Introduction to the Principles of Textile Testing - MA Wilding

Topic 7 (Addendum):
Integrated Systems for the Objective
Assessment of Handle
1
1.. B
Baacck
kggrro
ouun
ndd
The handle of a fabric (its qualities generally associated with "touch and
feel") is clearly determined largely by its various mechanical properties.
However, whilst these individual properties can be (and frequently are)
assessed, and inferences perhaps drawn as to the handle of a particular
piece of material, this is not the same thing as assessing the handle per
se – ie in its own right. Traditionally, that has always been the subjective
territory of "expert" panels, who arrive at their judgement by means of
actually handling the cloth. For many reasons – not least economic – it
would be preferable to have a laboratory-based system available that
could perform this task objectively. In order to achieve this though, two
important and connected questions had to be addressed:

1) Can the various objectively-determined properties be used to provide a

formal and reliable link to more subjective notions of fabric handle?

2) Might a conveniently small number of the many fabric properties be

combined in such a way as to provide an overall assessment of a
particular fabric’s suitability for a given end-use?

A positive answer to the first question would bridge the gap between
laboratory testing and traditional assessment methods, such as the use of
panels of expert “judges”. Ideally, it would also enable a universally-
recognised system to be developed for describing a fabric’s handle; one
that would allow rapid communication of easily-interpreted data
worldwide.

The second question deals with identifying what are the optimum
properties a fabric should have for a particular end-product. For instance,
we might wish to determine the best fabric (and fabric construction) for
men’s winter suiting, or for women’s summer outerwear. Which of the
many mechanical properties are important, and what combination works
best, are obvious concerns for manufacturers.

Over recent decades these questions prompted the development of a

number of integrated systems for the objective assessment of handle.
Two of these – the ‘Kawabata Evaluation System for Fabrics’ (KES-F),
and the ‘Fabric Assurance by Simple Testing’ (FAST) system are now
universally-acknowledged as industry standards. These were originally
intended for the assessment of apparel fabrics, but they have also been
successfully applied in textile applications more widely.

Topic7x-Kawabata-FAST.doc 1
 Introduction to the Principles of Textile Testing - MA Wilding

2
2.. T
Thhe
eKKa
awwa
abba
atta
aSSy
ysstte
emm:: K
KEES
S--F
F
The development of an integrated system for the objective assessment of
fabric handle was pioneered by the Japanese academic, Professor Sueo
Kawabata. Although fabric handle had traditionally been assessed by
experts, which is a wholly-subjective procedure, he recognised that the
stimuli causing the psychological response of handle must ultimately be
determined by the physical & mechanical properties of the fabric. It was
therefore logical to assume that a more objective approach should be
possible. In order to progress, however, it was first necessary to get
universal agreement as to how the most important handle qualities should
be described subjectively. Allied to this was agreement on how each of
these attributes should contribute to a fabric’s overall “rating” in terms of
its handle.

First, Kawabata defined eight descriptive terms (or 'descriptors') to be

associated with the various subjective aspects of a fabric's handlea. These
were essentially terms such as "stiffness", "smoothness", "fullness" and
"softness"; they were of course Japanese, and many of them had subtle
nuances which it is hard to translate directly into English. Taken together,
the eight descriptors were considered to determine a quality which
Kawabata called the ‘Primary Hand’. The terms adopted, along with their
approximate English translations are shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Kawabata’s eight primary hand definitions

Japanese term Approx. English translation
Koshi Stiffness
Numeri Smoothness
Fukurami Fullness & softness
Shari Crispness
Hari “Anti-drape” stiffness
Kishimi "Scroopy" feeling
Shinayakasa Flexibility with soft feeling
Sofutosa Soft touch

Next, Kawabata introduced several distinct categories of apparel-fabric

end-use. He associated with each a relatively small subset of the primary
hand descriptors, which he regarded as being of particular importance for
that category. Hence, the precise combination of primary hand descriptors
relevant to the handle of any given fabric depends on the end-use
category it is in. For example:

