ASTM D3884-01(2007)
(Guide)Standard Guide for Abrasion Resistance of Textile Fabrics (Rotary Platform, Double-Head Method)
Standard Guide for Abrasion Resistance of Textile Fabrics (Rotary Platform, Double-Head Method)
SCOPE
1.1 This guide covers the determination of the abrasion resistance of textile fabrics using the rotary platform, double-head tester (RPDH).
Note 1—Other procedures for measuring the abrasion resistance of textile fabrics are given in Test Methods D 3885, D 3886, D 4158, D 4966, and AATCC 61.
1.2 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard: the values in English units are provided as information only and are not exact equivalents.
1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety problems, 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.
General Information
Relations
Standards Content (Sample)
NOTICE: This standard has either been superseded and replaced by a new version or withdrawn.
Contact ASTM International (www.astm.org) for the latest information
Designation:D3884–01 (Reapproved 2007)
Standard Guide for
Abrasion Resistance of Textile Fabrics (Rotary Platform,
Double-Head Method)
This standard is issued under the fixed designation D 3884; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year of
original adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval. A
superscript epsilon (e) indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.
1. Scope AATCC 93 Impeller Tumble Method
1.1 This guide covers the determination of the abrasion
3. Terminology
resistance of textile fabrics using the rotary platform, double-
3.1 Definitions:
head tester (RPDH).
3.1.1 abrasion, n—the wearing away of any part of a
NOTE 1—Other procedures for measuring the abrasion resistance of
material by rubbing against another surface.
textile fabrics are given in Test Methods D 3885, D 3886, D 4158,
3.1.2 abrasion cycle, n—in abrasion testing, one or more
D 4966, and AATCC 61.
movements of the abradant across a material surface, or the
1.2 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as
material surface across the abradant, that permits a return to its
standard: the values in English units are provided as informa-
starting position.
tion only and are not exact equivalents.
3.1.2.1 Discussion—The abrasion cycle is dependent on the
1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the
programmed motions of the abrasion machine and the test
safety problems, if any, associated with its use. It is the
standard used. It may consist of one back-and-forth unidirec-
responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appro-
tionalmovementsuchasfortherotaryplatformtestmethod,or
priate safety and health practices and determine the applica-
a combination of both such as for the inflated diaphragm test
bility of regulatory limitations prior to use.
method. For the oscillatory cylinder abrasion method, an
abrasion cycle consists of one circular movement of the
2. Referenced Documents
specimen.
2.1 ASTM Standards:
3.1.3 breaking force, n—the maximum force applied to a
D 123 Terminology Relating to Textiles
material carried to rupture. (Compare breaking point, breaking
D 1776 Practice for Conditioning and Testing Textiles
strength).
D 3885 Test Method for Abrasion Resistance of Textile
3.2 For definitions of other textile terms used in this test
Fabrics (Flexing and Abrasion Method)
method, refer to Terminology D 123.
D 3886 Test Method for Abrasion Resistance of Textile
4. Summary of Test Method
Fabrics (Inflated Diaphragm Apparatus)
D 4158 Guide for Abrasion Resistance of Textile Fabrics
4.1 Aspecimenisabradedusingrotaryrubbingactionunder
(Uniform Abrasion)
controlled conditions of pressure and abrasive action. The test
D 4966 Test Method for Abrasion Resistance of Textile
specimen, mounted on a platform, turns on a vertical axis,
Fabrics (Martindale Abrasion Tester Method)
against the sliding rotation of two abrading wheels. One
D 5034 Test Method for Breaking Strength and Elongation
abrading wheel rubs the specimen outward toward the periph-
of Textile Fabrics (Grab Test)
ery and the other, inward toward the center. The resulting
D 5035 Test Method for Breaking Force and Elongation of
abrasion marks form a pattern of crossed arcs over an area of
Textile Fabrics (Strip Method)
approximately 30 cm . Resistance to abrasion is evaluated by
2.2 Other Documents:
various means which are described in Section 12.
5. Significance and Use
This guide is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee D13 on Textiles and
5.1 The measurement of the resistance to abrasion of textile
is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee D13.60 on Fabric Test Methods,
and other materials is very complex.The resistance to abrasion
Specific.
Current edition approved March 1, 2007. Published April 2007. Originally is affected by many factors, such as the inherent mechanical
approved in 1980. Discontinued January 2001 and reinstated as D 3884 – 01. Last
properties of the fibers; the dimensions of the fibers; the
previous edition approved in 2001 as D 3884 – 01.
For referenced ASTM standards, visit the ASTM website, www.astm.org, or
contact ASTM Customer Service at service@astm.org. For Annual Book of ASTM
Standards volume information, refer to the standard’s Document Summary page on Available from American Association of Textile Chemists and Colorists, P.O.
the ASTM website. Box 12215, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709.
Copyright © ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959, United States.
D3884–01 (2007)
structure of the yarns; the construction of the fabrics; and the 5.7 Before definite predictions of fabric usefulness can be
type,kind,andamountoffinishingmaterialaddedtothefibers, drawn from an abrasion test as made on the rotary platform,
yarns, or fabric. double-head (RPDH) abrader (Fig. 1), actual end-use trials
should be conducted and related to the abrasion test. Different
5.2 The resistance to abrasion is also greatly affected by the
types of wear (for example, wear on men’s clothing at cuffs,
conditions of the tests, such as the nature of abradant, variable
crotch, etc.) may correspond to different ratings of the RPDH
action of the abradant over the area of specimen abraded, the
test.
tension of the specimen, the pressure between the specimen
5.8 In making a comparison of different fabrics (that is, of
and abradant, and the dimensional changes in the specimens.
different fibers, weights, etc.) the RPDH test will not always
5.3 Abrasion tests are all subject to variation due to changes
reveal a difference known to exist when the fabrics are actually
in the abradant during specific tests. The abradant must
used.Therefore,end-usetrialsshouldbeconductedinconjunc-
accordingly be discarded at frequent intervals or checked
tion with the RPDH abrasion test, at least as a guide for future
periodically against a standard. With disposable abradants, the
testing of these fabrics.
abradant is used only once or discarded after limited use. With
5.9 Uncontrolled manufacturing or finishing variations oc-
permanent abradants that use hardened metal or equivalent
curring within a fabric or within lots of the same style of fabric
surfaces, it is assumed that the abradant will not change
can, however, be detected satisfactorily with the RPDH tester.
appreciably in a specific series of tests. Similar abradants used
5.10 Because of the conditions mentioned above, techni-
in different laboratories will not change at the same rate, due to
cians frequently fail to get good agreement between results
differencesinusage.Permanentabradantsmayalsochangedue
obtainedonthesametypeoftestinginstrumentbothwithinand
to pick up of finishing or other material from test fabrics and
between laboratories, and the precision of these test methods is
must accordingly be cleaned at frequent intervals. The mea-
uncertain. This test method is accordingly not recommended
surement of the relative amount of abrasion may also be
for acceptance testing in contractual agreements between
affected by the method of evaluation and may be influenced by
purchaser and supplier because of the poor between-laboratory
the judgment of the operator.
precision of the test method.
5.4 The resistance of textile materials to abrasion as mea-
5.11 If there are differences of practical significance be-
sured on a testing machine in the laboratory is generally only
tween reported test results for two laboratories (or more),
one of several factors contributing to wear performance or
comparative tests should be performed to determine if there is
durability as experienced in the actual use of the material.
a statistical bias between them, using competent statistical
While “abrasion resistance” (often stated in terms of the
assistance. As a minimum, the test samples used are to be as
number of cycles on a specified machine, using a specified
homogeneous as possible, drawn from the material from which
technique to produce a specified degree or amount of abrasion)
the disparate test results were obtained, and randomly assigned
and “durability” (defined as the ability to withstand deteriora-
in equal numbers to each laboratory for testing.The test results
tionorwearingoutinuse,includingtheeffectsofabrasion)are
from the two laboratories should be compared using a statis-
frequently related, the relationship varies with different end
tical test for unpaired data, at a probability level chosen prior
uses, and different factors may be necessary in any calculation
to the testing series. If bias is found, either its cause must be
of predicted durability from specific abrasion data. Laboratory
tests may be reliable as an indication of relative end-use
performance in cases where the difference in abrasion resis-
tanceofvariousmaterialsislarge,buttheyshouldnotberelied
upon where differences in laboratory test findings are small. In
general, they should not be relied upon for prediction of actual
wear-life in specific end uses unless there are data showing the
specific relationship between laboratory abrasion tests and
actual wear in the intended end-use.
5.5 These general observations apply to all types of fabrics,
including woven, nonwoven, and knit apparel fabrics, house-
hold fabrics, industrial fabrics, and floor coverings. It is not
surprising, therefore, to find that there are many different types
of abrasion testing machines, abradants, testing conditions,
testing procedures, methods of evaluation of abrasion resis-
tance and interpretation of results.
