Talk:Units of textile measurement

Serious edit

Added additional linear distance units; I think it makes it clear that you need to quote units as well as numbers. The nice thing about textile units is there are so many to pick from. Tried to structure so it could be extended. Removed duplication; I hope info has not been lost. (Charles Esson (talk) 01:51, 9 July 2018 (UTC)).

equation for Tex

Does 'cross area' mean the diameter? Is that generally understood by other people, I didn't hear of cross area before.

"Cross area" is not used in the current version of this article98.255.130.152 (talk) 15:50, 27 December 2012 (UTC).

Tex- what's normal?

It would be helpful to the merely curious to have some ideas of approximately how much a kilometer of thread weighs- after all, it's not something most of us really think about. Sample numbers anyone? RSido 19:52, 19 February 2007 (UTC) Denier equals 90% of dtex. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.255.130.152 (talk) 15:33, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Thread Count

Interesting to note that 400 thread count is almost impossible to obtain in London, but is easily found in Australian department stores (e.g. the Sheridan brand).

Should 'per square inch' or 'per square centimetre' actually read 'per 1-inch square' or 'per 1-centimetre square'? A square inch can have different shapes, and this would vary the thread count.

I have also seen fabric (sheets) labeled '250 thread count per 10cm^2' which if it means a 10 square centimetre square is a bit bigger than a 1-inch square. Still labeled percale. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.97.170.14 (talk) 08:26, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Thread counts are the sum of the warp & weft counts for a given unit length, so describing them "per-area" is highly misleading.

Thread count figures in Australia are along two sides of a square that's 10cm×10cm, meaning the warp count over 10cm plus the weft count per 10cm (or the average count per 20cm, assuming the weave is close to square).

When converting between metric & imperial, you must the linear conversion cm/in (2.54), *not* the area conversion cm²/sqin (6.45). Metric 400-TC (per 10cm) is roughly imperial 102-TC (per inch). 202.7.195.132 (talk) 03:45, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Thread count quote

The section on Thread Count contains a quotation about standard industry practice and the Federal Trade Commission. The footnote properly attributes the quotation. But the reference is not very useful; it contains no additional information about the FTC warning. What would be more useful is a reference to the actual warning, or to more information about it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.31.248.239 (talk) 22:42, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

So explain Denier to me

"Denier is a unit of measure for the linear mass density of fibers." - so does that mean the higher the number the stronger the fabric? A 40 denier stocking is more resilient than a 20 denier stocking? --IceHunter (talk) 13:45, 2 February 2009 (UTC) Yes that is right. 40 denier is double the weight of 20 denier. My Flatley (talk) 18:09, 20 October 2009 (UTC) No, "denier" does not necessarily "mean the higher the number the stronger the fabric." One must remember that denier only refers to "size" (more specifically: mass per length) of the yarn or fiber from which the fabric is woven. A multi-strand yarn and a monofilament fiber of the same denier and material will not be the same diameter, will have other different characteristics (such as "resiliency"), and may have different strengths as well, even though there is the same "amount" of material. Further, fabric strength depends on a number of factors besides denier, and it may vary with direction as well, but, yes, all other factors being identical (including density), for two similar fabrics of larger and smaller denier, the fabric made of the larger denier fibers will be stronger, if for no other reason than because it will be thicker (there is "more" of it). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.255.130.152 (talk) 15:13, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Fabric weight?

If a fabric is described by weight, such as "1.9 oz ripstop", is it 1.9 oz per square yard or 1.9 oz per running yard? My Flatley (talk) 18:14, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Weight per square yard98.255.130.152 (talk) 15:44, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Deci is x0.1, Deca is x10

Quote, ". The unit code is "tex". The most commonly used unit is actually the decitex, abbreviated dtex, which is the mass in grams per 10,000 meters" So that would be decatex, not decitex. 64.114.134.52 (talk) 10:43, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

One decitex one tenth of a tex, or 1 dtex = 0.1 tex = or 0.1 g / 1 km. This is equal to 1 g / 10 km. T71024 (talk) 19:02, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Thread count picture doesn't match article.

The picture used in the Thread Count section is unrelated to that section, and does not relate to any information given elsewhere on the page. A diagram explaining thread count would be really useful, ideally summarizing the controversy surrounding its definition. If I had better computer graphic skills, I could volunteer to do this, but it may prove beyond my level of proficiency. The existing picture should be moved to a new section which actually references it, or removed altogether. I have a bit of knowledge of textiles and some good reference books, so will see what I can find. It's an area of interest to me. Chellspecker (talk) 21:49, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

This page is starting to resemble a textile measurement forum.