Men’s winter suits – Koshi; Numeri; Fukurami

Men’s summer suits – Koshi; Fukurami; Shari; Hari
Women’s thin dress fabrics – Koshi; Hari; Shari; Fukurami; Kishimi;
Shinayakasa

a
which is sometimes referred to as its 'hand'

Topic7x-Kawabata-FAST.doc 2
 Introduction to the Principles of Textile Testing - MA Wilding

The values these individual properties should (ideally) have also differs
from one category to another; which leads us to the question of how the
various primary hand descriptors can be quantified. The procedure
adopted was to rate each on a 10-point scale, where 10 represents a high
value of the particular property and 1 represents its opposite. So, if a
fabric is judged to display a very high Koshi feel, it might be assigned a
value around 8, 9 or10 for this primary hand property. In contrast, a very
limp fabric could have a Koshi rating in the range 1-3.

This meant that a given fabric could be ascribed a set of numbers –

perhaps four or five – that taken together conveyed information about its
overall handle qualities. These numbers were called 'Primary Hand
Values' (PHV). However, Kawabata realised that it would be very
convenient if this kind of information could be encapsulated in just one
single value. To this end, he developed a further concept, which he
termed the 'Total Hand Value' (THV) of a fabric. This entailed much
fundamental work in understanding the underlying fabric mechanics
involved in the various handle characteristics, and the production of a
'translation equation' for each fabric category which could be used to
manipulate the individual PHVs to give an overall THV.

It is possible to make an assessment of the handle of an individual piece

of fabric in complete isolation – ie without reference to any other fabric.
However, this is not usually very satisfactory: it would be far better to
have a reproducible "ideal" fabric, of known handle properties, against
which to compare. This is especially important if the assessment is to be
made generally meaningful, and the results are to be communicated
within or between companies, say. In order to accomplish this, Kawabata,
in collaboration with an organisation known as the Hand Evaluation &
Standardisation Committee (HESC), produced books of standard fabric
samples. There was a reference sample for each of the primary hands,
and also standard samples corresponding to the ideal total hand, for each
of the following five categories:

1. Men’s winter/autumn suiting

2. Men’s summer suiting for a tropical climate
3. Ladies’ thin dress fabrics
4. Men’s dress shirt fabrics
5. Knitted fabrics for undershirts

It will be realised that up to this point the assessment of handle was still
completely subjective – ie the rating assigned using Kawabata's scheme
to a particular piece of cloth still depended on someone's impression from
actually handling it. To address this difficulty, he derived a further set of
translation equations linking the fundamental fabric mechanical
properties to the various primary hand values. Alongside this, he invented
a set of four test instruments designed to measure the appropriate

Topic7x-Kawabata-FAST.doc 3
 Introduction to the Principles of Textile Testing - MA Wilding

properties. This formed the integrated system that subsequently became

known as the KES-F system. The instruments themselves (or their
corresponding properties) were given short-hand codes:

FB1 Tensile & Shear

FB2 Bending
FB3 Compression
FB4 Surface friction & variation

The great advantage of this development was that it enabled any

operator to measure PHVs and THVs reproducibly, hence turning what
was a purely subjective exercise into an objective one. The KES-F system
actually facilitates the measurement of 17 different mechanical
parameters at the low levels of force typical of a fabric in normal use. In
fact, the fabric weight is also determined, thus raising the total number of
parameters to 18. These are grouped, and given short-hand codes, as
follows:

Tensile
EMT Extension at max. load (500 gfcm-1, = 4.9 Ncm-1)
LT Linearity of load-elongation curve
WT Tensile energy
RT Tensile resilience

Shear
G Shear rigidity
2HG Hysteresis of shear force at 0.5o shear angle
2HG5 Hysteresis of shear force at 5o shear angle

Bending
B Bending rigidity
2HB Hysteresis of bending moment

Lateral compression
To Fabric thickness at 0.5 gfcm-2 (= 4.9 mNcm-2)
Tm Fabric thickness at 50 gfcm-2 (= 0.49 Ncm-2)
LC Linearity of compression-thickness curve
WC Compressional energy
RC Compressional resilience

Surface characteristics
SMD Geometrical roughness
MIU Coefficient of friction
MMD Mean deviation of MIU

Fabric construction
W Fabric weight per unit area

Topic7x-Kawabata-FAST.doc 4
 Introduction to the Principles of Textile Testing - MA Wilding

In order to completely validate this new approach, it was of course

necessary to correlate the hand values measured using KES-F with those
arrived at traditionally by experts. This was successfully accomplished
over time.

