Textile Research Journal

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Register here to gain access to SAGE's 500+ Journals Online

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by deMaCarty, P.C.
Right arrow Articles by Dusenbury, J.H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Textile Research Journal, Vol. 25, No. 10, 875-885 (1955)
DOI: 10.1177/004051755502501007

On the Bulk Compression Characteristics of Wool Fibers

P.C. deMaCarty

Textile Research Institute, Princeton, New Jersey

J.H. Dusenbury

Textile Research Institute, Princeton, New Jersey

A method has been found to prepare bulk samples of wool fibers in such a way that reproducible compression tests may be performed upon them. An evaluation of the bulk compression characteristics of 29 widely different wool samples shows that compressive load, rather than resilience, serves to bring out differences among them. This finding suggests that quality differences among wools, as determined by handling, are related to differences in the wools' resistance to compression rather than to differences in compressional resilience.

For these 29 wool samples there is an inverse relationship between compressive load and mean fiber diameter. Although this finding is in agreement with similar results re ported for cotton fibers, it conflicts with the predictions from a theoretical model that has been proposed to explain the compressional behavior of wool. The theoretical model, which was based on a consideration of bending forces only during compression, has been claimed to fit results found for 310 samples of Merino wool. There is, therefore, an implication either that there is a different dependency of resistance to compression on fiber diameter within a wool breed as compared to that among different breeds or that the proposed theory is inadequate.

When the compressing piston size is varied at a constant sample size for a Targhee 60's wool card sliver, it is found that the effective volume of fibers being compressed is greater than the volume of fibers beneath the piston, probably because of fiber-to-fiber entanglements. The experimental results indicate that a constant area should be added to the compressing piston areas in order to achieve a constant compressive stress. This area increment is independent of sample diameter, providing the sample diameter is suf ficiently greater than that of the compressing piston, and this area increment decreases with increasing degree of compression.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Textile Research JournalHome page
J. H. Dusenbury, C.-N. Wu, and C. J. Dansizer
Mechanical Properties of Feather and Down Fibers: Part I: Measurements at 65% RH and 70{degrees} F
Textile Research Journal, April 1, 1960; 30(4): 277 - 290.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Textile Research JournalHome page
S.M. Fok and T.G. Finzel
Improved Method for Bulk Compression of Staple Fibers: INDUSTRIAL RAYON CORPORATION High Polymer Research Division 9801 Walford Avenue Cleveland 1, Ohio May 11, 1956
Textile Research Journal, September 1, 1956; 26(9): 684 - 686.
[PDF]