LYOCELL FILAMENT DENIM

Abstract

The invention relates to a denim fabric as it is used for clothes (1). The fabric is made from weft yarns (4) and warp yarns (6). At least one of the warp yarns and the weft yarns contains or consists of lyocell filaments (8). The resulting material combines high mechanical strength against wear and tear with superior softness, smoothness and luster. Furthermore, the denim according to the invention is bleachable. The denim according to the invention represents a new class of denim alongside existing cotton denims and denims with a silk component.

Claims

1. A lyocell denim made from weft yarns and warp yarns, wherein at least one of the weft yarns and the warp yarns contains or consists of lyocell filaments.

2. The lyocell denim according to claim 1, wherein the denim is bleached.

3. The lyocell denim according to claim 1, wherein the denim has a TS7 value of no more than 6 in a TSA test in the fixed state and/or after garment wash and/or after bleaching.

4. The lyocell denim according to claim 1, wherein the denim has a TS750 value of no more than 100 in the fixed state and/or after garment wash and/or after bleaching.

5. The lyocell denim according to claim 1, wherein the yarn strength of the yarns containing or consisting of lyocell is at least 25 cN/tex after fixation and/or at least 4.5 cN/tex after garment wash and/or at least 2 cN/tex after bleaching.

6. The lyocell denim according to claim 1, wherein the denim scores at least one at least 15,000 cycles to hole formation in a Martindale abrasion test in the fixed state and 8,000 cycles to hole formation in a Martindale abrasion test after garment wash and/or after bleaching.

7. The lyocell denim according to claim 1, wherein the warp face of the denim has a pilling grade of no worse than 5 in the fixed state and/or no worse than 5 after garment wash and no worse than 5 after bleaching in a Martindale pilling test.

8. The lyocell denim according to claim 1, wherein the yarn elongation of at least one of the warp and weft yarn containing the lyocell filaments is at least 4% after fixation and/or at least 2% after garment wash and/or at least 1% after bleaching.

9. The lyocell denim according to claim 1, wherein the of the denim on the warp face has a hairiness grade no worse than 4 after garment wash and no worse than 3 after bleaching.

10. The lyocell denim according to claim 1, wherein the fiber splice of the denim has a grade of no worse than 4 before and/or after fixation and/or no worse than 4.5 after garment wash and/or no worse than 4.5 after bleaching.

11. The lyocell denim according to claim 1, wherein the specific hand in the direction of the warp and/or weft yarns that combine or consist of lyocell filaments is at least 4 mN m.sup.2 g.sup.1 after garment wash and/or at least 3 mN m.sup.2 g.sup.1 after bleaching.

12. The lyocell denim according to claim 1, wherein the yarn consisting of or containing lyocell filaments has a luster of at least 20% reflection.

13. A garment comprising a lyocell denim according to claim 1.

14. A yarn comprising lyocell filaments in a denim fabric.

Description

[0105] RESULTS

[0106] From Tables 1 to 4, the following is apparent: Comparing samples 2 and 5 to comparative sample 4, the tenacity of the lyocell filament both wet and dry according to the invention is significantly higher than the tenacity of the silk denim of comparative sample 4. Further, yarn strength and yarn elongation both dry and wet are superior in all lyocell filament denims compared to non-lyocell filament cotton denims as exemplified in comparative sample 4 and 7.

[0107] Further, it has been demonstrated that lyocell filament denimas does cottonwithstands even aggressive finishing agents such as chlorine bleach that destroys silk.

[0108] With respect to pilling, hairiness and fiber splice, the lyocell filament denim is at least comparable to if not better by one grade than cotton denim before and after garment wash and after bleaching. Further, the lyocell filaments are not subject to the fibrillation that occurs with cotton after washing.

[0109] Although cotton still has higher yarn strength before and after garment wash and after the bleaching, yarn strength of the inventive lyocell filament denim is still very good. In particular, the yarn strength of the lyocell filament denim is paired with luster, softness and smoothness that are all superior to cotton denim and can only be achieved with a denim containing silk. However, the latter cannot be bleached.

[0110] This becomes clear from the following tests, in which the softness and smoothness are analyzed using the TSA Tissue Software Analyzer (TSA Test), a Handle-O-Meter, and a handfeel panel.

[0111] The TSA Test

[0112] The TSA test was carried out to verify that the haptic qualities of the lyocell filament denim of samples 1 to 5 are at least equal if not superior to the haptic qualities of the silk denim of comparative sample 4.

[0113] The two predominant haptic qualities that are improved by using silk in denim are softness and smoothness. To assess these characteristics objectively, the TSA test was carried out.

[0114] The TSA test is described in SchloBer et al., Griffbeurteilung von Textilien mittels Schallanalyse, Meilland Textilberichte, 1/2102, p. 43-45, in the emtec publication Gruner, A new and objective measuring technique to analyze the softness of tissue (2012), in the TSA Operating Instructions, and in Neue and Objektive Messtechnik fr Softness-Analyse in avr-Allgemeiner Vliesstoff Report 5/2015, p. 99-101. Originally developed to measure softness and smoothness of tissues and non-wovens using sound spectra, it has been adapted to also evaluate the softness and smoothness of woven fabrics.

[0115] The TSA test was performed using a TSA Tissue Softness Analyzer device of emtec electronics GmbH, Leipzig, Germany, and the software ESM which is shipped with the TSA. The TSA measures a sound spectrum which results from pressing and rotating a star-like body against a sample fabric with a defined force. For testing, the fabric is clamped around its perimeter and unsupported otherwise, in particular opposite the rotating body. In the TSA test performed here, the software and its evaluation algorithm was not used. Instead, the sound pressure as measured by the TSA at 7 kHz (TS7) was taken as an objective indirect measure of softness and the sound pressure at 750 Hz (TS750) in the sound spectrum measured by the TSA was taken as an objective indirect measure of smoothness. The sound pressure is automatically given by the TSA as dB V2 rms, where V is the rotational velocity of the rotating body. Using these values directly avoided any problems that may have arisen due to the EMS algorithm having been developed for tissue, and not for woven fabrics. A total of four probes was subjected to the TSA test for each sample.

[0116] For testing, a fabric sample of 11 cm diameter was clamped as required by the TSA device and tested without stretching.

[0117] Lower values of TS7 indicate higher softness and lower values of TS750 indicate higher value of smoothness.

[0118] Handle-O-Meter Tests

[0119] The Handle-O-Meter tests were carried out using a Handle-O-Meter testing device of Thwing-Albert Instrument Company, West Berlin, N.J., USA. Sample size was 10 cm10 cm. The inch slot was used with a 1,000 g beam and a stainless steel surface. The tests were conducted on samples cond. 65/20.

[0120] In both the TSA and the Handle-O-Meter tests, only the right, outer side of the denim was considered. The results are summarized in Table 5.

[0121] As a result, the Handle-O-Meter yields two force measurements which are assigned to two orthogonal directions, a machine direction MD which in the chosen set-up corresponded to the warp direction and a cross direction CD which in the chosen setup corresponded to the weft direction. These forces are correlated to the stiffness and smoothness of the tested surface. The force is normalized with the bulk weight of the test sample, resulting in a specific hand in mN m.sup.2 g.sup.1.

[0122] From Table 5, it follows that the cotton denim of comparative sample 7 s inferior regarding smoothness to samples 1, 3 and 6. Although these lyocell filament denims are stiffer than the cotton denim according to comparative sample 7 before garment wash, they are softer than comparative sample 7 after garment wash.

[0123] The silk denim of comparative sample 4 is less smooth then samples 2 and 5, in which lyocell endless filaments are used in the weft instead of silk. Further, the lyocell filament denim is softer than the silk denim of comparative sample 4 before finishing. After finishing, softness of samples 2 and 5 corresponds to the softness of comparative sample 4.

[0124] Thus, it can be concluded from the TSA and the Handle-O-Meter tests that the lyocell filament denim according to the invention combines indeed superior softness and smoothness with the capability of being bleached. In addition, the lyocell filament denim has high tenacity. This combination results in a new class of denim fabrics.

[0125] Handfeel Panel

[0126] To verify the results from the TSA and Handle-O-Meter tests, a handfeel panel was used. The panel was put together consisting of ten independent textile experts. The panel's task was to evaluate objectively the touch of the lyocell filament denim according to the invention in comparison to the comparative examples.

[0127] In order to obtain reproducible results independent of the panel members, the handfeel panel operated as follows:

[0128] All samples to be tested by the handfeel panel were provided in a format 17 cm17 cm and were glued to carbon using a double-sided gluing tape approximately 2 cm from the border on the upper edge. The fabric sample was glued onto the cardboard with the right, warp-faced side facing to the front. It was oriented such that the weft direction was horizontal and the warp direction was vertical.

