inter laboratory testing scheme - textiles...

INTER LABORATORY TESTING SCHEME

ON

“Testing of Mechanical parameters

in Textile Material”

TC/ILTS/15/MECH-2/2014

Designed and Conducted by

PPPrrrooofffiiiccciiieeennncccyyy TTTeeessstttiiinnnggg PPPrrrooovvviiidddeeerrr

LLLaaabbbooorrraaatttooorrriiieeesss

TEXTILES COMMITTEE (Ministry of Textiles, Government of India)

P. Balu Road, Prabhadevi Chowk, Prabhadevi, Mumbai – 400 025. Ph : (022) 6652 7542, Fax : 6652 7554

[email protected] & [email protected] www.textilescommittee.gov.in

2014

mailto:[email protected]


Inter Laboratory Testing Scheme

OOnn

““TTeessttiinngg ooff MMeecchhaanniiccaall ppaarraammeetteerrss iinn TTeexxttiillee MMaatteerriiaall””

TC/ILTS/15 /MECH-2/2014

Designed and Conducted by

PPPTTT PPPRRROOOVVVIIIDDDEEERRR LLLaaabbbooorrraaatttooorrriiieeesss

TEXTILES COMMITTEE Ministry of Textiles, Government of India

P. Balu Road, Prabhadevi, Mumbai – 400 025.

Ph : (022) 6652 7542, Fax : 6652 7554 [email protected] & [email protected]

www.textilescommittee.gov.in

2014



http://www.textilescommittee.gov.in/

of 28 This is electronically generated document. No signature requires. This document is downloaded from www.textilescommittee.gov.in

NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE PT PROVIDER PT Provider, Laboratory, TEXTILES COMMITTEE (Ministry of Textiles, Government of India) P. Balu Road, Prabhadevi, Mumbai – 400 025. Ph : (022) 6652 7542, Fax : 6652 7554, E-mail : [email protected], E-mail : [email protected]

CONTACT PERSONS (1) Shri Kartikay Dhanda, PT-Coordinator

Director(Laboratories), Textiles Committee, Mumbai –400 025 Ph: 91 22 6652 7519, Fax: 91 22 6652 7554,

(2) Dr. K.S. Muralidhara, PT-Quality Manager Joint Director(Laboratories), Textiles Committee, Mumbai –400 025 Ph: 91 22 6652 7542, Fax: 91 22 6652 7554,

(3) Shri M.S. Shyamsundar, PT-Technical Manager

Quality Assurance Officer (Laboratory), Textiles Committee, Tirupur – 641602 Report prepared by: Shri M.S.Shyamsundar, PT – Technical Manager SCHEME : INTER LABORATORY TESTING SCHEME -TC/ILTS/15/MECH-2/2014 - TTeessttiinngg ooff

MMeecchhaanniiccaall ppaarraammeetteerrss iinn TTeexxttiillee MMaatteerriiaallss DATE OF ISSUE: November 19, 2014

CONFIDENTIALITY : All the information furnished by the participant laboratories shall be kept confidential by the PT Provider and the same shall not be revealed to others. However, if the accrediting body, for example NABL, requests the PT provider to furnish the performance of any of the participant laboratories, the same shall be provided to them directly, after obtaining permission of the concerned participant laboratory

COPY RIGHT: This report is property of Textiles Committee, the PT Provider. The copy right of this report is retained with Textiles Committee. This report should not be reproduced by others in full or partially in any form without obtaining the consent from Textiles Committee, in writing Disclaimer: The PT Schemes are meant for evaluation of performance of the participating laboratory for the specified tests undertaken in the programme only and are voluntary in nature. Further, it is clarified that reasonable care has been taken to meet the requirement of ISO/IEC 17043:2010, while designing and conducting the Schemes. Participating laboratories are expected to exercise due diligence while carrying out the tests and meet all safety, statutory and accreditation body’s requirements. PT Provider and Textiles Committee will not be responsible for any claim/damages arising out of participating in this programme




I N D E X

S. No. Contents Page No.

1 PT-Provider details

1

2 Index

2

3 Report on Inter Laboratory Testing Scheme

Preamble 3

Textiles Committee 3

PT-Provider 4

The Present Programme 4

Advisory Group 6

Participants 7

Proficiency Test Proceedings 7

Compilation of the Test Results 8

Determination Assigned Value 9

Determination of Standard Deviation for Proficiency Assessment

9

Performance Evaluation of Participants 10

Interpretation of Performance Comment 10

Outliers and Stragglers 10

General Advise to the Participants on the performance

11

4 Annexure - Performance Evaluation of each Participant – Test wise

12

S.No. Table Page No.

