CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, NORTHRIDGE
,,CORRELATION
BETWEEN EASE IN KNIT GARMENTS
AND STRETCH IN KNIT FABRICS
A thesis submitted in partial satisfaction of the
requirements for the degree of Master of Science in
Home Economics
by
-
Nathalie Beatrice Edwards
June, 1974
.
.
The thesis of Nathalie Beatrice Edwards is approved:
California State University, Northridge
June, 1974
ii
Acknowledgments
The author wishes to acknowledge her indebtedness to those who
made this work possible:
Professor Nancy Owens for her guidance and
inspiration; Professor Dorothy Blackmru1 and Mrs. Alyce Adams for
their interest, helpful suggestions and careful review of the manuscript; the students in the beginning clothing construction classes
at California State University, Northridge, for their participation
in the study; and to the author's husband, Dr. Donald K. Edwards,
for his help in preparing the computer code.
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.
iii
LIST OF TABLES .
v
LIST OF FIGURES
vi
ABSTRACT . • . •
vii
I.
INTRODUCTION
1
Basis for Interest in Knit Fabrics
Definition of Terms
Objectives
Hypotheses
Assumptions
Limitations
II.
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
8
Measurement of Stretch
Ease in Woven Garments
Ease in Knit Garments
III.
PROCEDURE
13
Selection of Sample
Test Equipment
Test Procedure
Data Analysis
IV.
RESULTS
19
Correlation of Body Ease and Stretch
Correlation of Body Ease and Knit Type
Comparison of Ease in Knit and Woven Garments
Significance of Results
Application of Results
V.
SUNMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
... ....
.
35
Summary
Conclusions
Recommendations for Further Study
VI.
BIBLIOGRAPHY .
39
·VII.
APPENDICES . .
41
iv
..
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1
Pattern Company Stretch Classifications • • •
47
Table 2
Summary of Values of Ease Recommended in the
Literature
•••.
48
Table 3
Mean Stretch and Mean Ease
49
Table 4
Pattern Company Group Means • .
50
Table 5
Subdivided Pattern Company Group Means
51
Table 6
Knit Type Group Means
52
Table 7
Upper Back Ease •
53
Table 8
Bustline Ease .
54
Table 9
Waistline Ease
55
Table 10
High Hipline Ease
56
Table 11
Ease Through the Widest Part of the Hipline •
57
Table 12
Upper Arm Ease
58
Table 13
Correlation, Significance, and Analysis of Variance
of Data • • . • • • • • • . . . • . •
59
Comparison of Ease in Knit and Woven Garments
61
Table 14
v
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1
Scattergram of Upper Back Ease
43
Figure 2
Scattergram of Bustline Ease
43
Figure 3
Scattergram of Waistline Ease
Figure 4
Scattergram of High Hipline Ease
Figure 5
Scattergram of Ease Through the Widest Part of the
Hipline
45
Scattergram of Upper Arm Ease
45
Figure 6
..........
vi
.
44
....
44
....
'
.
ABSTRACT
CORRELATION BETWEEN EASE IN KNIT GARMENTS
AND STRETCH IN KNIT FABRICS
by
Nathalie Beatrice Edwards
Master of Science in Home Economics
June, 1974.
A study was undertaken to determine whether knit garments require
less ease than woven garments and if the ease varies inversely with
the stretchability of the fabric.
Students in beginning clothing construction classes donated speci- ·
mens of their fabric for testing of elongation.
When the garments were
fitted and finished, the students and their garments were measured to
determine the percentage of ease which had been incorporated.
The data were ranked in order of stretchability and the mean
stretch and mean ease for each of six bodylines was calculated.
Means
for the entire population and for several groupings of stretchability
as well as for the type of knit were determined.
Significant negative correlations between stretch and ease were
found for the bustline, waistline, high hipline, and widest part of the
hip when the population included all specimens.
One specimen was of an ;
extremely stretchable character and produced a high degree of negative
ease.
When this specimen was deleted, the correlations previously
disclosed were no longer significant.
vii
The study indicated that the amount of ease needed in knit garments is less than in woven garments for the upper back.
Bustline
ease needs to be less in most knit garments than in woven ones.
The
amount of ease needed through the widest part of the hip is approximately the same for both knit and woven garments.
Comparison of ease
in the waistline, high hipline, and upper arm were inconclusive.
viii
I.
INTRODUCTION
Basis for Interest in Knit Fabrics
The increasing popularity of knit fabrics is evidenced in the
production figures of the textile industry.
In 1969 knits accounted
for 42.3 percent of the total apparel poundage.
In 1971 knits
represented 47.3 percent of production and in 1972 knit fabric poundage increased to 49.1 percent of the total market.
Based upon
previous experience, industry spokesmen predicted that "for the first
time in U.S. history, knits will surpass wovens in apparel poundage
in 1973" (11: 53).
TI1e stretchability of knit fabrics has made it possible to reduce
the amount of body ease necessary for comfort in most body areas.
In
this study body ease is the difference between the measurement of a
garment and the measurement of the body in the corresponding location.
It has been shown that very stretchy knit fabrics need less ease than
stable knits (1:68;12:9).
There is some literature available on body
ease needed for woven fabrics and for knit fabrics.
A study has been
conducted which reports the percent of skin stretch in certain body
areas.
This study related the skin stretch to the percentage of
stretch of woven fabrics (19:69).
A guide to the amount of body ease required in knit fabrics
would be of value to clothing construction teachers as well as to
home seamstresses.
It should also be of interest to pattern and
1
2
ready-to-wear manufacturers.
Minimum size pattern pieces may allow
for a more efficient layout which would permit the consumer to buy
a shorter length of fabric and the ready-to-wear manufacturers to
fabricate more garments from each length of cloth.
As some knit
fabrics are quite expensive, this economy in cutting may result in
considerable monetary savings.
While a minimum ease is necessary for comfort, too much ease
leads to a full appearance which many consumers find unattractive.
Consequently, it is important to establish minimum ease values for
each bodyline consistent with comfort.
Definition of Terms
The terminology which will be used in this report will include
the following:
Body ease--the minimum difference between body measurements and
garment measurements which is needed for comfort in the corresponding area of the garment.
Bodyline--a circumferential location, such as the bustline, waistline,
or hipline.
Design ease-·-the difference between body measurements and garment
measurements which is needed
to achieve the style effect
intended by the designer.
Elongation--the number of centimeters a fabric can be stretched by a
power of two pounds per inch of fabric width, expressed to the
nearest 0.1 centimeter.
bility.
It is used interchangeably with stretcha-
3
Percent elongation
=
average increase in specimen length, em x 100
original length, em
= average
increase in length x 2
Stable knit--a fabric which stretches less than 32%.
Moderate stretch knit--a fabric which stretches from 32% to
65.5%.
Stretchable knit--a fabric which stretches over 65.5%.
Hand stretch--the amount a fabric can be stretched by hand from its
original dimension, without applying strong force.
High hip measurement--circumferential measurement 3 inches below the
waistline and parallel to the floor.
Knit fabric--a fabric manufactured by interlocking loops of yarn
(10:227).
Double knit--filling knit fabric formed by interlocking loops in
which both surfaces of the fabric have a somewhat riblike
appearance (10:229).
Rib knit--a filling knit fabric which has alternating lengthwise
rows of plain and purl stitches (17:91).
I
Single filling knit--a knit fabric formed into a series of horizontal loops.
Jersey or stockinette stitch are common
examples (10:227).
Tricot knit--a single warp knit fabric which has vertical ribs
on one side, the "right" side, and horizontal ribs on the
other, or "wrong" side (8:126).
4
Reanalyzed population--all specimens except the most stretchable one.
Reanalyzed truncated population--all specimens except the least
stretchable and the two most stretchable specimens.
Skin stretch--the amount the human skin will stretch when a joint is
flexed.
Truncated population--all specimens except the least stretchable one
and the most stretchable one.
Widest hip measurement--circumferential measurement around the
largest part of the hip, usually 7 to 9 inches below the waistline.
Widest part of the back--greatest measurement across the back between
the armscye lines.
Woven fabric--a fabric consisting of sets of yarns interlaced at
right angles in established sequences (10:235).
Objectives
The study reported in this thesis is undertaken to determine
the relationship between the percentage of crosswise stretch in a
knit fabric and the minimum amount of body ease required at selected
bodylines.
It is hoped that a guide to ease in knitted fabric gar-
ments will help seamstresses prepare pattern adjustments so that a
minimum number of fittings will be necessary.
Hypotheses
The research hypotheses of this study are:
1.
The percentage of ease needed for comfort through the (a)
upper back, (b) bust, (c), waist, (d) high hip, (e) widest part of the
5
hip, and (f) upper arm in a garment made of any knit fabric varies
inversely with the percentage of crosswise elongation in the fabric
when the garment is cut on the lengthwise grain of the fabric.
2.
The percentage of ease needed for comfort through the (a)
upper back, (b) bust, (c) waist, (d) high hip, (e) widest part of the
hip, and (f) upper arm in a garment made of a single knit fabric
varies inversely with the percentage of crosswise elongation in the
fabric when the garment is cut on the lengthwise grain of the fabric.
3.
The percentage of ease needed for comfort through the (a)
upper back, (b) bust, (c) waist, (d) high hip, (e) widest part of the
hip, and (f) upper arm in a garment made of a double knit fabric
varies inversely with the percentage of crosswise elongation in the
fabric when the garment is cut on the lengthwise grain of the fabric.
4.
The percentage of ease needed for comfort through the (a)
upper back, (b) bust, (c) waist, (d) high hip, (e) widest part of the
hip, and (f) upper arm in a garment made of a tricot knit fabric
varies inversely with the percentage of crosswise elongation in the
fabric when the garment is cut on the lengthwise grain of the fabric.
5.
The percentage of ease needed for comfort through the (a)
upper back, (b) bust, (c) waist, (d) high hip, (e) widest part of the
hip, and (b) upper arm in a garment made of a rib knit fabric varies
inversely with the percentage of crosswise elongation in the fabric
when the garment is cut on the lengthwise grain of the fabric.
6.
Garments made of knit fabrics require a smaller percentage
of ease through the (a) upper back, (b) bust, (c) waist, (d) high
6
hip, (e) widest part of the hip, and (f) upper arm than do garments
made of stable woven fabric.
Appropriate null hypotheses were formulated.
Assumptions
The following assumptions are made:
1.
The Static Extension Tester accurately measures the percent-
age of stretch in a fabric.
2.
Instructors in the beginning clothing construction classes
at California State University, Northridge, have fitted garments to
the correct amount of ease for the fabric and style selected for each
student.
3.
Body ease can be measured quantitatively according to the
following formula:
Ease
= garment
measurement-body measurement x 100
garment measurement
Limitations
As the researcher was limited in funds, it was impossible for
her to construct a large number of garments of varying degrees of
stretch.
Students in the beginning clothing construction classes
are required to make one garment of a knit fabric, and it was decided
to use approximately 100 such garments as the experimental sample.
The students were routinely required to purchase an additional quarter
yard of their fabric for testing and samples of construction techniques.
A specimen for testing crosswise stretch could be obtained
from the quarter yard available for experiment.
It was decided not
7
to test for lengthwise stretch and ease as the additional fabric
needed would incur further expense for each student.
Limiting the study to horizontal measurements reduces the value
of the study somewhat as it would be desirable to know the minimum
amount of ease required in the back waist length and the sleeve
length.
A study of the ease in pants would be of interest but was
outside the scope of this study as it would have introduced more variables in leg and hip measurements and would not have provided data on
bodice measurements.
