising from local UV radiation worldwide. Thus, the development of appropriate biological sensors assumes an important role in a scenario of increasing UV incidence.

Fig(8): UV rays effect on skin. Factors that affect solar UVR include cloud cover, the suns altitude, geographical position, altitude, ozone layer, scattering in the atmosphere, environmental and related conditions. Much research has been carried out to assess the impact of the UV rays on various living organisms, especially humans and the relationship between skin cancer and UV dosage is well correlated. Changes in leisure behaviour, which has led to more frequent sun exposure, are one of the major reasons for malignant cutaneous melanoma. Skin cells that receive sunlight absorb harmful UV radiation, and slough off to excrete harmful UV from the body. But the absorption of too much UVR leads to scars that can induce diseases like skin cancer. Excessive UV radiation leads to cell damage and causes inflammation of human skin, the obvious consequences of which are erythema or sunburn. The reciprocal value of these cuticle radiation doses is called erythema effectiveness whose maximum occurs at 308 nm. The total UVR dose reaching the skin is an important factor in the occurrence of both erythema and skin cancer, although there is no proven link between erythema and skin cancer. In terms of sensitivity to light and tendency to pigmentation, there are 6 basic types of skin that demand different levels of UV protection as shown in Table 2.

Page | 7

Skin type (Appearance unexposed) I - White

Critical dose mJ/cm 15 30

Self protection time (min) 5 - 10

Risk level

II - White III - Brownish IV - Brown V - Brown

25 35 30 50 45 60 60 100

8 - 12 10 - 15 15 - 20 20 - 35

VI Dark Brown Black

100 200

35 - 70

Burns easily, has the highest risk of premature skin ageing and greatest risk of developing skin cancer Burn and only rarely tan Tan and occasionally burn Tan and occasionally burn Sufficient levels of melanin and rarely burns, easily tan Sufficient levels of melanin pigment provide protection. Very rarely burns, easily tan

Table (2): Effect of UV rays on different types of skin.

The minimal erithemal dose (MED) is apparently consistent with a fair complexion, but shows variations among people of types III and IV. For practical purposes, the population could be classified into two main groups, sensitive and less sensitive individuals.

4. The DNA molecule as the main target of UV light in the cells:

The most important cellular effects induced by UV radiation (cell-death and mutagenesis) are directly related to a chain of events that primarily involve the induction of DNA lesions. Notwithstanding, the chemical nature and efficiency in the formation of DNA lesions greatly depend on the wavelength of incident UV photons as well as on the base composition of the DNA molecule, as previously demonstrated. In fact, the absorption spectra of DNA from various species for wavelengths greater than 300 nm clearly indicated that its relative absorption increases as a function of guanine-cytosine content. Therefore, as the maximum of light absorption by DNA molecules is 260 nm, UVC is revealed as being the most effective wavelength for the induction of DNA photoproducts. The absorption spectrum of a purified plasmid DNA sample is presented in Figure 3, as a demonstrative example.

Page | 8

Fig (9): The absorption spectrum for the DNA molecule. A sample of purified plasmid DNA (pCMUT vector), diluted in a TE buffer (10 mMTris-HCl [pH 8.0], 1 mM EDTA [pH 8.0]) at the indicated concentration, was used to obtain this spectrum, with an Evolution 300 UV-Vis Spectrophotometer (ThermoFisher Scientific, USA). The different wavelengths of UV light induce different types of DNA damage. The direct excitation of the DNA molecule by UV sunlight (mainly by UVB wavelengths) results in wellknown modifications that trigger off dimerization reactions between adjacent pyrimidines. The main products resulting from these photochemical reactions are cyclobutanepyrimidine dimers (CPDs) and pyrimidine (6-4) pyrimidone photoproducts (6-4PPs). In addition, upon further irradiation with UVA wavelengths (around 320 nm), the normal isomers of 6-4 PPs can be converted to their Dewar valence isomers. However, in certain dormant life-forms produced by bacteria, such as Bacillus subtilis, the only DNA photoproduct produced upon exposure to UV light corresponds to two thymines linked by the methyl group of one of the bases. The formation of this specific lesion, viz., 5-thyminyl-5,6-dihydrothymine (spore photoproduct, SP), is possibly due to specific features of the spores, these including DNA conformation (A form), dehydration, the presence of dipicolinicacid in the core, and the binding of small acidsoluble proteins to DNA . Apart from direct induction of DNA lesions, UV radiation can also cause DNA damage indirectly, following photon absorption by chromophores other than DNA itself, thereby generating reactive oxygen species. Oxidatively generated DNA damage, mostly in the form of 7, 8-dihydro-8-oxoguanine (considered a marker for this type of damage), and which occurs more effectively with UVA than UVB, has often been proposed as a pre-mutagenic lesion in UVA mutagenesis. Another type of UV-induced DNA lesion, although rather inefficiently so, is the single-strand break. It has also been suggested that this is probably an innocuous lesion with little involvement in the formation of mutations.

Page | 9

Fig (10): The main DNA lesions induced by UV light: CPD-cyclobutane pyrimidine dimer; 6-4PPpyrimidine (6-4) pyrimidone photoproduct; DewarPP-Dewar valence isomer; Single strand breaks; 8-oxoG-7, 8-dihydro-8-oxoguanine; Spore photoproduct.

It is well-known that solar UV radiation can generate chemical modifications in the DNA structure, leading to several biological consequences. Thus, in the evolution of life on Earth, cells have developed specific DNA repair mechanisms capable of dealing with different types of lesions. In both prokaryotes and eukaryotes, these biochemical pathways are indispensable for maintaining genomic integrity by removing damaged DNA bases or short fragments of nucleotides containing UV photoproducts. However, through inadequate repair, unremoved UV-induced DNA damage possibly interferes with basic cellular processes, such as transcription and DNA replication, thereby leading to mutations and/or cell-death.

5. Solar UV index, UV protection factor and solar protection factor:

The effect of ultraviolet radiation on living biological organisms has been extensively studied, and various reporting methods such as UV index, UV protection factor (UPF) and solar protection factor (SPF) have been adopted to create awareness among the general public of the deleterious effects of UV radiations. At a given wavelength, electromagnetic radiation may be reflected, absorbed or transmitted by any given object. If the response of the system at each wavelength is a linear function of the dose, then the response (R) by a broad spectrum is given by the following formula:

( )(

where I ( , t) is the irradiance at wavelength , t is time and () is the cross -section for eliciting this response at wavelengths . The changes in the spectrum have been covered by including time as an argument of the irradiance function and as a variable of integration. Page | 10

The UV index is designed to provide the public with a numerical indication of the maximum potential solar UVR level during the day; the higher the number, the higher the solar UVR hazard. The global solar UV Index is a measure of the highest level of UVR every day, and the UVI is calculated using various input parameters such as the ozone level, potential cloud cover, water vapour and aerosols. The UV index is reported as the maximum biologically effective solar average UVR (UVReff) for the day, and is an average taken over either 10 or 30 minutes. The UVR is usually highest around midday but the temperature is often highest later in the afternoon. UVR index values are grouped into five exposure categories, from low to extreme with different colour codes.