1 ILPT schemes conducted by the PT Provider 4

2 Tests covered in TC/ILTS/015/MECH-2/2014 5

3 Advisory Group 6

4 Assigned Values 9

5 Interpretation of Performance comments 10

6 Outliers and stragglers Analysis 11

7 List of outliers and stragglers 11


Report on Inter Laboratory Testing Scheme

Preamble:

Increasing awareness on textile quality and the buyer requirements are forcing textile

manufacturers and traders to test quality of textile products from reputed laboratories. Reputation of

any laboratory depends upon the result it produces. The test report given by any laboratory should be

precise, accurate, repeatable and reproducible. This means, a set of results obtained within a

laboratory by testing a representative sample at any time interval should be comparable. And also,

the result obtained over testing a representative sample in any laboratory should be comparable with

that of any other laboratory and fall within the statistical tolerance limit. In other words, the laboratory

should be able to generate comparable results by performing the same test

The repeatability and reproducibility of any test result involves the laboratory’s competence in

conducting the test which involves the testing equipment, the skill and knowledge of technical

manpower working in the laboratory, the testing conditions and test method adopted. In this pursuit,

the laboratory has to meet a requirement of maintaining its own management system as per ISO/IEC

17025:2005, to participate in Inter Laboratory Comparison (ILC) and/or Inter Laboratory Proficiency

Testing Scheme (ILPT)

Inter laboratory Comparison is defined by ISO/IEC 17043 as, Evaluation of participant

performance against pre-established criteria by means of inter laboratory comparisons. The goal of

the Inter-laboratory Comparisons (ILC) is to provide verification of each participating laboratory’s

technical capability by obtaining a measurement that agrees with all other Laboratories using different

make & model of testing equipment and man-power. The requirement for inter laboratory

comparisons remains in place today, and has been further entrenched into metrology management

systems by its incorporation in the requirements of ISO/IEC 17025:2005

Textiles Committee:

Textiles Committee is a statutory body under the Ministry of Textiles, Government of India,

established in the year 1963 vide an act of parliament. The Committee has set up 16 laboratories

throughout the country for catering to the testing requirements of the textile trade and industry.

Fourteen laboratories of Textiles Committee are accredited as per ISO/IEC 17025:2005 by National

Accreditation Board for testing & calibration Laboratories (NABL), India. Laboratory at Mumbai is the

first in India to get accredited in the field of Textile Testing. All the laboratories of Textiles Committee

have facilities to test mechanical and chemical test parameters. Nine laboratories of Textiles

Committee have Eco testing facilities. By virtue of the Act, Textiles Committee develops many test

standards and also adopts many national and international standards for testing purpose.


PT-Provider:

The Laboratory, Textiles Committee at Mumbai conducts as PT Provider, Inter Laboratory

Proficiency Testing (ILPT) schemes for the benefit of Textile Testing laboratories. The national

accreditation agency, NABL nominated Textiles Committee as nodal agency for two ILPT schemes.

The German Standards body, Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt (PTB), Germany recognized

the schemes conducted by Textiles Committee and sponsored some laboratories of SAARC countries

under its Quality Infrastructure Development Project (QIDP) in SAARC countries. Apart from India,

laboratories from Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal, China, Hong Kong, Vietnam and USA also

participate in the ILPT schemes conducted by Textiles Committee

In order to offer ILPT schemes professionally as a PT Provider, the laboratory of Textiles

Committee at Mumbai has implemented the Management System in accordance with the

requirements stipulated in ISO/IEC 17043 : 2010. The PT Provider has conducted 16 schemes since

2007. The details are given in Table – 1

The Present Programme:

Design: In order to assess the reproducibility of the test results being reported by the various

textile testing laboratories, this Proficiency Testing Scheme for Mechanical testing -

TC/ILTS/15/MECH-2/2014 was designed. The test parameters thus covered in the present PT

Scheme and suggested test methods are given in Table – 2. However, Participants were required to

use the test method which is routinely adopted for the testing of regular samples. Hence, participants

could adopt any equivalent standard or validated in-house method which is equivalent to the

suggested standards.

