Understanding the difference in softness of Australian Soft Rolling Skin wool and conventional Merino wool

Abstract

Softness is one of the key elements of textile comfort and is one of the main considerations when consumers make purchasing decisions. In the wool industry, softness can reflect the quality and value of wool fibers. There is verifiable difference in subjective softness between Australian Soft Rolling Skin (SRS) wool and conventional Merino (CM) wool, yet the key factors responsible for this difference are not yet well understood. Fiber attributes, such as crimp (curvature), scale morphology, ortho-to-cortex (OtC) ratio and moisture regain, may have a significant influence on softness performance. This study has examined these key factors for both SRS and CM wool and systematically compared the difference in these factors. There was no significant difference in the crimp frequency between these two wools; however, the curvature of SRS wool was lower than that of CM wool within the same fiber diameter ranges (below 14.5 micron, 16.5–18.5 micron). This difference might be caused by the lower OtC ratio for SRS wool (approximately 0.60) than for CM wool (approximately 0.66). The crystallinity of the two wools was similar and not affected by the change in OtC ratio. SRS wool has higher moisture regain than CM wool by approximately 2.5%, which could reduce the stiffness of wool fibers. The surface morphology for SRS wool was also different from that of CM wool. The lower cuticle scale height for SRS wool resulted in its smoother surface than CM wool. This cuticle height difference was present even when they both had similar cuticle scale frequency.

Keywords

Wool softness curvature ortho-to-cortex ratio moisture regain cuticle scale

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Shin

, et al. The effects of fabric for sleepwear and bedding on sleep at ambient temperatures of 17°C and 22° C. Nat Sci Sleep 2016; 8: 121.

Laing R and Swan P. Wool in human health and wellbeing. Nat Fibre 2016; 12: 19–34.

Manshahia M and Das A. High active sportswear-a critical review. Indian J of Fibre & Text R 2014; 39: 441–449.

Irfan Iqbal

Sun

Wool can be cool: water-actuating woolen knitwear for both hot and cold. Adv Funct Mater 2020; 30: 1–9.

Finnimore E. The effect of bleaching on the handle properties of wool fabrics. Melliand Textilberichte Int 1987; 68: 574–580.

De Boos

, et al. The effect of the diameter characteristics of the fibre ends on the skin comfort and handle of knitted wool fabrics. Wool Technol Sheep Breed 2002; 50: 110–120.

Purane

Panigrahi

NR.

Microfibers, microfilaments and their applications. AUTEX Res J 2007; 7: 148–158.

McGregor

Variation in the softness and fibre curvature of cashmere, alpaca, mohair and other rare animal fibres.

J Text Inst 2014; 105: 597–608.

McGregor

Naebe

Effect of fibre, yarn and knitted fabric attributes associated with wool comfort properties. J Text Inst 2013; 104: 606–617.

10.

Holman

Malau-Aduli

A review of sheep wool quality traits.

Ann Rev Res Biol 2012; 2: 1–14.

11.

Naylor

GRS

, et al. Fabric-evoked prickle in worsted spun single jersey fabrics part I: the role of fiber end diameter characteristics. Text Res J 1997; 67: 288–295.

12.

Madeley

Postle

Mahar

Physical properties and processing of fine Merino lamb's wool: part II: softness and objective characteristics of lamb's wool. Text Res J 1998; 68: 663–670.

13.

Madeley

Postle

Physical properties and processing of fine Merino lamb's wool: Part III: effects of wool fiber curvature on the handle of flannel woven from woolen spun yarn. Text Res J 1999; 69: 576–582.

14.

Van Wyk

The compressibility of wool and its role in South African Merino wool production. South Afric J Sci 1947; 43: 79–89.

15.

Preston

JWV

Hatcher

McGregor

BA.

Fabric and greasy wool handle, their importance to the Australian wool industry: a review.

Animal Prod Sci 2016; 56: 1–17.

16.

Ajayi

JO.