6. UV protection factor:
The protection extended by the textile materials, accessories and sun screen lotions are denoted by different terminologies known as UPF and SPF. Risk estimates of unprotected skin, protected skin and UPF are given by the following formulae: risk unprotected = SA risk protected = SAT UPF = risk unprotected / risk protected Where S is the source spectrum (Wm2 nm-1), T is the transmittance, A is the action spectrum for measured response and is the bandwidth in nm. Since the relative erythemal spectral effectiveness is higher in the UVB region compared to the UVA region, the UPF values depend primarily on the transmission in the UV B region. UV rays falling on textiles are partly reflected, absorbed and partly transmitted through the fibres& interstices, and the optical porosity of a fabric limits its potential to provide protection against UVR.The solar protection factor (SPF) is defined as a quotient from a harmful dose without, and a harmful dose with, sun protection. This can be calculated from erythemal effectiveness (EW ()), (P()) and from the wavelength dependent transmission of the sun protection agent. The difference between the values of UPS and SPF arises mainly because of the hole effect i n the fabrics.

7. Effect of UV radiation on textile materials:

UV radiation is one of the major causes of degradation of textile materials, which is due to excitations in some parts of the polymer molecule and a gradual loss of integrity, and depends on the nature of the fibres. Because of the very large surface volume ratio, textile materials are susceptible to influences from light and other environmental factors. The penetration of UVR in nylon causes photo oxidation and results in decrease in elasticity, tensile strength and a slight increase in the degree of crystallinity. In the absence of UV filters, the loss in tensile strength appears to be higher in the case of nylon (100% loss), followed by wool, cotton and polyester, with approximately 23%, 34% and 44% respectively after 30 days of exposure. Elevated temperature and UVB radiation on cotton plants result in severe loss of bolls. Naturallycoloured cottons contain pigment ranges from light green to tan, brown and inherent long-term UV protection properties with a UPF of 64 and 47, whereas normal cotton shows a UPF of 8.

Page | 11

8. UV absorbers:
UV absorbers are organic or inorganic colourless compounds with strong absorption in the UV range of 290 360 nm. UV absorbers incorporated into the fibres convert electronic excitation energy into thermal energy, function as radical scavengers and ?singlet oxygen quenchers. The high-energy, short-wave UVR excites the UV absorber to a higher energy state; the energy absorbed may then be dissipated as longer-wave radiation. Alternately,isomerisation can occur and the UV absorber may then fragment into non-absorbing isomers. Sunscreen lotions contain UV absorbers that physically block UVR. The most widely used UVB screens, 2-ethyl hexyl-4methoxy cinnamate with high RI, make a substantial contribution to the RI matching of skin, i.e. refractive index matching. An effective UV absorber must be able to absorb throughout the spectrum, to remain stable against UVR, and to dissipate the absorbed energy to avoid degradation orloss in colour. Organic UV absorbers are mainly derivatives of o-hydroxybenzophenones, o-hydroxy phenyl triazines, o-hydroxy phenyl hydrazines. The orthohydroxyl group is considered essential for absorption and to make the compound soluble in alkaline solution. Some of the substituted benzophenones penetrate into synthetic fibres much like disperse dyes. Commonly-used UV absorbers are 2-hydroxy benzophenones, 2-hydroxy phenyl benzotriazoles, 2-hydroxy phenylStriazinesand chemicals such as benzoic acid esters, and hindered amines. The strong absorptionin the near UV of 2, 4 dihydroxybenzophenone is attributed to conjugating chelation between theorthohydroxyl and carbonyl groups. Organic products like benzotriazole, hydro benzophenone and phenyl triazine are primarilyused for coating and padding processes in order to achieve broad protection against UV rays. Suitable combinations of UV absorbers and antioxidants can yield synergistic effects. Benzophenone derivatives have low energy levels, easy diffusibility and a low sublimation fastness. Orthohydroxy phenyl and diphenyltriazine derivatives have an excellent sublimation fastness, and a self-dispersing formulation can be used in high temperature dyeing in padbathsand also in print pastes. UV absorbers incorporated into the spinning dope prior to the fibre extrusion and dye bath in bath dyeing improve the light fastness of certain pastel shades and the weatherability of spundyed fibres. UV absorbers to the extent of 0.6 2.5% are sufficient enough to provide UVR protection fabrics. The presence of UV absorbers in PET, nylon, silk and wool protects the fibres against sunlight-induced photo degradation. On wool, UV absorbers can retard the photoyellowing that occurs upon exposure to sunlight. Triazine class-hindered amine light stabilisers are used in PP to improve the UV stability. The addition of HALS to 0.15% weight is sufficient to improve stability substantially. Even pigmented PP requires UV stabilisers if the fibres are exposed to UV during their services [43]. High-energy UV absorbers suitable for PET include derivatives of o-hydroxyphenyldiphenyltriazine, suitable for dye baths, pad liquor or print paste. UV absorbers have refractive indices of about > 2.55, by means of which maximum covering capacity and opacity is achieved. The presence of inorganic pigments in thefibres results in more diffuse reflection of light from the substrate, and provides better protection. TiO2 added in the spinning dope for matt effects in the fibres also acts as a UV absorber. Titanium dioxide and ceramic materials have an absorption capacity in the UV region between 280 and 400 nm, and reflects visible and IR rays; these absorbers are also added as dope additives [53]. For maximum effect, the particles have to be monomolecularly distributed, and are often applied Page | 12

in one bath. Nanoscale titanium gel particles strongly bound to the cotton fabrics can give a UPF 50 without impairing the tensile properties. Brighter viscose yarns provide the highest UV transmittance compared to the dull pigmented viscose yarns, modal yarns. Zinc oxide nanoparticles, which have a very narrow size distribution (20-40 nm) and minimal aggregation, can result in higher levels of UV blocking [51]. Use of TiO2, ZnO alone produces less absorption of UVR than a mixture of (67/33) titanium dioxide and zinc oxide on cotton and nylon fabrics [32]. Microfine nylon fabrics with a porosity of 0.1% are capable of giving UPF > 50 with 1.5% TiO2. Incorporating UV absorber in dyeing decreases the dye uptake slightly, except in posttreatment application. Many commercial products and processes have been developed to produce fabrics with a high level of UPF using various dope additions and topical applications for almost all types of fabrics produced from cellulosic fibres, wool, silk and synthetic fibres. Most of the commercial products are compatible with the dyes and other finishing agents applied to the textile materials, and these agents can be applied using simple padding, the exhaust method, the padthermofix and the pad-dry-cure methods.