Table – 1 ILPT schemes conducted by the PT Provider

S.No Identity of the ILPT Year Field PT

items

No. of test

parameters

No. of Labs

participated

1 TC/ILTS/MECH/01/07 2007 Mechanical Fibre, Yarn & Fabric

17 70

2 TC/ILTS/CHEM/02/07 2007 Chemical Fabric 13 70

3 TC/ILTS/MECH/03/08 2008 Mechanical Fabric 11 60


5 TC/ILTS/MECH/05/09 2009 Mechanical Fabric 11 50

6 TC/ILTS/MECH/06/09 2009 Mechanical Yarn 12 31

7 TC/ILTS/MECH/07/09 2009 Mechanical Fibre 15 14





S.No Identity of the ILPT Year Field PT

items

No. of test

parameters

No. of Labs

participated

11 TC/ILTS/MECH/11/10-11 2010-11 Mechanical Fabric 10 65

12 TC/ILTS/CHEM/12/10-11 2010-11 Chemical Fabric 10 70

13 TC/ILTS/Mech-1/2012-13 2012-13 Mechanical Yarn&Fabric 13 42

14 TC/ILTS/Chem-1/2012-13 2012-13 Chemical Fabric and clothing

accessory

12 56

15 TC/ILTS/15/Mech-2/2014 2014 Mechanical Fabric 8 50

16 TC/ILTS/16/Chem-2/2014 2014 Chemical Fabric 8 45

Table – 2 : Tests covered in TC/ILTS/15/MECH-2/2014

S.No TC / ILTS / 015 / MECH-2 / 2014 Standards suggested*

1 Count of yarn removed from fabric IS 3442 / ISO 7211

2 Pilling Resistance(Martindale) ASTM D 4970

3 Abrasion resistance (Martindale) IS 12673 /ISO 12947 / ASTM 4966

4 Breaking (Tensile) strength-raveled strip IS 1969-1/ISO

5 Tear Strength (Elmendorf) ASTM D 1424

6 Pilling Resistance(Random tumble) ASTM D 3512

7 Thickness of fabric ASTM D 1777

8 UV Protection Factor AS/NZS4399

*Note: Participants are required to use the test method which is routinely adopted for the testing of regular samples. Hence,

laboratories can adopt any equivalent standard or validated in-house method which is equivalent to the suggested standards.

Participants adopt in-house developed methods are requested to submit copy of the methods.


Advisory Group:

As per the requirements stipulated in ISO/IEC 17043:2010, an Advisory Group comprising

the following internal and external experts having the necessary expertise in testing of Textiles and/or

statistics was constituted

Table – 3 : Constitution of Advisory Group

S.No Expert Affiliation Field of

expertise

1 Shri.Kartikay Dhanda, Director (Laboratories), Textiles Committee, Mumbai –400 025

Chairman Textile testing

2 Dr. K. S. Muralidhara, Joint Director (Laboratories), Textiles Committee, Mumbai –400 025

Member Textile testing

3 Shri. S.G. Pathi, Joint Director (Laboratories), Textiles Committee, Mumbai –400 025


4 Shri. K. Selvaraj, Deputy Director (Laboratories), Textiles Committee, Mumbai–400 025 Assessor (ISO/IEC 17025), NABL.


5 Shri. S. P. Singh, Asst. Director (Laboratories), Textiles Committee, Kanpur-208005 Assessor (ISO/IEC 17025), NABL


6 Shri. M. S. Shyamsundar, Quality Assurance Officer, (Laboratories) Textiles Committee, Tirupur–641602, Assessor (ISO/IEC 17025), NABL

Member Textile testing& Statistics

7 Dr. P.V. Varadarajan Principal Scientific Officer (Rtd), CIRCOT, Mumbai Assessor (ISO/IEC 17025), NABL

External Technical Expert

Textile testing

The terms of reference of the Advisory Group were as follows:

a) Planning requirements

b) Identification and resolution of any difficulties expected in the preparation and maintenance of

homogeneous proficiency test items, or in the provision of stable assigned value for a

proficiency test item;

c) Preparation of detailed instructions for participants

d) Comments on any technical difficulties raised by participants

e) Provision of advice in evaluating the performance of participants


f) Comments on the results and performance of participants as a whole and, where appropriate,

groups of participants or individual participants;

g) Provision of advice for participants (within limits of confidentiality), either individually or within the

report;

h) Responding to feedback from participants; and

i) Planning or participating in technical meetings with participants.

j) Arbitration of any dispute(s) between participating laboratory(ies) and the PT provider

Participants:

In all 50 laboratories from India, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka were participated in this scheme

Proficiency Test Proceedings:

The laboratory of Textiles Committee (PT Provider), Mumbai, procured sufficient quantity of

materials (PT item) from a reputed textiles manufacturer for designing and conducting Inter

Laboratory Testing Scheme, on the basis of expected number of participants

Preparation of PT items: On receipt of the procured materials, PT items were prepared

ensuring the quantity of each PT item is adequate for the testing of all the parameters included in the

scheme. The PT items thus prepared from the material procured were numbered serially, packed in

polyethylene bags and labeled

Allotments of PT items: Allotments of PT items were done by following appropriate

Sampling procedures adopted by using Random Numbers generated by computer, for Homogeneity

testing, Stability testing and for distribution among participants. The remaining part of the population

was kept as reserve for replacement in case of loss or damage. Henceforth, the allotted PT items can

be referred as sample

Homogeneity testing: To verify the homogeneity of the prepared PT items homogeneity

testing was conducted at the laboratory of Textiles Committee at Mumbai, for the test parameters

covered in the scheme by adopting any one of the suggested methods. However, while conducting

performance evaluation of the participants, the “between- samples SD” calculated during

homogeneity testing by a particular method was used for calculating “SD of PT assessment” for

different methods adopted by the participants, as the inherent variation in the sample (degree of non

homogeneity) is independent of the test method adopted. The procedure given in ISO 13528:2005

was followed for conducting homogeneity testing


Dispatch of PT items: The Proficiency Testing items were dispatched to the respective

participant laboratories on 18th July 2014, along with the following:

(a) Form for Acknowledging the receipt of PT items

(b) Instructions to the participants in the Inter Laboratory Testing Scheme

(c) Form for reporting test results by the participants in the Inter Laboratory Testing Scheme

The participant laboratories were requested to send the test results by 18th August 2014. However, as

per request of participants and administrative reasons results were accepted till 30th September 2014.

