Sensory Robotics: Identifying Sewing Problems
Conference paper
Abstract
An essential feature of any automated garment manufacturing system is that it produces high quality seams, i.e. seams free from pucker, free from damage, with properly balanced sewing threads, etc. If poor quality seams are produced, all the sophistication of automated production will be wasted, as the garments produced will be commercially unacceptable. The various types of seam faults may be identified in different ways; this has consequences for the way in which sensing is carried out. Some “sensing”, because it relates to fabric or thread properties, is most appropriately carried out as part of quality control on incoming materials and not at the point of production. Other problems, because they arise as part of the sewing operation, are best identified at the sewing station.
Keywords
Sewing Machine Sewing Thread Needle Hole Needle Thread Sensory Robotic
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- 1.ULIS, Ltd. et al, submission to B.R.I.T.E. research program.Google Scholar
- 2.M. Nitta, “Introduction to Objective Measurement Data of Fabric Mechanical Properties to High-Quality Suit Production”, in “Objective Specification of Fabric Quality, Mechanical Properties and Performance”, edited by S. Kawabata, R. Postle, M. Niwa; The Textile Machinery Society of Japan, 1982, pp. 321–329.Google Scholar
- 3.L.M. Scott, “Some Problems Relating to Sewing”, Journal of the Textile Institute, 42 (8), 1951, pp. 653–660.Google Scholar
- 4.“A Review of Seaming Problems”, Clothing Institute Journal, 14, (1), 1966, pp. 35–45.Google Scholar
- 5.The Shorter Oxford Dictionary, Vol.11, Oxford Press, 3rd Edition, 1967, pp. 1614.Google Scholar
- 6.G. Stylios, “Seam Pucker and Structural Jamming in Woven Textiles”, M.Sc. thesis, University of Leeds, 1983.Google Scholar
- 7.A.M. Bertoldi, “An Investigation into the Effects of Seaming Variables on Fabric Pucker”, M.Phil, thesis, University of Leeds, 1973.Google Scholar
- 8.T.J. Mahar, R.C. Dhingra, R. Postle, “The Investigation and Objective Measurement of Fabric Mechanical and Physical Properties Relevant to Tailoring”, in “Objective Specification of Fabric Quality, Mechanical Properties and Performance”, edited by S. Kawabata, R. Postle, M. Niwa, The Textile Machinery Society of Japan, 1982, pp. 301–315.Google Scholar
- 9.K. Ito, “Process Control for Tailoring Based on Objective Data about Fabric Properties - Progress in the Last Year”, in “Objective Evaluation of Apparel Fabrics”, edited by R. 0Postle, S. Kawabata, M. Niwa; The Textile Machinery Society of Japan, 1983, pp. 89–96.Google Scholar
- 10.M. Nemura, “A High-Efficiency Tailoring System for Men’s Suit Production — Latest Progress”, in “Objective Measurement; Applications to Product Design and Process Control”, edited by S. Kawabata, R. Postle, M. Niwa; The Textile Machinery Society of Japan, 1986, pp. 243–250.Google Scholar
- 11.J. & P. Coats, Ltd., “Seam Pucker”, Thread Technology - Part 2, Technical Papers, September, 1976.Google Scholar
- 12.T. Townsend and N.H. Chamberlain, “More Light on Structural Seam Pucker in Lightweight Fabrics”, Clothing Institute Technological Report No. 16, September, 1964.Google Scholar
- 13.T. Townsend, “The Factors Affecting Structural Seam Pucker in Man-made Fibre Fabrics”, M.Sc. thesis, University of Leeds, 1964.Google Scholar
- 14.. G. Stylios, Ph.D. thesis, University of Leeds, 1988.Google Scholar
- 15.Schmetz handbook.Google Scholar
- 16.Singer, Private Communication.Google Scholar
- 17.G. Stylios, Ph.D. thesis, University of Leeds, 1988.Google Scholar
- 18.Schmetz, Private Communication.Google Scholar
- 19.J. Lindberg, L. Waesterberg, R. Svenson, “Wool Fabrics as Garment Construction Materials”, Journal of the Textile Institute, 51, 1960, T1475–1493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 20.J. Lindberg, B. Behre, B. Dahlberg, “Mechanical Properties of Textile Fabrics”, Textile Research Journal, 31 1961, pp. 99–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 21.J. Westerfeld, F.J. Van Krugten, T.N.O. Report No. 13030 (1226–030) 13, 1967.Google Scholar
- 22.S. Kawabata, “The Development of the Objective Measurement of Fabric Handle”, in “Objective Specification of Fabric Quality, Mechanical Properties and Performance”, edited by S. Kawabata, R. Postle, M. Niwa; The Textile Machinery Society of Japan, 1982, pp. 31–59.Google Scholar
- 23.Product Technical Literature, Kata, Ltd.Google Scholar
- 24.Private Communication, May, 1988.Google Scholar
- 25.. R. Postle, “Objective Evaluation of the Mechanical Properties and Performance of Fabrics and Clothing”, in “Objective Evaluation of Apparel Fabrics”, edited by R. Postle, S. Kawabata, M. Niwa; The Textile Machinery Society of Japan, 1983, pp. 1–14.Google Scholar
- 26.M. Niwa, S. Kawabata, K. Isizuka, “Recent Developments in Research Correlating Basic Fabric Mechanical Properties and the Appearance of Men’s Suits”, in “Objective Evaluation of Apparel Fabrics”, edited by R. Postle, S. Kawabata, M. Niwa; The Textile Machinery Society of Japan, 1983, pp. 67–82.Google Scholar
- 27.K. Ito, S. Kawabata, “Conception of the Automated Tailoring Controlled by Fabric Objective-Measurement Data”, in “Objective Measurement: Applications to Product Design and Process Control”, edited by S. Kawabata, R. Postle, M. Niwa; The Textile Machinery Society of Japan, 1986, pp. 175–181.Google Scholar
- 28.Automatic fibre tuft strength tester, ATLAS technical information.Google Scholar
- 29.Dextralog, Ltd. Product information.Google Scholar
- 30.Eildon Electronics, Ltd. Technical information.Google Scholar
Copyright information
© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1990