RAW MATWEIAL AND FABRIC YARN CHARACTERISTICS OF CAMEL-HAIR, SAIDI WOOL AND THEIR BLEND

Navigation: Main page » Hair and Hair Loss

 Print this page Submit articleComment article

Author: Helal, A; Guirgis, R. A; El-Ganaieny, M. M. and, E. A. Gad-Allah

Introduction

In Egypt about 136.3 thousand heads of one-humped camels, more than 19 thousand heads were existed in north western costal of Egypt (Statistics of the Animal Production Sector, Egyptian Ministry of Agriculture and Land Reclamation, 2003). Camel hair, like cashmere, comprises two qualities: relatively coarse outer hair and inner down fiber. The outer hair of the camel is coarse, long, colored, while the inner coat was fine, short, crimpy and dense. Camel-hair considered as a valuable material especially for Bedouin communities because they tended to use it to make their wears and tents. The irregularity in the characteristics of camel hair due to the great variability among its different types of fibers (outer and inner coat) could be the main problem in using camel hair in a large scale of the textile industry. Helal, et al (2007) found that camel hair could be more valuable after grading into fine and coarse parts on the fabricated yarn characteristics. Moreover, blending camel hair with wool could be more effective to improve camel hair characteristics but it needs a specific type of wool which has similar color of camel hair with good characteristics. Meanwhile, using colored wool and camel hair is favorable instead of using chemical dyes and it will be more applicable in the small scale industries. Saidi sheep have relatively light mature body weight with long thin-tail raised mainly in Upper Egypt and have a dark brown colored fleece. This study deals with both raw and fabricated yarn of both saidi wool and camel hair individually or as a blend (50:50 for each) to show the contribution of each type in the yarn characteristics. As well as, investigate the ability of using camel hair as textile materials which consider as waste one.

Materials and methods

In this study, 45 fleeces of camel hair were collected from a herd of one-humped camels at Maryout Research Station belongs to Desert Research center. In the same time a 45 fleeces from Saidi sheep were collected from a flock raised in El-Wady Aljadeed province. Three categories were used in this study; the G1 contains 100% camel hair, G2 contains 50% camel-hair and 50% Saidi wool and G3 contains 100% Saidi wool. A representative sample from each category was kept in plastic bags for the measurements of raw material. Ten staples from each previous representative sample were used to measure staple length (STL); staples were measured against a ruler to the nearest 0.5 cm, where measurements were made from the base to the dense part of the tip without stretching staples. The average length of these staples was calculated and recorded for each sample. Fiber diameter (FD) was measured using Image analyzer (LEICA Q 500 MC) with lens 4/0.12. A section of 0.2 mm in length was cut by a Hand-Microtom at a level of 2cm from the base of the staples of each sample. These cuttings were put on a microscope slide with 2-3 drops of paraffin oil and covered with a slide cover. About five hundred fibers were taken at random and measured from each sample. The mean fiber diameter (FD) together with the standard deviation of fiber diameter was calculated for each sample. Each scoured sample was hand carded using a hand-carding board. A 10-gm scoured and carded sample was placed into the cylinder of the WRONZ loose wool Bulkometer (Dunlop et al., 1974) to attain the measurements of loose wool bulk (BUL) and resilience (RES) for each sample. Random samples (n = 15) of yarns coming from each category after woolen process were tested as follows:

• Yarn count (metric) = yarns length (m) / yarns weight (g).

• Yarn twisting (yarns from each grade was played at nominal level of 170 turn per meter (TPM) on Z direction).

• Yarn strength and elongation: Uster Tensorapid 3 (Zellweger Uster) was used to measure yarn strength (RKM = count-related force at break), tenacity and elongation.

• Yarn evenness and hairiness were used to measure the regularity of the yarn by the following abbreviations: * Thin places (-50%): number of mass reduction of 50% or more in a yarn with respect to the mean value. * Thick places (+50%): number of mass increase of 50% or more in a yarn with respect to the mean value. * Neps (+200%): number of mass increase of 200% or more in a yarn with respect to the mean value and reference length of 1cm, these short thick places in a yarn may be the result of vegetable matter or fiber collections pushed together.

• Yarn friction: was used to examine the friction for standard length of yarns (Revs). Data were analyzed with the general linear model (GLM) of SAS (1995). Source of variation for dependent variable (grades) was tested. Comparisons among means within grades were tested using Duncan's New Multiple Range Test. Simple correlation coefficients among various studied traits were also calculated and tested.

