The effect of washing treatments on the sensory properties of denim fabric

Abstract

Several processes in textile finishing involve a modification on fabric sensorial and mechanical properties. This paper tries to evaluate the effect of four different washes on the denim fabric tactile properties using a sensory analysis. The studied washes were rinse, stone1, stone2 and stone bleach. The tactile sensory properties of washed denim fabrics were assessed by a trained panel composed of 10 assessors. The 10 panelists were selected from 15 assessors after a training program, during which their performance in terms of repeatability was controlled to decrease the variability of the provided measurements. This trained panel assessed 16 sensory attributes already selected to find out the differences between the washed samples. Analyses of variance and principal components analyses were carried out to define the most pertinent attributes, which allows one to find out the difference between the washed samples. It was found that the change of washed denim fabric handle depends on the washing intensity and it is more important in the case of normal finishing than the fifties finishing.

There have been some studies in which the influences of some washing and special treatments on the mechanical and physical properties of denim fabrics were determined. This paper identifies the most important tactile sensory properties that are influenced by industrial washings for the denim fabric. In addition, this paper represents the progressive changes of the handle that occur on treating the denim fabric with various washings.

Keywords

washing sensory analyses handle panel denim fabric

Introduction

When just woven, fabric is rough and hard. Before becoming final products, the fabric needs to undergo various mechanical and/or physical–chemical treatments.¹ In the case of denim fabric, treatments are realized in a quasi-systematic way followed by finishing treatments. They are made before the clothing production, in order to modify the state of the fabric surface and to change aesthetic appearances of denim products. The washing can be made before making-up on fabric or after clothing production on finished products. It confers a less hard aspect on denim fabric, such as giving it a bleached and worn look.

Certain research works have studied the influence of finishing and washing treatments on the handle of weaved or knitted fabric. Jevsnik et al.² used the KES-F³ to evaluate the effects of cellulose treatment on weft knitted fabric regarding mechanical and surface properties. The influence of enzyme treatments, friction and geometrical roughness on the face and reverse side of interlock knitted fabrics were discussed in comparison with untreated interlock knitted fabric. Agarwal et al.⁴ also used the Kawabata evaluation system for fabric (KES-F) and universal surface tester (UST) to evaluate the low-stress mechanical properties, in order to examine the influence of ageing and the fabric softener used during the wash cycles of knitted fabrics. Colina et al.⁵ quantified, using subjective and objective evaluation methods, the tactile and mechanical properties of 1 × 1 rib knitwear fabrics (acrylic, cotton and wool) that were subjected to different techniques of laundering in a variety of washing and drying conditions. In the work of Strazdiene et al.⁶ the effect of two finishing products (the crease-resistant finishing Knittex “K” and the softener macro Silicone Ultratex “Ul”) upon 100% cotton plain weave fabric was studied by two methods: objective evaluation and sensory analysis. Objective evaluation was done using a Griff tester device where a disc-shaped specimen was extracted through a rounded hole of the stand. Sensory analysis was performed by the panel of 11 trained subjects. Philippe et al.⁷ compared the effect of some type of softener on the sensory feeling of fabrics. They assumed that fabrics treated by a macro emulsion softener are greasier than fabrics treated by the micro emulsion softener. El-Gazel et al.⁸ used the sensory analysis to study the effects of certain finishing treatments, such as laundering, dying in different conditions, bio-polishing, softening, emerizing and calendering on the sensory properties of 100% cotton knitted fabric. For the denim fabric, the majority of studies investigated effects of different mechanical and chemical finishing processes on physical and mechanical properties of denim fabric. The effects of different washing treatments (rinse, stone and enzyme) on pilling and edge deformation⁹ and on abrasion resistance differing according to the washing parameters¹⁰ were investigated. Tarhan and Sariisik¹¹ studied the effects of sand blasting, laser application and enzyme silicone wash on fabric physical properties, hand, breaking and seam strengths and fabric stiffness. Sular and Kaplan¹² studied the influences of some washing (rinse, enzyme wash, stone, bleach) and special treatment processes on some physical, mechanical properties and hand of two types of denim fabrics. Hand evaluation was conducted by a panel composed of 10 graduate students of textile using a five-point rating scale.