Despite the assumption that someone reading this page might have some knowledge about these measurements and the relative obscurity of the subject matter and the temptation to seek information regarding textile measurements here, some of the questions asked here would be better taken up on a textile forum elsewhere on the web. Chellspecker (talk) 21:52, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Am I right that section 1.1 has few words out of context?

Am I right that section 1.1 has an out of context paragraph? I am referring to the paragraph with the words `a unit of fineness for fibres' as its only content. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.64.29.102 (talk) 01:20, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Meters or linear meters of cloth

Should this article define meters or linear meters or cloth? Is it 1×1 meter? Or 1m×1.46m? [1]. If a source says "100,000 meters of cloth annually were exported" is that meaningful? Or is there insufficient information (i.e. the weight of the cloth)? --Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:01, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Mathematical notation, please

Could someone please figure out what this means and put it in standard, unambiguous notation?

1÷√((density×0.7855)÷(Denier/900000))×10

86.149.137.8 (talk) 02:23, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

PIC

In Britain we have a measurement 'PIC' - eg a sheet is 144TPI 68PIC. Do I take it this means 'Picks (ie weft threads) per inch', ie PPI here? Perhaps it could be added. 86.187.156.116 (talk) 19:10, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Units of textile measurement/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

The section on Thread Count contains a quotation about standard industry practice and the Federal Trade Commission. The footnote properly attributes the quotation. But the reference is not very useful; it contains no additional information about the FTC warning. What would be more useful is a reference to the actual warning, or to more information about it.

Last edited at 22:38, 6 September 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 09:38, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Units of textile measurement. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131003032828/http://indiantextilejournal.com/articles/FAdetails.asp?id=552 to http://www.indiantextilejournal.com/articles/FAdetails.asp?id=552
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080411082804/http://www.hometextilestoday.com:80/article/CA475384.html to http://www.hometextilestoday.com/article/CA475384.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080411082804/http://www.hometextilestoday.com:80/article/CA475384.html to http://www.hometextilestoday.com/article/CA475384.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:48, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Add grist/yarn counts to "Yarn and thread"

This is information that I'd like to incorporate into the "Yarn and thread" section. However, it needs to be cleaned up or formatted some, so I'm leaving it here until I have time to incorporate it (unless someone else gets to it first):

Grist = yards/pound

Different types of fibers have different "counts", which refer to the maximum length (in yards) of 1 pound of fiber, spun into the thinnest possible single-ply thread.

In weaving, yarns are often labeled as 8/2, 16/2, 96/2, etc. The first number refers to the size of a single ply. 1 is the fattest, and larger numbers are thinner. This number is standardized, and depends on the fiber type; is is equal to NeW, NeL, NeS, NeK, etc. The second number refers to the ply count (8/1 is single-ply, 8/2 is 2-ply).

- Heddles (talk) 01:46, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

References

Fibre length

Fibre length is an important measure, longer fibres tend to pill less than shorter fibres. But there is no section about this under Fibres. FreeFlow99 (talk) 15:42, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

That's nonsense. -Roxy, the PROD. . wooF 12:16, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

I quote from the wikipedia page Pill (textile) "In general longer fibers pill less than short ones because there are fewer ends of fibers,[2] and because it is harder for the longer fibers to work themselves out of the cloth." FreeFlow99 (talk) 17:02, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a reliable source. -Roxy, the PROD. . wooF 17:26, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

The rationale appears sound and comes from Kay Obendorf, Professor of textiles and apparel at Cornell University. If there are longer and fewer fibres there will inevitably be fewer ends to pill. Longer fibres will be more difficult to pull out because longer length means greater friction with adjoining fibres. Even if you don't accept this, that does not mean that we should not have a section on fiber length for those people who do think that it is a relevant factor (googling textile fiber length produces a list of articles demonstrating that other people believe that it is an important factor). Clearly it is measurable aspect of textiles, so for completeness there ought to be a section in this article covering this.

Yes, fibre length is an important measurement in respect to the properties of textile fibres, but to state that it is any more than a very minor factor in the pilling of textiles is stretching the fibre a little. -Roxy, the PROD. . wooF 17:43, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Cotton Count link

The link to Cotton Count takes us to this same article (a circular reference). I take it that this link ought to take the user to the section on units that defines cotton count? FreeFlow99 (talk) 11:26, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

It is because we dont have articles on those particular count systems, and there are redirects in place to the next most sensible article, this one. -Roxy the elfin dog . wooF 11:46, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

It makes no sense to have a link to the very screen the user is already on; the use clicks the link and nothing appears to happen. That is not adding value, it is causing unnecessary surprise. I recommend we modify the link to go to the appropriate section of this article. FreeFlow99 (talk) 14:06, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Feel free, that is a good idea. -Roxy the elfin dog . wooF 14:09, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Done FreeFlow99 (talk) 14:17, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Courses and Wales

I have added the courses and wales. Please comment and discuss here, if anything needs improvement. Loops are the building blocks of knitted fabrics, and courses and wales in knitted fabrics are importantly similar to ends and pick in woven fabrics. The knitting structure is formed by intermeshing the loops in consecutive rows.