[0129] For evaluation of the handfeel a semantic grid was defined by providing contrasting pairs of descriptive adjectives for describing the handfeel. The term of the contrasting pairs which corresponded to the desired quality is considered best. Thus, for a fabric, in which smoothness was a desired quality, higher grades will be given than for the opposite quantity, coarseness. Grades ranged from 1 (worst) to 10 (best).

[0130] Further, it was prescribed how the evaluation should be done, e.g. by prescribing the motion of the hand over the fabric for assessing smoothness.

[0131] Reference sample fabrics of the same construction type (weave) with as close construction parameters as possible and, at the same time, significant differences in handfeel were pre-defined for each word pair. For example, a fabric being considered as having a reference coarseness and a fabric being considered as having a reference smoothness were given to the handfeel panel.

[0132] The grades for the respective reference fabrics were fixed at 2 and 8 respectively. Thus, the reference fabric for the worse quality of a word pair had by definition a grade 2 and the reference fabric for the better quality of a word pair a grade 8. Assigning the grades 2 and 8, respectively, allowed to expand the scale during the test if materials with a better or worse quality than the two reference materials were met. Thus, the reference material for coarseness was defined to have a grade 2 and the reference material for smoothness was defined to have a grade 8 in the coarseness-smoothness scale. All other materials which were then tested had to be graded by the handfeel panel relative to the reference material.

[0133] For testing the denim samples, the following semantic grid was used:

[0134] for assessing touch: cotton-like (grade 2) and silk-like (grade 8);

[0135] for assessing consistence: loose (grade 2) and compact (grade 8);

[0136] for assessing wearing sensation: stiff (grade 2) and flexible (grade 8);

[0137] for assessing surface: coarse (grade 2); and smooth (grade 8).

[0138] As reference material for grade 2, comparative sample 7 was used. As reference material for grade 8, comparative sample 4 was used for all word pairs.

[0139] The panel was instructed to assess the above characteristics as follows:

[0140] To evaluate touch, the sample card had to be taken up with one hand and the fabric was allowed to fold down. Then, the handfeel panel members were asked to grip into the pending fabric in such a way that the right (warp-faced) side of the denim touched the palm;

[0141] Consistence describes whether the fabric gives a feel of having a more open or more dens weaving. The sample card was put on table before the individual handfeel panel members. The fabric was taken up with both hands and kneading and stretching the fabric.

[0142] Wearing sensation is determined by again lifting the sampe card with one hand and allow the fabric to fold down. The sample card is then shaken to evaluate the falling pattern of the fabric. Then, the fabric is gripped by the free hand for further assessment.

[0143] Finally, for the judging the surface feel the cardboard lying was put on a table. The warp-faced surface was assessed by moving the palm of the hand in warp direction and in weft direction.

[0144] For each sample fabric and each word pair, the average across the evaluations by the individual handfeel panel members and the deviation from the mean was calculated. The average was used to assess and rank the samples. A summary of the results is given in Table 6.

[0145] Luster

[0146] Luster of individual yarns usable in a lyocell denim according to the invention was measured using a glossmeter. The results in % reflection of incident light are given in Table 7. For measuring the luster of yarns, they were wound on wrap-over cardboard and luster was measured according to EN 14086-01/2003 at 45. The luster of fabrics was determined according to TAPPI T480 at 75. The viewing angle was directed along the yarn direction for measuring yarn luster.

[0147] Samples 1, 3, 7, 8 were yarns made from 100% bright lyocell filaments having the linear mass densities indicated in Table 7.

[0148] Samples 2, 4, 5, 6 are comparative samples.

[0149] Sample 3 had a far superior luster to all other samples and the comparative examples. The luster of samples 1 and 6 was comparable to the denim of comparative sample 7, containing silk.

[0150] Luster of the yarn usable for denim was at least 20% reflection.

[0151] Thus it can be concluded that the inventive lyocell filament denim also combines a superior luster with resistance against aggressive finishing agents.