The purpose of this study is to determine the effect of various washing processes carried out under industrial conditions on tactile properties of denim fabric using a trained panel. Previously, the studied fabrics were subjected to two different finishing processes. The first one was a normal finishing, the second a fifties finishing. Afterwards, they were washed by four different washing processes: rinse, stone1, stone2 and stone bleach. The evaluation of the treated fabrics was done subjectively using a panel of 10 experts. Hand evaluations were carried out as hand has a critical influence on consumer preferences; even though mechanical properties influence the performance of the product, this is no longer the main concern of consumers. It is thought that results will be beneficial for scientists conducting studies on denim finishing. Moreover, results may guide denim producers in selecting the optimum application for required aesthetic appearances.

Materials and methods

Characteristics of the evaluated fabric

In this study, we assessed only one structure, twill 3/1 (denim) 100% cotton. The physical properties that identify this fabric are summarized in Table 1.

Table 1.

Physical properties of denim fabric

Weave	3/1 Twill
Composition;	100% cotton
Weight; g/m²	451
Yarn linear density; Nm	Warp	12.5
	Weft	13
Thread density; cm	27-17

Denim washing is known as one of the finishing treatments that has vast usage because it creates special appearance and modernizes clothes. The washing treatment consists of making denim turn for one or two hours in a barrel machine or in a washing machine with a perforated drum containing stones or chemical detergents and water. Depending on the intensity of the looked for ageing, jeans can present different aspects: grey blue, clear grey blue, bleached advantage, used, etc.

In this work, a trained panel assessed 10 samples: 2 untreated and 8 washed. Half of the assessed samples were subjected to a fifties finishing and the others to a normal finishing, before the washing process. Then, four different washing processes were applied to these samples, using industrial machines. The assessed samples are presented in Table 2.

Table 2.

The assessed samples

Fabric name	Finishing process	Washing
Nb	Normal	Not washed
Nr	Normal	Rinse
Ns1	Normal	Stone 1
Ns2	Normal	Stone 2
Nsbl	Normal	Stone 2 + bleach
Fb	Fifties	Not washed
Fr	Fifties	Rinse
Fs1	Fifties	Stone 1
Fs2	Fifties	Stone 2
Fsbl	Fifties	Stone 2 + bleach

The normal finishing

The normal finishing consists of a Denim Range treatment followed by a sanforizing.

Denim Range: this is a treatment of fabric in a bath of finishing agent in the presence of a straightening mechanism, which permits one to exercise a high tension to fix the angle of movement between the warp and the weft yarns. This treatment allows one to increase the density of fabric and makes the fabric more like cardboard.

Sanforizing: this is a treatment to increase the dimensional stability of textile materials. The sanforizing allows one to make the cotton fabrics less fragile to the wash, in particular as regards to their shrinkage and the possible loss of colors. During this operation, fabrics are stretched in length as well as in width and compacted so that they do not shrink after the first wash.

The fifties finishing

The fifties finishing is a process of finishing that begins with a treatment on Goller in the presence of NaOH (160 g/l) and at a low temperature of 10℃, followed by rinsing and neutralization. This treatment permits a partial desizing of fabric and makes it flatten, dense, smooth and brilliant, as it increases the fabric’s dynamic resistance and the unification of dye. This finishing process ends in a Denim Range and a sanforizing treatment, as in the case of normal finishing.

The washing

Washing is an aesthetic finish creating a worn look and softer hand in denim products. There are different methods of washing the fabric. This study investigated the influence of the following washing treatments on the handle of denim fabric.

