See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/277250099

EFFECT OF CHANGING ARM PRESSURE OF DRAFTING ZONE OF A ROVING

FRAME ON YARN QUALITY

Article · December 2015

CITATIONS READS

0 1,148

3 authors, including:

Nafis Abir Nur-Us-Shafa Mazumder

BGMEA University of Fashion and Technology Port City International University
4 PUBLICATIONS   0 CITATIONS    2 PUBLICATIONS   0 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Nafis Abir on 27 May 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 EFFECT OF CHANGING ARM PRESSURE OF DRAFTING ZONE OF A
ROVING FRAME ON YARN QUALITY
Nafis Abir*, Sanaullah Murad, Nur-Us-Shafa Mazumder
Department of Textile Engineering, Port City International University

ABSTRACT

To convert cotton fibers into yarn, a considerable number of machines are required. Each
and every machine has different parameters, which can be changed to optimize the
characteristics of intermediate or final products. The pressure applied on top rollers of drafting
zone is considered as one of the major factors that determines the characteristics of the roving
and the ultimate yarn.
Drafting zone is required for attenuation of the passing material. To properly draft the material,
adequate contact of top and bottom rollers is necessary. This contact is ensured by pressure arm,
generally pressures are provided by spring load principle. Pressures on rollers may differ with
the change of raw material. Here, in this Project Work, different pressure arm loads were
applied, and their consequences on product quality were studied.

Keywords: Roving, drafting zone, pressure arm, pressure disc, Toyota FL- 200

INTRODUCTION
In ring spinning process, roving frame is a must. Where the can of sliver from drawing
frames is fed between three sets of drafting rolls. Each following sets of rolls faster than
preceding set. This pulls the sliver to thin it down as a roving.
(Corbman, 1983)
In spite of the fact that the drawn sliver meets all requirements to make a yarn (as the
fibers are aligned in an orderly manner) but use of a speed frame is necessary for two principal
reasons. For a ringframe, it is impossible to give 300-500 draft to a sliver to make yarn.
Drawframe can represent the worst conceivable mode of transport and presentation of feed
material to the ring spinning frame.

The main objective of speed frame is to attenuate the drawn sliver into the form of a
roving which is suitable for feeding to the ring frame as the linear density of roving is within the
range of drafting capacity of the ring frame to make it a yarn.

The chief task of the roving frame is the attenuation of the sliver through drafting. Since
the resulting fine strand has scarcely any coherence, protective twist must be inserted in order to
hold it together.
(www.rieter.com)

*Corresponding Author: Nafis Abir, nafisabir91@gmail.com

 The action of reducing the thickness or linear density of the feed material by drawing is
known as drafting. 4 over 4 drafting zone is very much popular in drafting arrangement of roving
frame, where the draft ranges from 5 to 20, But, generally draft is around 8.

(Ayub Nabi Khan, 2009)

Drafting zone is usually comprised of bottom flutted rollers and rubber coated pressure
rollers. The top rollers must be pressed with relatively high force against the lower rollers to
ensure guidance of fibres.
(Klein, 1987)
Practically, all manufacturers weigh the top rollers by spring pressure, ‘Rieter’ is an
exception who prefer pneumatic weighting, and Platt Saco Lowell, who offer magnetic
weighting in addition to spring weighting. In every weighting system, particular amount of load
is applied on each top roller of drafting zone. There are some pressure disc which are coloured
with different colour, Such as green, red, and Black. Each colour represents particular amount of
load.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Fibre used
The property of the raw cotton determines the processing parameters of
the spinning machinery and the quality of final yarn. However for the current
experiment, we used the shankar – 6 Indian fibre. The HVI results for the fibre
are given below:

Name of fibre Origin of fibre Test result on HVI

Cotton (Shankar- India SCI – 161
6) Mst (%) = 7.0
Mat = 0.87
UHML = 31.85mm
UI = 83.3%
SF = 8.1%
Strength = 35.7 gtex
elongation = 4.5%
Rd = 79.2
+b = 8.6
Tr. Area = 0.57%
Tr. Cont. = 31

Experimental Method:

During our experiment, we changed arm pressure and observed how the
changes affect the quality of fibrous material.
Experimental setting of Pressure arm load:
Main specifications of Toyota FL–200:
Number of spindles: maximum 144