• Courses: are the total number of horizontal rows measured in per inch or per centimetre. The course is a horizontal row of loops formed by all the adjacent needles during one revolution. course length is obtained by multiplying loop length with the number of needles involved in the production of the course.
• Wales: are the number of vertical columns measured in per inch or per centimetre.
• Stitch/loop density: The more or less number of courses and wales per inch or per centimetre infers the tight and loose knitting. Stitch or loop density is the total number of loops in a unit area such as per square centimetre or per square inch.
• Stitch/loop length: Loop length is one of the major factor which influence knitted fabric's over all quality such as dimensional stability, drape and appearance, etc. Loop length is the length of yarn contained to form a loop. ThanksRAJIVVASUDEV (talk) 14:38, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

References

Stitch length

@ Roxy the elfin dog .Hey dog, Recently you reverted [[2]]. You mentioned that "Not a unit of textile measurement" For your information stitch length is the fundamental measure of a knitted fabric.. It is measured every time to analyze the product and for reproduction( in mm). Your repeated offensive behavior is not in favor of the article. Please reconsider. ThanksRAJIVVASUDEV (talk) 18:32, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello devvy boy. Did you read what you wrote? it described a stitch, and had nothing to do with the stitch length. it isn't my job to teach you english, or textiles. -Roxy the inedible dog . wooF 19:13, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Hey dog, Do not call me Devvy boy, I have more fancy names for you. So please be warned. A stitch in textiles defines stitch length also, especially for knitted fabrics.

.

What should have been done? Wikipedia is not a place to hold grudges, import personal conflicts, carry on ideological battles, or nurture prejudice, hatred, or fear.Wp:Wikipedia is not about winning

It was better to discuss on the talk page first, and anything more helpful could be added or rejected.

But you can't do anything constructive. It is not your business. Your only aim is to provoke, harras, discourage, and block the new-editors. If you are doing good it never means others are compulsorily harming the projects. You are a bane on here and maligning the respectful Wikipedia community. Rather than re-editing stitch with stitch length(Or any other possible correction), you deleted the things. I am not going to tolerate this anymore and report your harassing behavior to the admins. Better you stay away with my edits and let the other reviewers see them. You are crossing the limits by following my edits. Harassment is a pattern of repeated offensive behavior that appears to a reasonable observer to intentionally target a specific personWP: Harassment Editors engaged in a dispute should reach consensus or pursue dispute resolution rather than edit warring.WP:Edit warring And I told you many times, kindly stay focused on the article, not on the users. The Stenter talk is still incomplete. Thanks RAJIVVASUDEV (talk) 04:09, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Hey devvy boy, if you keep calling me dog, I will continue calling you devvy boy, until you stop. Also, there is no need to pinbg me, so please stop. Also note that I have removed your post from my talk page because you copied my posts again. please dont do that, how many times must I ask? -Roxy the inedible dog . wooF 05:07, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Roxy, I was never calling you a dog to annoy you, I was using this because you yourself use it(maybe to browbeat other users but it is not cool) and it is very much in your user name if you are feeling offended with the same I shall not call you "a dog" anymore. Stay calm and make sure no disruptions in my work. ThanksRAJIVVASUDEV (talk) 05:40, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

References

Denier

This is confusing because I've never seen a definition involving weight before. All uses of denier with nylon have been related to the number of threads. Turkeyphan^t 12:16, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Excellent, that means you have learned something. Denier has nothing to do with number of threads. -Roxy the sceptical dog. wooF 13:05, 31 October 2021 (UTC)

Conversion templates need removing

in this diff by User:SidP added a whole slew of changes, including conversion templates that have banjaxed the formulae of the various count and measurement systems.

Please can they be removed to restore the accuracy of the text. The whole point of the various systems of measurement is that the units involved are not converted. Thanks. -Roxy the dog 00:25, 24 January 2023 (UTC) (resign) Roxy the dog 00:27, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Citation "Busting the thread count myth" may be biased

The linked page is a blog post from a company selling bedclothes. The gist of the page is "our thread counts may be lower, but our threads and weaving patterns are better than products with higher counts." This may in fact be true, but can hardly be considered an encyclopedic level citation. I suspect some of this section was written by the company? Also the citation "What is thread count?" goes to a dead link. This whole area needs attention. Crag (talk) 03:07, 13 September 2023 (UTC)