TABLE-US-00001 TABLE 1 Samples and Comparative Examples Untreated Comparative Comparative Sample 3 Sample 1 Sample 5 Sample 2 Sample 4 Sample 7 Sample 6 design code Denim Denim Denim Denim Denim Denim Denim 1857-B 1857-A 978-100-814 978-150-814 840-814 435-4047 1857-C NF material 70% Lyocell 70% Lyocell 45% Lyocell 33% Lyocell 59% Cotton 98% Cotton 70% Lyocell filaments filaments filaments filaments 41% Silk 2% Elastane filaments 28% Polyester 20% Cotton 55% Cotton 67% Cotton 28% Cotton 2% Elastane 8% Elasto- 2% Elastane multiester 2% Elastane material warp 100% Lyocell 100% Lyocell 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Lyocell filaments filaments Cotton Cotton Cotton Cotton filaments dtex 500f300 dtex 500f300 dtex 500f300 bright 0 twist bright 0 twist bright 0 twist filament filament filament material weft 100% Polyester 100% Cotton 100% Lyocell 100% Lyocell 100% Silk 100% Cotton 100% Cotton with ELAS-core: with core: filaments filaments double plied with Elastane with Elastane Lycra T400 Lycra T400 100 dtex 150 dtex yarn filament from Invista from Invista filament filament material 100% Lyocell 100% Lyocell 100% Cotton 100% Cotton 100% Cotton 100% Cotton 100% Lyocell analyses - warp filaments filaments ring yarn Z ring yarn Z ring yarn Z ring yarn Z filaments filament S filament S filament S material 100% Polyester coreyarn Z: 100% Lyocell 100% Lyocell 100% Silk 100% Cotton 100% Cotton analyses - weft dull with coating: filaments filaments double plied with Elastane with Elastane Elastane core 100% Cotton filament S filament S yarn filament S core dull core dull dull core: 100% PES ring yarn Z ring yarn Z ring yarn Z with Elastane core filaments-number 300 300 60 90 300 weight g/m.sup.2 356 343 128 143 171 335 332 Weave Twill 3/1 Twill 3/1 Twill 3/1 Twill 3/1 Twill 3/1 Twill 3/1 Twill 3/1 yarn count - warp 526 526 556 dtex yarn count - warp 69/1 65/1 61/1 17 Nm yarn count - weft 94 154 159 dtex yarn count - weft 26 26 29 28 Nm single yarn count - 79 weft dtex yarn density - warp 383 386 540 541 553 347 344 yarns/dm yarn density - weft 237 228 380 355 377 201 239 yarns/dm yarn strength - warp cN/tex cond. 20/65 24 25.9 16.5 14 15.4 15.9 26.7 wet 19.4 16.6 14.3 15.7 16.1 19.5 19.4 yarn strength - weft cN/tex cond. 20/65 24 11.8 22.7 32.2 28.6 12.5 11.9 wet 25.3 13.8 13.5 27.9 18.5 18.1 17.5 yarn elongation - warp % cond. 7.1 6.7 4.5 4.7 5.1 5.5 8 wet 8.4 8.4 6.6 8.4 7.9 8.4 10.3 yarn elongation - weft % cond. 20.8 17.2 7.2 9.2 11.5 6.1 6.7 wet 23.6 24.4 6.4 11.7 13.7 15.6 14.6 surface aspect blue blue blue blue blue blue blue after wash- filament filament yarn yarn yarn yarn filament cycles - front side - original hairiness 3 3 2 2.5 3.5 4 4 pilling 4 3 4 4 3.5 4.5 4.5 fiber splice 2.5 3 2 2 2 2.5 3 surface aspect black white white white white white white after wash- yarn yarn filament filament filament yarn yarn cycles reverse side - original hairiness 2.5 2 3 3.5 4 2 2 pilling 3.5 4 4.5 4.5 4 3.5 4.5 fiber splice 3.5 2.5 3 3 2.5 2.5 3.5

TABLE-US-00002 TABLE 2 Samples and Comparative Examples After Fixation Comparative Comparative Sample 3 Sample 1 Sample 5 Sample 2 Sample 4 Sample 7 Sample 6 yarn strength - warp cN/tex cond. 20/65 26.1 27.6 14.5 14.6 15.6 15.4 25.3 wet 20.9 19.5 16.2 15.9 16 16.7 19.9 yarn strength - weft cN/tex cond. 20/65 22.9 12.4 27.5 32.8 25.5 13.8 12.8 wet 24.1 15.7 13 27.8 18.7 16.7 14.9 yarn elongation - warp % cond. 20/65 8.4 7.9 4.4 5 5.2 5.9 7.5 wet 9.2 10.1 7.7 7.6 7.3 6.6 9.5 yarn elongation - weft % cond. 20/65 31.3 26.1 7.9 9.8 11.5 6.8 6.2 wet 34 34.9 9.3 11.5 13.5 7.7 7.4 abrasion test Martindale cycles-sample 41250 40000 17000 16000 28750 27500 not destroyed cycles to hole 51250 48750 19000 18000 36250 32500 formation surface aspect blue blue blue blue blue blue blue after wash- filament filament yarn yarn yarn yarn filament cycles - front side - original hairiness 2 2 2 2 4 2.5 4.5 pilling 5 3 4 3.5 5 3.5 5 fiber splice 2.5 3 2 2 2.5 2.5 2.5 surface aspect black white white white white white white after wash- yarn yarn filament filament filament yarn yarn cycles reverse side - original hairiness 1 1 2.5 3 3 2 1.5 pilling 3.5 4 4 4 5 3 4 fiber splice 3.5 2 2.5 2.5 2 3 2.5