The following is an example of the combination of hand values that might

be expected of a fabric intended for summer suiting (from BP Saville, Pg
288):

Total Hand
THV 3.5
Primary Hand
Koshi 6.1
Shari 6.5
Fukurami 3.5
Hari 6.8

2.1 Measurement of the KES-F parameters

Saville gives a detailed discussion of the methods for determining the
various parameters on the KES-F system, and the following summary is
based on his description.

2.1.1 Tensile
For the tensile determinations, a standard-sized rectangular fabric sample
is extended at a constant rate, whilst the load (per unit width) is
monitored up to a maximum of 500 gfcm-1. Both loading and unloading
processes are carried out so as to determine the recovery behaviour.
Figure 1 illustrates how the various parameters are determined from the
test.

EMT is simply the relative extension (ie strain) at the maximum load; it is
normally expressed as a percentage,

WT is related to the energy needed to stretch the sample to the

maximum load, and is defined as the area under the "increasing-load" – ie
stretching - curve. This is the larger area under the experimental curves.
Note that the load is specified as force per unit width, and the "extension"
is in fact strain (ie no units). Therefore, WT also has the dimensions of
force per unit width. In the SI system, it could be expressed in Nm-1, for
example, which is exactly equivalent to Nm.m-2, or Jm-2; so it is in fact
an energy per unit area.

LT specifies how linear the extension curve is. This is done by comparing
the measured area (WT) with that which would be achieved for a
perfectly linear sample. This is essentially the area of the triangle AOB, so
that LT=WT/(Area AOB).

Topic7x-Kawabata-FAST.doc 5
 Introduction to the Principles of Textile Testing - MA Wilding

Figure 1. Schematic force-extension plot from a KES-F tensile test

The resilience, RT, is related to how recoverable the fabric is. It is the
area under the "load-decreasing" curve (shown grey in Figure 1)
expressed as a fraction (or %) of the area under the "load-increasing"
curve. That is:

Area under unloading curve

RT = x100%
WT

If the tensile hysteresis is required, this can be obtained by subtracting

the area under the unloading curve from that under the loading curve.

2.1.2 Shear
The essential features of the shear test are shown in Figure 2. The tensile
force of 10 gfcm-1 (98.1 mNcm-1) is applied in order to counteract the
buckling tendency which generally arises from the diagonal compression
accompanying shear.

Topic7x-Kawabata-FAST.doc 6
 Introduction to the Principles of Textile Testing - MA Wilding

20 cm

θ 5 cm

10 gfcm-1
Figure 2. The essential features of the Kawabata shear test

Figure 3 illustrates the kind of response that might be encountered, and

indicates how the shear parameters are defined. Note that generally the
horizontal axis represents the angle of shear: ie θ in Figure 2. This is not
strictly the same as the shear strain - which is tan θ - but since the
deformations are so small it can be taken as being proportional to it (or
equal, if θ is expressed in radians rather than degrees).

Figure 3. Typical KES-F plot of shear stress vs strain

2.1.3 Bending
In this test a fabric sample is bent first one way and then in the opposite
direction, as indicated in Figure 4. The instrument applies a linearly
increasing bend curvature (which is the reciprocal of the bend radius) to a
sample of fabric, whilst at the same time monitoring the bending moment
developed.

Topic7x-Kawabata-FAST.doc 7
 Introduction to the Principles of Textile Testing - MA Wilding

Figure 4. Principle of the KES-F bend test, and schematic plot of data

The test is performed between the maximum and minimum curvature

limits of +2.5 cm-1 and -2.5 cm-1.