5.6 All the test procedures and instruments that have been
developed for abrasion resistance of fabrics may show a high
degree of variability in results obtained by different operators
and in different laboratories, however, they represent the
procedures most widely used in the industry. Because there is
a definite need for measuring the relative resistance to abra-
sion, this is one of the several procedures that is useful to help
minimize the inherent variation in results that may occur. FIG. 1 Rotary Platform Double Head Abrader
D3884–01 (2007)
found and corrected, or future test results must be adjusted in 6.4 Auxiliary Apparatus—Resurfacing disks, of
consideration of the known bias. carborundum-coated paper, are provided for resurfacing of
rubber-base wheels.Astiff brush is provided for the removal of
6. Apparatus
loose particles from the surface of the wheels. (Compressed air
is recommended for cleaning vitrified-base wheels.)
6.1 Rotary Platform, Double-Head (RPDH) Abrader (Fig.
6.5 Abrasion Wheel Resurfacing Device, for resurfacing
1), comprised of a housing of compact design, a removable
uneven wheel wear.
flat-circular specimen holder, a pair of pivoted arms to which
the abrasive wheels are attached, a motor for rotating the
7. Sampling
platform and specimen, a fan for cooling the motor, a vacuum
nozzle and vacuum cleaner for removal of lint from specimen,
7.1 Take a lot sample as directed in the applicable material
and a counter for indicating the revolutions of the specimen specification, or as agreed upon by the purchaser and seller. In
holder. The specimen holder should be mounted so as to
the absence of such a specification or other agreement, take a
produce a circular surface travel of an essentially flat specimen laboratory sample as directed in 7.1.1. Consider rolls or pieces
in the plane of its surface.
of fabric to be the primary sampling unit.
6.1.1 The abrasive wheels, which are attached to the free
7.1.1 Take a laboratory sample that is the full width of the
end of the pivoted arms, rotate and have, when resting on the
fabric and at least 50 cm (approximately 20 in.) long, from
specimen, a peripheral engagement with the surface of the
each roll or piece of fabric in the lot sample. The laboratory
specimen, the direction of travel of the periphery of the wheels
sample should be taken no closer than1m(1yd) from the end
and of the specimen at the contacting portions being at acute
of each roll or piece of fabric.
angles, and the angles of travel of one wheel periphery being
7.2 Sample shipments of garments as agreed upon by
opposite to that of the other. Motion of the abrasive wheels, in
purchaser and seller.
oppositedirections,isprovidedbyrotationofthespecimenand
the associated friction therefrom.
8. Number and Preparation of Test Specimens
6.1.2 The abrasive wheels are either rubber-based or
8.1 If the number of specimens to be tested is not specified
vitrified-based. Both types of wheels are manufactured in
by a material specification or an agreement between purchaser
different grades of abrasive quality. The wheels are lead
and seller, test five specimens.
bushed, 13 mm (0.5 in.) thick and approximately 50 mm (2 in.)
8.1.1 If the number of specimens to be tested exceeds the
in diameter. The wheels customarily used for testing textiles
number of laboratory samples, randomly select those labora-
are the rubber-base, resilient type composed of abrasive grains
tory samples from which more than one test specimen will be
cushioned in rubber; consequently, they are distorted during
taken. If not, test one specimen per laboratory sample.
operation of the abrader. Accordingly, the wheels should be
8.2 Take specimens from garment samples as agreed upon
mounted as prescribed in 9.1 so as to compensate for this
by all interested parties.
distortion.
8.3 Cut ten specimens approximately 15 cm (6 in.) square,
6.1.3 Vitrified-base wheels are the hard abrasive type. They
five for abrasion tests and five reserved for controls. For the
may be cut with a diamond point to alter the roughness of the
five specimens to be abraded, fold each one twice into a square
wheel, the stroke of cut determining the degree of grit. The
and using a die or shears, cut off the folded corner to form a
position of these wheels is not critical, but it is recommended
6-mm ( ⁄4-in.) diameter hole in the center of the specimen.
that they be set as prescribed in 9.1.
8.3.1 For the widths 125 mm (5 in.) or more, take no
6.2 The specimen holder is supported by an adapter that is
specimen closer than 25 mm (1 in.) from the selvage edge.
motor-driven and provides motion for the circular travel of the
8.3.2 For fabric widths less than 125 mm (5 m), use the
specimen holder.
entire width for specimens.
6.2.1 Clamping rings are used to secure the specimen to the
8.3.3 Cut specimens representing a broad distribution di-
specimen holder, one for use with lighter weight fabrics, and a
agonally across the width of the laboratory sampling unit.Take
larger one for use with heavier-weight fabrics.
lengthwise specimens from different positions across the width
6.3 The RPDH abrader i
...
Questions, Comments and Discussion
Ask us and Technical Secretary will try to provide an answer. You can facilitate discussion about the standard in here.