Contact Us Right Away
If you run into any issue or have any question.
Wyzenbeek is a machine named after its inventor, Andrew Wyzenbeek, where the fabric can be tested to give an indication on the suitability of a particular fabric.
The test is universally recognised and only authorised testing bodies should provide certification. This method is widely used in the United States
The fabric being tested is set up on the machine and abraded against an option of two materials: One being cotton duck and the other a wire mesh. We generally test on the cotton duck.
The fabric is abraded back and forth and each motion is 1 rub. The ‘end point’ is determined when the subject fabric sample shows two consecutive yarns to have broken. The test is stopped and the results are recorded at that point.
An accepted outcome for residential use is 15,000 double rubs and heavy dutycommercial use, 30,000.
Martindale is another machine that can be used to test fabric for its upholstery suitability. It is named after inventor J.G Martindale who penned many books in the 1970’s such as ‘A Selective Bibliography Of Textile Engineering.’
The fabric being tested is set up on the machine and abraded against a wool fabric that is universally used. The motion of abrading is more like a “figure eight” and the number of oscillations is recorded.
When two consecutive yarns have broken the test is stopped and the results are recorded.
An accepted outcome for residential use is 20,000 cycles and heavy duty commercial use, 40,000.
Is there is any correlation between the Wyzenbeek and Martindale methods? In short, no. The methods are conducted in completely different manners, with differing weights, tension, and abradants. All factors in which contribute to the materials performance. Just because a material performs well on one of the methods, does not mean it will on the other method. But does that mean one is better than the other? Again, no. Both tests have a substantial history of providing guidance for abrasion resistance, which is why the Association for Contract Textiles (ACT), has included the ASTM Martindale method (ASTM D4966) in its performance guideline as an alternative to Wyzenbeek abrasion. Their recommendation is a minimum of 20,000 cycles for low traffic environments and 40,000 for high traffic environments.
In conclusion, Wyzenbeek and Martindale are both valid methods for assessing abrasion resistance even results do no correlate. Sometimes, one test may more accurately reflect a particular construction’s abrasion resistance than the other. Particularly when it has known reliability in the field, but performs poorly on a test. When it comes to meeting ACT requirements, you have the option of selecting the method that best reflects your construction’s true performance.