Staff: 440 mm or 520 mm

Lift: 406 mm
Full-bobbin diameter: 152 mm
Draft system: 4-line, D-type, double apron
(www.toyota-industries.com)
The top arm pressure and roller setting influence the yarn properties at all
three drafting stages almost in similar way. With the increase of top arm pressure
and roller setting the yarn tenacity increases initially up to a point and then
decreases. Yarn unevenness, imperfections and hairiness shows an initial
decrease up to a point with the increase of the above two parameters. In general,
the moderate level of top arm pressure and roller setting gives better results.
(Ishtiaqe, 2006)
The roller weightings generally applied to the top rollers by weight hung below
the roller beam are about 20 lbs for a double boss front roller, 14 lbs for middle
roller and 10 lbs for back roller, the middle and back rollers may be suddle
weighted (spring weighted) and in this case the applied weight is about 20 lbs.
Heavier weightings are helpful to deal with the occasional thick ends and piecing
in the creeled material to make even material.
(textileapex.blogspot.com)
Three types of pressures arm are available in Toyota FL–200; they are
Black, Green and Red. By changing pressure disc the pressures can be increased
or decreased. Each colour of pressure disc represents a particular pressures
which are shown below:
Pressure on the rollers

Roller Black Green Red

Front r/r 9 Kg 12 Kg 15 Kg
2nd r/r 15 Kg 20 Kg 25 Kg
3rd r/r 10 Kg 15 Kg 20 Kg
Back r/r 10 Kg 15 Kg 20 Kg
We did the experiment with three types of pressure setting.

Combination 1  Pressure setting  B–B–B–B

Combination 2  Pressure setting G-G-G-G

Combination 3  Pressure setting R-R-R-R

Where B = Black pressure(low pressure)

G = Green pressure (medium pressure)
R = Red pressure (red pressure)

Experimental work flowchart:

1. As the first step eight Carded Sliver Cans were produced in a particular
Carding machine (m/c no. 9) which got material from the same laydown in
Blowroom.
2. Those cans were fed to breaker drawframe and eight Breaker drawframe
sliver cans were produced from that particular breaker drawframe.

3. Those eight cans were fed to finisher drawframe and eight drawn Sliver
cans were produced which were fed to roving frame.
4. For pressure arm load combination 1, 2, 3; samples were produced from
same can sliver.
5. Finally yarn samples were taken to the quality control dept. for testing and
finally all tested results were analyzed.

Results & Discussions:

Results for different pressure arm loads:

Table 1: Quality parameters of yarn obtained from front- and back row
rovings by applying B-B-B-B (low) pressure arm loads on drafting
rollers (Combination 1).

CVm Thick Thin Sh H CSP

(%) (+50%/km) (-40%/km)

Front Row 16.02 345 370 1.64 6.65 1804.2

Back Row 16.38 397.5 407.5 1.73 6.75 1740.9

Table 2: Quality parameters of yarn obtained from front- and back row
rovings by applying G-G-G-G (medium) pressure arm loads on drafting
rollers (Combination 2).

CVm Thick Thin Sh H CSP

(%) (+50%/km) (-40%/km)

Front row 15.64 337.5 260.00 1.68 6.75 2314.6

Back Row 15.64 327.5 212.5 1.78 7.19 2116.8

Table 3: Quality parameters of yarn obtained from front- and back row
rovings by applying R-R-R-R (high) pressure arm loads on drafting
rollers (Combination 3).

CVm Thick Thin Sh H CSP

(%) (+50%/km) (-40%/km)

Front row 15.69 322.5 205 1.66 6.77 1894.2

Back Row 16.69 365.5 315 1.671 6.88 1764.9

Effect of pressure arm loads on quality of yarn:

Graphical representation of results for different loads:

From the figure 1(a), we can see that CV values of yarn obtained from back row
roving are higher than those obtained from front row.

17
16.5
CVm %

16 Combination 1
15.5 Combination 2
15 Combination 3
Front Row Roving Back Row Roving
Roving from Different Rows

Figure-1(a), Graphical presentation of CVm % of yarn obtained from front- and

back row rovings by applying different pressure arm loads on drafting rollers.
 The difference between the two rows (front and back) shows less variation in
the values of CV for combination 2 (medium load). Fig.-1(b)

1.2
1
CV variation

0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
Combination 1 Combination 2 Combination 3

Figure-1(b), CV variation between rows for combination 1, 2 and 3.

