| ||Format||Pages||Price|| |
|9||$50.00||  ADD TO CART|
|Hardcopy (shipping and handling)||9||$50.00||  ADD TO CART|
Significance and Use
5.1 The resistance to abrasion of textile materials is affected by many factors in a complex manner. The results obtained from the use of this instrument assist in evaluating these factors relative to the wear serviceability of the final textile product in specific end uses. The resistance to abrasion is affected by many factors that include the inherent mechanical properties of the fibers; the dimensions of the fibers; the structure of the yarns; the construction of the fabrics; the type, kind, amount of treatment added to the fibers, yarns or fabric; the nature of the abradant; the tension on the specimen; the pressure between the specimen and the abradant; and the dimensional changes in the specimen. Experience has shown in many instances, that relative results obtained with this instrument when used on a series of fabrics, agreed with those obtained based upon performance in end use. However, caution is advised because anomalous results may occur due to uncontrolled factors in manufacturing or other processes. Specific instances have been described.,,, In any event, anomalous results should be studied to further understand the complex behavior that may occur as a result of abrasion that may in turn assist in the development of more durable fabrics.
5.2 Testing some specimens under “wet” conditions can add another dimension to the evaluation of some textiles. Such testing under “wet” conditions can help ascertain the effect of changes in a fabric's resistance to abrasion when it becomes wet. This test can also increase the uniformity of the abrading action by washing away abrasion debris and preventing the build up of broken fibers that can interfere with the proper progression of the tests.
5.3 This test is used as a guide in evaluating textiles in quality control and in research.
5.3.1 If there are differences of practical significance between reported test results for two laboratories (or more), comparative tests should be performed to determine if there is a statistical bias between them, using competent statistical assistance. As a minimum, the test samples should be used that are as homogenous as possible, that are drawn from the material from which the disparate test results were obtained, and that are randomly assigned in equal numbers to each laboratory for testing. Other fabrics with established test values may be used for this purpose. The test results from the two laboratories should be compared using a statistical test for unpaired data, at a probability level chosen prior to the testing series. If a bias is found, either a cause must be found and corrected, or future test results must be adjusted in consideration of the known bias.
5.4 This test is unique and is significantly different from any other existing abrading test.
5.5 This guide may also be used as a technique for pretreating material for subsequent testing. For example, a predetermined number of abrasion cycles at specified test conditions may be performed on a series of specimens, which are then subjected to a strength or barrier performance test.
5.6 The resistance of textile materials to abrasion as measured by this guide does not include all the factors which account for wear performance or durability in actual use. While the “abrasion resistance” stated in terms of the number of cycles and “durability” (defined as the ability to withstand deterioration or wearing out in use, including the effects of abrasion) are frequently related. The relationship varies with different end uses, and different factors may be necessary in any calculation of predicted durability from specific abrasion data.
5.6.1 Laboratory tests may be reliable as an indication of relative end-use suitability in cases where the difference in abrasion resistance of various materials is large, but they should not be relied upon for prediction of performance during actual wear life for specific end uses unless there are data showing the specific relationship between laboratory abrasion tests and actual wear in the intended end use.
5.7 The pressure and tension used is varied, depending on the mass and nature of the material and the end use application. Whenever possible all materials that are to be compared with each other should be tested under the same pressure and tension.
5.8 When abrasion tests are continued to total destruction, abrasion resistance comparisons are not practical for fabrics have a different mass because the change in abrasion resistance is not directly proportional to the change in the fabric mass.
5.9 All the guides and instruments that have been developed for abrasion resistance may show a high degree of variability in results obtained by different operators and in different laboratories; however, they represent the methods most widely used in the industry. Because there is a definite need for measuring the relative resistance to abrasion, this is one of the several standardized guides and methods that is useful to help minimize the inherent variation in results that may occur.
1.1 This guide covers the determination of the resistance to abrasion of a wide range of textile materials using the uniform abrasion testing instrument. Fabrics of all types including carpets, garments and nonwovens may be tested under this method.
Note 1: Other procedures for measuring the abrasion resistance of textile fabrics are given in: Test Methods , , , , , and AATCC Test Method 93.
1.1.1 Provisions are provided for testing specimens in dry and wet conditions. Four options for evaluation are included:
Option 1—Fabric Rupture
Option 2—Mass Loss
Option 3—Thickness Loss
Option 4—Breaking Strength Loss
1.1.2 Provision is provided for testing specimens in the wet state.
1.2 The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as the standard. Within the text, the inch-pound units are shown in parentheses. The values stated in each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore, each system shall be used independently of the other. Combining values from the two systems may result in nonconformance with the specification.
1.3 This guide does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.
2. Referenced Documents (purchase separately) The documents listed below are referenced within the subject standard but are not provided as part of the standard.
D123 Terminology Relating to Textiles
D1776 Practice for Conditioning and Testing Textiles
D3884 Guide for Abrasion Resistance of Textile Fabrics (Rotary Platform, Double-Head Method)
D3885 Test Method for Abrasion Resistance of Textile Fabrics (Flexing and Abrasion Method)
D3886 Test Method for Abrasion Resistance of Textile Fabrics (Inflated Diaphragm Apparatus)
D4157 Test Method for Abrasion Resistance of Textile Fabrics (Oscillatory Cylinder Method)
D4850 Terminology Relating to Fabrics and Fabric Test Methods
D4966 Test Method for Abrasion Resistance of Textile Fabrics (Martindale Abrasion Tester Method)
D5035 Test Method for Breaking Force and Elongation of Textile Fabrics (Strip Method)
Other DocumentsAATCC Test Method 93 Abrasion Resistance of Fabrics: Accelerator Method Available from American Association of Textile Chemists and Colorists (AATCC), P.O. Box 12215, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, http://www.aatcc.org.
ICS Number Code 59.080.30 (Textile fabrics)
|Link to Active (This link will always route to the current Active version of the standard.)|
ASTM D4158-08(2016), Standard Guide for Abrasion Resistance of Textile Fabrics (Uniform Abrasion), ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2016, www.astm.orgBack to Top