The bending rigidity, B, is defined as the slope of the bending moment vs

curvature plot at the point where the line crosses the vertical axis. In
practice most fabrics show reasonably linear behaviour between the two
extreme limits of curvature; this therefore amounts to the slope of either
of the parallel lines representing the bending and unbending stages. In
common with most other physical properties of textile materials, the
bending behaviour usually displays a degree of hysteresis, as can be
appreciated from Figure 4. This is quantified in terms of the parameter
2HB which is quantified as indicated.

2.1.4 Lateral compression

The compression test uses the "anvil and presser-foot" principle, in which
the fabric sample is sandwiched between two flat, parallel metal plates.
One plate is connected to a force transducer from which the applied

Topic7x-Kawabata-FAST.doc 8
 Introduction to the Principles of Textile Testing - MA Wilding

pressure can be determined, via the sample dimensions. The thickness

change is monitored, and this would normally be converted to a
compressional strain. The pressure is varied up to a maximum of 50
gmcm-2 (0.49 Ncm-2)

Figure 5 shows the type of data plot that might be obtained. The actual
shapes of the curves will be very sensitive to the type of fabric being
tested, of course.

Figure 5. Schematic plot of pressure versus strain from KES-F compression test

The compressional energy, WC, is the area under the "load-increasing"

curve. The linearity, LC, is the same area divided by the area of the
triangle OAB (in Figure 5). LC is thus the equivalent, in compression, of
the tensile linearity, LT.

The compressional resilience, RC, is the equivalent of the tensile

resilience, RT, and is equal to the area under the "load-decreasing" curve
divided by WC, and expressed as a percentage.

The two thickness parameters, To and Tm, are simply measured from the
separation of the plates at the appropriate pressure levels.

2.1.5 Surface characteristic

An assessment of the "roughness" of a fabric's surface is effectively made
by dragging a U-shaped wire across it, as illustrated schematically in

Topic7x-Kawabata-FAST.doc 9
 Introduction to the Principles of Textile Testing - MA Wilding

Figure 6. The wire (of diameter 0.5mm) is attached to a lever arm whose
movement enables the fabric profile to be plotted. The arm is loaded so as
to apply a normal force of 10 gf (9.81 mN). Suppose the wire is dragged a
total distance X across the fabric. T is the average thickness as
determined by the instrument, but the shaded area in the figure is related
to how rough the surface is. The 'mean variation in surface
roughness' (SMD), is specified as this area divided by X.

Figure 6. Assessing the surface roughness of a fabric

The frictional characteristics are assessed in a similar manner to the

roughness, except that in this case a group of 10 wires (each having a
diameter of 0.5 mm) is used, as depicted in Figure 7. Additionally, a
higher normal force (50 gf; 0.49N) is applied. However, the main
distinction is that instead of determining the fabric profile, the friction test
monitors the force necessary to drag the wires over the surface. Dividing
this force by the normal force gives the dynamic friction coefficient. This is
then plotted as a function of the distance travelled across the fabric. Its
mean value (MIU) is determined, together with the mean variation
(MMD). Similarly to SMD, MMD is calculated from the total shaded area
(Figure 7) divided by the total distance traversed (X).

Topic7x-Kawabata-FAST.doc 10
 Introduction to the Principles of Textile Testing - MA Wilding

Figure 7. Assessing the frictional characteristics of a fabric

3
3.. T
Thhe
eFFA
ASST
TSSy
ysstte
emm
The system known as 'FAST' ("Fabric Assurance through Simple
Testing") was developed by 'CSIRO' – the Australian Commonwealth
Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation. It was initially
intended for the assessment of suiting fabrics, and as such was designed
specifically to aid tailors & worsted finishers. However, it can be - and is -
applied more generally. The approach is in some ways similar to that of
the Kawabata system, but the assessment is based on fewer measured
properties. The method is also claimed to be quicker, simpler & more
robust than KES-F. It is certainly less expensive.