The participant laboratories were also requested to

Treat the samples in the same manner as regularly tested samples and accordingly, codify

the samples such that the technical staff testing them are not aware that they are meant

for PT purposes;

Adopt the latest test method which is routinely used by the laboratory for the testing of

regular samples which may be any standard or validated in-house method;

Forward (i) copy of the in-house method adopted (if applicable) for testing any parameter

and also (ii) specify the standard method against which the validation has been done; and,

Forward photo copy of Scope of accreditation certificate as a proof of accreditation for the

test method adopted (applicable to accredited laboratories only).

The participants were informed that, in the absence of proof of accreditation, the participant’s

value will not be considered for arriving at “Assigned Value” for the concerned test parameter,

although, performance of the laboratory will be evaluated for this parameter. Further, it was also

informed that the test results that may be inappropriate for statistical evaluation, for example, gross

errors, miscalculations and transpositions may be excluded for calculation of summary statistics and

performance evaluation of participants.

Compilation of the Test Results:

In order to maintain the confidentiality of the participants of the PT Scheme, the individual

participants were given Code numbers which are generated by using computer. Subsequently, the

test results reported by the participants were tabulated and statistically analyzed for the basic

statistics viz., Mean, Median, Mode, Maximum, Minimum, Standard Deviation, etc., While doing so,

test results were checked for inappropriate for statistical evaluation, for example, gross errors,

miscalculations and transpositions


Determination Assigned Value:

To ensure the measurement traceability, only accredited participants are considered for

evaluating the Assigned Values. Thus due weightage is given to the accredited participants. That is,

this weightage is given only when the participant had submitted their Scope of accreditation along with

test results and accredited for the specific test in which the ILPT is conducted. However, when

sufficient numbers of accredited participant are not available for any test, Assigned Value is derived

from the consensuses from all participants for that parameter

Initially, the robust average and the standard deviation of values reported by the accredited

laboratories (in respective tests) were determined for each parameter in accordance with the

procedure given in ISO 13528: 2005. Subsequently, robust Z Score were calculated on the basis of

the above. The test results of those participants which were found to be outliers (Z score more than

+3 or less than -3) were deleted and Robust Average of the remaining expert participants was again

calculated. This Robust average is treated as the assigned value for the concerned parameter

The Assigned Value of both the parameters thus arrived are given in Table–4.

Table 4: Assigned Values

S.No. Test Assigned

Value

Ro

bu

st

SD

of

Assig

ned

Valu

e

Un

cert

ain

ty o

f

Assig

ned

Valu

e

No

. o

f L

ab

s

co

ntr

ibu

ted

fo

r

Assig

ned

Valu

e

To

tal N

o. o

f

Accre

dit

ed

Lab

s

avail

ab

le f

or

the T

es

t

To

tal n

um

ber

of

part

icip

an

ts(*

)

1 Count of yarn removed from fabric (Ne) (2F)

14.0s 0.15 0.04 18 20 43

2 Pilling Resistance(Martindale) - Rating

3.0, 3.5 NA 0.5 8 11 31

3a Abrasion resistance (Martindale) Change in Colour - Rating

4.0 NA 0.5 10 13 31

3b Abrasion resistance (Martindale) Mass loss(%)

0.84 0.31 0.11 13 13 29

4a Breaking strength-Raveled strip (N)

1207.9 34.4 8.4 26 27 45

4b Elongation (%) at Break-Raveled strip

22.8 1.2 0.3 25 26 43

5 Tear Strength (Elmendorf) (N) 58.1 4.2 1.9 8 15 35

6 Pilling Resistance(Random tumble) - Rating

2.0, 2.5 NA 0.5 4 11 21

7 Thickness of fabric (mm) 1.01 0.06 0.01 15

$ 2 15

(*)Total participants reported valid results in the respective method $ Consensus value from all participants NA: Not Applicable

Determination of Standard Deviation for Proficiency Assessment (σ):

The robust average and the robust standard deviation (σ1) of all qualified values reported by

the participant laboratories were calculated for each of the test separately in accordance with the

procedure given in ISO 13528:2005. Subsequently, the “between-samples standard deviation (SS)” of

homogeneity testing data was compared with the standard deviation of all the participants. If SS 0.3


σ1 , then the sample is considered as homogenous and the robust standard deviation of all the

participants is treated as Standard Deviation for Proficiency Testing. That is σ = σ1

If SS > 0.3 σ1 , then the sample is considered as heterogeneous and Standard Deviation for

Proficiency Assessment is calculated by adding allowance for heterogeneity of the sample as

stipulated in ISO 13528:2005, by using the formula

Performance Evaluation of Participants:

The performance of the individual participant was evaluated by adopting Robust Z score

technique given in ISO 13528:2005, as per the following formula:

XxZ

where x is the test result reported by the individual participant; X is the Assigned Value and σ is the

standard deviation of the Proficiency Assessment

In case of Ordinal test results the deviation of participant result by more than ½ grade

compared to Assigned Value is taken as unsatisfactory (and outliers) and all other results are taken

as satisfactory.