TABLE-US-00003 TABLE 3 Samples and Comparative Examples After Garment Wash Comparative Comparative Sample 3 Sample 1 Sample 5 Sample 2 Example 1 Example 2 Sample 4 yarn strength - warp cN/tex cond. 20/65 5.5 5.1 8.1 5.5 4.5 11.8 4.4 wet 10.3 7.3 9 9 7.5 17 7.9 yarn strength - weft cN/tex cond. 20/65 19.9 8.2 4.7 7.3 19.8 10.2 8.4 wet 23.6 10.4 3.9 5.8 15.5 15.3 11.8 yarn elongation - warp % cond. 20/65 1.6 2.2 4.2 2.7 2.2 4.5 1.6 wet 5.3 4.3 6.9 6.8 5.1 8.6 4.4 yarn elongation - weft % cond. 20/65 25.4 27.5 2.4 2.1 9.4 5.4 5 wet 37.7 32.6 2.9 2.9 13 12.2 10.2 abrasion test Martindale cycles-sample 6500 6500 11000 not destroyed cycles to hole 8500 9500 13000 formation surface aspect blue blue blue blue blue blue blue after wash- filament filament yarn yarn yarn yarn filament cycles - front side - original hairiness 3.5 3 3 3 2.5 2.5 2.5 pilling 4 4 4 3.5 3 4 5 fiber splice 1 1 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 surface aspect black white white white white white white after wash- yarn yarn filament filament filament yarn yarn cycles reverse side - oriqinal hairiness 1 2.5 4 4 2.5 3 3 pilling 3 4 4.5 5 2 4 5 fiber splice 4.5 2 1.5 1.5 1 3 2.5

TABLE-US-00004 TABLE 4 Samples and Comparative Examples After Strong Chlorine Bleach Comparative Comparative Sample 3 Sample 1 Sample 5 Sample 2 Example 1 Example 2 Sample 4 yarn strength - warp cN/tex cond. 20/65 4.3 3.4 4.9 4.6 no 9.8 2.1 material wet 6 6.4 8.6 7.8 no 14.9 5.7 material yarn strength - weft cN/tex cond. 20/65 21.7 9.2 2.3 3.6 no 10 8.8 material wet 22.8 10.7 2.2 3.8 no 14.3 11.3 material yarn elongation - warp % cond. 20/65 1.5 1.9 2.8 3 no 4.2 1.3 material wet 3.4 3.8 6.8 6.5 no 8.3 3.4 material yarn elongation - weft % cond. 20/65 27.8 31.4 1 1.5 no 5.4 7.6 material wet 33.2 34 1.7 2.4 no 11 9.9 material abrasion test Martindale cycles-sample 5000 no not destroyed material cycles to hole 9500 no formation material surface aspect blue blue blue blue blue blue blue after wash- filament filament yarn yarn yarn yarn filament cycles - front side - original hairiness 3 3 3.5 3 not 3 3 tested pilling 5 5 4 4 4 5 fiber splice 1 1 2 2 1.5 1 surface aspect black white white white white white white after wash- yarn yarn filament filament filament yarn yarn cycles reverse side - original hairiness 1.5 3 4.5 4 not 3.5 4 tested pilling 3 3.5 5 5 5 5 fiber splice 4.5 2.5 1.5 1.5 2 2