As the name implies, FAST was developed to be a quality-assurance tool

for fabrics – a means of ensuring good performance during downstream
operations such as sewing and making up into garments. In this respect,
one of its main objectives was to enable discrimination between loosely-
constructed and tightly-constructed fabrics. Loose fabrics tend to distort
very easily, and this can cause a multitude of problems during making-up.
On the other hand, excessively tight fabrics can cause problems
associated with moulding, over-feeding of seams, etc.

Topic7x-Kawabata-FAST.doc 11
 Introduction to the Principles of Textile Testing - MA Wilding

The complete set of instruments consists of four sub-systems, as follows:

FAST 1 Compression meter

FAST 2 Bending meter – bending length test
FAST 3 Extension meter
FAST 4 Dimensional stability test

3.1 Measurement of the FAST parameters

Saville provides a full description of the methods used in the FAST
system, from which the following is a summary.

3.1.1 Compression
The compressional characteristics of the fabric are assessed by measuring
the thickness of a 10-cm2 area in response to two different normal
pressures:

a) 2 gfcm-2 (19.6 mNcm-2)

b) 100 gfcm-2 (981 mNcm-2).

The fabric is assumed to consist of a core layer, which is essentially

incompressible, and a surface layer which can be compressed. The
thickness of the latter is taken as the difference between the two
thickness values determined as above.

The measurements are repeated after steaming the fabric sample on a

Hoffman press for 30 seconds, which imparts stability to the surface layer.

3.1.2 Bending length

The method for determining the flexural characteristics on the FAST system is
effectively the Shirley bending-length test (BS 3356), but using a fabric specimen
width of 5 cm. The bending rigidity is calculated from the bending length and the
fabric weight per unit length.

3.1.3 Extension testing

For this test rectangular specimens are used (100 mm x 50 mm), the longer
dimension being in the direction of stretching. The extension of the fabric is
-
measured in both warp and weft directions at three fixed forces: 5, 20 and 100 gfcm
1 -1 -1
(49, 196 and 981 mNcm ); and in the bias direction at one force only: 5 gfcm .
This also enables an estimate to be made of the shear rigidity

3.1.4 Dimensional stability

FAST differs from KES-F in that it includes an assessment of how susceptible the
fabric is to shrinkage. No special equipment is needed for this other than an oven, in
o
which the sample is dried at 105 C. Shrinkage is measured (for each of the warp
and weft directions) to give an initial length L1. The sample is then soaked in water
and re-measured to give a ‘wet relaxed’ length L2. It is then re-dried in the oven and
re-measured to give a final length L3.
The following parameters are determined from these measurements:

Topic7x-Kawabata-FAST.doc 12
 Introduction to the Principles of Textile Testing - MA Wilding

L1 − L 3
• Relaxation shrinkage: x100%
L1

L2 − L 3
• Hygral expansion: x100%
L3

3.2 The wider applicability of FAST

The basic parameters measured using FAST can be utilised effectively in
determining fabric performance more widely. For example, from the warp- weft- and
bias-extension data the in-plane shear behaviour can be derived. In combination
with the bending parameters, this can then be related, for example, to the fabric’s
ability to drape.

Fabric ‘formability’ can be assessed from the longitudinal compressibility and the
bending rigidity. Although the former is not measured directly, it can be estimated by
assuming the in-plane compressional modulus to be equal to the extensional
modulus.

4
4.. W
Wiid
deerr S
Siig
gnniiffiicca
anncce
eooff K
KEES
S--F
F&&F
FAAS
STT–
–QQu
uaalliitty
y cco
onnttrro
oll

4.1 Identification of potential problems in garment manufacture

The many processes that are involved in making up fabric and other
components into a final product, such as a garment, can be fraught with a
range of difficulties arising from shortcomings in the fabric properties.
Particularly in view of their convenience and speed of operation, KES-F
and FAST have proved of great value in their ability to highlight such
potential problems. Examples of property-deficiencies that might be
encountered include:

• low bending stiffness

This can cause ‘seam-pucker’ and problems in cutting out.