From figure 2(a), we can see that thick places values of yarn obtained from back
row rovings are higher than those obtained from front row.

500
Thick place(+50%/km)

400
300
Combination 1
200
Combination 2
100
0 Combination 3
Front Row Roving Back Row Roving
Roving from Different Rows

Figure-2(a), Graphical representation of thick places (+50%) of yarn obtained

from front- and back row rovings by applying different pressure arm loads on
drafting rollers
The difference between the two rows (front and back) shows less variation in the
values of thick places for combination 2 (medium load). Fig.-2(b)

60
50
Thick place variation

40
30
(no.)

20
10
0
Combination 1 Combination 2 Combination 3

Figure-2(b), Thick place variation between rows for combination 1, 2 and 3.

From figure 3(a), it can be see that thin places per km of yarn obtained from the
back row are higher than those obtained from front row for combination 1 and 3.
In back row thin places value of yarn is lower than front row in combination 2.

500
Thin place (-40%/km)

400
300
Combination 1
200
100 Combination 2

0 Combination 3
Front Row Roving Back Row Roving
Roving from Different Rows

Figure-3(a), Graphical representation of thin places (-40%) of yarn obtained

from front- and back row rovings by applying different pressure arm loads on
drafting rollers.
The difference between the two rows (front and back) shows less variation of
thin place in combination 3 (high load) Fig.-3(b). For combination 2 the
difference is also low.

120
Thin place variation (n0.)

100
80
60
40
20
0
Combination 1 Combination 2 Combination 3

Figure-3(b), Thin place variation between rows for combination 1, 2 and 3.

We can observe from this figure-4(a) the yarn from the front row roving shows
better CSP value than that from back row roving.

2500

2000

1500
CSP

Combination 1
1000
Combination 2
500
Combination 3
0
Front Row Roving Back Row Roving
Roving from Different Rows

Figure-4(a), Graphical representation of CSP values of yarn obtained from

front- and back row rovings by applying different pressure arm loads on drafting
rollers.
The differences between CSP values of the yarn obtained from two rows show
more variation in case of combination 2 (medium load) Fig.-4(b). However CSP
value yarn from back is much higher than the CSP values of combination 1 and
2.

250
200
CSP variation

150
100
50
0
Combination 1 Combination 2 Combination 3

Figure-4(b), CSP variation between rows for combination 1, 2 and 3.

In case of pressure arm loads we can see from fig 1(b) and 2(b) that , differences between CVm
and thick places of yarn obtained from front and back row rovings show less variation for
combination 2 (with medium pressure on drafting roller). Here, the CSP values were also found
higher in case of combination 2, fig 4(a).though this variation of CSP of yarns between rows
were higher, the lowest value in this combination is higher than the highest values of other two
combinations (combination 1 and 3 ).
So, among those three combinations combination 2 (medium pressure on drafting rollers) is
optimum.

Conclusion:
From the experimental results it may be concluded that , the process and quality
parameters of roving and yarn can be improved by using appropriate arm
pressure on drafting zone. This practice leads to reduction in differences between
the properties of yarns obtained from front and back row rovings. The
optimization of loads on drafting rollers of the Speed frame is very much
essential important for smooth running of machine and quality of ultimate
product.
 REFERENCES

Corbman P. Bernard, 1983. Textiles Fiber to Fabric: 18-19

Klein W, 1987. Manual of textile technology, The technology of short-staple spinning,

6(3): 43-44

Ayub Nabi Khan., Mohammad Rubaiyat Chowdhury, Principles of Short Staple Spinning
(2nd Edition): 183

Abu Sayed. Importance and amount of Roller weighting & advantages of spring
Weighting, (textileapex.blogspot.com)

Ishtiaque S.M., Optimization of Fiber Friction, Top Arm Pressure and Roller Setting at
Various Drafting Stages. Textile Research Journal, 76(12): 913-921

www.toyota-industries.com, 14.01.15

www.rieter.com, 14.01.15

View publication stats