staple length comparision

18
COTTON STRENGTH PREDICTION J. Militký, D. Křemenáková, G. Krupincová, J. Ripka The Technical University of Liberec Liberec, Czech Republic THESALONIKI 2004

Upload: prasannavm2000399

Post on 01-Oct-2015

249 views

Category:

Documents


2 download

DESCRIPTION

Staple length comparison

TRANSCRIPT

  • COTTON STRENGTHPREDICTION

    J. Militk, D. Kemenkov, G. Krupincov, J. Ripka

    The Technical University of Liberec

    Liberec, Czech RepublicTHESALONIKI 2004

  • OUTLINE

    Cotton fibers quality characteristics Introduction of geometric characteristics index

    of cotton fibers Inter-relations between cotton fiber properties

    and bundle strength. Dependencies between cotton strength results

    from various devices.

  • Strength PredictionProblems

    Lack of theories or models Measurements of fiber properties (LVI, HVI).

    Direct vs. indirect principles (fineness) Measurements of fiber strength (Pressley,

    Stelometer, Fibrodyn, Mathis, HVI)Single, bundle, test length, calibration

    Mutual interrelations (fineness, length, strength) Variability of fiber properties (small range,

    dependence on maturity etc.)

  • Uster HVI spectrum

  • Uster AFIS

  • Cotton fiber geometry

    Premium Range 3.7-4.2Base Range 3.5-3.6 or 4.3-4.9Discount Range 3.4 and below or 5.0 and up

    Micronaire Reading and Market Value

    UHM [mm] UI [%]

    MIC [-]

    FI [tex]

    SF [%]

    MAT [-]

  • Geometric properties index

    Korickij higher index higher quality multiplicative factors

    LVI measurements mean lengthIG = 0.1*Lm*(1-SF/100)*MAT*(FI)-0.5

    HVI measurements

    MICSFUIUHMIGa

    *10000)100(** =

    FIMATSFUIUHMIG

    *1000000*)100(** =

    3 3.2 3.4 3.6 3.8 4 4.2 4.4 4.6 4.8 50.13

    0.14

    0.15

    0.16

    0.17

    0.18

    0.19

    0.2

    0.21

    0.22regres s ion model

    FJ = 0.038*MAT + 0.016Me an re lative e rror: 5.63039

  • Cotton fiber strength

    STR [cN/tex]EL [%] elongation ant break

  • Time trends in Cotton Quality

  • Texas cottons 1990 -I

    -10 -5 0 5 10 15-20

    -15

    -10

    -5

    0

    5

    10

    15

    20

    1

    2

    34

    5

    6

    7

    8 9

    10

    11

    1213

    14

    15

    1

    2

    3

    4

    56

    s econd component

    f

    i

    r

    s

    t

    c

    o

    m

    p

    o

    n

    e

    n

    t

    combined graph

    15 TEXAS cottons (1990 crop)

    1 2 3 4 5 60

    10

    20

    30

    40

    50

    60

    c

    o

    n

    t

    r

    i

    b

    u

    t

    i

    o

    n

    [

    %

    ]

    component No

    Contribution of variables

    1.UHM,2. UI,3. SF, 4. MAT,5. FI,6. MIC7. STR

    UHM 0.0060 0.0008 UI 1.6499 0.6472 SF 46.575 27.793 MAT 51.751 26.443 FI .0001 0.0000 MIC 0.0172 0.0262

    Principal components

  • Texas cottons 1990 -II

    1.UHM,2. UI,3. SF, 4. MAT,5. FI,6. MIC7. STR

    Principal components1 2 3 4 5 6

    0

    10

    20

    30

    40

    50

    60

    component No

    v

    a

    r

    i

    a

    n

    c

    e

    d

    r

    o

    p

    [

    %

    ]

    Component s election

    % of Variance58.835939.45291.57430.13520.00170.0000

  • Texas cottons 1990 - III

    x

    1

    x

    2

    x

    3

    x

    4

    x

    5

    x

    6

    x

    7

    x1 x2 x3 x4 x5 x6 x7

    1.UHM,2. UI,3. SF, 4. MAT,5. FI,6. MIC7. STR

    Scatter graphs

  • Texas cottons 1990 - IV

    1.UHM,2. UI,3. SF, 4. MAT,5. FI,6. MIC7. STR

    1

    2

    3

    4

    5

    6

    7

    S cale Gives Value of abs (R) for Each Variable P air

    Correlation Map

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7

    0.1

    0.2

    0.3

    0.4

    0.5

    0.6

    0.7

    0.8

    0.9

    Pairedcorrelations

  • Simple predictions

    79 79.5 80 80.5 81 81.5 82 82.5 83 83.5 8420

    22

    24

    26

    28

    30

    32regres s ion model

    HVIS TR = 0.87*UI - 42Me an re lative e rror: 7.2 %

    70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 8620

    22

    24

    26

    28

    30

    32regres s ion model

    HVISTR= 0.26*MAT + 6.9Me an re lative e rror: 7.7 %

    20 22 24 26 28 30 3224

    25

    26

    27

    28

    29

    30

    31

    y meas

    y

    p

    r

    e

    d

    y = 0.35*x + 18HVIS TR = -45 + 0,68*UI + 0,23*MATMe an re lative e rror: 7.08 %

  • Comparison of US cottons strength

    Comparison ofSTELOMETER, HVI andSPINLAB strength for 15TEXAS cottons (1990 crop)

  • Prediction of strength I

    STELOMETER strength prediction

    SF,UHM, UI,MIC,FI,MAT

  • Prediction of strength II

    HVI strength prediction

    SF,UHM, UI,MIC,FI,MAT

  • Strength comparison

    The main problems in strength comparison based on various devices are:

    differences in gauge length (strength is decreasing function of gauge length),

    differences in various methods for fibres fineness evaluation, differences in strength measuring principles.

    It is therefore no possible to obtain directly comparable results and regression lines are some kind of calibration equation serving for re-computation purposes mainly.

    COTTON STRENGTH PREDICTIONOUTLINEStrength Prediction ProblemsUster HVI spectrumUster AFISCotton fiber geometryGeometric properties indexCotton fiber strengthTime trends in Cotton QualityTexas cottons 1990 -ITexas cottons 1990 -IITexas cottons 1990 - IIITexas cottons 1990 - IVSimple predictionsComparison of US cottons strength Prediction of strength IPrediction of strength IIStrength comparison