Rinse: this consists of a desizing in a hot bath (60℃) of NaOH, followed by three rinses succeeded by a softening. It gives the jeans a less hard aspect and does not discolor them.

Stone1: this consists of fading the jeans in a cold bath for 30 min, before putting them into a machine with a perforated drum or with barrel, and tumbling them with pumice stone that is not soaked with bleaching agent. It is intended to give a worn look to jeans, to achieve a soft hand feeling and to discolor them slightly. The cycle of this washing contains a desizing + two rinses + stone1 + two rinses and a final softening.

Stone2: this is a pushed stone (double stone) washing. It consists of a desizing, followed by a hot washing with stone at 60℃ for 60 min and being tumbled with pumice stone soaked in enzyme, succeeded by three rinses. Then, the jeans are rinsed three times again with another stone in addition to a softening. It is intended to give a used look to jeans and to lighten them.

Stone bleach: the bleach is a fading that allows the producers of jeans to obtain all the nuances of the blue that is looked for by the clientele. Its purpose is partially discoloring the jeans by using a bath containing 20–100 g/l of sodium hypochlorite according to the wished degree of discoloration and the concentration of the used bleach. In this research paper, we studied the bleach combined with stone2, which allows one to obtain both a used and light look.

Condition of the sensory evaluation

The tactile sensory properties of washed fabrics were evaluated by a panel of 10 trained members. Sixteen fabric attributes, specific to denim fabric evaluation, were selected after qualitative and quantitative reductions of a list of 56 tactile attributes,¹³ which were generated following a preliminary questionnaire of 200 persons (of different age, sex and experience). For each attribute the assessment method was defined through qualitative discussions with the panelists. The panelists were then trained in the quantification of each tactile attribute, in order to prove the consistency of panelists’ evaluation and variability between panelists. A structured line-scale (from 0 to 10) was used for recording the sensory attributes scores. The 16 fabric tactile sensory properties and their assessment methods are presented in Table 3.

Table 3.

The list of attributes

	Categories			Attributes	Reference		Assessment technique
	Surface	Physical	Dynamical	Attributes	Negative	Positive	Assessment technique
Bipolar	*			Cold–heat	Glass or leather	Wool	To take the sample suspended with full hand.
	*			Moist–dry		Wool	To take the sample suspended with full hand.
		*		Thin–thick	Veil	Velvet of furnishing	To estimate the thickness with the thumb and index finger.
		*		Light–heavy	Veil	Fabric furnishing	To weigh with the hand the mass of the sample.
	*			Smooth– grooved	Paper	Fabric furnishing	To estimate the relief and the grooves with the end of the thumb.
			*	Supple–stiff	Viscose and Lycra Jersey	Raw twill	To handle and to compress the fabric with the two hands.
Simple		*		Falling	Raw twill	Viscose and Lycra jersey	To take the closed hand, if it opens while passing on the suspended fabric, therefore not falling.
			*	Flexible	Raw twill	Viscose and Lycra jersey	The sample is held between two fingers in one hand and swept from top to bottom with the palm of the other hand.
	*			Tender	Raw twill	Cashmere	To graze with the fingers and the palm of hand.
	*			Silky	Raw twill	Silk satin	To rub gently with the fingers and thumb.
	*			Sleek		Satin	To make flat past the fingers on the fabric, it is smooth when there is no roughness.
	*			Slippery		Paper	To move the palm of the hand across the surface of the sample.
	*			Hairy	Paper	Angora	To estimate the density and the length of fibers at the surface of the fabric with the ends of the fingers
			*	Elastic	Paper	Viscose and Lycra jersey	The edges of the sample are held with both hands then stretched for three times in the same direction.
	*			Compact		Paper	To check the density of the fabric with the ends of fingers.
			*	Wrinkly		Paper	To get the sample into one hand and to compress, open the fabric and check if the folds persist.

