journal article·2015-03-04

An Evaluation of Drapeability of Jute Fabric

Swapan Kumar Ghosh, Rajib Bhattacharyya, Chinmoy Dey, Badrinath Mukherjee

Journal of Natural Fibers· Volume 12· Issue 2
Publisher page

Abstract

From the very inception of the Indian Jute Industry, jute fiber has proved its superiority over other fibers particularly in the area of packaging for food grains, in terms of its functionality and reusability due to its considerable tensile strength, low extensibility, and good dimensional stability, which is obviously the natural choice for packaging. One of the growing alternatives in today’s context is the emergence of technical textiles made out of natural fibers which includes geotextile products for geotechnical applications, agrotextile products as well as other such relevant areas. Jute geotextile can certainly be considered as a potential aspirant replacing majority of today’s popular synthetic products which are posing severe threats to our environment thereby adversely affecting the eco-congruity. During the application of jute fabrics of different types at the sites and even in designing garments in the Apparel Sector, it has been observed that the ability of the fabric to assume a graceful appearance of the contour is very crucial conveying the significance of drapeability of the jute fabric. An attempt has been made in this paper to study the effect of relevant property parameters and their comparative analysis on the drapeability of jute fabric as well as synthetic woven and nonwoven fabrics with respect to their end-use requirements.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Textile materials and evaluations · Natural Fiber Reinforced Composites · Structural Analysis and Optimization

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

References (24)

Show source-provided references
1. Amano T. · Sen-I Seihin Shohi Kagaku · 1994 · 35 · 570
2. 10.1177/00405175950650060310.1177/004051759506500603 ↗
3. 10.1177/00405175600300010910.1177/004051756003000109 ↗
4. 10.1177/00405175500200080210.1177/004051755002000802 ↗
5. 10.1080/0040500910865921810.1080/00405009108659218 ↗
6. 10.1177/00405175900600090610.1177/004051759006000906 ↗
7. 10.1177/0887302X910100010710.1177/0887302X9101000107 ↗
8. 10.1080/0040500910865874110.1080/00405009108658741 ↗
9. 10.1080/19447027.1961.1075051310.1080/19447027.1961.10750513 ↗
10. 10.1080/1944702650866231910.1080/19447026508662319 ↗
11. 10.1080/0040500680865998510.1080/00405006808659985 ↗
12. Dhingra and Postle · 1980 · 8 · 59
13. 10.1177/00405175950650110610.1177/004051759506501106 ↗
14. 10.1177/00405175830530050610.1177/004051758305300506 ↗
15. 10.1177/00405175860560120310.1177/004051758605601203 ↗
16. 10.1177/00405175980680110710.1177/004051759806801107 ↗
17. Morooka H. · Jpm · 1976 · 22 · 67
18. Niwa M. · Jpm · 1986 · 39 · 161
19. 10.1080/1944702300866152910.1080/19447023008661529 ↗
20. 10.1108/eb00300310.1108/eb003003 ↗
21. 10.1080/0040500940865901210.1080/00405009408659012 ↗
22. 10.1108/0955622941005443110.1108/09556229410054431 ↗
23. Suda N. · Polymeric Materials Research Institute · 1984 · 142 · 39
24. Sudnik Z.M. · Textile Institute · 1972 · 59 · 14