15
Measurement and Control of Drafting Forces: Using the Draftometer for Ring Spinning Improvements C.D. Delhom USDAAgricultural Research Service Cotton Structure and Quality New Orleans, LA USA

Using the Draftometer for Ring Spinning Improvements C.D ...€¦ · – Uster Tester CV%, Tenacity, Classimat. Draftometer Results Cotton TwistGear Twist Multiple 138 1.33 232 1.58

  • Upload
    others

  • View
    13

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Using the Draftometer for Ring Spinning Improvements C.D ...€¦ · – Uster Tester CV%, Tenacity, Classimat. Draftometer Results Cotton TwistGear Twist Multiple 138 1.33 232 1.58

Measurement and Control of Drafting Forces: Using the Draftometer for Ring Spinning 

Improvements

C.D. DelhomUSDA‐Agricultural Research Service

Cotton Structure and QualityNew Orleans, LA USA

Page 2: Using the Draftometer for Ring Spinning Improvements C.D ...€¦ · – Uster Tester CV%, Tenacity, Classimat. Draftometer Results Cotton TwistGear Twist Multiple 138 1.33 232 1.58

Draftometer?

• Measures drafting forces• Used to determine critical draft

– Critical Draft?• Draft at which the fiber strand becomes highly unstable• Also known as “stick‐slip”

• ITT work concluded that break draft should be set 10% below critical draft– In lieu of changing break draft, roving twist can be adjusted to move critical draft at a given break draft

Page 3: Using the Draftometer for Ring Spinning Improvements C.D ...€¦ · – Uster Tester CV%, Tenacity, Classimat. Draftometer Results Cotton TwistGear Twist Multiple 138 1.33 232 1.58

Draftometer

Schematic from “Short Staple Manufacturing” McCreight, et al

Page 4: Using the Draftometer for Ring Spinning Improvements C.D ...€¦ · – Uster Tester CV%, Tenacity, Classimat. Draftometer Results Cotton TwistGear Twist Multiple 138 1.33 232 1.58
Page 5: Using the Draftometer for Ring Spinning Improvements C.D ...€¦ · – Uster Tester CV%, Tenacity, Classimat. Draftometer Results Cotton TwistGear Twist Multiple 138 1.33 232 1.58

Critical Draft• Factors known to impact critical draft:

– Roving size– Twist– Tension

• Unknown factors:– Fiber quality

• Length• Fineness• Surface characteristics?

– Convolutions?– Frictional properties?

Page 6: Using the Draftometer for Ring Spinning Improvements C.D ...€¦ · – Uster Tester CV%, Tenacity, Classimat. Draftometer Results Cotton TwistGear Twist Multiple 138 1.33 232 1.58

Critical Draft

‐0.5

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

30 130 230 330 430 530 630

Failed

Passed

Page 7: Using the Draftometer for Ring Spinning Improvements C.D ...€¦ · – Uster Tester CV%, Tenacity, Classimat. Draftometer Results Cotton TwistGear Twist Multiple 138 1.33 232 1.58

Motivation• Properly constructed roving produces more uniform yarns with decreased ends down

• Break Draft can be difficult to change– Gearing/roll spacing on spinning frame– Draft distribution concerns

• What is appropriate roving twist?

• Draftometer is sensitive and time consuming

Page 8: Using the Draftometer for Ring Spinning Improvements C.D ...€¦ · – Uster Tester CV%, Tenacity, Classimat. Draftometer Results Cotton TwistGear Twist Multiple 138 1.33 232 1.58

Previous Work

• Mill trials have shown occasional inconsistencies in draftometer results between replications of lots

• What role do fiber properties play in determining drafting forces?

Page 9: Using the Draftometer for Ring Spinning Improvements C.D ...€¦ · – Uster Tester CV%, Tenacity, Classimat. Draftometer Results Cotton TwistGear Twist Multiple 138 1.33 232 1.58

Method• Full bale quantities were carded and drawn• Draftometer used to determine optimum twist level for 1.0 hank roving draft for each cotton– 7 twist levels of roving to be produced for each cotton

1. Use twist gear for optimum twist level2. Critical Twist gear +1 tooth3. +2 teeth4. +3 teeth5. Critical Twist gear ‐1 tooth6. ‐2 teeth7. ‐3 teeth

Page 10: Using the Draftometer for Ring Spinning Improvements C.D ...€¦ · – Uster Tester CV%, Tenacity, Classimat. Draftometer Results Cotton TwistGear Twist Multiple 138 1.33 232 1.58

Method

• 3 doffs of Ne 30/1 with 3.8 TM @ 16,000 rpm• Ends down recorded

– Quantity, position and type of ends down

• Yarn Quality – Uster Tester CV%, Tenacity, Classimat

Page 11: Using the Draftometer for Ring Spinning Improvements C.D ...€¦ · – Uster Tester CV%, Tenacity, Classimat. Draftometer Results Cotton TwistGear Twist Multiple 138 1.33 232 1.58

Draftometer Results

Cotton Twist Gear Twist Multiple

1 38 1.33

2 32 1.58

3 31 1.63

4 38 1.33

5 38 1.33

tpi = TM *(Roving Hank)1/2

Twist gear as determined by Draftometer: Critical draft – 10%Break Draft fixed at 1.31

Page 12: Using the Draftometer for Ring Spinning Improvements C.D ...€¦ · – Uster Tester CV%, Tenacity, Classimat. Draftometer Results Cotton TwistGear Twist Multiple 138 1.33 232 1.58

Hard Ends

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

‐3 teeth ‐2 teeth ‐1 tooth CriticalDraft

+1 tooth +2 teeth +3 teeth

Ends Dow

n pe

r 1000 spindle ho

urs

Twist Setting

Cotton 1

Cotton 2

Cotton 3

Cotton 4

Cotton 5

Less Roving Twist 

Page 13: Using the Draftometer for Ring Spinning Improvements C.D ...€¦ · – Uster Tester CV%, Tenacity, Classimat. Draftometer Results Cotton TwistGear Twist Multiple 138 1.33 232 1.58

Yarn Uniformity

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

‐3 teeth ‐2 teeth ‐1 tooth CriticalDraft

+1 tooth +2 teeth +3 teeth

CV(%

)

Twist Setting

Cotton 1

Cotton 2

Cotton 3

Cotton 4

Cotton 5

Less Roving Twist 

Page 14: Using the Draftometer for Ring Spinning Improvements C.D ...€¦ · – Uster Tester CV%, Tenacity, Classimat. Draftometer Results Cotton TwistGear Twist Multiple 138 1.33 232 1.58

Yarn Strength

5

7

9

11

13

15

17

19

‐3 teeth ‐2 teeth ‐1 tooth CriticalDraft

+1 tooth +2 teeth +3 teeth

Tena

city (cN/tex)

Twist Setting

Cotton 1

Cotton 2

Cotton 3

Cotton 4

Cotton 5

Less Roving Twist 

Page 15: Using the Draftometer for Ring Spinning Improvements C.D ...€¦ · – Uster Tester CV%, Tenacity, Classimat. Draftometer Results Cotton TwistGear Twist Multiple 138 1.33 232 1.58

Conclusions• Further work is needed to asses the ‐10% recommendation

• Differences between front and back roving frame positions do exist due to tension

• Role of tension changes with package size needs to be examined

• No clear fiber property /drafting force interaction understood at this time

• More work is needed!