The handle of the fabric was assessed in a specific cabinet with temperature and humidity control. The evaluated fabric sensory attributes were predominantly tactile without sight. The fabric swatches were presented in random order. Before the evaluation, swatches (dimension 30 cm × 20 cm) are kept in the standard condition (T = 20 ± 2℃ and H = 65 ± 2%) for 24 hours.

Before handling fabrics, the panelists were required to wash and dry their hands. In order to minimize errors arising from fatigue, the panelists assessed only five samples per session.

Results and discussion

To reach the objectives of this study, at first an analysis of variance (ANOVA) in two factors was realized. The ANOVA allowed us to calculate F fabric and F interaction (F is a statistical of Fisher Snedecor). The F fabric allows one to find if the subjects will perceive the differences between fabrics. If the F fabric is significant, then the fabrics can be considered different. The F fabric was defined as follows:

F fabric = \frac{\frac{r \sum_{i = 1}^{p} (\bar{Y ij} - \bar{Y j})}{p - 1}}{\frac{\sum_{i = 1}^{p} \sum_{k = 1}^{r} (Y ijk - \bar{Y ij}) 2}{p (r - 1)}}

(1)

where

Y ijk

is the note given by panelist j to the evaluation k of the sample i. In our case, the number of samples p = 4, the number of panelists q = 10 and the number of evaluations for the same samples r = 2.

\bar{Y} ij

was the average of notice for the sample i given by the panelist j:

\bar{Y} ij = \frac{\sum_{k = 1}^{r} Y ijk}{r}

(2)

The F interaction (Equation (3)) informs one about the degree of association between the subjects; if the F interaction is not significant, the subjects can be considered as homogeneous in their notation for this attribute; therefore, they are considered in agreement. Otherwise, they are in total disagreement. Therefore, a principal components analysis (PCA) is carried out on the average notes for attributes in disagreements in order to find out the origin of the significance of this interaction:

F interaction = \frac{\frac{r \sum_{i = 1}^{p} \sum_{j = 1}^{q} (\bar{Y} ij - \bar{Y}) 2 - pr \sum_{j = 1}^{q} (\bar{Y} j - \bar{Y}) 2 - qr \sum_{i = 1}^{p} (\bar{Y} i - \bar{Y}) 2}{(q - 1) (p - 1)}}{\frac{\sum_{i = 1}^{p} \sum_{j = 1}^{q} \sum_{k = 1}^{r} (Y ijk - \bar{Y} ij) 2}{pq (r - 1)}}

(3)

where

\bar{Y}

is the global average of the notice given by

\bar{Y} = \frac{\sum_{i = 1}^{p} \sum_{j = 1}^{q} \sum_{k = 1}^{r} Y ijk}{pqr}

(4)

\bar{Y} j

was the average of the notice for the panelist j:

\bar{Y} j = \frac{\sum_{i = 1}^{p} \sum_{k = 1}^{r} Y ijk}{pr}

(5)

and

\bar{Y} i

was the average of the notice for the sample i:

\bar{Y} i = \frac{\sum_{j = 1}^{q} \sum_{k = 1}^{r} Y ijk}{qr}

(6)

Table 4 represents F fabric and F interaction calculated for 16 attributes by the ANOVA. According to this table, F fabric is not significant for the attributes cold–heat, falling, hairy, flexible and elastic. The panel did not establish any difference between the samples for these attributes. For that reason, these attributes will not be taken into account in later statistical studies.

Table 4.

Results of analysis of variance for two factors

Attributes	F fabric	F interaction
Cold–heat	1.74	2.901^a
Moist–dry	3.159^a	0.44
Thin–thick	4.119^a	0.338
Falling	0.856	0.096
Tender	649.681^a	166.4^a
Silky	4.065^a	0.765
Light–heavy	22.348^a	1.555
Sleek	4.269^a	2.081^a
Slippery	33.293^a	11.101^a
Smooth–grooved	3.221^a	0.563
Hairy	0.766	0.794
Compact	62.338^a	45.953^a
Flexible	0.629	0.168
Elastic	0.143	0.301
Supple–stiff	9.755^a	1.348
Wrinkly	5.622^a	1.628

F statistically significant at the 95% confidence level.