Test wise performance evaluation is given in Annexure.

Interpretation of Performance Comment:

Table – 5: Interpretation of Performance comment

Range Performance of Laboratory

Quantitative Results

│Z - Score│≤ 2 Satisfactory

2 <│Z - Score│< 3 Straggler

│Z - Score│≥ 3 Outlier

Ordinal Results

│Reported Value – Assigned Value │≤ ½ grade or 0.5 rating Satisfactory

│Reported Value - Assigned Value │> ½ grade or 0.5 rating Outlier

Outliers and Stragglers:

Overall performance of all the participants is good. Outliers and Stragglers are very rare and far.

The Outlier and Straggler Analysis is given in Table – 6.


General Advise to the participants on the performance:

If the participant is found to be “Outlier”, necessary corrective action should be taken after

thorough investigation of the root cause of the problem. In case the participant is found to be

“Straggler”, the method of testing, personnel error, use of correct materials / equipments,

maintenance of environmental conditions etc., are have to be re-examined to ensure that the test

results being reported for the concerned test parameters are satisfactory

Table – 6: Outlier and Straggler Analysis

S.No Test

No

. o

f

Part

icip

an

ts

Valid

resu

lts

% o

f valid

resu

lts

No

. o

f

Str

ag

gle

rs

% o

f

Str

ag

gle

rs

No

. o

f

Ou

tlie

rs

% o

f

Ou

tlie

rs

1 Count of yarn removed from fabric (Ne) (2F) 43 42 98 3 7.1 0 0

2 Pilling Resistance(Martindale) - Rating 31 31 100 0 0 3 9.7

3a Abrasion resistance (Martindale) Change in Colour - Rating 31 31 100 0 0 0 0

3b Abrasion resistance (Martindale) Mass loss (%) 29 28 97 0 0 0 0

4a Breaking strength-Raveled strip (N) 45 42 93 1 2.4 0 0

4b Elongation (%) at Break-Raveled strip 43 42 98 1 2.4 1 2.4

5 Tear Strength (Elmendorf) (N) 35 21 60 1 4.8 0 0

6 Pilling Resistance(Random tumble) - Rating 23 21 91 0 0 6 28.6

7 Thickness of fabric (mm) 15 14 93 0 0 0 0

8 UV Protection Factor 2 2 100 0 0 0 0

Total 297 275 92 6 2.2 10 3.6

*Inclusive of Gross error and other methods.

Parameter-wise the outliers and stragglers are listed below:

Table – 7: List of Outliers and Stragglers

S.No. Test Stragglers Outliers

1

Count of yarn removed from fabric (Ne) (2F)

15021, 15024, 15025 Nil

2

Pilling Resistance(Martindale) - Rating

Nil 15011, 15032, 15036

3a

Abrasion resistance (Martindale) Change in Colour - Rating

Nil Nil

3b

Abrasion resistance (Martindale) Mass loss(%)

Nil Nil

4a

Breaking strength-Raveled strip (N)

15032 Nil

4b

Elongation (%) at Break-Raveled strip

15029 15019

5 Tear Strength (Elmendorf) (N) 15034 Nil

6

Pilling Resistance(Random tumble) - Rating

Nil 15007, 15009, 15015, 15041, 15045, 15050

7 Thickness of fabric (mm) Nil Nil

8 UV Protection Factor Nil Nil

Total 6 10


Annexure

PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF EACH PARTICIPANT- TEST WISE

1. LINEAR DENSITY OF YARN REMOVED FROM FABRIC

Participant Code

Reported value (Ne)

Test method adopted Z-

Score Performance

Remark

15001 14.0 IN HOUSE 0.0 Satisfactory

15002 13.9 ISO 7211 -0.5 Satisfactory


15005 13.7 IN HOUSE -1.4 Satisfactory


15007 14.1 ASTM D 1059 0.5 Satisfactory



15011 14.0 ISO 7211 0.0 Satisfactory

15012 13.8 ASTM D 1059 -1.1 Satisfactory

15013 13.9 IS 3442-2004 -0.5 Satisfactory








15021 14.6 ISO 7211 2.5 Straggler


15024 13.5 IS 3442-1980 -2.3 Straggler

15025 14.6 IN HOUSE 2.7 Straggler



15029 14.0 ISO 7211-5:1984 -0.2 Satisfactory



15032 13.9 IS 3442 -0.5 Satisfactory






15039 13.9 IS 3442-1980 -0.5 Satisfactory





Participant Code

Reported value (Ne)


Score Performance

Remark

15044 14.0 ISO 7211-5 0.0 Satisfactory





No. of participants 42

Maximum 14.6

Minimum 13.5

Mean 14.0

Std Deviation 0.22

Median 14.0

Mode 14.0

SUMMARY

Robust Average = 14.0

Robust SD for all valid participants (1 ) = 0.17

Between sample SD of Homogeneity testing (SS ) = 0.1362

SD for PT Scheme with allowance for the heterogeneity if any () = 0.220

Heterogeneity Accounted

Assigned Value (X) = 14.0 Ne (2F)

SD of PT Scheme() = 0.2 Remarks: The following is not included for evaluation.

