Comparative study on compressional recovery performance of vertically laid and cross-laid highloft nonwovens
Source abstract
Abstract
Vertically laid nonwoven fabrics are structurally different from conventional cross-laid nonwoven fabrics, resulting in an exceptional bulkiness and unique compressional recovery performance. In this paper, two testing methods (manual procedure vs. machine procedure) to determine bulky nonwoven thickness were first studied and statistically analyzed. Then, pore sizes of selected nonwoven samples were measured by a porosimeter to examine relationship between the pore size and nonwoven structural parameters. Finally, compressive properties of the nonwoven samples were measured by an Instron tester for assessment of main effects of nonwoven structural parameters in terms of thickness, gram weight, bulk density, and porosity on nonwoven compressional properties. The results showed that there was no significant difference between the two thickness measurement methods, and the manual measurement was basically consistent with the machine measurement. Bubble point pore size and average flow pore size were correlated with the structure parameters in varied correlation coefficients. Compared to cross-laid nonwovens, vertically laid nonwovens exhibited a greater compressive energy and linearity and a lower compressive resilience.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Textile materials and evaluations · Material Properties and Processing · Dyeing and Modifying Textile Fibers
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
School of Human Ecology, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA
School of Textile and Clothing, Nantong University, Nantong, Jiangsu, P.R. China
References (19)
Show source-provided references
1. Vasile S · Fibres Text East Eur · 2006 · 14 · 68
2. Vasile S · J Text Apparel Technol Manag · 2004 · 3 · 1
3. Wiah W · J Text Inst · 2017 · 8 · 1035
4. Dipayan D · Indian J Fibre Text · 2010 · 35 · 303
5. 10.1177/00405175040740010210.1177/004051750407400102 ↗
6. 10.1177/00405175730430110110.1177/004051757304301101 ↗
7. 10.1016/0266-1144(92)90002-R10.1016/0266-1144(92)90002-R ↗
8. 10.1177/00405175020720061510.1177/004051750207200615 ↗
9. 10.1177/00405175980680050710.1177/004051759806800507 ↗
10. 10.1177/00405175020720041110.1177/004051750207200411 ↗
11. 10.1177/00405175020720050110.1177/004051750207200501 ↗
12. 10.1007/s12221-008-0033-110.1007/s12221-008-0033-1 ↗
13. 10.1007/s10853-008-2482-810.1007/s10853-008-2482-8 ↗
14. 10.1080/00405000.2013.79608410.1080/00405000.2013.796084 ↗
15. 10.1177/004051751775363410.1177/0040517517753634 ↗
16. 10.5772/182110.5772/1821 ↗
17. 10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2017.12.01110.1016/j.ijsolstr.2017.12.011 ↗
18. Asanovic KA · Indian J Fibre Text · 2019 · 44 · 329
19. Jain RK · Indian J Fibre Text · 2019 · 44 · 39