This table also shows that F interaction of the compact cold–heat, tender, sleek and slippery attributes is significant at the threshold of 5%. This means that panelists noted the fabrics differently for these attributes. With the aim of determining the origin of the importance of these interactions, we represented the circle of correlation for each of the attributes in disagreements.

On the circles of correlation (Figures 1 and 2) of the attributes tender and sleek, two panelists were a bit far from the others, but the agreement is unanimous for the majority of the subjects on the evaluation of washed fabrics. These attributes will be considered during the statistical studies in question. The slippery attribute (Figure 3) also will be taken in consideration, because the panelists are positively correlated on the evaluation of fabrics for this attribute.

Figure 1.

Circle of correlation for the tender attribute.

Figure 2.

Circle of correlation for the sleek attribute.

Figure 3.

Circle of correlation for the slippery attribute.

However, for the attribute compact (Figure 4), the panelists are scattered on the circle of correlation. Then, they are totally disagreeing on the notation of fabrics. For that reason, this attribute will not be taken into account in later statistical studies.

Figure 4.

Circle of correlation for the compact attribute.

The discriminating attributes to be taken into account in the study of the influence of washing on the handle of denim fabric, are thus: moist–dry, thin–thick, tender, silky, light–heavy, sleek, slippery, smooth-grooved, supple–stiff and wrinkly. For these attributes, a global PCA is realized on the average notes of the group. The PCA permitted us to project a multidimensional data (size 10) onto two dimensions (axes F1&F2) that account for the greatest percentage of the variance in the data (Figure 5).

Figure 5.

The appropriate values.

The biplot (Figure 6) represents 86.48% of the total variance in the data, which we consider to be adequate for making broad comparisons between the treated fabrics and to give an overall view of all effects of washing them. The axis F1, which forms 68.41% of the total inertia opposed the attributes supple–stiff, smooth–grooved, wrinkly and light–heavy to the attributes sleek, tender, slippery and silky. The axis F2 (18.08%) is mainly formed by the moist–dry and thin–thick attributes.

Figure 6.

Circle of attributes correlation.

Figure 7 maps the position of all the variously washed samples, relative to each other, in terms of all the measured sensory attributes. This map shows that the fading influences the handle of fabrics, in particular for the fabrics that were subjected to a normal finishing previously. A projection (Figure 8) of fabrics on the axes of the discriminating attributes allows one to compare the various fabrics. Before washing, the fabric Nb (submitted normal finishing and not washed-out) represented a stiff and slightly rough aspect because of the size, which still remains fixed to the fabric. Every time the washing intensifies, the effect of the size decreases and the fabric becomes suppler, tenderer, sleeker, more slippery and silkier. However, for the fabrics treated with fifties finishing, the influence of washing on the tactile properties was not of the same intensity as it was in fabrics subjected to a normal finishing before washing. Stone2 wash and stone bleach made the fabrics dry and light.

Figure 7.

Map of fabrics.

Figure 8.

Map of fabrics and circle of correlation.

We studied separately the influence of washing on the handle of fabrics that were subjected previously to a fifties finishing and on the handle of fabrics that were subjected to a normal finishing.

Figure 9 shows a PCA biplot representing the progressive changes that occur on washing the denim fabrics treated previously with a normal finishing, in different wash regimes. The figure shows that the not-washed-out fabric Nb is stiffest, the heaviest and the most wrinkly. It also shows that fabric Ns1 was judged the thickest and fabric Nsbl the thinnest. According to the panel, the rinse wash (Nr) improved moderately the handle of the fabrics subjected previously to a normal finishing. The stone wash (Ns1 and Ns2) and stone bleach (Nsbl) made this fabric more slippery, silkier, sleeker, tender and drier.

