Effect of load orientation and weave pattern on the mechanical properties of woven active textiles for the design of wearable devices and soft actuators
Source abstract
Abstract
Active textiles featuring pneumatic actuators, such as thin McKibben muscles, enable tunable stiffness, which is desirable for soft robotics, but the characterisation of their mechanical properties, particularly with respect to load orientation and weave pattern, remains lacking. Consequently, this paper ascertains the mechanical properties of active textiles, crucial for real-world scenarios, with unevenly distributed strains often misaligned with the weave pattern. The results show that: (i) tensile properties exhibit a hysteretic behaviour, with a maxima at 0.05 MPa during pressurisation and a minima at 0.15 MPa during depressurisation and a reduction in tensile modulus for increasing rotation angle; (ii) greater tensile properties are achieved by minimising the warp’s deviation from straightness, via weave pattern or reduction in muscle density; (iii) flexural properties require both a non-zero pressure and rotation angle greater than 15° to exhibit meaningful flexural properties, reaching circa 30 MPa at 90°; and (iv) where out-of-plane curvature occurs, flexural properties are significantly affected by the concave face’s orientation. Ultimately, tensile properties are driven by the warp’s alignment with the load, while flexural properties are driven by the weft’s alignment with the load. These findings provide novel insights into the mechanical properties and design optimisation of active textiles.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Advanced Materials and Mechanics · Soft Robotics and Applications · Advanced Sensor and Energy Harvesting Materials
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Birmingham City University, UK
The University of Edinburgh, UK
References (42)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1088/0964-1726/22/12/12500110.1088/0964-1726/22/12/125001 ↗
2. 10.1007/s12369-017-0446-310.1007/s12369-017-0446-3 ↗
3. 10.1088/0964-1726/23/5/05300110.1088/0964-1726/23/5/053001 ↗
4. 10.1016/j.nanoen.2023.10889810.1016/j.nanoen.2023.108898 ↗
5. 10.3390/textiles102001510.3390/textiles1020015 ↗
6. 10.1177/1729881421105353410.1177/17298814211053534 ↗
7. 10.1109/IROS47612.2022.998126510.1109/IROS47612.2022.9981265 ↗
8. 10.1088/1361-665X/ab6ba710.1088/1361-665X/ab6ba7 ↗
9. 10.1109/ROBIO.2017.832451710.1109/ROBIO.2017.8324517 ↗
10. Greig J McInnes M Chadwick EK et al. (2025) Decoupled wearable soft robotic rehabilitation device for the upper limb. Wearable Technologies 6: e38 pp.1–19.10.1017/wtc.2025.10018 ↗
11. 10.1109/ROBOSOFT.2019.872280210.1109/ROBOSOFT.2019.8722802 ↗
12. 10.1080/01691864.2022.215681310.1080/01691864.2022.2156813 ↗
13. 10.1088/0964-1726/22/1/01401610.1088/0964-1726/22/1/014016 ↗
14. 10.1088/0964-1726/21/5/05300110.1088/0964-1726/21/5/053001 ↗
15. International Organization for Standardization (2012) ISO 527-2:2012 Plastics - Determination of Tensile Properties - Part 2: Test Conditions for Moulding and Extrusion Plastics. International Organization for Standardization.
16. International Organization for Standardization (2013) ISO 13934-1:2013 Textiles - Tensile Properties of Fabrics - Part 1: Determination of Maximum Force and Elongation at Maximum Force Using the Strip Method. International Organization for Standardization.
17. International Organization for Standardization (2019) ISO 178:2019 Plastics - Determination of Flexural Properties. International Organization for Standardization.
18. 10.1109/LRA.2024.345589010.1109/LRA.2024.3455890 ↗
19. 10.1109/LRA.2018.285102510.1109/LRA.2018.2851025 ↗
20. 10.1016/j.sna.2017.04.04710.1016/j.sna.2017.04.047 ↗
21. 10.1080/19475411.2024.234287110.1080/19475411.2024.2342871 ↗
22. 10.1109/LRA.2023.326217710.1109/LRA.2023.3262177 ↗
23. 10.1002/adma.20170440710.1002/adma.201704407 ↗
24. 10.1109/TOH.2018.280590110.1109/TOH.2018.2805901 ↗
25. 10.1016/j.sna.2023.11438110.1016/j.sna.2023.114381 ↗
26. 10.1109/LRA.2022.314661110.1109/LRA.2022.3146611 ↗
27. 10.1088/1361-665X/ac383a10.1088/1361-665X/ac383a ↗
28. 10.1109/RoboSoft54090.2022.976212110.1109/RoboSoft54090.2022.9762121 ↗
29. 10.1088/1361-665X/abea0110.1088/1361-665X/abea01 ↗
30. Souppez JBRG, Laci J (2022) Ultimate strength of quasi-isotropic composites: ISO 12215-5:2019 validation. The Royal Institution of Naval Architects Part A: International Journal of Marine Engineering 162(A): 237–246.
31. 10.3390/s14071195710.3390/s140711957 ↗
32. 10.1017/wtc.2025.210.1017/wtc.2025.2 ↗
33. 10.1016/B978-1-78242-379-9.00007-410.1016/B978-1-78242-379-9.00007-4 ↗
34. 10.1017/wtc.2020.410.1017/wtc.2020.4 ↗
35. 10.1017/wtc.2022.1410.1017/wtc.2022.14 ↗
36. 10.1089/soro.2024.003110.1089/soro.2024.0031 ↗
37. Vraitch R, Ma X, Giorgio-Serchi F, et al. (2024) Additive manufacturing of patient-specific intervertebral disc models for spinal cord compression management. In: International Conference on Smart and Advanced Manufacturing, 2024.
38. 10.1088/1361-665X/aa549610.1088/1361-665X/aa5496 ↗
39. 10.1002/adma.20200264010.1002/adma.202002640 ↗
40. 10.1080/19475411.2024.235731310.1080/19475411.2024.2357313 ↗
41. 10.1016/B978-0-08-100574-3.00027-810.1016/B978-0-08-100574-3.00027-8 ↗
42. 10.1089/soro.2019.003310.1089/soro.2019.0033 ↗