Results and discussion

Fiber diameter pattern was found to be in decreasing order, G1 was the highest (42.1, Camel-hair) followed by G2 (35.1, Wool and camel-hair blend) and G3 (30.9, Saidi wool). Likewise, Staple length (STL) was found to follow the same trend of FD. The corresponding STL values were 11.0, 10.6 and 9.2 for G1, G2 and G3, respectively. The highly significant correlation (r = 0.44) between both fiber diameter and staple length might support the previous results. Many studies on different wool types had confirmed the same correlation between FD and STL (Azam (1999); Abd El-Maguid, 2000 and Gadallah, 2001). However, Kroiter and Dyudina (1991) found that the correlation coefficient between wool length and fiber diameter was highly significant and ranged between 0.74 and 0.9. Because of both fiber diameter and length contributed in the fibers weight, where fiber weight increased with the increase of both FD and STL. The yarn metric count as a function of both weight and length showed an opposite trend of both FD and STL; it increased significantly from G1 (1.32) to G2 (1.41) and reached the maximum in G3 (1.47). Table (5) also demonstrated a significant and negative correlations between yarn count and both of fiber diameter and its standard deviation (R = -0.32 and -0.45, respectively). Helal, et al (2007) reported similar result that with the increasing in fiber diameter the yarn count tended to decrease. They also found a highly negative correlation (r = -0.87) between fiber diameter and yarn count. Furthermore, Hunter et al (1985 and 1987) reported that fiber diameter and length played a vital role in the yarn characteristics.

Yarn twisting (Table 1) was found to be affected by the increasing in both fiber diameter and its standard deviation rather than the increase in staple length, values were 242.7, 235.3 and 229.4 TPM for G1, G2 and G3, respectively. The significant correlation between yarn twisting and both fiber diameter and its standard deviation (r = 0.34 and 0.38, respectively), as well as the low correlation between yarn twisting and STL (r = 0.23) might support the previous findings and confirmed well with those results of Helal et al (2007). Friction test is affected mainly by the scales profile and as many authors explained that with increasing fiber diameter the scales become larger in size and increased the necessary number needs to surround the fiber circumference (Ryder and Stephenson, 1968). The present results illustrated that friction tended to increase with the increase of fiber diameter (Tables 1 and 2). Friction had a positive and significant correlation with fiber diameter (r = 0.56), standard deviation of fiber diameter (r = 0.58) and staple length (r = 0.34). While it had a negative and significant correlation with bulk (r = -0.42) and resilience (r = -0.35). Also, Yarn friction was correlated negatively with yarn count as showed in table (3). The previous finding becomes logic when taken into consideration the negative correlation between yarn count and fiber diameter which leads to increase the yarn friction. Bulk, the volume occupied by a given mass of fibers at a given pressure is important for yarns to give the covering power of carpet pile (Elliott and Clare, 1981). From this point of view, G3 had the highest wool in bulk (25.2) followed by G2 (22.1) and finally G1 (20.3). Table (4) showed that both bulk and resilience increase with decreasing of fiber diameter, standard deviation of fiber diameter and staple length. Furthermore, yarn elongation, yarn count and yarn tenacity tended to increase with increasing loose bulk (Table 5). On the other hand, both yarn twisting and yarn friction tended to decrease with increasing loose bulk. Carnaby and Elliott (1980) indicated that bulky wool produces bulky yarns. Yarn tenacity was decreased with the increase of fiber diameter and staple length (2.2, 3.1 and 3.4 Rkm for G1, G2 and G3, respectively).the significant and negative correlation found between Yarn tenacity and both of fiber diameter (r = -0.79) and staple length (r = -0.34) which indicate that with increasing fiber diameter, yarn strength tended to decrease. In accordance with our results,

Phillips et al (1991) and De Groot (1995) reported that the coefficient of variation of fiber diameter has a measurable effect on yarn properties such as evenness, tenacity and extension at break. Yarn tenacity is not quite easy to be explained because yarn always made from a blend of different fiber types, leading to large differences in physical properties among fibers. This variability could exist not only among fibers but also along a single fiber as well, that could be due to the variation in cross-section area of the fiber. This irregularity leads to very complicated mechanical behavior. Furthermore, twisting process make a redistribution of fibers in the yarn form and leads to a lateral movement of fibers towards the external yarn axis. As long as yarn forming some fibers tended to break and others tended to slipped, while the ultimate yarn rupture is due to the combination of slippage and fiber breakage. Tandon et al. (1995) related some of this variability in yarn strength to the tension on the longitudinal extension. In coarse fiber medulla considered as one of the important factors affecting staple and yarn strength, that could explain why in fine fibers the correlations between yarn strength and both of fiber length and fiber diameter were significant and positive in fine wool breeds as reported by Ryder and Stephenson (1968) and Ince (1979).