Participant Code Reported Value Method Adopted Reason for rejection

15004 21.2 IS 3442 Gross Error and trivial outlier


-3.0

-2.0

-1.0

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

15

00

1

15

00

2

15

00

3

15

00

5

15

00

6

15

00

7

15

00

9

15

01

0

15

01

1

15

01

2

15

01

3

15

01

4

15

01

5

15

01

6

15

01

7

15

01

8

15

01

9

15

02

0

15

02

1

15

02

3

15

02

4

15

02

5

15

02

6

15

02

7

15

02

9

15

03

0

15

03

1

15

03

2

15

03

3

15

03

4

15

03

5

15

03

6

15

03

8

15

03

9

15

04

0

15

04

1

15

04

3

15

04

4

15

04

5

15

04

6

15

04

7

15

05

0

Z-S

co

re

Participant Code

Linear Density of Yarn removed from Fabric - Ne


2. PILLING RESISTANCE (MARTINDALE METHOD)

Assigned Value : 3.0, 3.5

Participant code Reported

value (Rating) Test method adopted

Performance Remark

15002 3.5 ASTM D 4970 Satisfactory

15006 3.5 ASTM D 4970:2010 Satisfactory





15011 4.5 ASTM D 4970 Outlier





15017 3.0 IS 10971:84 Satisfactory








15029 2.5 ASTM D D 4970M - 2010 Satisfactory



15032 1.5 ASTM D 4970:2010 Outlier

15036 1.5 ASTM D 4970:2010 Outlier









Frequency Distribution

Rating Frequency

1.5 2

2.0 0

2.5 4

3.0 13

3.5 9

4.0 2

4.5 1

Total 31

Remark: As the frequency distribution of expert participants is bimodal, both the ratings viz.,3.0 and 3.5 are considered as Assigned Value.


3a. ABRASION RESISTANCE - CHANGE IN COLOUR IN 5000 MOVEMEVTS

Assigned Value: 4.0

Participant Code Reported

value (Rating)

Test method adopted Performance

Remark


15007 3.5 ISO 12947 Satisfactory

15008 4.0 ASTM D 4966-2012 Satisfactory

15009 4.0 IS 12673-1 Satisfactory



15012 4.0 ISO 12947-2 Satisfactory


15015 3.5 ISO 12947:2002 Satisfactory


15019 3.5 ISO 12947-3&4:2002 Satisfactory


15022 4.0 ISO 12947-3&4 Satisfactory


15025 4.0 ISO 12947-3,4 Satisfactory

15026 4.0 ISO 12947-2 Satisfactory


















Rating Frequency

3.5 9

4.0 22

4.5 0

Total 31


3b. ABRASION RESISTANCE - MASS LOSS (%) AT 5000 MOVEMEVTS

Participant Code Reported value (%)


Score Performance

Remark



15008 0.50 ASTM D 4966-2012 -0.7 Satisfactory




15015 0.70 ISO 12947:2002 -0.3 Satisfactory


15019 0.30 ISO 12947-3&4:2002 -1.2 Satisfactory


15022 0.50 ISO 12947-3&4 -0.7 Satisfactory


15025 0.90 ISO 12947-3,4 0.1 Satisfactory







15033 1.10 ASTM D 4966-2012 0.6 Satisfactory










Maximum 1.40

Minimum 0.20

Mean 0.76

Std Deviation 0.33

Median 0.70


SUMMARY


Robust SD for all valid participants (1) = 0.366

Between sample SD of Homogeneity testing (SS) = 0.3111



Assigned Value (X) = 0.84%

SD of PT Scheme () = 0.48% Remarks: The following is not included for evaluation.


15012 0.04(%) ISO 12947-2 Gross Error and trivial outlier

-2.0

-1.5

-1.0

-0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

15002

15007

15008

15010

15011

15013

15015

15016

15019

15020

15022

15023

15025

15026

15027

15029

15030

15031

15032

15033

15036

15038

15040

15041

15043

15044

15045

15046

Z-S

co

re

Participant Code

ABRASION RESISTANCE - MASS LOSS (%) AT 5000 MOVEMEVTS


4a. BREAKING STRENGTH

Participant Code Reported Value (N)