9. Textile materials and UV protection:

Sun protection involves a combination of sun avoidance and the use of protective garments & accessories. Reducing the exposure time to sunlight, using sunscreens and protective clothes are the three ways of protection against the deleterious effects of UV radiation. Apart from sunscreen lotions, textile materials and accessories made of textile materials are largely used for UV protection. UV protection through textiles include various apparels, accessories such as hats, shoes, shade structures such as umbrellas, awnings, and baby carrier covers and the fabric materials to produce these items.

Fig (11): Relationship between percentage reduction of UV radiation by textile.

Page | 13

 Nature of fibres & fabric:

In textiles, UPF is strongly dependent on the chemical structure of the fibres. The nature of the fibres influences the UPFs as they vary in UV transparency. Natural fibres like cotton, silk, and wool have a lower degree UVR absorption than synthetic fibres such as PET. Cotton fabric in a grey state provides a higher UPF because the natural pigments, pectin, and waxes act as UV absorbers, while bleached fibres have high UV transparency. Raw natural fibres like linen and hemp possess a UPF of 20 and 10 to 15 respectively, and are not perfect UV protectors even with lignin content. However, the strong absorption of jute is due to the presence of lignin, which acts as a natural absorber. Protein fibres also have mixed effects in allowing UV radiation. Dyed cotton fabrics show higher UPF, and undyed, bleached cotton yields very poor UPF values. Wool absorbs strongly in the region of 280 400 nm and even beyond 400 nm. Exposure to sunlight damages the quality of silks colour, strength and resiliency in both dry and wet conditions. Mulberry silk is deteriorated to a greater extent than muga silk. Bleached silk and bleached PAN show very low UPFs of 9.4 and 3.9 respectively. Polyester fibres absorb more in the UV A& UV B regions than aliphatic polyamide fibres.

Moisture and swelling:

The ability of textile fibres to provide UV protection varies depending upon the structure and other additives present in the fibres. Besides, the construction parameters and wear conditions of the textile materials, moisture and additives incorporated in processing also affect the UPF of the textile material. In the case of moisture, the influence largely depends on the type and hygroscopicity of fibres, as well as conditioning time, which result in swelling phenomena. The RH and/or moisture content affect the UPF of the fabric in two ways, namely the swelling of fibres due to moisture absorption, which reduces the interstices, and consequently the UV transmittance. On the other hand, the presence of water reduces scattering effects, as the refractive index of water is closer to that of the textile polymer, and hence there is a greater UV transmission vis- vis a lower UPF.A typical cotton fabric could transmit 15-20% UVR, rising to more than 50% if the garment is wet. Foradequate protection, the UVR transmission should be lower than 6% and 2.5% for extremely good protection. Dependence of humidity is more pronounced in silk and viscose, of which viscose has a higher water absorption and swelling capacity, while silk has poor swelling properties. Even though silk has poor swelling properties, its very fine nature and a greater number of fibres in the crosssectionof yarn results in higher swelling due to capillary absorption, and in turn less UV transmittance. Finishing treatments given to the fabrics to reduce swelling reduce the transmittance of UV rays. In general, hygroscopic fibres and their UPF show better correlation.

Fabric construction factors:

When the ultraviolet radiation hits the textile materials, different types of interactions occur depending upon the substrate and its conditions. The UV protection by textile materials and apparel is a function of the chemical characteristics, physico-chemical type of fibre, presence of UV absorbers, construction of fabric, thickness, porosity, extension of the fabric, moisture content of the fabrics, colour and the finishing given to the fabric. A part of the radiation is reflected at the boundaries of the textile surface. The UVR transmitted through textile fabrics consists of the unchanged waves that pass through the interstices of the fabrics as well as Page | 14

scattered waves that have interacted with the fabrics. Another part is absorbed when it penetrates the sample, and is converted into a different energy form. The portion of radiation that travels through the fabric and reaches the skin is appropriately referred to as the transmission component. The UPF increases with fabric density and thickness for similar construction, and is dependent on porosity (UPF = 100 / porosity). A high correlation exists between the UPF and the fabric porosity but is also influenced by the type of fibres. The relative order of importance for the UV protection is given by % cover >fibre type > fabric thickness. Cloth cover does not consider the flatness of the yarns, which might result in a higher cloth cover than the calculated value. A UPF with fabric weight and thickness shows better correlation than cloth cover. Therefore fabrics with themaximum number of yarns in warp and weft give high UPFs. UPF values of 200, 40, 20 and 10 can be achieved with the percentage cover factors of 99.5, 97.5, 95 and 90 respectively. The percentage UVR transmission of a fabric is related to the fabric cover factor by (100 cover factor) and the UPF is given by UPF = 100 / (100-CF). To achieve a minimum UPF rating of 15, the cover factor of the textile must be greater than 93%, and a very small increase in CF leads to substantial improvements in the UPF of the textiles above 95% cover factor. In the case of terry cloth, a high variability in UPF exists due to irregularities in the fabric construction. Woven fabrics usually have a higher cover factor than knits due to the type of construction. Thick rib structures of hemp and linen can allow 10.52 12.70% and 9.03 11.47% of UV A and UV B respectively . However, knitted structure made from a blend of synthetic fibres with Lycra offers the best protection against solar radiation, and warp-knitted blinds are capable of screening up to 80% of the solar radiation and bright glares. Stretching reduces the UPF rating of the fabric during wear, as the effective cover factor is reduced. However, the cover factor can be modified through many dry finishing processes through overfeed on the stenter, compressive shrinkage processes such as compacting and sanforising, whichare normally used to obtain dimensional stability, incidentally increasing the cover factor and hencethe UPF. Gentle milling employed in the case of lightweight wool fabrics can also enhance the cover factor and the UPF.