TABLE-US-00005 TABLE 5 TSA and Handle-O-Mat Test Results Handle- TSA O-Meter TS7 TS750 Specific Hand Bulk [dB [dB MD CD weight V.sup.2 V.sup.2 [mN [mN [gm.sup.2] rms] rms] m.sup.2/g] m.sup.2/g] ORIGINAL Sample 3 368 15.69 176.84 6.5 6.9 Sample 1 345 21.37 124.39 Overload 1.7 Sample 5 127 5.23 52.30 2.1 2.4 Sample 2 143 4.98 58.96 1.8 3.3 Comparative Sample 4 172 17.04 118.02 9.3 4.7 Comparative Sample 7 337 13.48 240.17 6.2 2.3 Sample 6 338 7.33 141.91 18.9 2.5 Original fixed Sample 3 337 5.14 89.42 6.1 0.8 Sample 5 126 6.07 57.71 1.7 2.2 Sample 2 143 6.12 63.23 1.6 3.0 Comparative Sample 4 168 11.08 79.23 7.9 3.5 Comparative Sample 7 315 6.16 150.06 5.1 1.5 Sample 6 318 7.91 118.31 16.8 1.6 Garment washed Sample 3 362 3.09 91.99 4.1 0.6 Sample 1 376 4.98 105.25 Sample 5 121 6.00 37.49 1.4 2.0 Sample 2 141 5.89 39.23 1.2 2.8 Comparative Sample 4 163 4.49 70.17 1.3 1.3 Comparative Sample 7 315 5.76 151.85 3.0 1.5 Sample 6 338 5.15 117.20 4.5 0.9 Chloride strong bleached Sample 3 360 3.51 93.93 3.8 0.6 Sample 1 371 4.84 110.91 Sample 5 120 5.68 33.85 1.3 1.9 Sample 2 127 5.69 37.77 1.1 2.7 Comparative Sample 4 NO MATERIAL! Comparative Sample 7 310 5.66 141.56 3.0 1.3 Sample 6 330 5.73 104.03 4.4 0.9

TABLE-US-00006 TABLE 6 Handfeel Panel Tests garment strong fixed washed bleached Comparative Sample 7 touch: cotton-like/silk-like 2.9 3.2 2.8 consistency: loose/compact 5.3 5.2 5.6 wearing sensation: stiff/flexible 6.0 5.0 5.3 surface: coarse/smooth 3.0 3.3 3.7 Comparative Sample 4 touch: cotton-like/silk-like 5.7 7.2 consistency: loose/compact 7.1 6.1 wearing sensation: stiff/flexible 4.4 7.8 surface: coarse/smooth 7.3 7.5 Sample 6 touch: cotton-like/silk-like 4.1 4.4 5.1 consistency: loose/compact 6.0 5.9 6.3 wearing sensation: stiff/flexible 4.2 5.9 5.9 surface: coarse/smooth 3.3 5.8 6.3 Sample 1 touch: cotton-like/silk-like 4.1 5.0 5.3 consistency: loose/compact 7.7 6.5 6.7 wearing sensation: stiff/flexible 2.6 6.7 5.6 surface: coarse/smooth 5.0 5.9 6.2 Sample 2 touch: cotton-like/silk-like 7.5 7.2 7.7 consistency: loose/compact 6.2 6.0 6.3 wearing sensation: stiff/flexible 7.5 7.8 7.9 surface: coarse/smooth 7.8 7.2 7.6 Sample 3 touch: cotton-like/silk-like 5.7 5.0 5.5 consistency: loose/compact 6.4 6.2 6.0 wearing sensation: stiff/flexible 5.5 6.8 6.7 surface: coarse/smooth 5.6 5.3 6.6 Sample 5 touch: cotton-like/silk-like 8.0 7.8 7.6 consistency: loose/compact 6.3 6.0 5.9 wearing sensation: stiff/flexible 7.7 7.9 7.6 surface: coarse/smooth 8.0 7.3 7.6

TABLE-US-00007 TABLE 7 Luster Lustre Sample No. % Yarn Luster 26.10 40 dtex f30 bright (single filament 1.3 dtex) sample 1 Luster 22.32 56 dtex f30 bright (single filament 1.8 dtex) Cupro sample 2 Luster 28.19 80 dtex f60 bright (single filament 1.3 dtex) sample 3 Luster 23.10 84 dtex f45 bright (single filament 1.8 dtex) Cupro sample 4 Luster 7.89 84 dtex 124 bright (single filament 3.5 dtex) viscose sample 5 Luster 8.49 110 dtex f40 bright (single filament 2.8 dtex) viscose sample 6 Luster 21.32 300 dtex f180 bright (single filament 1.6 dtex) sample 7 Luster 16.32 500 dtex f300 bright (single filament 1.6 dtex) sample 8