Analysis of the data has been limited to the entire sample, to
classifications of stretch as defined by the major pattern companies,
to a subdivision of the pattern companies' classifications, and to
the type of knit fabric used.
A further limitation was that different patterns were used by
the students.
An uncontrolled variable in style was thus introduced.
Lack of a standard style made it impossible to measure the ease required for different sizes and/or figure types.
II.
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
There is little technical literature dealing with the percentage
of body ease compared to the percentage of elongation of knit fabrics.
Some studies have reported various methods and apparatus for testing
the stretchability of woven or knit fabrics.
There are sewing instruc-
tion books of a general nature which suggest minimum amounts of ease
in garments of woven fabrics and other books devoted to knits only
which recommend a minimum number of inches of ease for knit garments.
The literature survey in this study reports methods of measuring
stretch, ease in woven garments and ease in knit garments.
Measurement of Stretch
No standard method or apparatus for measuring stretch has been
adopted (6:649).
Fletcher ru1d Roberts (6:649) report three methods
for testing elastic recovery of knit fabrics.
They used a
table~
model Instron tensile tester for producing cyclic stress-strain
curves.
Two methods were used to obtain these curves; one utilized
a predetermined extension and the other a predetermined load.
both cases the extension was held for thirty seconds.
In
The authors
also devised their own method which they call the manual method.
In
this procedure a loop of fabric ten inches in circumference is suspended from a bar with another bar hung through the bottom of the
loop.
Weights of one, three, five, ten, and twenty-five pounds
respectively were added to the bottom bar and the amount of elongation
was measured.
The authors found that their manual method agreed better
8
9
with the Instron at the predetermined extension than with the Instron
at a predetermined load.
The Static Extension Tester is an apparatus for determining
elongation which has been developed by the E. I. Du Pont de Nemours
Company (9:1).
With this device specimens are extended under a
load of two pounds per inch of fq.bric width.
This extension is
reported as Fabric Elongation Potential, percent.
The formula for
calculating the elongation is:
~rage
~
increase in specimen length, em x 100
original length, em
average increase in length x 2
(9: 3).
TI1e above formula is the same as that reported by Fletcher and Roberts
(5:498).
The n1anufacturer of the Static Extension Tester reports that "in
the determination of fabric stretch good correlation bet\veen percent
fabric stretch at two pounds per inch and 'hand stretch' was observed
for a broad range of stretch fabrics" (18: 1).
The three major commercial pattern companies have recently
developed hand stretch measuring gauges which appear on some pattern
envelopes.
In each case a four inch width of fabric is stretched
as far as possible without distortion.
among the three companies exists.
To date, no standardization
The number of inches of elongation
suggested as minimum by each company has been converted to percentage
and is presented, together with the mean minimum stretch, for each
classification of knit stretch in Table 1, page 47 (3·4·7)
' '
.
10
Ease in Woven Garments
Margolis (13:11) points out that it is often difficult to suggest
a standard amount of ease as the amount depends on the figure type
and the activity of the individual.
as minimum.
She does suggest certain
~~ounts
These include one-half inch through the back, three
inches through the bust, zero to one-half inch in the waist, two
inches through the hip, and two inches in the bicep.
A somewhat different range for ease in fitting is presented by
Mauck and Stepat (15:207).
They report that the ease through the
shoulder should be one-fourth to one-half inch and the bust ease
should be four to six inches.
For a separate skirt the waist should
allow one-half inch ease, whereas for a dress the ease should be one
inch.
At a point three inches below the waist the recommended ease
is one-half to one inch, at a point seven inches below the waist
one to two inches.
Around the upper arm Mauck and Stepat recommend
one and one-half to two inches of ease.
TI1e three major pattern companies were asked to provide information on the amount of body ease which their patterns provide for
woven fabrics, stable knits and stretchable knits.
Two of the
companies replied that they considered ease in knits to be a matter
of style and therefore could not offer any specific information.
The
third company provided information for woven fabrics or stable knits
and for knits only.
These figures are presented in Table 2, page 48,
together with a summary of ease allowances for woven and knit garments
as reported in the literature (3;12:7,8;13:11;15:207;16:17,45,64).
11
Ease in Knit Garments
According to Bernier (1: 68), the amount of ease needed is
generally agreed to be less in knit garments than in garments made
of woven fabric.
A garment of a knit fabric must be made slightly
smaller in the shoulders and hip area but little difference is made
in the collar line and under the arms.
Lawrence (12:9) suggests
that a smaller size can be obtained by making all seam allowances
three-fourths inch instead of the standard five-eighths inch.
Martens-
son (14:15) advised her readers that some patterns for knits only are
designed for fabrics of medium stretch.
She also suggests that if
the consumer is using a fabric which has a low amount of stretch she
should select the next size larger pattern and if the fabric is
particularly stretchy she should use a smaller size pattern than she
would normally select.
Reference to the relationship between the amount of ease and
the stretchability of the fabric is made by both Cameron and Lawrence.
Cameron (2:42) estimates that the shoulder, curve of the hip, and bust
can be cut three percent smaller in a knit than the same pattern made
in a woven fabric.
She notes that the exact percentage is dependent
upon the percentage of stretch in the fabric.
Lawrence (12:7) also
states that the amount of stretch influences the size pattern the
consumer should use.
She advises consumers to hand stretch knits in
order to develop experience in judging appropriate pattern size.
Some recommended amounts of ease are suggested by Lawrence (12:7,8).
For most knit fabrics three to four inches ease through the bust is
recommended.
If the fabric stretches greatly only one to two inches
12
will be needed.
At the hip line two inches of ease should be used.
Lawrence also points out that for short sleeves one to one and onehalf inches ease through the upper arm is sufficient.
The amount of ease, expressed in inches, is reported for some
body areas by Person (16:17,45,64).
She estimates that four inches
ease through the bust is correct for sweaters and jackets and that
no cupping in the back of a skirt will occur if two inches ease is
allowed.
She further states that one inch ease in the waist is the
proper amount.
III.
PROCEDURE
Selection of Sample
Students enrolled in beginning clothing construction classes at
California State University, Northridge, were asked to participate
in this study.
Those students who had surplus fabric after meeting
their own testing needs donated a 22.9 em. lengthwise by 76.2 em.
crosswise sample of their knit fabric.
Garments with excessively
full style lines, such as gathered skirts or wrap-around bodices,
were not included.
Test Equipment
Each female student and her garment were measured by this investigator with a new plastic metric tape measure.
The tape was checked
periodically against a meter stick to be sure the tape had not been
stretched.
Crosswise elongation of the specimen was measured on a Static
Extension Tester.
With this device a 50 em. by 5.1 em. specimen is
stretched by a 1.8 Kg. weight to the specimen's furthest extension.
A scale which reads the elongation directly in percent was affixed
to the test apparatus to minimize the possibility of error.
Test Procedure
All fabric was preshrunk before garment construction and testing
of elongation.
The method of preshrinkage was dependent upon the
cleaning methods to be used after the garment was worn.
13
All fabrics
.
.
14
were laundered and either tumble or air dried.
Each specimen was
assigned an identification number which was written on the fabric
with marking pen.
Specimens were conditioned at ambient temperature
and relative humidity for twenty-four hours.
Each specimen was then
cut exactly on grain into three lengths. each 5.1 em. in lengthwise
grain by 55.9 em. in crosswise grain.
Care was taken to see that the
three specimens came from varying distances from the selvage.
Benchmarks were placed SO em. apart, starting 2 em. from one end.
The long end was folded into a loop and a seam was sewn along the
benchmark.
of the loop.
A "V" cut was made in the center of the fold at the bottom
The short end of the specimen was placed in the clamp
so the benchmark was lined up with the edge of the clamp.
The sewn
line at the other benchmark was checked to see that it lined up with
the zero of the percent-elongation scale.
A metal rod was inserted
through the loop and a 1.8 Kg. weight attached to it by means of a
The weight was released and allowed to hang for thirty seconds,
hook.
as timed by a stopwatch.
The sewn benchmark line was read to the
nearest percent elongation and recorded.
TI1e elongation of each set
of three specimens was averaged to the nearest one-tenth percent.
When each garment was fitted and finished, the student tried
it on.
Safety pins were placed by this inves.tigator in the garment
to mark the widest part of the back between the armscye lines, the
bustline, the waistline, the high hipline, the largest part of the
hip, and the upper arm.
The garment was then removed and the stu-
dent's body measurements taken with the metric tape measure for the
same bodylines.
Tilese measurements were recorded to the nearest
IS
millimeter, as were the measurements at the indicated lines on the
garment.
A pilot study had been conducted in which four safety pins
were placed on each bodyline.
When the garments were placed on a
table for measurement it was discovered that the front and back pins
coincided and that one pin per bodyline was sufficient.
The ease in each of the six bodylines was calculated as follows:
garment measurement, cm.-body measurement, em. x 100
garment measurement, em.
= % ease
In addition to recording the percentage of stretch of each
specimen, a note was made of the type of knit fabric that was used.
Each specimen was classified as a single filling, double, tricot, or
rib knit.
Data Analysis
Following collection of the data, scattergrams were constructed
to show the distribution of ease for each of the six bodylines.
These scattergrams are presented in Figures 1-6, pages 43-45.
The specimens were ranked in order of elongation.
The least
stretchable specimen did not stretch as far as the minimum considered
to be a stable knit as defined by the major pattern companies.
This
sample was placed in a separate group called "non-stretchable knit".
The most stretchable knit could not be measured accurately as its
elongation exceeded the range of the Static Extension Tester.
It is
recorded as having an elongation of 235.9 percent as this percentage
was the amount recorded when the weight rested on the floor.
The
data obtained from this extremely stretchable rib knit distorted the
16
averages in all groups in which it was included.
Therefore calcula-
tions were made including and excluding the data from the most
stretchable specimen.
A computer program was written to compute the means for the
following groups of data:
1.
The entire population.
2.
A truncated population which deleted the least and most
stretchable specimens.
3.
The entire population, excluding the most stretchable speci-
men (called the reanalyzed population).
4.
The reanalyzed truncated population, excluding the least
stretchable and the two most stretchable specimens.
The means for these populations are presented in Table 3,
page 49,
The three major pattern companies divide the stretchability of
knits into three groups.
knit.
The least stretchable is called a stable
The average maximum stretch which the pattern companies
classify as stable isJ32 percent.
The middle range of stretchability
is called moderate stretch by the pattern companies and ranges from
32 percent to 65.5 percent.
are called stretchable knits.
Fabrics which stretch over 65.5 percent
The computer was programmed to calcu-
late the mean stretch and the mean ease for each of these classifications and for the most stretchable group excluding the last specimen.
The calculations are presented in Table 4, page 50.
The pattern company groupings provided a basis for further subdivision into smaller groups.
The stable knit group (17.3%- 32.0%
17
stretch) with eleven specimens was retained.
The moderate stretch
group was divided approximately in half and designated as low moderate
stretch (32.2%- 42.8%) and high moderate stretch (46.3%- 65.5%).
1be "stretchable" knits encompassed the largest range and were divided
into three groups:
"stretchable" (65.8%- 78.3%), "high stretch"
(83.3% - 104.2%), and "ultra-high stretch" (111.2% - 235.9%).
A
histogram was developed to aid in the determination of these groups.
Data from the most stretchable knit were deleted, and the resulting
group was labeled reanalyzed ultra-high stretch (111.2%- 180.7%).
The means for these seven groups are presented in Table 5, page 51.
A further analysis of the data was made based on the four knit
types.
The averages for single filling, double, tricot, and rib
knits, as well as the rib knit group without the extremely stretchable
specimen are presented in Table 6, page 52.
Pearson's "r" was calculated and a "t" test conducted to determine if a significant correlation existed between the stretch of the
fabric and the ease of the garment.
Each of the six bodylines under
consideration was analyzed in several ways.
The entire population
of ninety-seven specimens was examined, as were the truncated population, the reanalyzed population and the reanalyzed truncated population.
The data were then grouped according to the stretchability
classification of the major pattern companies.
The "stretchable"
knit group was reanalyzed excluding the most stretchable specimen.
The same treatment was used on the subdivided pattern company groups.
Correlation coefficients and tests of their significance were conducted on each knit type group.
.
.
18
Tables 7-12 present the average ease, correlation coefficients
and results of tests of significance for the following bodylines:
Table 7, page 53, Upper Back Ease
Table 8, page 54, Bust Ease
Table 9, page 55, Waist Ease
Table 10, page 56, High Hip Ease
Table 11, page 57, Ease Through the Widest Part of the Hip
Table 12, page 58, Upper Arm Ease
The correlations with the pattern company groups, the subdivided
pattern company groups and the knit groups were subjected to a "t"
test to determine the significance of the correlation and an F-test
to ascertain whether or not the between groups variance exceeded the
variance within the groups.
The data were reanalyzed for each of these
groupings after deleting the most stretchable specimen.
Table 13,
page 59, presents the results of these correlations and tests.
Summary
Specimens of fabrics used by students in construction of knit
garments were tested to determine their percentage of elongation.
The garments and the students were measured to determine body ease
in each of six bodylines.
The data were ranked in order of stretcha-
bility of fabric and grouped into various categories depending on
amount of stretch or type of fabric.
Correlation of ease within
each group and from group to group was determined and will be further
discussed in the next chapter.
IV.
RESULTS
Correlation of Body Ease and Stretch
The results obtained in this study are presented in the same
order in which the research hypotheses are stated.
Upper Back Ease
No correlation Was found between the stretch of knit fabric and
the ease provided across the upper back.
The average ease for the
entire population as well as for the entire population deleting the
most extreme
percent.
specimen~
was found to be between 7.18 percent and 7.51
The standard deviation of the truncated population was 7.39.
Upper back ease within the stable, moderate and stretchable knit
groups did not decrease or increase with the amount of stretch.
The
largest percentage of ease was found in the moderate stretch group
(8.33 percent), while the stable and stretchable groups each had
less ease across the upper back (5.35 percent and 5.44 percent respectively).
1110 subdivided pattern company stretch groups did not yield
decreasing or increasing percentages of ease.
The moderate stretch
group required larger amounts of ease as the stretchability of the
knit increased.
The ultra-high stretch group, when it included the
most stretchable specimen, required the least amount of ease.
When
the extreme sample was deleted, the group required more ease than the
stable knit group but less than the moderate knits (Table 7, page 53).
19
20
Bustline Ease
A slight negative correlation which was significant at the .OS
level, was found between the stretch of all types of knit fabrics and
the ease through the bustline.
However, when the most stretchable
specimen was deleted from the data, it was discovered that no significant correlation existed.
Average bustline ease steadily decreased as the stretch of fabric
increased in the pattern company groupings.
The average percentage
of ease in the stable knit group was 6.26 percent, 4.90 percent in
the moderate group and 3.78 percent in the stretchable group.
A "t"
test conducted on the negative correlations which were calculated
from these data proved that results were not significant.
The ultra-high stretch group, when it included the most stretchable specimen, was found to have a significant negative coefficient
of correlation.
As in all other cases involving this group, when the
most extreme specimen was not considered, the correlation was no
longer statistically significant (Table 8, page 54).
Waistline Ease
Although waistline ease is largely a matter of fashion and
design, a significant negative correlation was found between the
stretch throughout the entire population and the waistline ease.
Vfuen the correlation coefficient was recalculated without the most
extremely stretchable specimen it was found that the correlation was
no longer significant.
Within the stretchable and ultra-high stretch groups a decrease
in waistline ease was found with an increase in stretch.
When the
_,
21
most stretchable specimen was deleted from these groups, the average
percentage of ease increased so much that the negative correlation
was no longer significant (Table 9, page 55).
High Hipline Ease
A slight negative correlation between the stretch of the knit
fabric and the ease through the high hipline was observed when all
specimens were included in the correlation study.
With the elimina-
tion of the least and most stretchable specimens, the average ease
increased and the correlation coefficient became slightly positive.
A negative correlation was again obtained when the least stretchable
and the two most stretchable specimens were deleted.
A "t" test was
conducted, and all correlation coefficients except that for the
entire population were found to be not significant.
TI1e stretchable and the ultra-high stretch groups which included
the specimen with the greatest elongation showed a negative correlation of ease and stretch within each group.
When data from the most
highly stretchable specimen were not included, the correlation coefficient for the stretchable group became positive, though not significantly so.
The smaller reanalyzed ultra-high stretch group retained
a negative correlation, although it was not a significant one (Table
10, page 56).
Ease Through the Largest Part of the Hip
TI1roughout the entire population, as stretch increased, the
percentage of ease through the largest part of the hip decreased.
22
However, when the last specimen was not included the negative correlation between stretch and ease was no longer significant.
Among the pattern company groups, only the stretchable knit group
showed a statistically significant negative correlation.
This cor-
relation became slightly positive when the most stretchable specimen
was deleted.
A "t" test indicated that the reanalyzed correlation
was not significant.
Within the low moderate stretch group a negative correlation
was found to be significant at the five percent level.
Within the
high moderate stretch and the ultra-high stretch groups negative correlations proved to be significant at the one percent level (Table
11, page 57).
Upper Arm Ease
No correlation between stretch and upper arm ease could be found
except within the ultra-high stretch group when it included the most
stretchable specimen.
A "t" test indicated that the negative corre-
lation found within this group was significant only at the five percent level.
As in previous instances, when the most stretchable
specimen was excluded from the group, the negative correlation was
not significant.
Correlation of Body Ease and Knit Type
Knit specimens in this study were classified as single filling,
double, tricot, or rib knits.
Sixty-four specimens were double knits,
twenty-two were single filling knits, eight garments were made of-
.
.
.
.
tricot knit, and three were made of rib knits.
The exceedingly
stretchable specimen was a rib knit.
Upper Back Ease
Garments made from single knit fabrics had an average ease of
4.29 percent across the upper back.
Within this single knit group,
the correlation between stretch and ease was slightly positive.
A
"t" test was conducted and the correlation was found to be not significant.
Average upper back ease in the double knit group was twice as
great as that of the single knit group (8.60 percent).
As the stretch
of double knits increased, the ease across the upper back decreased,
but not to a statistically significant extent.
Tricot knit garments had slightly less ease across the upper back
than did the double knit garments (7.29 percent).
The negative cor-
relation between the stretch of tricot knit fabric and upper back
ease in garments was not significant.
The complete rib knit group was the only one which had a negative
average ease (-1.30 percent).
Although the coefficient of correlation
was -0.989, the size of the group was so small that it was not significant.
When the most stretchable rib knit was not included, the average
ease increased to 9.15 percent.
The two remaining specimens had a
perfect negative correlation between the stretch of fabric and the
ease through the upper back (Table 7, page 53).
Bustline Ease
The average bustline ease for garments made of single knit fabric
24
was 2.65 percent.
increased.
As stretch within this group increased, ease also
The positive correlation was not significant.
Double knit garments had an average of 5.81 percent ease.
A
very low negative correlation was found within the double knit group
but was not significant.
The correlation between stretch of tricot fabric and bustline
ease was the smallest of any of the knit type groups.
The average
ease through the bustline of garments made of tricot was 5.15 percent.
The only fabrics which had negative ease were the rib knits.
When all three specimens were averaged, the mean stretch was 124.4
percent and the bust line ease was -7.23 percent.
After eliminating
the data from the most stretchable specimen the average stretch
decreased to 68.65 percent and the ease increased to -2.65 percent
(Table 8, page 54).
Waistline Ease
The average stretch of single knit fabrics was 64.98 percent and
the mean waistline ease was 17.06 percent.
The negative correlation
within the single knit group was not significant.
Double knits had slightly less average stretch (61.26 percent)
than did the single knits and a correspondingly greater percentage of
ease (21.75 percent).
The correlation between stretch and ease was
negative, but not significantly so.
Tricot knits had greater average stretch (73.17 percent) than did
the double knits and less average ease (19 .96 percent).
There were
eight specimens in the tricot group and as the stretch increased, so
.
~.
-
-
.
25
did the ease.
This positive correlation proved to be significant at
the one percent level when subjected to a "t" test.
The rib knit group had the highest average stretch (124.40 percent)
and the least amount of average ease (-3.47 percent).
The correlation
within the three specimen group was negative but was not significant.
When the most stretchable specimen was deleted from the group, the
average stretch decreased to 68.65 percent and the average ease increased to 19.55 percent (Table 9, page 55).
High Hipline Ease
Garments constructed of single knit fabrics had 4.69 percent
average ease through the high hipline.
There was a negative correla-
tion between the stretch of single knit fabrics and the high hipline
ease.
A "t" test was conducted and the correlation was found to be
not significant.
The double knit group has slightly less average stretch and a
greater mean ease (8.51 percent).
The correlation between stretch
and ease was very slightly positive, though not to a significant
degree.
Tricot knit garments had greater average stretch than double
knits and less average high hipline ease.
There was a positive cor-
relation between the stretch of tricot knits and the ease through the
high hipline.
A "t" test confirmed that this correlation was signifi-
cant at the one percent level of confidence.
Inclusion of the most extremely stretchable specimen in the rib
knit group resulted in an average ease of -22.47 percent.
When this
26
most stretchable sample was deleted from consideration, the high hipline ease average became 6.25 percent (Table 10, page 56).
Ease Through the Largest Part of the Hip
No significant correlation was found between the stretch of any
of the knit types and the ease through the largest part of the hip.
Double knit fabrics had less average stretch than did any other
t)Te of knit.
Rib knit fabrics had the least amount of ease, -28.93
percent for the entire group and 1.30 percent for the reanalyzed group.
The greatest percentage of ease was in double knit garments (7.18 percent), followed by tricot (5.66 percent) and single knit fabrics (3.22
percent) (Table 11, page 57).
Upper Arm Ease
Single knit, tricot knit, and rib knits all showed a negative
correlation between the stretch of the knit fabric and the ease
around the upper arm.
None of these correlations was significant.
When the most stretchable specimen was eliminated from the rib knit
group, a perfect positive correlation was found to exist between the
remaining two specimens.
A positive, though not significant, corre-
lation was found within the double knit group.
The greatest amount of ease (21.25 percent) was found in the
tricot group.
The least amount of ease was found in the rib knits
when the group included all samples (9.57 percent).
When the most
stretchable sample was eliminated from the rib knit group, the ease
around the upper arm was almost as high as in the tricot knit group
(20.05 percent).
Double knits required slightly more average ease
27
than did single knits and had slightly less average stretch (Table 12,
page 58).
Comparison of Ease in Knit and Woven Garments
Upper Back Ease
The ease provided across the upper back in a basic pattern for
a woven fabric is twice as large as the ease provided in most of the
knit garments constructed in this study.
The ease found in a basic
pattern for woven fabric is 14.0 percent whereas the average amount
of ease in all knit garments was 7.18 percent to 7.51 percent.
Average upper back ease among the various subdivisions of knits
ranged from -1.30 percent to +9.15 percent, as may be seen in Table
14, page 61.
Bustline Ease
The percentage of ease through the bustline of a woven. garment
is greater than the corresponding ease in a knit garment.
One major
pattern company allows 9.2 percent ease through the bust.
The average
ease for the entire population and the averages for the several subdivisions range from -7.23 percent to +6.26 percent.
Waistline Ease
The waistline ease of two percent for a woven fabric is for a
garment with a fitted waistline.
With very few exceptions, the eases
reported in this study reflect that which is appropriate in garments
of a loose fitting style.
The average ease through the waistline
for the entire population, the truncated population, the reanalyzec1.
.
.
28
population, and the reanalyzed truncated population were all approximately 20 percent.
The range of waistline ease in the subdivided
knit groups was from -3.47 percent to 23.38 percent.
High Hipline Ease
No information on the percentage of high hipline ease incorporated in patterns for woven fabrics was available.
Ease Through the Largest Part of the Hip
The amount of ease through the largest part of the hip was found
to be approximately the same for both woven and knit fabrics.
Basic
fitting patterns allow 5.8 percent ease through the largest part of
the hip.
In the total population groups the range was 4.96 percent
to 6.01 percent.
Excluding the rib knit groups, ease through this
area in the pattern company and knit type groups ranged from -2.79
percent to 7.31 percent.
The rib knit groups hadaR average ease of
-28.93 percent with all three specimens and 1.30 for the two specimen
group.
Upper Arm Ease
No information on the percentage of upper arm ease allowed in
patterns for woven fabrics was available.
Significance of Results
The specimen which had the greatest amount of elongation produced
data on ease which were considerably different from those for all
other specimens.
Because the data from this specimen disproportion-
ately affected the averages in all groups in which it was included,
29
these groups will not be considered in acceptance or rejection of the
null hypotheses.
Correlation of Stretch and Body Ease
The first null hypothesis states that the percentage of ease does
not vary inversely with the stretch of knit fabric.
appears to be true for (la) the upper back.
This statement
None of the negative
correlations were significant nor was the positive correlation found
in the stable knit group.
There were no groups which showed a significant negative correlation between stretch and (lb) bustline ease.
It is interesting to
note> however, that as the pattern company groups increased in stretch
from stable through moderate to stretchable, that the average bustline
ease of each of these groups decreased by approximately 1.25 percent
from group to group.
No significant correlation could be found between stretch and
(lc) waistline ease.
Due to the influence of fashion, the amount of
ease through the waistline should be viewed as being largely a matter
of style.
Correlation between stretch and (ld) high hipline ease was not
significant for any group.
The null hypothesis may therefore be ac-
cepted for the high hipline.
A significant negative correlation was found between stretch and
ease through (le) the largest part of the hip within the low moderate
stretch group and within the high moderate stretch group.
The average percentage of ease was higher in the high moderate
group than in the low moderate group.
This anomalous behavior would
.
.
.
30
account for the lack of significant correlation in the pattern company
moderate stretch group.
The null hypothesis may be accepted for the
entire population, all the pattern company stretch groups and the
stretchable, high stretch and ultra-high stretch subdivided groups.
The null hypothesis may be rejected (le) for the low moderate and
high moderate stretch groups and.the corresponding research hypotheses
accepted for these two groups.
Null hypothesis (lf) may be accepted as there was no significant
correlation between stretch and upper arm ease.
Correlation of Stretch of a Single Knit Fabric and Body Ease
The second null hypothesis states that the percentage of ease
does not vary inversely with the stretch of a single knit fabric.
There was no significant negative correlation between the stretch of
single knit fabric and any of the six bodylines.
Therefore, null
hypothesis number two may be accepted in its entirety.
Correlation of Stretch of a Double Knit Fabric and Body Ease
The third null hypothesis concerns the negative correlation between stretch of a double knit fabric and body ease.
This null hypoth-
esis may be accepted for all six bodylines, as no significant negative
correlation was found between the percentage of stretch of double
knit fabrics and the percentage of ease through the upper back, bust,
waist, high hip, largest part of the hip, and the upper arm.
Correlation of Stretch of Tricot Knit Fabric and Body Ease
The fourth null hypothesis may be accepted for all six bodylines,
as no significant negative correlation was found between the stretch
.
31
of tricot knits and body ease through the upper back, bust, waist,
high hip, largest part of the hip, and the upper arm.
A positive
correlation which was significant at the one percent level of confidence was found between stretch of tricot knit and body ease in the
waistline and high hip.
Possibly this unexpected result was due to
the design of the garments constructed, as control of style was not
possible in the study.
Correlation of Stretch of Rib Knit Fabric and Body Ease
The rib knit group consisted of only three specimens, one of
which was deleted because of the extremely stretchable character of
the fabric and the unusual design of the garment, a bodysuit, constructed from the fabric.
The remaining two garments formed a two-
specimen group which consequently had perfect negative correlation
in the upper back and bust.
The null hypotheses (Sa) and (Sb) may
therefore be rejected for the upper back and bust lines.
It would be
inadvisable, however, to accept the research hypotheses because of the
small size of the experimental group.
A positive correlation was
found between the stretch of the two specimens and the ease through
the (c) waist, (d) high hip, and (f) upper arm.
No correlation was
found between the stretch of rib knits and the ease through the largest
part of the hip.
Therefore, the null hypotheses may be accepted for
all body areas.
An
F test was conducted to determine if the variance between
the four groups of knit types exceeded the variance within the knit
type groups.
The two bodyline eases which were significant (at the
32
.01 and .05 level respectively) were the bust and widest part of the
hip lines of the reanalyzed knit type groups.
These two eases varied
significantly with knit type even though the stretch did not.
There-
fore, the findings in Table 6 for these two bodylines are meaningful.
Both bodyline eases rank in ascending order from rib knit, single
filling knit, tricot knit to double knit.
This finding was not
anticipated in the research hypotheses.
The slight negative ease in the bustline which was found satisfactory for rib knits may be due to additional vertical stretch; only
crosswise stretch was measured in this study.
Application of Results
Although results of this study were inconclusive in many cases,
an attempt wi 11 be made to formulate generalizations, which can be
used as rules of thumb in pattern alterations.
Upper Back
The average percentage of ease through the upper back in knit
garments needs to be only half as much as is incorporated in McCall's
patterns for garments of woven fabric (Table 2, page 48).*
As no
correlation was found between the stretchability of the knit and ease
through the upper
bac~,
the mean ease of seven percent, which was
found for the entire population, would seem to be sufficient for both
comfort and appearance.
*McCall's patterns were used as a standard for comparison because they
were the only company for which information on the amount of minimum
ease incorporated in their patterns was available.
33
Bustline Ease
Bustline ease in knits should be less than the ease needed for
the same bodyline in woven fabrics.
Although a statistically signifi-
cant correlation with stretch was not discovered 1 some preference for
decreasing bustline ease with increasing fabric stretch did seem to
be apparent.
For fabrics of less than 50 percent
ease can be 6 percent.
elongation~
bustline
Fabrics which stretch from 50 percent to 100
percent may decrease this amount of ease to 5 percent.
Knit garments
which stretch over 100 percent can be constructed with only 4 percent
ease through the bust.
Rib knits can have a negative ease (Table 6,
page 52).
Waistline Ease
Due to fashion considerations, the percentage of ease through the
waist in styles with loose fitting waistlines is a matter of appearance.
No special study of garments with fitted waistlines was made,
so no recommendations for ease can be offered.
High Hipline Ease
Comparison of the high hipline and widest part of the hipline
ease indicates that more ease is preferred in the high hipline than
in the widest part of the hip.
This apparent anomaly may be due to
the effect of the loose waist styles.
Depending upon the style of
the garment, stable knit fabrics may require as much as 11 percent
ease through the high hipline, while moderate and stretchable fabrics
would need only about 5 percent ease.
34
Ease Through the Widest Part of the Hipline
The average amount of ease through the widest part of the hipline
was found to be approximately 5 percent to 6 percent, regardless of
the stretchability of the knit.
The percentage of ease which was
recommended by authors cited in the literature survey was 5.48 percent
to 5.80 percent, which agrees well with the findings of this study.
Upper Arm Ease
A much higher average percentage of ease through the upper arm
was found in this study than was recommended in the literature.
No
correlation between stretch and upper arm ease could be found, so an
average of 18 percent ease would seem to be acceptable in appearance
and comfort for all knit fabrics.
V.
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Summary
Approximately one hundred students and their knit garments were
measured to determine the ease in each of six bodylines.
The cross-
wise stretch of each of the 97 fabrics was measured by a Static
Extension Tester and the elongation expressed in percent.
The data were arranged in order of stretchability and a computer
program written which computed the mean stretch and ease of various
groups.
Statistical analysis of the data was applied to determine
whether a significant correlation existed between stretch and ease.
One knit specimen was found to be extremely stretchable.
The
garment of which it was constructed was designed to have negative ease.
The correlations obtained when this specimen was included were significant for the bust line, waistline, high hipline, and widest part of
the hip.
When this mpst stretchable specimen was deleted from the
data set however, no significant correlations with stretch were found.
Tile type of knit fabric used was found to have a significant effect
upon bust and widest part of the hipline ease requirements.
Comparison of the mean ease of knit garments in each bodyline was
made with the amounts of ease recommended for garments made of woven
fabrics.
Information on the percent of ease through the high hipline
and the upper arm in woven fabrics was not available in the literature.
'lliercfore, no comparisons can be made for these two bodylines.
Waist-
line ease in the experimental population was a matter of style and
35
36
could not be properly compared to the ease recommended for fitted
waistline garments.
Considerably less ease was found to be required across the upper
back in knit garments than is recommended in woven garments.
The
amount of ease required through the bustline of a knit garment is
slightly less than the amount needed in a woven garment.
Little dif-
ference was found between the amount of ease needed through the widest
part of the hip regardless of whether the garment fabric was woven or
knit.
One great shortcoming of this study was the lack of standardization of the pattern styles used.
As a result, no correlation between
the stretch of fabric and ease in knit garments was found.
It was
apparent that garments of knit fabrics can be made with less body
ease than would be required in the same garment made of a woven fabric.
Conclusions
The amount of ease needed for comfort across the upper back of a
knit garment is only half as much as is required in the same area of
a woven garment.
There appeared to be no important difference in the
amount of ease needed in fabrics of varying percentages of stretch or
type of knit.
The only exception was the negative ease of the rib
knit group when it contained the most stretchable specimen.
Ease through the bustline is slightly less in knit garments than
in garments of a woven fabric.
Although no significant correlation
between stretch and ease was found, it appeared that students preferred
approximately 1 percent less ease for every 50 percent greater stretch
'
+
•
37
in the fabric.
Rib knit garments can be constructed with slight nega-
tive ease in the bust.
The appearance of the garment when the body
was at rest seemed to be of more importance than the comfort factor.
No useful information on the amount of ease through the waistline
was developed by this study.
The current preference for loose-waisted
styles made it impossible to determine the minimum ease needed for
comfort.
Surprisingly, the amount of ease needed for comfort through the
widest part of the hip was not dependent upon the stretch of the fabric.
The percentages needed were approximately the same for both
woven and knit garments and were not affected by the stretchability
of the knit.
The equality of ease required between knit and woven
fabric may be due to a desire to present the appearance of a garment
which is not stretched over the figure.
The amount of ease through the upper arm in the experimental
knit fabrics was even greater than that recommended in the literature
for woven fabrics.
The data from some sleeves were eliminated due to
their obvious style characteristics.
The remaining sleeves, however,
presented some variations in style which may account for the large
percentage of ease, as was the case with the waistline data.
Vast differences in mean ease and in statistical measures were
founded when
~highly
stretchable specimen with negative eases was
included in the data set.
Reference to the scattergrams of Figures
1-6 show how far this one specimen departed from the ease allowances
of the other specimens.