Dyeing and finishing:

Depending upon the type of dye or pigment, the absorptive groups present in the dyestuff, depth after dyeing, the uniformity and additives, the UV protection abilities of the textile materials are considerably influenced. In a given fabric, higher transmission of UV radiation is observed in the case of bright fibres (viscose) than dull fibres. A protective effect can be obtained by dyeing or printing, which is better than using heavyweight fabrics which are not suitable for summer conditions. Darker colours of the same fabric type (black, navy, dark red) absorb UVR much more strongly than the light pastel colours for identical weave with UPF, in the ranges of 18 37 and 19 34 for cotton and polyester respectively [3, 35]. Some direct, reactive and vat dyes are capable of giving a UPF of 50+. Some of the direct dyes substantially increase the UPF of bleached cloth, which depends on the relative transmittance of the dyes in the UV B region. In many cases, a UPF calculated using a direct dye solution appears to be higher than that of the fabric after dyeing, mainly because the actual concentrations are mostly less than the theoretical concentration. Dyes extracted from various natural resources also show the UPF within the range of 15 45 depending on the mordant used. Cellulosic fabrics transmit UV A and UV B equally with the transmittance ratio (TA/TB) 0.9. When dyed with the reactive dyes, the UPF increases from 4.7 to 5.0 14.0 depending upon the concentration, Page | 15

which is not sufficient to satisfy the minimum requirements. Some of the vinyl sulphone dyes and monochlorotriazine dyes possess UVR absorption characteristics, which also increase with theconcentration. Cellulosic fabrics dyed with these dyes show reduced UVR transmission from 24.6% to 10-20% and 27.8% to 8-22% for UV A and UV B respectively. When mixtures of these dyes are used, the UPF increases synergistically. Some combinations of disperse reactive mix can give prolonged UV protection with a UPF of 50+ for P/C blends. Optical brightening agents or fabric whitening agents are used at the finishing operations, as well as in the wash cycles, and their effect on UPFs has been demonstrated extensively in the past. Optical brightening agents are often applied to enhance the whiteness of textiles by UV excitation and visible blue emission. The phenomenon of excitation and emission is caused by the transition of electrons involving p-orbitals from either conjugated or aromatic compounds. Most optical brighteners have excitation maxima within the range of 340 400 nm. OBA can improvethe UPF of cotton and cotton blends, but not of fabrics that are 100% polyester or nylon. The presence of OBA in the P/C blends (67/33) to the extent of 0.5% can improve the UPF from 16.3 to 32.2, which is more or less closer to that obtained using the UV absorbers with 0.2% (UPF 35.5). Washing the fabrics leads to a loss of UPF in the case of OBA-treated fabrics, and the UPF reaches the level of that in untreated fabric after 10 washes, which shows the semi-permanent nature of the finish and protection. Another limitation of many OBAs is that they mostly absorb in the UVA part of the day light spectrum (93%) but have a weak absorption in UV absorption around 308 nm (92%), which plays an important role in skin disease.

Protection factor of fabrics:

The ability of fabrics to protect against UV radiation can be tested by two major methods: in vitro method (or instrumental / spectrophotometric method) and in vivo method (or laboratory / human skin method). Both methods assess the amount/degree of sunburn protection provided by the fabrics with so called term UPF by in vitro method and SPF by in vivo method. Theoretically, the UPF and SPF value for any fabrics should be the same. However, some studies indicated that the results of UPF and SPF values are not statistically identical; never the less both values are in a good correlation (Hatch &Osterwalder, 2006).

10.

How Sun Protection Clothing Works:

Fig(12): Clothing of Astronauts Page | 16

There are a variety of factors:

Construction: Dense, tight construction (either weaves or knits) minimizes the spaces
between yarns, which in turn minimizes the amount of UV light that can pass through. Some tightly constructed UPF-rated garments use vents to boost air circulation and help the wearer stay cool. Thicker fabrics also help reduce UV transmission. Dyes: It is the specific type of dye (and the concentration in which it is used) that impacts a fabric's UV transmission, not its color. Some dyes deflect more UV radiation than others, and some absorb none at allincluding black dyes. How can one know what kind of dyes are used in individual garments? The only tip-off is if the garment carries a UPF rating. Clothing engineered for UV protection may use high concentrations of premium dyes that disrupt UV light. Such dyes include "conjugated" molecules that disrupt UV radiation. The higher the concentration of such dyes, the darker the garment becomes. But ultimately color has no influence on UV rays. Note: Pigment-dyed fabrics, which include a resin that creates a powdery look and feel, get high marks for UV protection. Treatments: Chemicals effective at absorbing UV light may be added during processing. Specialized laundry additives, which include optical brightening agents and newly developed UV-disrupting compounds, can boost a garment's UPF rating. Fiber type: Polyester does an excellent job at disrupting UV light (due to hydrogenand carbon-based benzene rings within the polymer). Nylon is good. Wool and silk are moderately effective. Cotton, rayon, flax and hemp fabrics (natural fibers composed of cellulose polymers) often score low without added treatments. However, unbleached or naturally colored cotton performs better at interacting with UV light than bleached cotton. Stretch: If a garment is stretched 10% or more beyond its normal dimensions, spaces between yarns are widened and its effectiveness against UV light may be reduced up to 40%. Wetness: A fabric's ability to disrupt UV radiation is usually reduced when wet, though the reasons why are not completely understood. Wetness may cause a 30% to 50% reduction in a fabric's UPF rating. Condition: Worn or faded fabrics are less effective against UV light.

11.

Factors which effects the UV protection:

There are several reasons or factors available which effects the protection factor of UV protective textile. Those factors are so important for the better performance to that textile. Those factors are Effects of yarn structure on UV protection Effects of fabric geometry on UV protection Effect of cover factor or open porosity Effect of fabric tightness Effect of volume porosity Effects of colour on UV protection Effects of maintenance and usage on UV protection Effects of additives on UV protection Page | 17

 Effects of yarn structure on UV protection: Woven fabrics are made from different types of yarns. Raw material of yarn or fibre composition is the initial yarn parameter which has an effect on UVR protection. Fibres have different ability to absorb UV radiation and to block most of the incident radiant energy and those prevent it from reaching the skin. There is a lack of studies dealing with the effect of fibre composition only. The reason is that yarn colour, additives and coatings have much more significant impact on UV transmission properties rather than fibre composition itself. Never less, Crews et al. (Hatch &Osterwalder, 2006) conducted a comparison of undyed woven fabrics and determined how fibre composition ranked relative in regard to UV absorbance. They established three distinct groups regarding the decreasing ability of fibre UVR absorbance: 1.group includes polyester, 2. group includes wool, silk and nylon and 3. group includes cotton and rayon fibres. Natural fibres have lower UV blocking properties regarding the synthetic ones, but from the thermo-physiology point of view there are more suitable in hot wearing conditions. Hustvedt et al. (2005) found that naturally-pigmented cotton fabrics have excellent sun protective properties, which are far superior to conventional, bleached or unbleached cotton fabrics. Stankovic et al. (2009) conducted a study of yarn twist effect on UPF of cotton knitted fabric and found that yarn twist to a great extent influenced the UV protection properties through the influence on yarn compactness and surface properties, which in turn influenced the open porosity of the fabric.

Effects of fabric geometry on UV protection:

UV light passes direct through the macropores or fabric open area (direct UV transmittance) and also through the yarns, where changes the direction before leaving the fabric (scattered UV transmittance). Numerous studies focused on different fabric constructional parameters which represent the fabric structure the best and have direct and significant effect on UV protection. Such role has been given to fabric cover factor, fabric open porosity, fabric mass, fabric thickness etc. (Gies et al., 1998; Dimitrovski et al., 2009; Gabrijeliet al., 2009; Hatch &Osterwalder, 2006).