• Excessively stiff fabrics

Very stiff fabrics may be more manageable in sewing, but can cause
problems during operations such as moulding.

• Low values of fabric extension

If the fabric is insufficiently extensible it can give rise to unwanted effects such
as seam-pucker, problems associated with moulding and overfed seams.

• Excessively high values of fabric extension

If a fabric is extended too easily, it can cause problems in laying-up because
it may stretch during cutting, producing excessive subsequent shrinkage and
pattern matching errors.

• Low values of formability

Topic7x-Kawabata-FAST.doc 13
 Introduction to the Principles of Textile Testing - MA Wilding

If the formability is too low there is the likelihood of puckering, especially

when the fabric is made up into collars, cuffs etc.

• High values of shrinkage:

This is often associated with problems in garment sizing and seam pucker
during final pressing.

• High values of hygral expansion

If the hygral expansion is high there can be a significant loss of appearance
when the fabric/garment is stored in humid conditions, because the
dimensions will increase. This may or may not be reverible.

4.2 KES-F & FAST in practical quality control procedures

The KES-F and FAST systems are considerably useful in the area of fabric
quality control. In the case of KES-F, the measured values of the 16
properties are generally "normalised" by comparing them with their
counterparts in an "ideal" reference fabric. The normalised value, xN, of
any given property is defined as follows:

xN =
(x meas − x )
σ
In the above, xmeas is the actual property value, as obtained from the
instrument, in its appropriate units. x is the average value of the same
property - obtained "historically" over many tests - for fabrics of that type
(ie the "reference" value), and σ is a parameter called the 'standard
deviation' which is a statistical parameter related to how variable such
fabrics might be. The normalised quantity would clearly be zero if the
reference and test fabric were exactly the same with regard to that
particular property. The greater the normalised value (either positive or
negative), then the further the test fabric lies from the reference. In any
practical application there will be a "window" of acceptable values.

Typically, all the normalised properties are plotted on the same scale onto
a single chart, preferably along with their respective acceptable maximum
and minimum values. Joining the data points with straight lines produces
a ‘snake chart’. A similar normalisation process is applied to the primary
and total hand values, so that these can also be incorporated. See Figure
8.

Topic7x-Kawabata-FAST.doc 14
 Introduction to the Principles of Textile Testing - MA Wilding

Figure 8. A typical HESC control chart, as used with KES-F; source: S Kawabata, "The
Standardization and Analysis of Hand Evaluation", Second Edition (1980)

Using this kind of chart, departures from the ideal (zero) can readily be
identified. The procedure is used to map the acceptable range for the
various handle parameters in relation to the technical requirements for
any given application or set of operations, such as cutting and sewing.

Topic7x-Kawabata-FAST.doc 15
 Introduction to the Principles of Textile Testing - MA Wilding

The FAST system is also often used in conjunction with a control snake-
chart (Figure 9). In this case, though, it is usual to plot the actual
measured property values in their original units, as distinct from the
dimensionless normalised quantities. The procedure is designed
specifically to aid the tailoring of worsted suiting fabrics, as previously
mentioned.

Figure 9 A blank control chart, as used with the FAST system; the shaded areas indicate
where problems could be expected to occur during the various making-up operations;
source: CSIRO Report No. WT92.02 (see Further Reading)

Topic7x-Kawabata-FAST.doc 16
 Introduction to the Principles of Textile Testing - MA Wilding

5
5.. F
Fuurrtth
heerr R
Reea
addiin
ngg
A de Boos & D Tester. "SiroFAST – A System for Fabric Objective
Measurement and its Application in Fabric and Garment Manufacture",
CSIRO Report No. WT92.02 (1994). ISBN: 0 643 06025 1

JE Booth “Principles of Textile Testing”, (3rd Ed.), Butterworths (1986).

ISBN: 0 408 01487 3. Chapter 7

BP Saville. “Physical Testing of Textiles”. Woodhead (1999).

ISBN: 1-85573-367-6. Chapter 10

Topic7x-Kawabata-FAST.doc 17