It may be inferred that knits of such highly
stretchable nature can be constructed with extreme negative ease (-90
+
38
percent in the widest part of the hipline), providing the style of the
garment is intended to present the appearance of a snug fit.
Recommendations for Further Study
The following recommendations for further study of eases in knit
garments are offered:
1.
In such a study all garments should be the same style.
Vari-
ations could include styles with and without waistline seams, or
dresses with long or short sleeves.
Patterns of similar style but
from each of the major pattern manufacturers could be utilized as a
variable.
2.
A study in which the stretchability of fabric is controlled
would be of interest.
An
equal number of garments could be made
within specified stretch limits.
The type of knit fabric of speci-
fied elongation could also be controlled.
3.
A broader study which would include more female adult figure
types and sizes might disclose a difference in ease required for
different size figures using identical fabric.
4.
A study of the ease requirements in pants, using knit fabrics
of specified elongation, could provide useful information.
VI.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1.
Bernier, Edward J. "The Fabrication of Stretch Apparel."
Modern Textiles Magazine, 46 (March 1965), pp. 67-75.
2.
Cameron, Hendy. Knit and Stretch Sewing.
Cameron Publishing Co., 1967.
3.
Carter, Meg~ (Personal correspondence), Consumer Service,
The McCall Co., October 30, 1973.
Portland, Oregon:
4. ·Curtis, Susan P. (Personal correspondence), Technical Research,
Simplicity Pattern Co., November 14, 1973.
5.
Fletcher, Hazel M., and Roberts, S. Helen. "Elastic Properties
of Plain and Double Knit Cotton Fabrics." Textile Research
Journal, 35 (June 1965), pp. 497-503.
6.
Fletcher, Hazel M., and Roberts, S. Helen. "Three Methods for
Testing Elastic Recovery of Knit Fabrics." Textile Research
Journal, 34 (July 1964), pp. 649-652.
7.
Fortner, Janis. (Personal correspondence), Consumer Information,
Butterick Fashion Marketing Co., January 3, 1974.
8.
Hollen, Norma, and Saddler, Jane. Textiles.
Co./Collier-Macmillan Limited, 1968-.---
9,
"How to Measure the Elastic Properties of Woven Stretchable
Fabrics." Multifiber Bulletin X-187. E. I. Du Pont de Nemours
and Co., Wilmington, Del., February 1964.
London: Macmillan
10.
Joseph, Marjory L. Jntroductory Textile Science.
New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1972.
11.
"Knits vs. Wovens, Armageddon or a Standoff?" American Fabrics
and Fashions. 97 (Spring/Summer 1973), pp. 53.
12.
Lawrence, Judy.
1970.
13.
Margolis, Adele P. How to Make Clothes that Fit and Flatter.
Garden City, New York: Doubleday and Co. Inc., 1969.
14.
Martensson, Kerstin. It's Easy, Here's How.
Minn.: Sew-Knit-N-Stretch, 1968.
Sewing Knits.
39
2nd ed.
Boulder, Colo.: Judy Lawrence,
Golden Valley,
.
.
.
.
.
.
40
15.
Mauck, Francis F., and Stepat, Dorothy L. Modern Sewing Techniques. New York: Macmillan Co., 1963.
16.
Person, Ann. Stretch and Sew Instruction Book.
Stretch and Sew, Inc., 1967.
17.
Potter, M. David, and Corbman, Bernard P. Textiles: Fiber to
Fabric. 4th ed. New York: Gregg Division/McGraw-Hill Book
Co., 1967.
18.
"Static Extension Tester Model CS-138. 11 Custom Scientific
Instruments, Kearney, New Jersey, n.d.
19.
"Woven Stretch." American Fabrics Magazine, 92 (Winter
pp. 64-76.
Eugene, Oregon:
1971~1972),
VII.
APPENDICES
Appendix A, Figures
Appendix B, Tables
Appendix C, Correspondence
Appendix D, Raw Data
41
APPENDIX A
FIGURES
42
,
.
,
.
,
43
•
30
•
......
..... : . •
20
10
0
•
.•.••-.• •••• •
• •
•
• ••••
..
..
•
••• ••• . •• •
~
• •
•• •••••
• •
• • •
•
60
30
••
•
•
.
••
.
•
•
0
•
•
unique
90
120
150
~
180
210
•
240
% Stretch
Fig. 1.
15
Scattergram of Upper Back Ease
•
••• •
.
•••
10
s~
<
~
P..
P..
::J
0
VI
cd
1-l.l
-5
•
~
~
•
•
•
•
••
• •
••
•
•
-10
• •
•
•
•
••
•
•
•
•
........
.j.J
(J)
(.)
••
••••• •• •
•
•• :
•
"'
(J)
•
•
•
•••• ••
••• •
••• •
••••• ••
"
•••
•• • ·:
5
(J)
•
(J)
c..
unique~
-15
0
.
30
60
90
120
150
180
210
% Stretch
Fig. 2.
Scattergram of Bust line Ease
240
.
44
•
40
Cl)
I=!
•r-i
.•...•..... ...•• .. • •
.
..:..·' ..: .·:·
20
.--I
:s:
'
.....
:~
• ••
.j-J
(/)
•r-i
C'd
• • \•
•
~
•
•
0
•
•
••
•••
• ••
•
• •
•
• • •• •
•
•
Cl)
(/)
C'd
t.Ll
-20
•
•
.j-J
I=!
Cl)
u
1-1
-40
Cl)
0..
unique~n
•
-60
0
30
60
90
120
150
180
210
240
% Stretch
Scattergram of Waistline Ease
Fig. 3.
40
•
Cl)
I=!
. ..• • • . •
...•
•. • :,: }•e:::.• •
•••
20
•r-i
r-1
.. ... .
p.,
•r-i
:r:
• •,r •• •••,._ ;. • •:
• •
••
•
0
~
•r-i
:r:
•
•
..
• •
•
••
•
•
•
-20
Cl)
~
t.Ll
.j-J
-40
I=!
Cl)
u
1-1
Cl)
0..
-60
unique
~n
-80
•
0
30
Fig. 4.
60
90
120
150
180
210
% Stretch
Scattergram of High Hipline Ease
240
45
•
20
•
•
0
•
.: •:
·~·
i
e•
I
•
I •
••I ••
••
•
"
•
....,
H
~
•
.• .•......·..s..:\ .··'... .•.•........ •
•
,' e
' •
-20
unigue~
0
60
.30
I20
90
ISO
I80
2IO
240
% Stretch
Fig. S.
30
~
H
ll)
p..
p..
:::J
20
Scattergram of Ease Through the Largest Part
of the Hip
••• •
•• • • •
•
•• :
••••
..... ·:..
•••
•• • ·'
••
•
• •• •
•
•
_
••
IO
...
•••• •
..
••
•
•
•
•
• ••
••
•
•
•
ll)
Ul
cO
r.t.l
0
unique~
.j.j
r::
ll)
(.)
-IO
•
H
ll)
0..
-20
0
.30
60
90
120
ISO
I80
2IO
% Stretch
Fig. 6.
Scattergram of Upper Arm Ease
240
APPENDIX B
TABLES
i
46
•''
\
47
TABLE 1
PATTERN COMPANY STRETCH CLASSIFICATIONS
% Elongation Under Hand Stretch
Vogue-Butterick
McCall's
Simplicity
Mean
Stable
12.7
14.2
19.6
15.5
Moderate
30.9
39.2
25.0
31.7
Stretchable
79.4
76.0
50.0
68.5
I
48
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF VALUES OF EASE RECOMMENDED IN THE
LITERATUP~
Body Ease
Upper
Back
%
Source
Bust
%
Waist
Widest
Part of
Hip
Upper
Arm
%
%
%
Woven Garments
Margolis (13: 11)
3.39
8.45
2.04
5.80
13.79
Mauck & Stepat (15: 207)
1.72
to
3.39
10.96
to
15.58
2.04
to
4.00
2.82
to
5.80
10.71
to
13.79
14.00
9.20
2.00
5.80
McCall's (3: 1)
Knit Garments
2.99
to
10.96
Lawrence (12:7,8)
-
McCall's (3:1)
Person (16:17,45,64)
7.00
5.48
4.60
2.00
5.80
10.96
4.00
5.48
7.41
to
10.71
TABLE 3
MEAN STRETCH AND MEAN EASE
Entire
Population
TrWlcated
Population
Reanalyzed
Entire
Population
Reanalyzed
Truncated
Population
Number of specimens
97
95,
96
94
Stretch
65.04
63.76
63.26
62.52
Upper back ease
7.18
7.40
7.51
7.28
Bustline ease
4.63
4.92
4.85
4.96
Waistline ease
19.76
20.44
20.48
20.39
High hipline ease
6.48
7.41
7.44
7.33
Widest part of hipline ease
4.96
6.01
6.01
5.91
18.13
18.52
18.50
18.58
Upper arm ease
~
10
.
.
so
TABLE 4
MEAN STRETCH AND EASE OF PATTERN COMPANY GROUPS
Bod
Number of
Specimens
in Group
Mean
Stretch
Upper
Back
%
%
Bust
Ease
Waist
High
Hip
Widest
Part of
Hip
Upper
Arm
%
%
%
%
%
Stable Knit
11
27.26
5.35
6.26
23.38
11.32
6.45
17.00
6.53
6.10
19.24
4.61
2. 39
16.50
5.67
17.67
Moderate Knit
53
46.40
8.33
4.90
20.62
Stretchable Knit
32
110.46
5.44
3.78
16.95
Reanalyzed Stretchable Knit
31
106.41
'6.43
4.45
19.09
7.63
51
TABLE 5
MEAN STRETCH AND EASE OF SUBDIVIDED PATTERN COMPANY GROUPS
Bod'/ Ease
Number of
Specimens
in Group
Mean
Stretch
Upper
Back
%
%
Bust
Waist
High
Hip
Widest
Part of
Hip
Upper
Arm
90
%
%
90
6.45
17.00
4.95
17.01
6.92
7.31
21.57
5.04
5.17
14.89
8.03
5.07
18.76
0.50
-2.79
15.83
. 6.83
18.86
%
Stable Knit
11
27.26
5.35
6.26
23.38
11.32
Low Moderate Stretch Knit
26
37.58
8.24
5. 39
19.62
6.15
High Moderate Stretch Knit
27
54.89
8.41
4.43
21.58
"Stretchable" Knit
8
71.09
5.23
2.20
18.35
High Stretch Knit
13
94.96
6.08
5.57
17.46
Ultra-High Stretch Knit
11
157.40
4.86
2.97
15.32
Reanalyzed Ultra-High Stretch Knit *
10
149.55
7.57
4.91
21.80
9.43
*Ultra-high stretch group deleting the most stretchable specimen.
.
+
.
+
52
TABLE 6
KNIT TYPE GROUP MEANS
Bod
Number of
Specimens
Average
Stretch
Upper
Back
%
%
Bust
Ease
Waist
High
Hip·
Widest
Part of
Hip
Upper
Arm
%
%
%
%
4.69
3.22
16.12
8.51
7.18
18.87
6.86
5.66
21.25
-22.47
-28.93
9.57
6.25
1.30
20.05
%
Single Knit
22
64.98
4.29
2.65
17.06
Double Knit
64
61.26
8.60
5.81
21.75
Tricot Knit
8
73.17
7.29
5.15
19.96
Rib Knit
3
124.40
-1.30
-7.23
-3.47
Reanalyzed Rib Knit *
2
68.65
9.15
-2.65
19.55
'
* Rib knit group deleting the most stretchable specimen.