Effect of cover factor or open porosity:

To evaluate only the influence of fabric cover factor (or its complementary relationship open porosity) on UPF and eliminate other significant factors such as colour and additives, the set of fabrics should be precisely prepared. Our experiment (Dubrovski&Golob, 2009) was focused on 100% cotton woven fabrics in a grey state with the same yarn fineness (14 tex) and different thread densities to achieve fabric cover factor between 59% and 87%. This was possible by introducing different types of weave (plain, twill, satin), while it is known that by plain weave lower densities are achieved due to the high number of thread passages regarding to the twill and satin weaves. Fabric cover factor and open porosity were calculated according to Eq. (15) to Eq. (18). While also cotton yarns absorb some of the incident UVR we could not focuse only on the UVR that goes through the macropores. To eliminate the influence of raw material, yarns with 100% absorption of UV light that strikes them should be used but this is not usually the case. From the Fig. 5 it can be seen that higher cover factor (or lower open porosity) means better UV protection and that cover factor should be at least 80% (or open porosity lower than 20%) to achieve good UV protection according to Page | 18

AS/NZ standard. This is possible only by higher thread densities and definitely not by plain weaves in our case. Even if the plain fabric would have the 0highest cover factor it would not reach the UPF 15. The results of mentioned study refer to the theoretical values of open porosity and cover factor. In real fabric open porosity is much lower, especially in the case of fabrics made from the staple-fibre yarns, where the phenomenon of latticed pores, the phenomenon of changing the position of warp threads according to the longitudinal axis and the phenomenon of thread spacing irregularity occur. In this case the correlation between the measured open porosity/cover factor (image analysis) and UPF is not so good and should be treated regarding the type of weave (Fig. 6).

Fig (13): The influence of theoretical values of open porosity or cover factor on UV protectionof cotton fabrics in a grey state. The plain-weave fabric includes the maximum percentage of weave passages (67%) and it is reasonable to assume that all the threads are more or less equidistant and that the effect of fully latticed pores is reduced to its minimum, whereas by satin weave the effect of fully latticed pores is very high those reducing open area for UV transmission. If we observe measured values of open porosity, the limit values to reach good UV protection of fabrics is 12% or lower without taking into account the type of weave. Further observation regarding the type of weave shows that by plain and twill weave it is not possible to reach UPF 15 neither by 12% of open porosity, while by satin weaves this is possible. The results clearly indicate that theoretically defined open porosity/cover factor is not satisfactory parameter toasses its influence on UPF because of the absence of weave influence. In real fabrics, especially in fabrics with staple-fibre yarns, different types of pores regarding the type of weave and other phenomenon are involved, which all reduce the fabric open area in comparison with theoretically calculated values of open porosity. On the other hand, open porosity/cover factor could be a good parameter showing the influence on UPF if the set of fabrics with the same type of weave, raw material and yarn fineness is observed. In our previous research (Dubrovski&Brezocnik, 2002) we also proposed the predictive model of open porosity which is in better correlation with measured values than theoretical ones. Page | 19

Fig (14): The influence of measured values of open porosity and cover factor on UV protection of cotton fabrics in a grey state (a without weave influence, b with the weave influence).

Effect of fabric tightness:

Fabric tightness or relative fabric density is another parameter which represents the fabric structure or how tight the fabric is woven, similar as cover factor. Advantage of fabric tightness is the consideration of weave by its calculation (Eq. (8) to Eq. (11)). It is known that by satin weave it is possible to achieve higher warp/weft density than with twill or plain weaves, so the limit density as well as actual density will be higher. Consequently, the macropores will be smaller and UV radiation will have less free space to pass through thanin twill or plain weaves. The fabric tightness is relative term and according to previous mentioned experiment Page | 20

(Dubrovski&Golob, 2009), the following decreasing rate of UPF values could be seen within the same fabric tightness: satin twill plain

Fig(15): The influence of fabric tightness on UV protection of cotton fabrics in a grey state.

The macropores in plain fabrics have very stable and uniform form as a consequence of more thread passages. On the other hand, the pores in satin fabrics are not as stable due to few thread passages, and tend to group together which further reduces the free space area. By fabrics made from staple-fibre yarns macropores are further reduced because of the phenomenon of latticed pores. Nerveless higher actual warp/weft density by each weave means higher fabric tightness and consequently higher UV protection. Results for fabrics in a grey state show that none of the plain fabrics offered minimum UV protection, even if they were tightly woven. Twill fabrics had good UV protection if they were woven with tightness above 70%, while satin fabrics offered good UV protection already by 60% tightness.

Effect of volume porosity:

Thicker and heavier fabrics minimize UVR transmission (Scott, 2005). While some of the researchers focused on fabric mass and thickness, we decided to include volume porosity as a parameter influencing UPF, while it includes fabric mass and thickness through the fabric volume fraction according to the Eq. (19), Eq. (20) and Eq. (25). Results for grey fabrics (Fig. 8) show that there is no direct correlation between volume porosity and UPF. Moreover, results indicate that volume porosity depends on the type of weave and affects UPF as well. This is in accordance with previous mentioned discussion about the macropores. The macropores as three-dimensional forms are bigger, more stable and uniform in plain fabrics compared with macropores in twill or satin fabrics at the same volume porosity. Lower volume porosity means higher UPF. Plain fabrics did not offer any UV protection, while twill and satin fabrics offered good UV protection when volume porosity was less than 64% and 66%, respectively.

Page | 21

Fig(16):The influence of fabric volume porosity on UV protection of cotton fabrics in a grey State.

Effects of colour on UV protection:

Undyed or bleached fabrics offer much lower protection against UV radiation if any in comparison with dyed fabrics. Dyes react like additives; they improve UV protection abilities, because they absorb UV radiation in the visible and UV radiation band. By bleaching process the naturally occurring pigments and lignin which act as UV absorbers are removed those affect UV absorber ability of cotton fabrics. Hypothesis that the hue of dye is responsible for UV protection of fabric is a matter to discuss.Gatewood (Scott, 2005) noted that transmission/absorption characteristics of dyes in the UV band were a better predictor of UV protection than thecolour of the dyestuff itself. Srinivasaen et al. (Hatch &Osterwalder, 2006) who studied the effect of fourteen direct dyes on the UPF of cotton fabrics, concluded that colour (hue) is not related to UPF, while fabrics dyed with the dyestuff with the same hue (red 28, red 24, red 80) and identical oncentration had different UPF values. Also the black fabric in this study did not have the highest UPF despite the common fact that darker colours (such as black, navy blue, dark green, red) of the same fabric type absorb UVR more strongly than light pastel shades (Yallambie, 2003; Wilson et al., 2008b).Neverless, the results of mentioned study indicate that higher dye concentration means higher UPF. Wilson et al. (2008a) concluded that black fabrics generally transmitted 20% less UVR than their matched white quivalent. In another study Wilson et al. (2008b) examined the relationship between UV transmittance and colour and found that depth of colour, rather than colour per se is the principal aspect of colour affecting UV transmittance. The best description of the relationship between colour and UVR transmission was provided by the L*, and L* and b* components of the LAB system. He suggested that by developing fabrics for UV protection, selection of dyes that generate colours with CIE Y or L* values of less than pproximately 28 or 38, respectively is recommended. Our study (Dubrovski&Brezocnik, 2009) focused on the effect of woven construction and colour of cotton woven fabrics dyed with the same concentration (1%) of reactive dyestuffs Cibacron LS Page | 22