Figure 9.

Map of fabrics treated with normal finishing.

According to Figure 10, the not-washed-out fabric Fb was judged stiff, most grooved and heavy. On the other hand, fabric Fs2 was judged the most wrinkly, the most slippery, the silkiest, the most supple and the smoothest. This implies that the stone wash has a softening effect. However, the stone bleach improves the tactile properties of the fabric treated previously with fifties finishing, it makes it (Fsbl) sleeker, silkier, tenderer and more slippery. This figure also shows that the stone1 wash makes the fabric treated previously with fifties finishing less wrinkly, tenderer and more slippery, and a simple rinse modifies slightly the handle of this fabric and makes it less sleek.

Figure 10.

Map of fabrics treated with fifties finishing.

The previous interpretations are confirmed by the Duncan test, which allows a multiple comparison of the averages note by attribute. Table 5 presents the classes of the significantly different fabrics for every discriminating attribute. The fabrics that had been subjected before washing to a normal finishing are classified in the same class for the moist–dry and thin–thick attributes. For these same attributes, fabric Fsbl is considered the driest and the thickest, and fabric Fb is considered the thinnest and the moistest. For the attribute light–heavy, the washing provoked a weighty variation only for fabrics that had been subjected previously to a normal finishing. For the tender, sleek and slippery attributes, fabric Nb (respectively fabric Fb) is arranged in the negative extreme class and fabric Nsbl (respectively fabric Fsbl) is arranged in the positive extreme class. The washing treatment varies slightly the silky attribute for the fabrics that had been subjected to a fifties finishing, but for fabrics treated with a normal finishing the fabric Nb is considered the least silky and the fabric Nsbl the most silky.

Table 5.

Classification of the fabrics (Duncan test)

Attributes	Nb	Nr	Ns1	Ns2	Nsbl	Fb	Fr	Fs1	Fs2	Fsbl
Cold–heat	6071	6357	6429	6657	6529	4,500	5286	6000	6357	6429
	a	a	a	a	a	c	b	ab	a	a
Thin–thick	5286	5429	5571	5429	5286	4,071	4214	4286	4643	4500
	a	a	a	a	a	c	bc	bc	bc	b
Tender	2,021	3143	3286	3643	4143	3,429	3571	4000	4286	4571
	c	b	b	ab	ab	ab	ab	ab	ab	a
Silky	1143	2500	2786	3143	2929	3,357	3571	3643	3643	3571
	c	b	ab	ab	ab	ab	ab	a	a	ab
Light–heavy	6571	6500	5857	5571	5429	4,500	4571	4429	4357	4286
	a	ab	bc	c	c	d	d	d	d	d
Sleek	2679	3357	4071	4500	4000	3,929	3714	4000	3714	3929
	c	bc	ab	ab	a	abc	abc	ab	abc	ab
Slippery	3214	3714	4571	4357	4214	4,571	4571	4929	5000	5143
	d	cd	abc	abc	bc	abc	abc	ab	ab	a
Smooth–grooved	3143	2857	2643	2214	2500	2,500	2357	2214	2257	2286
	a	ab	abc	c	bc	bc	bc	c	c	bc
Supple–stiff	7236	5929	5143	4500	5214	5,000	4571	4900	5214	4857
	a	b	bc	bc	c	bc	c	c	bc	c
Wrinkly	6593	4714	4571	5000	5071	4,500	4643	4657	4857	4714
	a	b	c	ab	ab	c	bc	ab	b	b

a, ab, b, abc, bc, c, d: classification of the fabric according to the intensity of the panel notes.

The profiles of washed fabrics are represented in Figure 11. This figure shows that the profiles of fabrics treated with a fifties finishing before washing are slightly far from one another. This implies that the washing in question does not influence enormously the handle of these fabrics except for the attributes moist–dry and tender.

Figure 11.