Yarn elongation tended to increase with the decrease of fiber diameter (Table 1). Also, significant positive correlation was found between yarn elongation and yarn tenacity. Similar trend was reported by Helal, et al (2007). Regularity of yarns could be measured by three terms like thin and thick places and number of Neps. In this respect, both camel hair and camel-wool blend had higher thin and thick places compared with wool category. The irregularity in camel hair as we explained earlier leads to increase number of thin places 3 times (300.3 Vs. 95.9) and thick places 3.7 times (150.0 Vs. 40.6) compared with wool group. Number of Neps in both camel-hair and wool were found to be the same. While, the hair-wool blend has the highest number of Neps which might be related to the bad merging of both hair and wool together. The irregularity of yarn as represented by thin and thick places had similar positive and significant correlation with yarn friction (r=0.60), fiber diameter (r=0.84) and staple length (r=0.45).The same result was obtained by De Groot (1995) who indicated that the frequency of thin and thick places is increases with increasing fibre diameter. Further more, thin and thick places had a negative correlation with bulk and resilience (Table 5), while number of Neps had no obvious trend with both yarn and fiber characteristics.

It could be concluded that it is better to make a blend between wool and camel hair instead of using camel-hair as it is. Camel hair contains different types of fiber leads to a great variability in its yarn characteristics. Saidi wool is more than suitable for the blend with camel-hair that because this wool not only improve the blend characteristics but also give a good colored yarn desirable for small scale industry especially for portrait shows the Bedouins communities or natural views. Improving camel-hair is necessary and must be including in breeding programs for more homogeneity in its clip.

Table (1).

Least-squares (X) ± standard errors (SE) for some processing characteristics of different experimental groups of camel hair and wool. Yarn Characteristics Camel-hair (G1) Camel and wool blend (G2) Saidi wool (G3) Yarn Metric count 1.32±0.04 a 1.41±0.04 ab 1.47±0.04 b Yarn Twisting 242.7±3.4 a 235.3±3.4 ab 229.4 ±3.5 b Friction 302.8±10.6 a 244.6±10.6 b 235.4±10.9 b Yarn Tenacity 2.2±0.06 a 3.1±0.06 b 3.4±0.07 c Yarn Elongation 10.7±0.58 a 10.9±0.58 a 12.1±0.60 a Thin place(-50%)/Km 300.3±0.81 a 130.0±0.81 b 95.9±0.83 c Thick place(+50%)/Km 150.0±0.67 a 60.2±0.68 b 40.6±0.71 c Neps (+200%)/Km 9.91±0.46 a 49.5±0.46 b 10.0±0.47 a Within each classification for each trait means not followed by the same letter are differed significantly (P< 0.05).

Table (2).

Least-squares means (X) ± standard errors (SE) for some physical characteristics of different experimental groups of camel hair and wool. Hair Characteristics Camel-hair (G1) Camel and wool blend (G2) wool (G3) Hair Bulk 20.3±0.49 a 22.1±0.49 b 25.2±0.51 c Hair Resilience 6.3±0.10 a 6.4±0.10 a 7.0±0.10 b Fiber diameter (FD) 42.1±0.71 a 35.1±0.71 b 30.9±0.73 c SD of fiber diameter 16.4±0.23 a 12.5±0.23 b 9.8±0.24 c Staple length 11.0±0.29 a 10.6±0.29 a 9.2±0.30 b SD = Standard deviation Within each classification for each trait means not followed by the same letter are differed significantly (P< 0.05).

Table (3).

Simple correlation coefficients among some yarn characteristics of different experimental group of camel hair and wool. Elongation Yarn tenacity Yarn count Thin Thick Neps Yarn Friction Yarn Twisting 0.13 -0.16 -0.03 0.37* 0.37* -0.03 0.20 Elongation 1 0.43** 0.10 -0.21 -0.21 -0.07 0.21 Yarn tenacity 1 0.36* -0.89** -0.89** 0.29 -0.49** Yarn count 1 -0.41** -0.40** 0.05 -0.26 Thin places 1 0.99** -0.38* 0.60** Thick places 1 -0.37* 0.60** Neps 1 -0.22 * Significant at P{ 0.05 ) ** Significant at P{ 0.01 )

Table (4).