Score Performance

Remark

15001 1251.9 IS:1969-1:2009 1.2 Satisfactory

15002 1203.0 ISO:13934-1 -0.1 Satisfactory

15003 1152.3 IS 1969:85 (RA 2009) -1.5 Satisfactory

15004 1221.6 IS 1969 0.4 Satisfactory

15005 1188.0 IS:1969-1:2009 -0.5 Satisfactory


15008 1276.0 ISO:13934-1:2013 1.8 Satisfactory

15009 1235.7 IS 1969 0.8 Satisfactory

15010 1265.2 ISO:13934-1 1.6 Satisfactory



15013 1220.0 IS 1969-2006 0.3 Satisfactory

15014 1173.0 IS 1969 -0.9 Satisfactory

15015 1186.8 IS 1969 -0.6 Satisfactory



15018 1238.0 IS:1969-1:2009 0.8 Satisfactory

15020 1193.0 IS:1969-1:2009 -0.4 Satisfactory




15024 1210.0 IS 1969:1985 0.1 Satisfactory


15026 1174.3 ISO:13934-1:2013 -0.9 Satisfactory





15032 1108.6 IS 1969:85 -2.7 Straggler


15034 1227.2 IS 1969:85 0.5 Satisfactory

15037 1186.0 IS 1969:85 -0.6 Satisfactory




15042 1237.7 IS 1969-1:2009 0.8 Satisfactory





15049 1178.0 IS:1969-1:2009 -0.8 Satisfactory



Participant Code Reported Value (N)


Score Performance

Remark


Maximum 1276.0

Minimum 1108.6

Mean 1202.4

Std Deviation 36.31

Median 1206.5

SUMMARY





No Heterogeneity Observed

Assigned Value (X) = 1207.9 N

SD of PT Scheme () = 36.8 N Remark: The following are not included for evaluation

Participant Code

Reported Value (N)

Method Adopted Reason for rejection

15036 >1000 ISO:13934 Specific values only feasible for evaluation 15046 >1000 IS 1969

15019 697.5 ISO:13934-1:2013 Gross Error and trivial outlier


4b. ELONGATION (%) AT BREAK



Score Performance

Remark

15001 24.9 IS:1969-1:2009 1.6 Satisfactory


15003 24.4 IS 1969:85 (RA 2009) 1.2 Satisfactory

15005 23.6 IS:1969-1:2009 0.6 Satisfactory






15013 21.5 IS 1969-2006 -1.0 Satisfactory

15014 20.2 IS 1969 -2.0 Satisfactory

15015 21.0 IS 1969 -1.4 Satisfactory



15018 22.4 IS:1969-1:2009 -0.3 Satisfactory

15019 18.5 ISO:13934-1:2013 -3.3 Outlier

15020 23.6 IS:1969-1:2009 0.6 Satisfactory




15024 24.0 IS 1969:1985 0.9 Satisfactory




15029 25.7 ISO:13934-1:2013 2.2 Straggler



15032 22.2 IS 1969:85 -0.5 Satisfactory


15034 25.3 IS 1969:85 1.9 Satisfactory

15036 21.7 ISO:13934 -0.8 Satisfactory

15037 22.4 IS 1969:85 -0.3 Satisfactory




15042 22.5 IS 1969-1:2009 -0.2 Satisfactory




15048 23.2 IS 1969:1985 (RA 2006) 0.3 Satisfactory

15049 22.0 IS:1969-1:2009 -0.6 Satisfactory





Score Performance

Remark

No. of participants 42 Maximum 25.7 Minimum 18.5 Mean 22.8 Std Deviation 1.44 Median 22.6

SUMMARY






Assigned Value (X) = 22.8%

SD of PT Scheme () = 1.3% Remarks: The following is not included for evaluation.


15004 30.75 IS 1969 Trivial outlier


-3.0

-2.5

-2.0

-1.5

-1.0

-0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

15001

15002

15003

15004

15005

15006

15008

15009

15010

15011

15012

15013

15014

15015

15016

15017

15018

15020

15021

15022

15023

15024

15025

15026

15027

15029

15030

15031

15032

15033

15034

15037

15039

15040

15041

15042

15043

15044

15045

15048

15049

15050

Z-S

co

re

Participant Code

BREAKING STRENGTH OF FABRIC-RAVELED STRIP

-4.0

-3.0

-2.0

-1.0

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

15001

15002

15003

15005

15006

15008

15010

15011

15012

15013

15014

15015

15016

15017

15018

15019

15020

15021

15022

15023

15024

15025

15026

15027

15029

15030

15031

15032

15033

15034

15036

15037

15039

15040

15041

15042

15043

15044

15045

15048

15049

15050

Z-S

co

re

Participant Code

ELONGATION (%) AT BREAK OF FABRIC-RAVELED STRIP


5. TEAR FORCE (N)

Participant Code Reported value (N)


Score Performance

Remark

15008 61.5 ASTM D 1424:2013 1.0 Satisfactory






15015 60.6 ASTM D 1424:2009 0.7 Satisfactory

15017 53.2 IS 6489:93 -1.4 Satisfactory

15020 54.3 ISO 13937-1:2000 -1.1 Satisfactory






15029 53.0 ASTM D 1424:2009 -1.4 Satisfactory

15034 50.6 ASTM D 1424 -2.1 Straggler




15049 59.0 IS 6489-1:2011 0.3 Satisfactory



Maximum 62.8

Minimum 50.6

Mean 58.0

Std Deviation 3.71

Median 59.2

SUMMARY






Assigned Value (X) = 58.1 N

SD of PT Scheme () = 3.5 N Remark: The following are not included for evaluation


Participant Code

Reported Value (N) Method Adopted Reason for rejection

15002 ABOVE RANGE ISO 13937-1

Specific numeric values only feasible for

performance evaluation quantitatively*

15016 >53 ISO 13937-1:2000

15019 Not Reported the results. Observation: Untearable at 6400gm

ISO 13937-1:2000 (COR 1:2004)

