Standard Test Method for Fabric Abrasion Resistance (Martindale Abrasion Tester Method)

1. Field of application
1. This test method involves the use of a Martindale fabric abrasion tester that measures abrasion resistance. All kinds of fabrics can be tested with this method, but with fabrics a problem can arise with a stack of fabrics with a depth greater than 0.08. (2mm). 2. The value in inch-pound units is considered standard. Values ​​in parentheses are mathematical conversions of four units of the information provided, regardless of criteria.
3. This standard is not intended to address all possible safety issues related to its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate health and safety practices and determine the applicability of restrictions prior to use.
Note to maintain other current test methods for textile abrasion resistance testing, reference test methods d3884, d3885, d3886, d4157, d4158 and AATCC test methode?93.

2. References
ASTM Standard
D123 Terminology Textiles
Conditioning and Testing of Textiles D1776 Practice
Test Method for Fabric Abrasion Resistance (Rotating Platform, D3884 Double Head Method)
Abrasion Resistance of Fabric d3885 test method (method of bending and abrasion)
Test method of fabric wear resistance (d3886 inflatable diaphragm device)
Test method of fabric wear resistance (d4157 oscillating cylinder method)
d4158 guided fabric wear resistance (uniform wear)d4850 terminology substances and substance test methods
AATCC methods and procedures
abrasion resistance of substances test method 93 : Accelerator method

Third, meaning and application
1, the acceptance test of the test method, this test method is not satisfactory in the acceptance test of the substance. Due to the poor inter-laboratory precision of this test method and due to the nature of the wear test itself, technicians are often unable to obtain resultson the same type of test instrument, regardless of laboratory-to-laboratory agreement. Although this test method is not recommended for acceptance testing, it is useful because it is widely used, especially outside the United States.

2. In the event of disputes over the acceptance of goods using the test method when reporting test results of differences, the buyer and supplier should determine that there is a statistical bias between their comparative testing laboratories. Supervisor Statistical Aid advises on deviation investigations. Both parties must take at least one set of test samples, as homogeneous as possible, of the relevant material type. Test samples should be randomly assigned to each laboratory for testing. The averaged results of two experiments should begin with the student\'s pairwise data comparison and choice of acceptable probability levels by both on the test. If a discrepancy is discovered, either its cause must be discovered and corrected, or the purchaser and supplier must agree to interpret future test results in light of the known discrepancy.

3. The wear resistance is also greatly affected by the test conditions, such as the nature of the abrasive; The abrasive varies in the wear zone of the test piece, in the tension of the test piece, the pressure between the test piece and the abrasive, and the dimensional changes in the test piece.

4. Abrasive tests are subject to variation due to variations in abrasives in any given test. Abrasives should be changed accordingly and checked regularly or periodically with standards. Disposable abrasives, abrasives that are used only once or modified for limited use. Permanent abrasives that use hard metals or iso surfaces assume that the abrasive is not noticeabler will vary in a given set of tests, but applications of seemingly similar abrasives in different laboratories will use the same speed at different speeds that are unlikely to vary. There may also be other material changes due to permanent abrasives that pick up finishing or test substances and need to be cleaned accordingly. The measurement of the amount of wear can also be influenced by the evaluation of the method and can influence the judgment of the operator.

5. The abrasion resistance of fabrics tested in the lab is usually only one of many factors that contribute to the abrasion resistance or durability of the material used in the field. While \"abrasion resistance\" (usually a certain number of machine cycles, using a specified technology, causing a certain degree or amount of wear) and \"durability\" (defined as the ability to withstand wear orimpacts) are often correlated with different usage relationships and different factors may be needed to predict durability based on specific wear data.
6. Laboratory tests can be reliable where the abrasion resistance of different materials is a large relative performance indicator, but they should not rely on the small differences in laboratory test results. In general, it should not be relied upon to predict actual service life in a particular end use unless there is data demonstrating a specific relationship between laboratory wear testing and actual wear in the intended end use.

7. These general notes apply to all types of fabrics, including woven fabrics, non-woven fabrics, knitwear fabrics, home textiles, industrial fabrics and floor coverings. It is therefore not surprising that there are many different types of wear testing machines, schhour agents, test conditions, test procedures, methods for evaluation of abrasion resistance and interpretation of results.
8. All abrasion resistance test methods and instruments developed to date can show a high degree of variability in the results obtained by different operators and in different laboratories; however, they represent the methods most commonly used now.

9. Since there is a clear need to measure relative resistance to wear, standardized test methods are desirable, useful and can clarify issues and reduce confusion.

Prev: A method for quantitatively detecting the abrasion resistance of fabrics using a Martindale abrasion tester