53
TABLE 7
UPPER BACK EASE
Number of
Specimens
Average
Stretch
%
Entire population
Truncated population
Reanalyzed population
Reanalyzed truncated
population
Pattern Co. GrouEs
Non-stretch knit
Stable knit
Moderate knit
Stretchable knit
Reanalyzed stretchable
knit
Average
Ease
~6
Corr.
Coo f.
''r''
"t"
Value
97
95
96
65.04
63.76
63.26
7.18
7.40
7.51
-0.174
0.011
-0.008
-1.669
0.103
-0.077
94
62.52
7.28
-0.040
-0.370
1
53
32
15.30
27.26
46.40
110.46
17.30
5.35
8.33
5.44
0.000
0.287
-0.070
-0.184
0.000
0.847
-0.492
-0,972
31
106.41
6.43
0.286
1.520
11
11
27.26
37.58
54.89
71.09
94.96
157.40
5.35
8.24
8.41
5.23
6.08
4.86
0.287
-0.214
-0.181
-0.035
0.351
-0.431
0.847
-1.053
-0.901
-0.071
1.184
-1.433
10
149.55
7.57
0.587
2.049
22
64
8
3
2
64.98
61.26
73.17
124.40
68.65
4.29
8.60
7.29
-1.30
9.15
0.152
-0.004
-0.325
-0.989
-1.000
0.671
-0.029
-0.768
-6.769
0.000*
11
Subdivided Pattern Co.
GrouEs
Stable knit
Low moderate knit
High moderate knit
Stretchable knit
High stretch knit
Ultra-high stretch
Reanalyzed ultra-high
stretch knit
26
27
8
13
Knit TyEe GrouEs
Single knit
Double knit
Tricot knit
Rib knit
Reanalyzed rib knit
'*
Significant at the .01 level.
.
.
54
TABLE 8
BUSTLINE EASE
Number of
Specimens
Entire population
Truncated population
Reanalyzed population
Reanalyzed truncated
population
Pattern Co. GrouEs
Non-stretch knit
Stable knit
Moderate knit
Stretchable knit
Reanalyzed stretchable
knit
Average
Stretch
Average
Ease
%
%
Corr.
Coef.
"r"
"t"
Value
97
95
96
65.04
63.76
63.26
4.63
4.92
4.85
-0.220
-0.073
-0.052
-2.186*
-0.702
-0.506
94
62.52
4.96
-0.049
-0.472
1
53
32
15.30
27.26
46.40
110.46
-1.90
6.26
4.90
3.78
0.000
-0.373
-0.143
-0.297
0.000
-1.208
-1.031
-1.674
31
106.41
4.45
0.071
0.377
11
11
27.26
37.58
54.89
71.09
94.96
157.40
6.26
5. 39
4.43
2.20
5.57
2.97
-0.373
-0.282
0.055
-0.134
0.121
-0.768
-1.208
-1.438
0.275
-0.330
0.387
-3.595**
10
149.55
4.91
-0.367
-1.114
22
64
8
3
2
64.98
61.26
73.17
124.40
68.65
2.65
5.81
5.15
-7.23
-2.65
0.131
-0.089
0.028
-0.949
-1.000
0.593
-0.702
0.069
-3.008
0.000**
11
Subdivided Pattern Co.
Groups
Stable knit
Low moderate knit
Iligh moderate knit
Strctchab lc knit
High stretch knit
Ultra-hi~l stretch knit
Reanalyzed ultra-high
stretch knit
Knit Tz::Ee GroU£5
Single knit
Double knit
Tricot knit
Rib knit
Reanalyzed rib knit
26
27
8
13
*Significant at the .05 level.,
** Significant at the .01 level.
55
TABLE 9
WAISTLINE EASE
Number of
Specimens
Entire population
Truncated population
Reanalyzed population,
Reanalyzed truncated
population
Average
Stretch
Average
Ease
Corr.
Coef.
"r"
"t"
Value
%
%
97
95
96
65.04
63.76
63.26
19.76
20.44
20.48
-0.313
-0.041
-0.048
-3.207**
-0.397
-0.463
94
62.52
20.39
-0.065
-0.621
1
53
32
15.30
27.26
46.40
110.46
24.70
23.38
20.62
16.95
0.000
-0.384
0.071
-0.390
0.000
-1.247
0.512
-2.319*
31
106.41
19.09
0.259
1.441
11
13
11
27.26
37.58
54.89
71.09
94.96
157.40
23.38
19.62
21.58
18.35
17.46
15.32
-0.384
-0.206
0.064
0.120
0.495
-0.788
-1.24 7
-1.033
0.321
0.297
1.888
-3.846**
10
149.55
21.80
-0.186
-0.535
22
64
8
3
2
64.98
61.26
73.17
124.40
68.65
17.06
21.75
19.96
-3.47
19.55
-0.013
-0.102
0.919
-0.993
1.000
-0.059
-0.810
5.717**
-8.405
0.000**
Pattern Co. GrouES
Non-stretch knit
Stable knit
Moderate knit
Stretchable knit
Reanalyzed stretchable
knit
11
Subdivided Pattern Co.
Grou,es
Stable knit
Low moderate knit
High moderate knit
Stretchable knit
High stretch knit
Ultra-high stretch knit
Reanalyzed ultra-high
stretch knit
Knit TzEe GrouEs
Single knit
Double knit
Tricot knit
Rib knit
Reanalyzed rib knit
26
27
8
*Significant at the .OS level.
** Significant at the .01 level.
.
.
56
TABLE 10
HIGH HIPLINE EASE
Number of
Specimens
Entire population
Truncated population
Reanalyzed population
Reanalyzed truncated
population
Pattern Co. GrouEs
Non-stretch knit
Stable knit
Moderate knit
Stretchable knit
Reanalyzed stretchable
knit
Average
Ease
%
%
97
95
96
65.04
63.76
63.26
6.48
7.41
7.44
-0.350
0.031
0.026
-3.529*
0.292
0.243
94
62.52
7.33
-0.012
-0.109
1
53
32
15.30
27.26
46.40
110.46
9.70
11.32
6.53
4.61
0.000
-0.553
0.001
-0.468
0.000
-1.879
0.005
-2.748*
31
106.41
7.63
0.200
1.041
11
11
27.26
37.58
54.89
71.09
94.96
157.40
11.32
6.15
6.92
5.04
8.03
0.50
-0.553
-0.302
0.002
0.473
0.532
-0.802
-1.879
-1.553
0.007
1.316
1.885
-3.795*
10
149.55
9.43
-0.308
-0.857
22
64
8
64.98
61.26
73.17
124.40
68.65
4.69
8.51
6.86
-22.47
6.25
-0.221
0.078
0.890
-0.995
1.000
-0.990
0.594
4. 372*
-9.522
0.000*
11
Corr.
Coef.
"r"
"t II
Value
Average
Stretch
Subdivided Pattern Co.
GrouEs
Stable knit
Low moderate knit
High moderate knit
Stretchable knit
High stretch knit
Ultra-high stretch knit
Reanalyzed ultra-high
stretch knit
Knit TlJ~C GrouES
Single knit
Double knit
Tricot knit
Rib knit
Reanalyzed rib knit
26
27
8
13
3
2
* Significant at the .01 level.
'
.
57
TABLE 11
EASE THROUGH THE WIDEST PART OF THE HIPLINE
Number of
Specimens
Entire population
Truncated population
Reanalyzed population
Reanalyzed truncated
population
"t II
Value
Average
Stretch
Average
Ease
%
%
97
95
96
65.04
63.76
63.26
4.96
6.01
6.01
-0.393
-0.006
-0.006
-4.031**
-0.056
-0.059
94
62.52
5.91
-0.066
-0.617
1
53
32
15.30
27.26
46.40
110.46
6.10
6.45
6.10
2.39
0.000
-0.596
-0.005
-0.513
0.000
-2.099
-0.033
-3.106**
31
106.41
5.67
0.141
o. 727
11
11
27.26
37.58
54.89
71.09
94.96
157.40
6.45
4.95
7.31
5.17
5.07
-2.79
-0.596
-0.492
-0.518
0.112
0.308
-0.772
-2.099
-2.771*
-2.905**
0.276
0.972
-3.437**
10
149.55
6.83
-0.061
-0.163
22
64
8
3
64.98
61.26
73.17
124.40
68.65
3.22
7.18
5.66
-28.93
1. 30
-0.243
0.083
0.595
-0.995
0.000
-1.093
0.631
1.655
-10.006
0.000
Corr.
Coef.
"r"
Pattern Co. Grou:es
Non-stretch knit
Stable knit
Moderate knit
Stretchable knit
Reanalyzed stretchable
knit
11
Subdivided Pattern Co.
GrouEs
Stable knit
Low moderate knit
High moderate knit
Stretchable knit
High stretch knit
Ultra-high stretch knit
Reanalyzed ultra-high
stretch knit
Knit Tn)e Grou:es
Single knit
Double knit
Tricot knit
Rib knit
Reanalyzed rib knit
26
27
8
13
2
*Significant at the .OS level.
**
Significant at the .01 level.
58
TABLE 12
UPPER ARM EASE
Number of
Specimens
Entire population
Truncated population
Reanalyzed population
Reanalyzed truncated
population
Average
Stretch
Average
Ease
%
%
Corr.
Coef.
"r"
97
95
96
65.04
63.76
63.26
18.13
18.52
18.50
-0.144
0.033
0.036
-1.304
0.291
0.321
94
62.52
18.58
0.060
0.532
1
53
32
15.30
27.26
46.40
110.46
16.70
17.00
19.24
16.50
0.000
-0.250
0.205
-0.270
0.000
-0.582
1.405
-1.346
31
106.41
17.67
0.193
0.924
11
26
27
11
27.26
37.58
54.89
71.09
94.96
157.40
17.00
17.01
21.57
14.89
18.76
15.83
-0.250
-0.208
0.099
0.479
0.420
-0.682
-0.682
-0.997
0.456
1.219
1.134
-2.640*
10
149.55
18.86
-0.134
-0.357
22
64
64.98
61.26
73.17
124.40
68.65
16.12
18.87
21.25
9.57
20.05
-0.072
0.151
-0.630
-0.995
1.000
-0.281
1.124
-1.621
-9.735
0.000**
"t"
Value
Pattern Co. GrOU£5
Non-stretch knit
Stable knit
Moderate knit
Stretchable knit
Reanalyzed stretchable
knit
11
Subdivided Pattern Co.
Grou:es
Stable knit
Low moderate knit
High moderate knit
Stretchable knit
High stretch knit
Ultra-high stretch knit
Reanalyzed ultra-high
stretch knit
Knit Tz:pc GrOU£5
Single knit
Double knit
Tricot knit
Rib knit
Reanalyzed rib knit
8
13
8
3
2
*Significant at the .OS level.
**
Significant at the .01 level.
TABLE 13
CORRELATION,
SIGNIFICAl~CE,
AND ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF DATA
Body1ine
Group
Number
of Groups
Upper
Back
Bust
Waist
Widest
High
Part of
___H~p____ , --- __ H~p
Upper
Arm
-
--
Correlation Coefficients
Pattern Co.
4
-0.747
0.564
-0.980*
-0.855
-0.771
0.168
Reanalyzed Pattern Co.
4
-0.703
0.628
-0.990** -0.665
-0.665
0.585
Subdivided Pattern Co.
7
-0.685
0.276
-0.951** -0.778*
-0.668
-0.043
Reanalyzed Subdiv. Pattern Co.
7
-0.568
0.431
-0.637
-0.297
-0.027
0.285
Knit Type
4
-0.531
-0.648
-0.700
-0.732
-0.735
-0.442
Reanalyzed Knit Type
4
0.788
-0.557
0.379
0.249
-0.362
0.834
-6.961*
-2.326
-1.713
0.241
-10.169** -1.261
-1.249
1.020
"t" Test
Pattern Co.
4
-1.587
0.966
Reanalyzed Pattern Co.
4
-1.399
1.143
Subdivided Pattern Co.
7
-2.103
0.641
-6.857** -2.766*
-2.005
-0.095
Reanalyzed Subdiv. Pattern Co.
7
-1.543
1.067
-1.850
-0.695
-0.060
0.664
Knit Type
4
-0.886
-1.203
-1.385
-1.519
-1.531
-0.698
Reanalyzed Knit Type
4
1~808
-0.948
0.579
0.363
-0.549
2.134
en
\0
TABLE 13 (continued)
Bodyline
Group
-·
----
-
Number
Upper
of G:roups___ ~_ac_!<___
Bust
Waist
L~~;h
Widest
Part of
Upper
H"l.p -- Arm
--------
F Test
Pattern Co.
4
1.588
1.192
1.300
1.017
0.790
0.753
Reanalyzed Pattern Co.
4
1.322
1.039
0.828
1.702
0.067
0.412
Subdivided Pattern Co.
7
0.818
1.067
0.790
0.958
1.077
1.167
Reanalyzed Subdiv. Pattern Co.
7
0.759
1.024
0.809
1.228
0.546
1.169
Knit Type
4
2.752
7.216
5.736
7.613
9.871
1.903
Reanalyzed Knit Type
4
1.877
3.986**
1.766
1.933
3.285*
1.036
* Significant at the .OS level.
**
Significant at the .01 level.
0"
0
TABLE 14
COMPARISON OF EASE IN KNIT AND WOVEN GARMENTS
Ran;re of average ease, %
Pattern Co. Ease in Woven Fabrics
Widest
Part of
Hip
Upper
Back
Bust
Waist
High
Hip
14.0
9.2
2.0
---
5.8
Upper
Arm
Total Population in Knit Garments
7.18
to
7.51
4.63
to
4.96
19.76
to
20.48
6.48
to
7.44
4.96
to
6.01
18.13
to
18.58
Pattern Company Groups, Knits
5.35
to
8.33
3.78
to
6.26
16.95
to
23.38
4.61
to
11.32
2.39
to
5.67
16.50
to
19.24
Subdivided Pattern Company Groups
4.86
to
8.41
2.20
to
6.26
15.32
to
23.38
0.5
to
11.32
-2.79
to
7.31
14.89
to
21.57
Single Knits
4.29
2.65
17.06
4.69
3.22
16.12
Double Knits
8.60
5.81
21.75
8.51
7.18
18.87
Tricot Knits
7.29
5.15
19.96
6.86
5.66
21.25
-1.30
to
9.15
-2.65
to
-7.23
-3.47
to
19.55
-22.47
to
6.25
-28.93
to
1. 30
9.57
to
20.05
Rib Knits
0\
1-'
.
'
.
.
APPENDIX C
CORRESPONDENCE
62
•
+
63
15497 Hamner Drive
Los Angeles, Calif. 90024
October 22, 1973
Consumer Information Department
Simplicity Pattern Co.
200 Madison Avenue
New York City, N. Y. 10016
Gentlemen:
I was very interested to see your new patterns with the Pick-aKnit Rule. I am a sewing teacher presently working at California State
University, Northridge, on a Master's thesis, "Correlation Between the
Per Cent of Body Ease and the Per Cent of Stretch in Knit Fabrics".
This thesis was started in the Fall of 1971, and I am about to complete
it.
I would appreciate it greatly if you would tell me what you would
recommend for the minimum body ease (not design ease) in patterns for
(1) woven fabrics, (2) stable knits, and (3) stretchable knits.
I have
limited my study to the following six dimensions:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Upper back, armscye to armscye
Bust
Waist
High hip, 3 inches below the waist
Largest part of the hip
Upper arm
According to your publications, your patterns for stretchable
knits have less body ease than those designed for all fabrics. Could
you refer me to ru1y technical papers describing how you determined the
lesser amount of. ease? Do all the Pick-a-Knit patterns have the same
amount of stretch? If not, is there a formula to determine the amount
of stretch needed for the body ease provided?
Any information you can send me will be greatly appreciated.
would be glad to reciprocate in any way that I could.
Yours truly,
(Mrs.) Nathalie B. Edwards
I
64
15497 Hamner Drive
Los Angeles, Calif. 90024
October 22, 1973
Consumer Information Department
Buttcrick Fashion Marketing Co.
161 Sixth Avenue
New York City, N. Y. 10013
Gentlemen:
Your article "Sewing Knits" in the October-November 1973 issue of
Vogue Patterns has been of great interest to me. I am a sewing teacher
presently working at California State University, Northridge, on a
Master's thesis, "Correlation Between the Per Cent of Body Ease and the
Per Cent of Stretch in Knit Fabrics". This thesis was started in the
Fall of 1971, and I am about to complete it.
I would appreciate it greatly if you would tell me what you would
recommend for the minimum body ease (not design ease) in patterns for
(1) woven fabrics, (2) stable knits, and (3) stretchable knits. I have
limited my study to the following six dimensions:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Upper back, armscye to armscye
Bust
Waist
High hip, 3 inches below the waist
Largest part of the hip
Upper arm
According to your publications, your patterns for stretchable knits
have less body ease than those designed for all fabrics. Could you
refer me to any technical papers describing how you determined the
lesser amount of ease? Is there any difference in body ease between
patterns which say "Suitable for Knits" and those with no such designation? Do Vogue and Butterick use the same amounts of ease in their
patterns for all fabrics and those for stretchable knits?
Any information you can send me will be greatly appreciated.
would be glad to reciprocate in any way that I could.
Yours truly,
(Mrs.) Nathalie B. Edwards
I
65
15497 Hanmer Drive
Los Angeles, Calif. 90024
October 22, 1973
Consumer Information Department
The HcCall Pattern Company
230 Park Avenue
New York City, N. Y. 10017
Gentlemen:
I have
only. I am
University,
Per Cent of
This thesis
it.
been interested in your patterns for stretchable knits
a sewing teacher presently working at California State
Northridge, on a Master's thesis, "Correlation Between the
Body Ease and the Per Cent of Stretch in Knit Fabrics".
was started in the Fall of 1971, and I am about to complete
I would appreciate it greatly if you would tell me what you would
recommend for the minimum body ease (not design ease) in patterns for
(1) woven fabrics, (2) stable knits, and (3) stretchable knits. I have
limited my study to the. following six dimensions:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Upper back, armscye to armscye
Bust
Waist
High hip, 3 inches below the waist
Largest part of the hip
Upper arm
According to your publications, your patterns for stretchable
knits have less body ease than those designed for all fabrics. Could
you refer me to any technical papers describing how you determined the
lesser amount of ease? Is there a formula to determine the amount of
stretch needed for the body ease provided?
Any information you can send me will be greatly appreciated.
would be glad to reciprocate in any way that I could.
Yours truly,
(Mrs.) Nathalie B. Edwards
I
66
15497 Hanmer Drive
Los Angeles, Calif. 90024
March 26, 1974
Meg
'D1e
230
New
Carter, Consumer Service
McCall Pattern Company
Park Avenue
York, New York 10017
Dear Ms. Carter:
I certainly appreciate all the very helpful information regarding
ease in patterns which you sent me in your letter of October 30, 1973.
Now that I am involved in actually writing up my thesis I find I need
to know the body measurements for a new sizing size 10. I have been
able to find out all that I need except the upper back, high hip and
upper arm body measurements. I have searched the college library and
have been unable to find any publication which gives these measurements. I tried to order a McCall's basic fitting pattern in order to
measure it and subtract the ease given in your letter but the department store has been unable to deliver it even after four weeks. If
you could please provide me with the upper back, high hip, and upper
arm body measurements for a size 10, I would appreciate it greatly. I
am enclosing a stamped, self-addressed envelope for your convenience.
Sincerely yours,
(Mrs.) Nathalie B. Edwards
.
.
.
.
.
.
67
...-....
'
consumer
serVICe
Simplicity Pattern Co. Inc.
200 MADISON AVENUE. NEW YORK. N.Y. 10016
November
14, 1973,
Mrs. Nathalie B. Edwards
15497 Hamner Drive
Los Angeles, Calif.
90024
Dear Mrs, Edwards:
Thank you for your letter raqu~sting info~tion on knit tabrica.
We are enclosina Simplicity loafleta:
News In Knits, Spring 1973
All About Sewing Knits,
Techniquas Fol."
Su~r
1q71
So~o~ing 'l)o).o~utUul T.ln~~cla
Sawing Fashion Fabrics
Knit fabrics are divided into at leas: two KtOUlll: those whlch are "at.rl'ltchobla"
and those which aro not, or hove~ "BruLtad atr~tch",
Stylaa which aro pnrticulnrly API"'oprintu fot' limtt"d str.,tch o:: l•onuod kni.U will
have the usuRl uao allownnca. Tho~y will fit eq•1ally wall in woven fabrics,
Pot.tern~ tnon ax·c lllllrked "OeslRned for Knit fr.bdc.:s only, uo" at1:~tch knits only,''
hnvo lc•s than thti usual minimum cane bccnuoe t.h .. knitG otretch ana ~hould, to
have the rif;ht fashion look, ba clinay 11n<l doAe tQ the body. Th<'y ~rn~y or may not
have a bust dart.
With the popular J.ty of the stretchy sweater knits
for these fabrics,
w~
!1ad to make patterns s!Mller
The Pick-A-Knit rulP. shows 4" of fabric stretching 3/l•" for ~or.JO patterns and 1"
for others. Tho given amount of stretch should be wLthout distortion,
Also enclosed are si?.ing leaflP-ts nnd meagurement charts,
list the body measurements on which the pattern is based,
The measurement charta
The eaou allowance La given for a boo lc stylo with aet•in sl4levu and 11 aeam at
the waiot line in woven fabric and stable ~nita.
•continued•
I
I
I
~I I l·
'
I.
f · I·
I
68
,..
November 14 1 1973
Mrs. Nathalie B. Edwards
15497 Hamner Driva
Los Angeles, Calif.
90024
-2-
Our pattern-making department advl.ses us that the style would determine the amount
of ~ase in a knit as we 11 as in a woven fabric. He are sure you understand that
a hnlter style would have less ease than a style 1o1ith sleeves whether it 1a
made for a knit fabric or woven.
A ,style with a wnist Hno seam will have lass ease a1: wl\iat line than a atyle
without a W¥istline aeam, regardless of fabric.
While a stretchable knit is made tighter it still
are unable to give figures.
depend~
on l:ha style, ao we
We do hope we have been helpful.
Slncerely yours,
SIMPLICITY PATTERN CO. INC.
Suecn P. Curtis
Technical Research
SPC: dCrn
Enc. Sizing 1edflets
"How To Sew With lCnita, Sulllller 1971"
69
BUTTERICK
FASHION
MARKETING
COMPANY
JaDUary 3, 1974
Vogue Panem Service
BuHerick Pallem Service
Mra. Nathalie B. Edwards
15497 Hamner Drive
Los Angeles, Calif.
90024
Dear Mrs. Edwards:
Please accept our apologies for the delay in answering your letter. Our
department has b0en in the process of re-organizing and we have boom
unable to answer our mail as quickly as we would like, Please don't
feel you have been forgotten.
Your thesis sounds very interenting and I would like to wish you the
best of luck with it. Unfortunately, I have very little information
that may be useful to you, but I will tell you what I can,
As JI'U knov, the entire pattern h.. a standar.tlized it's size ran:;es, with
the advent of liow Sizing. At tht! sam11 time, minimum ea"e allowances
for woven fabrics were standardized ao J inches for the bust, ~ inch
for the waiat and 2 inches in the hip.