(red, blue marine and black), bleached fabrics (white) and naturally pigmented abrics (dirty white). The comparison of UPF of fabrics with the same construction but different colour was made for fabrics in plain, twill and satin weave and by three different levels of fabric tightness (55-65%, 65%-75%, 75%-85%). By satin and twill fabrics at third level of fabric tightness, where higher densities can be achieved and those the influence of open porosity is set to its minimum, the results show that all dyed fabrics posses excellent UV protection (UPF=1000), while naturally pigmented twill and satin fabric had UPF 25 and 50, respectively. UPF of bleached twill and satin fabric was 10 and 15, respectively. The L* component of fabric colour was around 93, 86, 44, 31 and 17 for white, dirty white, red, blue marine and black fabric, respectively. The previous mentioned recommendation that L* value of the dyed fabrics should be less than 38 to develop fabric with good UV protection, could not be generalized, while in our case also white satin fabric with L* of 93 showed good UV protection at third level of fabric tightness. Our results show that there were no big differences between red, blue and black coloured fabrics UPF at higher thread densities by twill and satin fabrics, but there was a huge difference between uncoloured and bleached fabrics UPF on one side and coloured fabrics UPF on another. The general conclusion of mentioned research was that UPF of cotton fabrics dyed with direct dyestuffs is influenced by the colour components (L*, a*, b*), fabric tightness and type of weave so we proposed a prediction model of UPF based on CIELAB colour components, weave factor, and warp/weft density. Riva et al. (2009) analyzed the influence of the shade and colour intensity of the dyeing as well as their interaction with the initial UPF of the uncoloured cotton fabrics. They proposed UPF prediction model for cotton fabrics dyed with direct dyestuffs (yellow 98, blue 77, red89) on the basis of the initial UPF of fabrics before dyeing, standard depth of colour, the corrected standard depth of colour and two categorical qualitative variables that define colour hue of dyestuffs.

Effects of additives on UV protection:

During the fibre/yarn/fabric processes there is a possibility to include additives like a dye, pigment, delusterant, optical brighteners and UV absorbers, which have the ability to absorb UV radiation and those improve UV protection properties of fabrics with little UV protection like cotton, rayon, silk, wool, nylon and undyed fabrics. Besides dying, other techniques are known to incorporate additives in fabric structure: 1. addition of additives duringfibre/yarn manufacturing, 2. addition of additives during fabric surface treatments or special treatments. Pigments found in naturally-pigmented cotton are naturally UV absorbers and produce shades ranging from tan to green and brown. According to the study of Hustvedt& Crew (2005), fabrics from naturally pigmented cotton have excellent sun protection properties, which are far superior to conventional, bleached and unbleached cotton fabrics (green UPF=30-50+, tan UPF=20-45, brown UPF=40-50+, bleached conventional UPF=4, unbleached conventional UPF=8). Their UV protection properties remain high enough even after 80 AFUs light exposure. its effect is permanent. Optical brighteners convert a portion of incident UV radiation near 360 nm to the visible blue wavelengths about 430 nm and reflect it. UV absorbers are colourless additives having chromophore system that absorbs very effectively in the UV band. Optical brightness and UV absorbers are recently added to commercial laundry detergents (Yallambie, Page | 23

2003). Varga et al. (2009) introduced a nanoparticle coating on yarns. They applied anoZnOfinish on undyed and reactive dyed cotton yarns with the aim of studying the effect of the knitting operation on the durability of the coated nanoparticles and found that such yarns withstand the knitting process. They also performed sol-gel finishing of cotton fabrics, coated with TiO2 nanoparticles and found that such fabrics are durable to domestic washing, and even there was a reduction in the load of nanoparticles on the fabric surface after washing, the UPF values were not affected. Abidi et al. (2009) reported that titania or titania-silicianonosol treatment in the form of thin film at cotton fabric surface offer excellent UV protection.Gorensek et al. (2007) treated cotton fabrics with nanosilver, which was in the form of nano powder added in the dyebathat two concentration (5 mg/L and 20 mg/L) and found that a noticeable increase of UPF was recorded by the 5% mock dyed sample with 20 mg/L nanosilver as well as by pale dyed fabrics in comparison with bleached and dyed cotton fabrics, respectively. Grancaric et al. (2009) treated PET fabrics for summer clothing with ultrasound (US), ethylene-diamine (EDA), fluorescent whitening agents Uvitex ERN based on benzoxazolederivate (FWAs) and Tinofast PES UV absorbers based ontriazine derivate and compared their UPF values. Untreated PET fabrics did not have any UV protection (UPF=5), while all other treatments lead to very good UV protection. EDA treated fabric resulted in better UV protection than US treated fabrics.

Effects of maintenance and usage on UV protection:

When the fabrics for clothing are in use, their initial UPF of fabric is modified by laundering as well as by wearing conditions connected with the tension produced in contact with the body (fabric stretch) and with an exposure to the UV radiation in wet state (swimsuit). Stretching is more common in knitted rather than woven fabrics, with exception of elasticised woven fabrics. Most fabrics shrink when they are laundered which lead to significant improvement in the UPF of fabrics because of the open area reduction (Hatch & Osterwalder, 2006). Another reason of UPF improvement by laundering is optical whiteners whichare added to laundry detergent. Due to the effect of wetness and the effect of opening of the fabrics caused by the tension on tightened and/or elasticized garments, the initial UPF of unstretched and dry fabric does not have proper meaning. European standard EN 13758-1 in annex C considers measurements under stretched and wet conditions informatively, while ASTM D 6544 refers to the preparation of textiles prior to ultraviolet transmission testing which includes exposure conditions (laundering, simulated sunlight and chlorinated pool water). Algaba et al. (2007) conducted a study on undyed woven fabrics made with three different cellulose fibres (cotton, modal and modal sun fibresthat contain UV absorber in the spinning bath) which were exposed to the simulation of the wearing conditions of the clothing. Samples were stretched with a tension of 2, 4, and 6 N and the measurements were carried out after maintaining the samples (unstretched or stretched) in water until saturation. The UPF of fabrics decreased significantly when tension increased. The sign of the influence of the wetness on UPF depended on the fibretype. The UPF of wet cotton and modal fabrics was lower, while modal sun fabrics had higher UPF regarding the dry fabrics. Osterwalder et al. (Scott, 2005) concluded that UV absorbance is independent from environment and therefore treating cotton with UV absorber will afford complete protection when the fabric is wet. Wilson et al. (2008a) reported that by 10 x 20% extension UPF of cotton woven and knitted fabrics were decreased by -30% to -75%.