15021 >62.8 ISO 13937-1

15023 >62.8 ISO 13937-1

15030 >53.4 ISO 13937-1

15031 >53.3 ISO 13937-1:2000

15033 >50.2 ASTM D 1424

15040 EXCEEDS THE LIMIT NOT MENTIONED

15043 >62.8 ISO 13937-1

15044 >53.3 ISO 13937-1

15046 >64 ASTM D 1424

15013 627.8 ASTM D1424-07a Gross Error

15032 81.18 ASTM D 2261 Trivial outlier

*Depending on the equipment and operational constraints participants have different upper limit and hence the 12 participants who have reported a qualitative result cannot be considered and evaluated as a separate group.

(a) It is observed that the Coefficient of variation (%) of the 21 valid results reported by the participants for which performance has been evaluated varies from 0.0006 to 4.8 only. Thus the Repeatability of each participant is very good.

(b) A continuous length of fabric was serially numbered from 01 to 60 at equal interval and cut

them into 60 pieces to form the PT-population. From the population 10 pieces were drawn by adopting ‘Systematic Random Sampling’ for Homogeneity Testing. That is the homogeneity testing was conducted on the samples numbered 06, 12, 18, 24, 30, 36, 42, 48, 54 and 60 which represents the entire population. The homogeneity test resulted 54.4N with SD 0.73N. That is the homogeneity of population was ensured.

(c) The PT was conducted for “Tear force ACROSS WARP” only and obviously the geometric and performance properties of WARP are consistent.

In view of (a), (b) and (c) the above participants results were rejected from performance evaluation though it amounts to 40% of total participants for this test.

-2.5

-2.0

-1.5

-1.0

-0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

15008

15009

15010

15011

15012

15014

15015

15017

15020

15022

15024

15025

15026

15027

15029

15034

15036

15039

15041

15049

15050

Z-S

co

re

Participant Code

TEAR FORCE OF FABRIC


6. PILLING RESISTANCE TO RANDOM TUMBLING

Assigned Value = 2

Participant Code Reported value

(Rating) Test method adopted

Performance Remark


15007 3.5 ASTM D 3512 M-10e1 Outlier




15015 3.0 ASTM D 3512:2010 Outlier







15029 2.5 ASTM D 3512/3512 M -2010 Satisfactory







15045 4.0 ASTM D 3512 M-10e1 Outlier




Rating Frequency

1.5 4

2.0 6

2.5 5

3.0 2

3.5 2

4.0 1

4.5 1

Total 21

Remark: The following are not included for evaluation


Value (Grading) Method Adopted Reason for rejection

15004 4 - 5 IS 10971 Gross error. Different test which is not included in this PT Scheme. 15039 4 IS 10971-1984 (RA 1999)


7. THICKNESS OF TEXTILE MATERIAL


value (mm) Test method adopted Z- Score

Performance Remark


15004 1.02 IS 7702 0.1 Satisfactory



15015 0.96 ASTM D 1777:2012 -0.9 Satisfactory



15021 0.92 ASTM S 1777 -1.6 Satisfactory






15039 1.05 IS 7702-1975 (RA 1999) 0.7 Satisfactory


Maximum 1.1

Minimum 0.9

Mean 1.0

Std Deviation 0.04

Median 1.0135

SUMMARY






Assigned Value (X) = 1.01

SD of PT Scheme () = 0.06

Remark: The following are not included for evaluation

Participant Code Reported Value (N) Method Adopted Reason for rejection

15019 0.32 IN HOUSE Gross Error and trivial outlier

-2.0

-1.5

-1.0

-0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

15003

15004

15005

15009

15015

15018

15020

15021

15023

15024

15026

15032

15034

15039

Z-S

co

re

Participant Code

THICKNESS OF TEXTILE MATERIAL


8. UV PROTECTION FACTOR

Participant code Reported

value Test method adopted

15009 13.6 AS/NZS 4399

15028 15.0 AS/NZS 4399


As there are only two participants, the individual test results were obtained from them and their mean values compared using Stuent’s t test as follows.

Participant Code 15009 15028

1 14.70 15

2 14.13 15

3 13.05 16

4 12.58

5 13.60

Mean 13.61 15.33

SD 0.842 0.577

Combined Standard Deviation 0.503

Test Statistic t 3.422

Degrees of freedom 6

t6,0.05

1.943

Conclusion: As t > t6, 0.05, it is concluded that the results reported by the two participants are not comparable.

inter laboratory testing scheme - textiles...

Documents