The same minimum ease allowances are used for ga~ents suitable for
staple knits. For a stretchable knit, the minimuru ease allowance is
the actual body measur"n1ent. Allow:1nce added b~yond this will depend
upon the style and intended fit of th" garment, 1\1\d therefore becomes
design ease.
Since we are a pattern company, we work directly with fnbric and models
to achieve the fit we are looking for wl.th knit end woven f:.brics and
th.,refore do not have percentages standardized and av~il&ble. However,
we do provide our customers a gauge to use when purchasing her kuit fabric
to insure the correct amount of stretch. I have enclosed one for your
inspection.
I hope this information will be of aome help to you.
help again, please let ua know.
If we can be of
Sincerely,
%-..~ ;j.c~
Tania Fortner
Consumer Information
----------·---------
181 SIXTH AVlNUE NEWVOAK,N V IOOil
I
..L
70
THE McCALL PATTERN COMPANY
230 PAF<K AVENUE, NEW YORK. N.Y. 10017
PHONE 212 QB:ra200
October 30, 1973
Mrs. Nathalie B. Edwards
15497 Hamner Drive
Los Angeles, Ca. 90024
Dear Mrs. Edwards:
Thank you for your recent letter.
We appreciate your interes'!: in McCall's Patterns and your
inquiry concerning the minimum hoC:y ease in our patterns.
All of our patterns are sized according to the standards
established by the Pattern Fashlon_ Industry and followed
by all the pattern coMpanies in this country. The amount o:.f
basic ease in a pattern depends on the individual pattern
companies.
The minimum body •3ase is the same .for patterns designed for
woven fabrics and for stable knits. The following chart
shows the body ease in our. patterns:
Woven or
e -l:nble knit~
--------------------upper back
bust
waist
high htp
2"
3"
~"
1"
largest part of hip
upper arm
1"
2''
Knits onl v
-------~~ ~---------
1"
l J,.n
~;;
1"
2"
3/4"
Tha amount o.f body ease is detet·mined by averaging several
body measurements; there is no scientific formula. We are
enclosi,lg a chart to determine the amount of stretch a knit
should have to be considered stable or stretchable.
We hope this information will prove helpful to you.
can be of further assistance, do l:;a l; us know.
If we
Cordially,
/IJ &Wu
Meg'-'i.rter
Consumer Service
MC:lc
encl.
l
!
.
.
APPENDIX D
RAW DATA
t'il
71
Ill
I
,I
I
I!
lj
72
Body Ease
Rank
Spec.
No.
Knit
Code
Stretch
Upper
Back
0,
9o
'0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
36
llO
148
145
13
109
31
140
26
144
164
104
169
146
136
8
29
ll7
22
125
152
131
184
161
24
11
28
27
149
15
163
168
12
162
135
132
6
179
32
185
182
17
30
5
127
141
112
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
2
3
2
1
2
2
1
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
1
2
2
1
2
2
2
1
1
1
15.3
17.3
20.5
24.8
25.8
27.8
28.3
29.5
31.0
31.2
31.7
32.0
32.2
32.7
32.7
33.0
33.2
34.5
34.8
35.3
35.7
36.0
36.8
37.7
37.7
37.8
38.3
38.5
39.3
39.3
39.7
40.5
41.2
41.5
41.7
41.7
42.5
42.8
46.3
49.3
49.7
49.7
50.0
50.5
50.8
51.3
51.5
Bust
17.3
2.6
0.0
1.3
0.0
5.8
17.9
-99.9
18.4
15.9
- 8.2
2.4
- 1.2
8.5
24.3
4.7
17.6
12.0
9.1
- 6.6
14.3
13.0
15.8
13.7
14.7
0.5
13.3
8.9
-99.9
2.8
0.4
8.6
12.7
-12.3
- 2.9
13.7
17.5
2.9
16.2
12.7
1.7
4.1
24.7
9.6
4.4
7.9
15.8
-
'Jo
-
1.9
16.9
2.1
2.1
10.0
2.3
12.8
10.4
13.3
1.1
3.3
- 5.4
1.4
5.9
10.9
11.2
4.0
8.1
5.2
o.o
6.8
9.4
7.5
6.2
9.4
7.5
5.8
9.4
0.2
3.0
2.1
7.3
12.1
- 4.8
5.9
8.9
6.3
- 9.5
8.5
3.7
0.9
12.0
5.4
2.0
1.6
1.7
3.6
Waist
%
24.7
43.8
19.1
21.1
18.0
8.3
30.0
26.1
30.8
27.4
19.0
13.6
21.7
17.9
24.4
25.1
27.9
12.8
29.7
7.7
15.5
22.1
29.3
13.5
12.5
25.1
22.3
27.6
26.9
27.4
18.3
19.6
29.5
-23.6
21.8
19.8
23.0
12.2
12.7
21.7
17.9
26.8
24.6
28.3
16.8
16.6
19.5
Hip
lligh
%
Jlip
Large
Upper
Arm
90
'0
9.7
6.1
22.9
34.6
8.1
7.5
9.4
0.7
0.9
3.4
-99.9 -99.9
8.6
14.4
4.8
4.8
9.2
3.6
18.6
10.6
3.2
8.2
2.5
1.7
1.0
8.0
9.4
14.5
7.2
11.3
9.8
2.5
13.3
8.8
4.9 - 0.3
15.0
7.4
0.5
1.7
1.9
7.4
6.5
5.9
12.6
11.3
3.4
- 6.0
18.3
13.4
9.9
8.8
12.0
5.7
5.3
13.6
13.5
8.0
7.4
0.4
4.8 - 2.5
9.6
4.4
8.4
7.2
- 9.3 -13.3
2.4
1.8
0.6
2.0
7.7
3.1
- 6.8 - 5.9
11.7
19.7
1.1
7.6
5.6
6.7
9.9
7.1
7.6 . 9.0
2.8
6.3
1.2
8.3
-99.9 -99.9
2.6
7.8
o,
16.7
12.8
29.0
16.7
17.6
15.0
-99.9
23.4
23.2
1.8
-99.9
13.5
11.8
21.4
24.2
8.7
20.6
20.9
-99.9
-99.9
16.7
16.9
17.2
29.2
27.3
28.0
19.4
23.5
11.7
12.7
19.7
12.5
13.4
-25.0
25.0
25.8
12.4
14.3
19.7
25.0
26.5
17.2
23.4
20.0
29.0
-99.9
17.3
>
•
73
.
~'~-~~----- ._......-"'""...__....~-~
·-~~~--~·---~---~-,.
Rank
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
Spec.
Knit
No.
Code
71
_.._
2
%
51.7
2
5L7
3
1
1
9
2
11.3
124
2
2
51.8
55.2
55.2
55.3
55.7
56.2
56.5
57.0
2
1
2
1
58.5
58.8
59.0
59.0
59.5
61.7
64.5
65.5
65.8
67.0
67.3
69.0
71.0
7:5.3
77.0
78.3
83.3
84.0
90.3
90.8
90.8
"
96.0
1
0 .. ,
1
2
142
20
2
121
172
103
166
10
133
118
:s
4
2
3
2
1
1
2
115
2
143
177
3
1
2
1
72
73
74
75
76
170
183
151
106
2
2
2
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
165
.:
92
93
94
%
150
174
134
34
176
33
3
90
91
Stretch
Upp(; -~·
Bo.ck
101
129
102
16
25
111
167
122
137
19
181
7
35
4
18
107
14
4
.
..J
!i
I , V
2
97 ,:':
3
99.0
99. ;:
.,...
')
•"
l
2
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
l
100.5
101.8
104,.2
lll. 2
124.2
137.7
143.5
147.3
152.2
153.7
171.7
3.9
-99.9
1.3
10.8
8.9
3.8
0.5
9.2
13.2
6.9
14.6
5.8
o.o
13.7
2.6
21.8
0.0
4.6
0.0
12.2
4.6
-99.9
4.,9
-99.9
S.l
4.6
4.4
"'99.9
2.9
--10.8
11.2
8.8
5.4
0.0
4.1
22.2
10.0
7,9
6.9
1.3
0.0
11.5
- 1.2
10.1
4.8
17.0
7.1
Bust
%
'-"··
'Naist
0,5
23.0
24.8
10.0
22,7
17.9
31.0
28.3
')
3.2
0.6
9.3
1.0
7.2
9.2
0.2
5.6
13.5
3.3
3.4
0.9
4.3
8.9
2.2
4.7
4.9
4.6
2.5
0.6
- 3.0
2.2
12.0
- 6.2
7.2
-99.9
5.5
2.1
7.6
9.9
2.3
2.1
8.8
8.6
- 1.9
12.0
6.9
0.2
13.1
~L.
8
11.8
1.9
1.4
6,5
0.2
Ilip
Hi?
High
Large
~1
%
·;
tf, ......
-~---
Bod.z: Ease
...--"""""'··
23.4
17.3
21.4
46.3
%
13.5
8 •'-'0
15.4
9.6
13.8
-99.9
6.9
9.4
15.2
12.7
4.1
2.3
4.7
-99.9
13.5
7.1
ll.S
5.4
2.4
0.0
9.8
-99 . 9
30.4
-99.9
28.9
23.8
14.5
25.0
13.8
6.4
9.2
3.5
3.3
-09.9
10.6
11.3
lf,. 0
18.5
18.4
18.8
19.8
19.2
21.2
15.8
19.8
21.5
18.3
20.0
12.0
5.4
29.5
20.3
20.5
1.1
10.8
10.4
19.3
25.3
18.6
18.5
26.8
24.1
8.8
16.4
26.4
26.5
21.4
21.9
24.1
22.3
12.8
23.3
15.5
9o
Upper
Arm
3,0
1.3
6.0
'7
1
.),4
oR • ">
.:.
13.2
2.9
4.7
1.8
3.9
7.4
- 4.3
4.3
16.0
6.5
-
5.3
-
::?.3
9.2
-99.9
2.2
-99 .~.'
-
2.0
4.0
7.4
3.9
1.4
7.9
5.8
4.6
0.2
18.0
5.0
1.3
..,
R
.<.... (,.;•
1:1.6
7.7
7.6
-99.9
12.2
6.7
4.3
9.1
22.3
15.0
14.8
10.8
-99.9
9.0
0.0
12.7
- 6.9
0.8
1 r::
~·"
5.1
l.O
-99.9
13.6
8.8
- 1.8
9.4
7.6
5.9
13.7
4.9
-99.9
4.3
6.1
-
7.6
5.7
16.9
20.0
24.8
30.8
26.6
22.5
8.1
15.0
19.9
-99.9
7.3
8.7
zr:
-~
J,~
20.1
20.0
-99.9
-99.9
16.7
11.2
20.1
16.0
-99.9
15.0
26.1
-99.9
-99.9
25.0
17.4
12.7
33.3
24.0
20.7
21.9
14.9
'
10.0
'
'
I'
74
Body Ease
Rank
95
96
97
Note:
Spec. Knit
No. Code
114
175
120
2
2
4
Stretch
Upper
Back
%
%
173.3
180.7
235.9
7.6
17.5
-22.2
Bust
%
4.0
1.2
-16.4
Waist
Hip
High
Hip
Large
Upper
Arm
%
%
%
%
24.9
25.3
-49.5
14.6
14.9
-79.9
10.3
14.4
-89.4
25.0
13.8
-11.4
Where a measurement was not possible, such as an arm measurement for a sleeveless dress, the percentage of ease was
recorded as -99.9 for convenience in data processing.