Page | 24

12.

History & development of UV protecting textile:

In the early 1990s UV protective clothing was considered to be a niche market as it comprised mainly swimwear for children and babywear. Its lack of popularity among adults was due to its relatively high cost, and the perception that it was heavy, hot and uncomfortable to wear. However, in the past decade, a number of companies have introduced UV protective fabrics and garments which do not sacrifice comfort, breathability or other desirable characteristics commonly associated with good performance apparel. Furthermore, high quality UV protective clothing today is both functional and fashionable. It is typically made from lightweight, breathable fabrics, and can provide as much protection from UV radiation as heavyweight denim. Looking ahead, it has been projected by some authorities that consumers will come to expect their outdoor apparel to offer UV protectionin the same way as they expect it to be waterproof or insulating today. Others in the industry are less optimistic, and believe that it will take some time before garment manufacturers and consumers fully understand the benefits of UV protective clothing. Although clothing has been used for protection against solar exposure for thousands of years, in modern times sun protective clothing was popularized (but not exclusively used) in Australia as an option or adjunct to sunscreen lotions and sunblock creams. Sun protective clothing and UV protective fabrics in Australia now follow a lab-testing procedure regulated by a federal agency: ARPANSA. This standard was established in 1996 after work by Australian swimwear companies. The British standard was established in 1998. The NRPB (National Radiological Protection Board) forms the basis of the British Standards Institute standard. Using the Australian method as a model, the USA standard was formally established in 2001, and now employs a more stringent testing protocol: This method includes fabric longevity, abrasion/wear and washability. (To date, the focus for sun protection is swimwear, appropriate hats, shade devices and sunglasses for children.) UPF testing is now very widely used on clothing used for outdoor activities. The original UPF rating system was enhanced in the United States by the ASTM (American Standards and Testing Methods) Committee D13:65 at the behest of the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to qualify and standardize the emerging sun protective clothing and textile industry. The FDA had reviewed clothing making sun protection claims (SPF, % UV blockage, or skin cancer prevention claims) in 1992. Only one brand of sun protective clothing, Solumbra , was reviewed and cleared under medical device regulations. The FDA initially regulated sun protective clothing as a medical device, but latter transferred oversight for general sun protective clothing to the FTC. The UPF rating system may eventually be adopted by interested apparel and domestic textile/fabric manufacturers in the industry at large as a "value added" program strategic to complement consumer safety and consumer awareness.

Page | 25

 Solumbra:
Solumbra is a line of sun protection clothing and a patented fabric. Introduced in 1992, Solumbra was reviewed under medical device regulations by the U.S. (FDA) and by Health Canada. This was revolutionary; no sun protective clothing had previously been reviewed as a medical device in the U.S. or Canada.] Solumbra offered improved and superior (UV) protection when compared to a conventional 30 SPF sunscreen and typical summer clothing. Solumbra sun protective clothinghats, shirts, pants and accessoriesis now rated at 100+ SPF. Solumbra was developed as a personal sun protection clothing solution by Shaun Hughes, who was diagnosed and treated for malignant melanoma, a potentially deadly form of skin cancer, at age 26 during a visit to Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in 1983. After two surgeries, he found that traditional UV protection was not sufficient: he would sun tan through his sunscreen and sunburn through his summer clothing. Based upon medical research and involvement of UV and medical experts, Hughes developed the Solumbra line of fabric and clothing. Solumbra was reviewed under medical device regulations. Solumbra entered the U.S. marketplace soon after May 13, 1992. The Solumbra logo is a depiction of the suns rays eclipsed by effective sun protection that, in turn, provides an area of safe shade. Solumbra has been used by highly sun sensitive patients as well as by world-class athletes participating in international competition. Sun protection clothing can offer superior photoprotection because of typical sunscreen shortcomings: not equally broad spectrum, misapplication, low durability, allergic reaction, poor reapplication behavior, and poor cosmetic elegance. Sun protection clothing has become a choice of patients with skin cancer, lupus, vitiligo, porphyria, XP, and sun allergies.

Page | 26

Technology: Solumbra sun protection fabrics rely on four methods to achieve sun protection: fiber content, weaving methods, fabric dyeing process and finishing process. The key concept is to prevent UV from transmitting through the fibers and apertures (holes between the fibers). Solumbra I fabric is protected by U.S. and international design and process patents.Hughes developed the technology without treatments or coatings that could lose their effectiveness and photoprotection after use, laundering and exposure to environmental factors. Solumbra clothing designs are based upon published medical guidelines.] Designs are typically long sleeved, long legged and wide brimmed, all to provide maximum UV protection against both direct and indirect UV exposure. Research: Solumbra fabrics were at the forefront of in vitro and in vivo research into UV protection offered by fabrics. This research revealed that traditional summer clothing in North America offered less than 15 SPF protection, the minimum level recommended by doctors. R Sayre was the lead researcher of in vitro SPF testing for regular summer fabrics, which tested between SPF 5 to 9 when dry and SPF 3-9 when wet. Nicholas Lowe and R Sayre followed this up with in vivo research. They found that Solumbra offered over 50 SPF when dry or wet. In vivo research spearheaded by J Menter and Sayre, published in the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology, showed that most mice contracted squamous cell carcinoma (scc) skin cancers through typical summer fabrics and mice protected by Solumbra fabrics did not incur skin cancers. Subsequent research by Menter and Sayre found that specific Solumbra fabrics provided photoprotection for mice against injury from visible light when sensitized with the photosensitizer, ALA, compared to insufficient protection by typical summer fabric. Research was just presented by an independent researcher in March 2012 that showed that Solumbra fabrics now offer 100+ SPF even after 500 durability cycles. Innovation: The New York Times declared Sun Precautions was the innovator, with its Solumbra line, which blocks more than 97 percent of UVA and UVB. Solumbra has been featured in other leading publications and national media, including Time, U.S. News and World Report, People, MSNBC, The Today Show, The Los Angeles Times, Vogue, and Health. In October 2011, Travel and Leisure magazine found that Solumbra was one of the 'The Game Changers'--Worlds Most Important Travel Innovations. The American Academy of Dermatology recognized Solumbra and Sun Precautions with a Gold Triangle Award for assisting with skin cancer awareness and prevention.