Profiles of fabrics treated with fifties finishing.

On the other hand, the influence of these washes is remarkable on the handle of fabrics (Figure 12) that had been subjected to a normal finishing previously.

Figure 12.

Profiles of fabrics treated with normal finishing.

Conclusion

Commonly used washing processes were applied on denim fabrics that were treated with normal and fifties finishing previously, to see their effects on tactile sensory properties of the products, which are crucial for the preference quality of the denim products. According to the results, the effects of the washing process group (rinse, stone1, stone2, stone bleach) were determined to be statistically more significant in the case of normal finishing than of the fifties finishing. The studied washes did not modify enormously the handle of fabrics that were subjected to a fifties finishing previously. On the other hand, the influence of these washings is remarkable on the handle of the fabrics that were subjected to a normal finishing before washing.

Hand evaluation results were better after the applications stone1 or stone2 washing, as they wear out some of the surface fibers, creating a softer and bulkier surface. Stone 1 wash makes the fabric less wrinkly, tenderer and more slippery. The combination of the stone 2 wash with bleaching created desirable hand evaluation results for the attributes sleek, silky, tender and slippery. Nevertheless, this is not the case for the rinse wash, as panelists evaluated the rinse wash with lower scores for the attributes tender, silky, sleek and slippery and the attributes supple–stiff and wrinkly with higher scores.

Footnotes

Funding

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

Acknowledgments

We would like to express our sincere thanks to the director and to the entire group of development service at the SITEX Ksar Hellal Company for their help. We are also grateful to the group of panelists for their collaboration with the sensory assessment.

References

Pietro B, Ferrucio B, Ester F, Giuseppe R and Sergio V. Reference book of textile finishing, 1st ed., Italian Association of Textile Machinery Producers (ACIMIT), Milano (Italia), 2001.

Jevsnik

Stjepanovic

Heikinheimo

. Effect of enzyme treatments on interlock knitted fabric. Int J Clothing Sci Technol 2011; 23: 61–73.

Kawabata S. The standardisation and analysis of hand evaluation, 2nd ed., Textile Machinery Society of Japan, Osaka, Japan, 1980.

Agarwal

Koehl

Perwuelz

. Simultaneous influence of ageing and softener on mechanical properties of knitted textiles during life cycle of garment. Int J Clothing Sci Technol 2011; 23: 152–169.

Colina

Subhashm

David

. Effects of laundering on the sensory and mechanical properties of 1 × 1 rib knitwear fabrics. Part II: changes in sensory and mechanical properties. Textil Res J 1999; 69: 252–260.

Strazdiene

Ben Said

Gutauskas

. The evaluation of fabric treatment by Griff tester and sensory analysis. Int J Clothing Sci Technol 2006; 18: 326–334.

Philippe F, Schacher, L and Adolphe, D. Characterisation of different finishing treatments using tactile sensory analysis. In: the Fiber Society spring 2003 symposium, Loughborough University, UK, 30 June-2 July 2003, Actesctes, pp.11–12.

El-Gazel

Babay

Sahnoun

. The tactile sensory evaluation of knitted fabrics: effect of some finishing treatments. J Sens Stud 2010; 25: 201–215.

Card

Moore

Ankeny

. Garment washed jeans: impact of laundering on physical properties. Int J Clothing Sci Technol 2006; 18: 43–43.

10.

Patrick

Foddy

. New method to evaluate strength effect on denim garment. AATCC Rev 2002; 2: 38–38.

11.

Tarhan

Sariisik

. A comparison among performance characteristics of various denim fading processes. Textil Res J 2009; 79: 301–301.

12.

Sular

Kaplan

. Effects of different finishing processes on some performance characteristics of denim fabrics. Industria Textila 2011; 62: 281–288.

13.

Halleb

Sahnoun

Cheikhrouhou

. Training and control of performance of tactile sensory panel. J Appl Sci 2013; 13: 366–376.