Simple correlation coefficients among some physical characteristics of different experimental group of camel hair and wool. Bulk Resilience Fiber diameter (FD) SD of FD Staple length Bulk 1 0.30* -0.59** -0.59** -0.41** Resilience 1 -0.52** -0.56** -0.44** Fiber diameter 1 0.81** 0.44** Sd of fiber diameter 1 0.43** Staple length 1 SD = Standard deviation ** Significant at P{ 0.01 )

Table (5).

Simple correlation coefficients among some yarn and physical characteristics of different experimental group of camel hair and wool. Bulk Resilience Fiber diameter (FD) SD of FD Staple length Yarn Twisting -0.31* -0.28 0.34* 0.38** 0.23 Elongation 0.21 0.24 -0.21 -0.22 -0.08 Yarn Friction -0.42** -0.35* 0.56** 0.58** 0.34* Yarn tenacity 0.60** 0.44** -0.79** -0.83** -0.34* Yarn count 0.26 0.21 -0.32* -0.45** -0.31* Thin places -0.64** -0.46** 0.84** 0.91** 0.45** Thick places -0.63** -0.47** 0.84** 0.92** 0.45** No of Neps -0.09 -0.18 -0.15 -0.11 0.14 SD = Standard deviation * Significant at P{ 0.05 ) ** Significant at P{ 0.01 )

References

Abd El-Maguid, I. I. (2000). Objective and subjective assessment of domestic wool clip in relation to carpet industry. M.Sc. Thesis, Faculty of Agriculture, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt. Carnaby, G. A. and Elliott, K. H. (1980). Bulk: A wool trait of importance to the carpet industry. Proceeding of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production, 40: 196-204. De Groot, G. J. B. (1995). The use of effective fineness to determine the effect of wool-fiber-diameter distribution on yarn properties. Journal textile institute, 86: 33-44. Gad-Allah, A. A. (2001) Studies on some characteristics, clip preparation and the use of Barki wool in the local textile industry. M. Sc. Thesis, Faculty of Agriculture, Alexandria University, Alexandria., Egypt. Dunlop, J. I., Carnaby, G. A. and Ross, D. A. (1974). Bulk I. The bulk of loose wool. Wool. Researsh Organization of New Zealand, Communication No. 28: 34, New Zealand. Elliott, K. H. and Clare, L. T. (1981). Wool appraisers can subjectively assess important differences in loose wool bulk. Reprinted from wool research organization of New Zeland; 41-46 (1980/1981) Helal, A; Guirgis, R. A; El-Ganaieny, M. M. and Taha, E. A. (2007). Some hair characteristics of one-humped camels in relation to textile industry. Alexandria, Journal of Agriculture Research, 52 (1) 25-31. Hunter, L; Smust, S. and Gee, E. (1987). Role of sheep breed in determining the relationship between wool fiber properties and worsted yarn and fabric properties. Animal Breeding Abstract, 44: (4) 2146. Hunter , L; Turpie, D.W. F. and Gee, E. (1985). The effect of wool fiber properties and breed of sheep on worsted processing performance and on yarn and fabric properties. In proceedings of the 2nd World congress on sheep and Beef cattle breeding, Pretoria, South Africa. Ince, J. (1979). Engineering of wool carpet yarns. Textile Institute and Industry. 17: 23-28. Kroiter, Mk. and Dyudina, VE. (1991). The relationship of skin histological structure with wool quality in crossbred sheep. Zootekhniya, 3: 59-60. (Animal Breeding Abstract: 59: (12) 8320). Ministry of Agriculture and Land Reclamation (2003). Statistics Sector. Dokky, Cairo, Egypt. Phillps, D. G; Piper, L. R; Rottenbury, R. A; Bow, M. R; Hansford, K. A. and Naylor, G. R. S. (1991). The significance of fiber diameter distribution to the wool industry. Review of CSIRO Workshop held at CSIRO division of wool technology, GEE LONG laboratory on 27-28 November (1991). Ryder, M. L. and Stephenson, S. K. (1968). Wool growth. Academic press, London and New York. SAS, (1995). SAS procedures guide. Release 6.03 Edition. SAS Institute. Inc., Cary, NC., USA. 130. Tandom,S. K; Carnaby, G. A; Kim, S. J. and Choi, F. K. F. (1995). The torsional behaviour singles yarn. Part 1: theory, Journal Textile Institute, 86: (2) 200-217.