Recent invention of NCSU researcher :

Designing affordable, ultraviolet-resistant clothing that lessens wearers' risk of skin cancer is the goal of North Carolina State University researchers.The researchers began by imagining clothing that acts like a computer. They developed clothing fibers with a microscopic coating of the same conductive material found on computer chips. The team discovered another potential benefit "to be able to impart UV protection on different fabrics," NCSU textile Page | 27

engineering researcher Chris Oldham said.The fabric coating resists the sun's UV rays, which can prevent fading of outdoor materials such as flags. It might also be used on clothing to reduce the risk of skin cancer.UV-resistant fabrics already on the market can be expensive."They are looking for a more affordable product that will protect them in the sunlight," Oldham said rather than dipping fabrics in an oil-based liquid solution, NCSU researchers heated chemicals into gas form that deposits a coating 1,000 times thinner a human hair. The process might work on a wide range of lightweight, summer-time fabrics. "What we're trying to do is use greener materials like cotton and recycled polyesters and make those feel the same and also act the same as some of these high-end, UV-resistant fabrics," NCSU textile engineering researcher Jesse Jur said. In addition to protecting people from the sun, the clothing could be used as a sensor to track heart rate and body temperature in real time.The NCSU Chancellor's Innovation Fund recently awarded a $75,000 grant to get the technology into the market more quickly.

13.

UPF measurement systems & test:

Appropriate precaution which were applied while carrying out the measurement should be sufficient to collect all the scattered and transmitted lights through an integrating sphere, to include all the erythemal active wavelengths (UVA & UVB) spectral measurements without any influence of fluorescence from FWA, if it is present in the fabric. There are currently 12 sites in Australia and Antarctica installed with broadband UVR detectors to measure the total energy received over a range of wavelength in UVR region in both direct and diffuse radiation. Polysulphone films have been widely used in the construction of personal dosimeters, which absorb strongly in the UV B region. The instrument for measuring fabric transmission includes broadband radiometers, spectroradiometers, or spectrophotometers, and Xenon lamps. Filters are placed next to the test specimen to prevent the effects of fluorescence reaching the integrating sphere. The spectral response of the detector is also important in determining system performance, and it must be capable of detecting UVR accurately and linearly over a very large rangeof intensities and discriminating the signal from the detector dark current. Many commercial systems have difficulty in measuring UPFs above 100 due to dynamic range, dark current discrimination at lower wavelengths of <300 nm, and fluorescence at wavelengths of >380 nm. Low light levels in the UVR source used for measurement can also lead to difficulty in distinguishing between the transmitted UVR and the natural dark current of the detector.The measurement of UPF on a clothing material can be carried out by measuring the diffuse spectraltransmittance in vitro or by measuring the increase in exposure time required to induce erythema or sun burn in vivo. The preparation of the fabric prior to the UV transmission test includes the exposure of specimen to laundering, simulated sunlight and chlorinated pool water, and to present in a state that simulate the conditions at the end of two years of normal seasonal use, so that the UV protection level finally stated on the label estimates the maximum transmittance of the garment fabric during a two-year life cycle.

Page | 28

14.

UV protection care labeling:

Initiatives for developing standards related to UV protection started in the 1990s, and standards related to the preparation of fabrics, testing and guidance for UV protection labelling have been formulated by different agencies. Care labelling similar to fabric andgarment care labels has been developed for UV protection, and standard procedures have been established for the measurement, calculation, labelling methods and comparison of label values of textile products. Since 1981, the Skin Cancer Foundation, an international body, has offered a Seal of Recommendation for the photo-protective products which includes sunscreens, sunglasses, window films and laundry detergent additives, in accordance with AATCC TM 183 or AS/NZS 4399; the products recommended are reviewed annually.

UPF > 40 30-40 20-29

Transmission (%) < 2.5 3.3 2.5 5.0 2.4

Classification Excellent protection Very good protection Good protection

Grade III II I

Table(3): Grades and classification of UPF UV labelling is an additional requirement besides other labelling requirements of garments including Permanent Care Labels and Fibre Content labels. Apart from the UPF label, block numbers can also be used based on the UV transmittance value in their respective UVR range. Table 2 shows the various grades and the related protection factors for the textile materials. The UPF value to be placed on the label is that of the sample, reduced by its standard error of UPF values, and then rounded down to the nearest multiple of 5 but not greater than 50. A UPF of 20 means that 1/20th, i.e. 5%, of the biologically effective UV radiation striking the surface of the fabric actually passes through it.

15.

Conclusion:

The best technique for reducing UV exposure is to avoid sun exposure, but this is an unacceptable solution to all. Recreational exposure accounts for most of the significant UVR exposures of the population, and occupational exposure is also significant. However, there is growing interest in reducing the UVR exposure of outdoor workers. This necessitates the development of stronger UV absorbers which will be especially suitable for low UPF fibres, which are highly preferred by the consumers. UVR exposure can be reduced by implementing by behavioural changes such as avoiding sunlight at its maximum, using protection such as hats, sunscreens, sun glasses, and clothing.

Page | 29

Woven fabrics can provide simple and convenient protection against harmful effects of UV radiation if the necessary attention is paid to their engineering in the phase of a new product development. There are several factors influencing UV protection properties of woven fabrics like yarn construction (fibre type, twist, yarn packing factor), fabric construction with its primary (type of weave, yarn fineness, warp/weft density, relative fabric density or fabric tightness) and secondary (cover factor, open porosity, mass, thickness, volume porosity) parameters of fabric geometry, additives (dye, pigment, delusterant, optical brighteners, UV absorbers), laundering and wearing conditions (stretch, wetness). The proper combination of mention factors allows production of passive woven fabrics with high UV protection properties, which may reduce risk associated with UV overexposure. For subject wearing garment made from UV protected fabrics the information about how long he/she could be exposed to the harmful UV rays before the serious skin damage occur, will be more useful, instead of knowing UPF value of garment. UV exposure time is affected by several factors like subject skin type, geographic position of subject, daily time or the sun position, the presence of clouds, altitude, portion of skin covered by fabric, etc. However, nowadays, there is a trend to develop smart textiles or active intelligent fabrics which, for example, could change their own colour in dependence on external stimulus like UV light (Vikova, 2004). Soon such smart textiles will be developed which will warn the subject how long he/she could be on the sun, what is the average UV index in a particular position, what is the UPF of wearing fabric in a particular moment, when subject should use the shadow, etc.

16.
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.

References:

D. Saravanan, UV PROTECTION TEXTILE MATERIALS Perkin S.W., Functional Finishes and High Performance Textiles Mallik S.K., Arora T., UV Radiations: Problems and Remedies Hatch K.L., Making a Claim that a Garment Fabric is UV Protective Anon, UPF Analysis of Textile Achwal W.B., UV Protection by Textiles Polona Dobnik Dubrovski Woven Fabrics and Ultraviolet Protection http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_suit http://www.rei.com/learn/expert-advice/sun-protection.html

Page | 30