Fabric smoothness, friction, and handle. Text Res J 1992; 62: 52–59.

17.

Eryuruk S, et al. Analysing the effect of decatising on the frictional properties of wool fabrics. Fibre Text East Eur 2014; 3: 79–83.

18.

Rippon J. A. Friction, felting and shrink-proofing of wool, Friction in textile materials 2008; 78: 253–291, Cambridge, England: Elsevier.

19.

Gupta B.S. Frictional properties of textile materials. Surf Character Fiber Text 2001; 94: 60–91. United States: CRC Press.

20.

Watson

Jackson

Whiteley

Inheritance of the resistance to compression property of Australian Merino wool and its genetic correlation with follicle curvature and various wool and body characters. Aus J Agric Res 1977; 28: 1083–1094.

21.

Liu

Wang

Resistance to compression behavior of alpaca and wool.

Text Res J 2004; 74: 265–270.

22.

, et al. A modified resistance to compression (Rtc) test for evaluation of natural fiber softness. Text Res J 2020 (Accepted on 31-Dec-2020).

23.

Zhang

, et al. An experimental study on fabric softness evaluation. Int J Clothing Sci Technol 2006; 18: 83–95.

24.

Broega AC, et al. A correlation study of subjective sensorial evaluation and objective softness measurement of wool. In: 12th international wool research conference, 2010. National Engineering Research Center for Dyeing and Finishing of Textiles, Editors, 19–22 Oct. 2010, pp.690–693. Shanghai,China: Donghua University: Shanghai, China.

25.

Wang X, et al. The softness of alpaca fibres. In: growth with diversity: Australian Alpaca Association National conference: proceedings, 2004. 20–22 Aug. 2004, pp.71–75. Hobart, Australia: Australian Alpaca Association: Mitcham, Victoria.

26.

Liu

Wang

Evaluating the softness of animal fibers. Text Res J 2004; 74: 535–538.

27.

Munro

Carnaby

Wool-fibre crimp part I: the effects of microfibrillar geometry. J Text Inst 1999; 90: 123–136.

28.

Harland D.P, et al. Intrinsic curvature in wool fibres is determined by the relative length of orthocortical and paracortical cells. J Exp Biol 2018; 221(6): 1–9.

29.

Popescu

Höcker

Hair—the most sophisticated biological composite material. Chem Soc Rev 2007; 36: 1282–1291.

30.

Bunsell A. R. Handbook of tensile properties of textile and technical fibres. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Elsevier, 2009.

31.

Morton

Hearle

JWS.

Physical properties of textile fibres. 4th ed. Cambridge: Woodhead Publishing, 2008.

32.

, et al. Objective comparison on the softness of Australian soft rolling skin wool and ordinary Merino wool. Published September 2, 2021. Text Res J 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00405175211042887.

33.

Australian Wool Innovation. Wool-the fibre, https://www.learnaboutwool.com/globalassets/law/resources/factsheets/secondary/gd0317-secondary-fact-sheet_a1_v4.pdf (2021, accessed 18 March 2021).

34.

Pan

, et al. Ultrasonic scouring as a pretreatment of wool and its application in low-temperature dyeing. Text Res J 2019; 89: 1975–1982.

35.

Hurren

Wang

Ultrasonic assisted industrial wool scouring.

Procedia Eng 2017; 200: 39–44.

36.

Niu

, et al. Molecular structure and properties of wool fiber surface-grafted with nano-antibacterial materials. Spectrochimica Acta A Mol Biomol Spectr 2012; 86: 289–293.

37.

, et al. Modification of wool fiber using steam explosion. Eur Polym J 2006; 42: 2168–2173.

38.

Long

, et al. Effect of treatment pressure on wool fiber in supercritical carbon dioxide fluid. J Cleaner Prod 2013; 43: 52–58.

39.

Hearle

JWS

Morton

WE.

Physical properties of textile fibres. Cambridge: Woodhead Publishing Limited, 2008.