Exploring the Psychophysical Relationship Between Basic Fabric Construction Parameters and Typical Tactile Sensations

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering book series (LNEE, volume 318)


The psychophysical relationship between fabric construction parameters and tactile sensations remains unknown, and it limits the development of textile products as well as their virtual rendering techniques. To uncover the underlying psychophysical relationship, this study designed a series of plain woven fabrics, and two basic construction parameters, i.e., weft yarn density and weft yarn diameter, gradually change. Meanwhile, the typical tactile sensations of these fabrics are evaluated by the magnitude estimation method and the paired comparison method. By applying the classical psychometric analysis to the sensation evaluation data, the discrimination threshold and the Weber fraction are calculated, respectively. From psychometric analysis, both perceived roughness and softness sensation decreased with an increase of weft density and weft yarn diameter. The Weber fraction for weft density is 0.16 in roughness and 0.21 in softness, for yarn diameter 0.3 in roughness and 0.26 in softness, respectively.


Yarn density Yarn diameter Roughness Softness Weber fraction 



This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation through project (No. 51175076, No. 11232005), the Natural Science Foundation of Shanghai through project (No. 12ZR1400500), and Chinese Universities Scientific Fund.


  1. 1.
    Winakor G, Kim CJ, Wolins L (1980) Fabric hand: tactile sensory assessment. Text Res J 50(10):601–610CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Behery MH (2005) Effect of mechanical and physical properties on fabric hand. Woodhead Publishing in Textiles, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sahnoun M (2002) Caractérisation et modélisation de l’influence des paramètres de structure des étoffes sur l’évaluation mécanique et sensorielle de leur toucher [Phd thesis]: Université de MulhouseGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chattopadhyay R, Banerjee S (1996) The frictional behaviour of ring-, rotor-, and friction-spun yarn. J Text Inst 87(1):59–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bensaid S, Osselin JF, Schacher L, Adolphe D (2006) The effect of pattern construction on the tactile feeling evaluated through sensory analysis. J Text Inst 97(2):137–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Choi M-S, Ashdown SP (2000) Effect of changes in knit structure and density on the mechanical and hand properties of weft-knitted fabrics for outerwear. Text Res J 70(12):1033–1045CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Philippe F, Schacher L, Adolphe DC, Dacremont C (2004) Tactile feeling: sensory analysis applied to textile goods. Text Res J 74(12):1066–1072CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cavaco-Pauio A, Almeida L, Bishop D (1996) Cellulase activities and finishing effects. Text Chemist Colorist 28(6):28–32Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bueno MA, Viallier P, Durand B, Renner M, Lamy B (1997) Instrumental measurement and macroscopical study of sanding and raising. Text Res J 67(11):779–787Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Weber AI, Saal HP, Lieber JD, Cheng JW, Manfredi LR, Dammann JF et al (2013) Spatial and temporal codes mediate the tactile perception of natural textures. Proc Natl Acad Sci 110(42):17107–17112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bergmann Tiest WM (2010) Tactual perception of material properties. Vision Res 50(24):2775–2782CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hu J, Zhao Q, Jiang R, Wang R, Ding X (2013) Responses of cutaneous mechanoreceptors within fingerpad to stimulus information for tactile softness sensation of materials. Cogn Neurodyn 7(5):441–447CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.College of TextileDonghua UniversityShanghaiPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations