inter laboratory testing scheme - textiles committee · 2014-06-05 · report on inter laboratory...
TRANSCRIPT
Page 1 of 1
INTER LABORATORY TESTING SCHEME
ON
“Testing of Chemical parameters
in Textile Material”
TC/ILTS/CHEM-1/2012-13
Conducted by
PPPrrrooofffiiiccciiieeennncccyyy TTTeeessstttiiinnnggg PPPrrrooovvviiidddeeerrr
LLLaaabbbooorrraaatttooorrriiieeesss
TEXTILES COMMITTEE (Ministry of Textiles, Government of India)
P. Balu Road, Prabhadevi Chowk, Prabhadevi, Mumbai – 400 025. Ph : (022) 6652 7542, Fax : 6652 7554
E-mail : [email protected] E-mail : [email protected]
2012-2013
Inter Laboratory Testing Scheme
OOnn
““TTeessttiinngg ooff CChheemmiiccaall ppaarraammeetteerrss
iinn TTeexxttiillee MMaatteerriiaall””
TC/ILTS/CHEM-1/2012-13
Conducted by
PPPTTT PPPRRROOOVVVIIIDDDEEERRR
LLLaaabbbooorrraaatttooorrriiieeesss TEXTILES COMMITTEE
(Ministry of Textiles, Government of India) P. Balu Road, Prabhadevi,
Mumbai – 400 025. Ph : (022) 6652 7542, Fax : 6652 7554
E-mail : [email protected]
2012-2013
Page 1 of 56
NAME AND ADDRESS OF THE PT PROVIDER PT Provider, Laboratory, TEXTILES COMMITTEE (Ministry of Textiles, Government of India) P. Balu Road, Prabhadevi, Mumbai – 400 025. Ph : (022) 6652 7542, Fax : 6652 7554, E-mail : [email protected]
CONTACT PERSONS (1) Shri Kartikay Dhanda, PT-Coordinator
Director(Laboratories), Textiles Committee, Mumbai –400 025 Ph: 91 22 6652 7519, Fax: 91 22 6652 7554, E-mail : [email protected]
(2) Dr. K.S. Muralidhara, PT-Quality Manager Joint Director(Laboratories), Textiles Committee, Mumbai –400 025 Ph: 91 22 6652 7542, Fax: 91 22 6652 7554,
E-mail : [email protected]
(3) Shri M.S. Shyamsundar, PT-Technical Manager Quality Assurance Officer (Laboratory), Textiles Committee, Mumbai –400 025 Report prepared by: Shri M.S.Shyamsundar, PT – Technical Manager SCHEME : INTER LABORATORY TESTING SCHEME -TC/ILTS/CHEM-1/2012-13 - TTeessttiinngg ooff MMeecchhaanniiccaall ppaarraammeetteerrss iinn TTeexxttiillee MMaatteerriiaallss DATE OF ISSUE: August 1, 2013
CONFIDENTIALITY : All the information furnished by the participants shall be kept confidential by the PT Provider and the same shall not be revealed to others. However, if the accrediting body, for example NABL, requests the PT provider to furnish the performance of any of the participants, the same shall be provided to them directly, after obtaining permission of the concerned participant COPY RIGHT: This report is property of Textiles Committee, the PT Provider. The copy right of this report is retained with Textiles Committee. This report should not be reproduced by others in full or partially in any form without obtaining the consent from Textiles Committee, in writing Disclaimer: The PT Programmes are meant for evaluation of performance of the participants for the specified tests undertaken in the programme only and are voluntary in nature. Further, it is clarified that reasonable care has been taken to meet the requirement of ISO/IEC 17043:2010, while designing and conducting the programmes. Participants are expected to exercise due diligence while carrying out the tests and meet all safety, statutory and accreditation body’s requirements. PT Provider and Textiles Committee will not be responsible for any claim/damages arising out of participating in this programme
Page 2 of 56
I N D E X
S. No. Contents Page No. 1 PT-Provider details
1
2 Index
2
3 Report on Inter Laboratory Testing Scheme Preamble 3 Textiles Committee 3 PT-Provider 3 The Present Programme 4 Advisory Group 5 Participants 6 Proficiency Test Proceedings 6 Compilation of the Test Results 7 Determination Assigned Value 8 Detection and elimination of Trivial Outliers 9 Determination of Standard Deviation for Proficiency Assessment
9
Performance Evaluation of Participants 9 Interpretation of Performance Comment 10 Outliers and Stragglers 10 General Advise to the Laboratories on the performance
10
4 Annexure - Performance Evaluation of participants – Test wise
13
S.No. Table Page No. 1 ILPT schemes conducted by the PT Provider 4 2 Tests covered in TC/ILTS/CHEM-1/2012-13 4 3 Advisory Group 5 4 Assigned Values 8 5 Details of Eliminations of Trivial Outliers from
Analysis 9
6 Interpretation of Performance comments 10 7 Outliers and stragglers Analysis 11 8 List of outliers and stragglers 12
Report on Inter Laboratory Testing Scheme
Preamble: Increasing awareness on textile quality and the buyer requirements are forcing textile
manufacturers and traders to test textile products from reputed laboratories. Reputation of any laboratory depends upon the result it produces. The test report given byshould be precise, accurate, repeatable and reproducible. This means, a set of results obtained within a laboratory by testing a representative sample at any time interval should be comparable. And also, the result obtained over testing a laboratory should compare with that of other laboratory and fall within the statistical tolerance limit. In other words, the laboratory should be able to generate comparable results by performing the same test
The repeatability and reproducibility of any test result involves the laboratory’s
competence in conducting the test which involves knowledge of technical manpower working in the laboratory, the testing conditions and test method adopted. In this pursuit, the laboratory has to meet a requirement of maintaining its own management system as per ISO/IEC 17025:2005Comparison (ILC) and/or Inter Laboratory Pr
Inter laboratory Comparison is defined as’ of tests on the same or similar test items by two or more laboratories in accordance with predetermined conditions.” The goal of the Interverification of each participant’s with all other Laboratories using different make & model of testing equipment and manpower. The requirement for inter laboratory comparisons remaibeen further entrenched into metrology management systems by its incorporation in the requirements of IS0/IEC 17025:2005
Textiles Committee:
Textiles Committee is a statutory organization under the Ministry of Textiles, Government of India, established in the year 1963. The Committee has set up 19 laboratories throughout the country for catering to the testing requirements of the textile trade and industry in different centers. Fourteen laboratories of Textiles Committee are accredited as per ISO/IEC 17025:2005 by National Accreditation Board for testing & calibration Laboratories (NABL), India
PT-Provider:
The Laboratory, Textiles Committee at Mumbai conducts Inter Laboratory Testing (ILPT) schemes for the benefit of Textile Testing national accreditation agency, NABL nomILPT schemes. The German Standards body, (PTB), Germany recognized the schemes conducted by Textiles Committee and sponsored some laboratories of SAARC countries under (QIDP) in SAARC countries. Apart from India, laboratories from Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal, China, Hong Kong and Vietnam also participate in the ILPT schemes conducted by Textiles Committee
In order to offer ILPT schemes professionally
Textiles Committee at Mumbai with the requirements stipulated in ISO/IEC 17043 : 2010. The PT Provider has conducted14 schemes since 2007. The details are given in Table
Report on Inter Laboratory Testing Scheme
ncreasing awareness on textile quality and the buyer requirements are forcing textile manufacturers and traders to test textile products from reputed laboratories. Reputation of any laboratory depends upon the result it produces. The test report given by the laboratory should be precise, accurate, repeatable and reproducible. This means, a set of results obtained within a laboratory by testing a representative sample at any time interval should be comparable. And also, the result obtained over testing a representative sample in any laboratory should compare with that of other laboratory and fall within the statistical tolerance limit. In other words, the laboratory should be able to generate comparable results by
ty and reproducibility of any test result involves the laboratory’s conducting the test which involves the testing equipment, the skill and
knowledge of technical manpower working in the laboratory, the testing conditions and test ted. In this pursuit, the laboratory has to meet a requirement of maintaining its
own management system as per ISO/IEC 17025:2005, to participate in Inter Laboratory Comparison (ILC) and/or Inter Laboratory Proficiency Testing Scheme (ILPT)
Inter laboratory Comparison is defined as’ “Organization, performance and evaluation of tests on the same or similar test items by two or more laboratories in accordance with
The goal of the Inter-laboratory Comparisons (ILC) i technical capability by obtaining a measurement that agrees
with all other Laboratories using different make & model of testing equipment and manpower. The requirement for inter laboratory comparisons remains in place today, and has been further entrenched into metrology management systems by its incorporation in the
uirements of IS0/IEC 17025:2005
extiles Committee is a statutory organization under the Ministry of Textiles, rnment of India, established in the year 1963. The Committee has set up 19
the country for catering to the testing requirements of the textile trade and industry in different centers. Fourteen laboratories of Textiles Committee are accredited as per ISO/IEC 17025:2005 by National Accreditation Board for testing &
boratories (NABL), India
The Laboratory, Textiles Committee at Mumbai conducts Inter Laboratory for the benefit of Textile Testing laboratories as PT Provider. T
national accreditation agency, NABL nominated Textiles Committee as nodal agency for two The German Standards body, Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt
the schemes conducted by Textiles Committee and sponsored SAARC countries under its Quality Infrastructure Development Project
Apart from India, laboratories from Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal, China, Hong Kong and Vietnam also participate in the ILPT schemes conducted by
schemes professionally as a PT Provider, the laboratory of Textiles Committee at Mumbai has implemented the Management System in accordance with the requirements stipulated in ISO/IEC 17043 : 2010. The PT Provider has conducted
schemes since 2007. The details are given in Table – 1
ncreasing awareness on textile quality and the buyer requirements are forcing textile manufacturers and traders to test textile products from reputed laboratories. Reputation of
the laboratory should be precise, accurate, repeatable and reproducible. This means, a set of results obtained within a laboratory by testing a representative sample at any time interval should be
representative sample in any laboratory should compare with that of other laboratory and fall within the statistical tolerance limit. In other words, the laboratory should be able to generate comparable results by
ty and reproducibility of any test result involves the laboratory’s the testing equipment, the skill and
knowledge of technical manpower working in the laboratory, the testing conditions and test ted. In this pursuit, the laboratory has to meet a requirement of maintaining its
participate in Inter Laboratory
“Organization, performance and evaluation of tests on the same or similar test items by two or more laboratories in accordance with
laboratory Comparisons (ILC) is to provide technical capability by obtaining a measurement that agrees
with all other Laboratories using different make & model of testing equipment and man-ns in place today, and has
been further entrenched into metrology management systems by its incorporation in the
extiles Committee is a statutory organization under the Ministry of Textiles, rnment of India, established in the year 1963. The Committee has set up 19
the country for catering to the testing requirements of the textile trade and industry in different centers. Fourteen laboratories of Textiles Committee are accredited as per ISO/IEC 17025:2005 by National Accreditation Board for testing &
The Laboratory, Textiles Committee at Mumbai conducts Inter Laboratory Proficiency as PT Provider. The
inated Textiles Committee as nodal agency for two Technische Bundesanstalt
the schemes conducted by Textiles Committee and sponsored Quality Infrastructure Development Project
Apart from India, laboratories from Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal, China, Hong Kong and Vietnam also participate in the ILPT schemes conducted by
as a PT Provider, the laboratory of the Management System in accordance
with the requirements stipulated in ISO/IEC 17043 : 2010. The PT Provider has conducted
Table – 1 ILPT schemes conducted by the PT Provider
S.No Identity of the ILPT
1 TC/ILTS/MECH/01/07
2 TC/ILTS/CHEM/02/07
3 TC/ILTS/MECH/03/08
4 TC/ILTS/CHEM/04/08
5 TC/ILTS/MECH/05/09
6 TC/ILTS/MECH/06/09
7 TC/ILTS/MECH/07/09
8 TC/ILTS/CHEM/08/09
9 TC/ILTS/CHEM/09/09
10 TC/ILTS/CHEM/10/09
11 TC/ILTS/MECH/11/10-11
12 TC/ILTS/CHEM/12/10-11
13 TC/ILTS/Mech-1/2012-13
14 TC/ILTS/Chem-1/2012-13
The Present Program
Design: In order to assess the reproducibility of the test results being reported by various textile testing laboratoriesTC/ILTS/CHEM-1/2012-13 was designed. present PT Scheme are given in Table
Table – 2 : Tests covered in
S.No Test parameter
1 Quantitative analysis of fibre mixturesDissolution method
2 pH of aqueous extract of Textile Material
3 Dimensional Changes on soaking in water
4 Dimensional Changes of Fabric after Home Laundering
5 Appearance of Fabrics after Repeated Home Laundering
6 Skewness Change in Fabric Resulting from Automatic Home Laundering
1 ILPT schemes conducted by the PT Provider
Year Field PT
items
No. of test
parameters
2007 Mechanical Fibre, Yarn & Fabric
17
2007 Chemical Fabric 13
2008 Mechanical Fabric 11
2008 Chemical Fabric 10
2009 Mechanical Fabric 11
2009 Mechanical Yarn 12
2009 Mechanical Fibre 15
2009 Chemical Fabric 7
2009 Chemical Fabric 4
2009 Chemical Fabric 2
2010-11 Mechanical Fabric 10
2010-11 Chemical Fabric 10
2012-13 Mechanical Yarn&Fabric 13
2012-13 Chemical Fabric and metal
clothing accessory
12
The Present Program me:
In order to assess the reproducibility of the test results being reported by textile testing laboratories, this Proficiency Testing Scheme for Chemical
was designed. The test parameters thus covered in the present PT Scheme are given in Table – 2
2 : Tests covered in TC/ILTS/CHEM-1/2012-13
Standards suggested
Quantitative analysis of fibre mixtures-Chemical IS 667:1981 and Suitable Standard test method for blend composition
pH of aqueous extract of Textile Material IS 1390-1983 ISO 3071:2005
Dimensional Changes on soaking in water IS 2977:1989
Dimensional Changes of Fabric after Home Laundering AATCC 135- 2010 ISO 6330:2012
Appearance of Fabrics after Repeated Home AATCC 124:2011 ISO 16322:2005
Skewness Change in Fabric Resulting from Automatic AATCC 179:2010
1 ILPT schemes conducted by the PT Provider
parameters
No. of Labs
participated 70
70
60
60
50
31
14
51
45
20
65
70
42
56
In order to assess the reproducibility of the test results being reported by the Chemical testing -
covered in the
13
Standards suggested
Suitable Standard test method for blend composition
S.No Test parameter
7 Colour fastness of Textile Materials to organic solvents
8 Quantitative analysis of fibre mixture by physical separation
9 Determination of water repellency of fabrics by cone test
10 Moisture Content in cotton Textile materials
11 Screening Test for Nickel release
12 Absorbency of Textiles
However, participants were required to use the test method which is routinely adopted for the testing of regular samples. Hence, validated in-house method which is equivalent to the suggested standards.
Remark: The ILPT was initially designed for protocol/notification. However, subsequently it was upgraded to 1
Advisory Group:
As per the requirements stipulated in ISO/IEC 17043:2010, an comprising the following internal and external experts having the necessary expertise in testing of Textiles and/or statistics was constituted
Table
S.No Expert
1 Mr. Kartikay Dhanda Director (Lab), Textiles Committee, Mumbai
2 Dr. G.S. Nadiger Ex-Director (Lab), Textiles Committee, MumbaiAssessor, NABL
3 Dr. P.V. Varadarajan Ex-Principal Scientific Officer, CIRCOT, Assessor, NABL
4 Mr. G. M. Fairoze Deputy Director (Lab), Textiles Committee, Mumbai
5 Mr. K. Selvaraj Deputy Director (Lab), Textiles Committee, TirupurAssessor, NABL
6 Dr. P. Ravichandran Deputy Director (Lab), Textiles Committee, Bangal
7 Mr. S. P. Singh, Asst. Director (Lab), Textiles Assessor, NABL
Standards suggested
Colour fastness of Textile Materials to organic solvents IS 688-1988 ISO 105 X05:1994
Quantitative analysis of fibre mixture by physical AATCC 20 and 20 A-
Determination of water repellency of fabrics by cone IS: 7941-1976
Moisture Content in cotton Textile materials IS 199:1989
Test for Nickel release BSEN 12471:2002
AATCC 79:2000
were required to use the test method which is routinely adopted for the testing of regular samples. Hence, participants could adopt any equivalent s
house method which is equivalent to the suggested standards.
The ILPT was initially designed for 11 parameters as indicated in the subsequently it was upgraded to 12 parameters.
As per the requirements stipulated in ISO/IEC 17043:2010, an Advisory Groupcomprising the following internal and external experts having the necessary expertise in
and/or statistics was constituted
Table – 3 : Constitution of Advisory Group
Expert Affiliation Field of expertise
Textiles Committee, Mumbai Chairman Textile testing
Director (Lab), Textiles Committee, Mumbai Member Textile testing
Principal Scientific Officer, CIRCOT, Mumbai Member Textile testing
Director (Lab), Textiles Committee, Mumbai Member Textile testing
Deputy Director (Lab), Textiles Committee, Tirupur Member Textile testing &
Statistics
Deputy Director (Lab), Textiles Committee, Bangaluru. Member Textile testing
Asst. Director (Lab), Textiles Committee, Kanpur. Member Textile testing
Standards suggested
-2008
were required to use the test method which is routinely adopted for could adopt any equivalent standard or
parameters as indicated in the
Advisory Group comprising the following internal and external experts having the necessary expertise in
Field of expertise
Textile testing
Textile testing
Textile testing
Textile testing
Textile testing & Statistics
Textile testing
Textile testing
The terms of reference of the Advisory Group were as follows:
a) Planning requirements b) Identification and resolution of any difficulties expected in the preparation and
maintenance of homogeneous assigned value for a proficiency test item;
c) Preparation of detailed instructions for participantsd) Comments on any technical difficulties raised by participantse) Provision of advice in evaluating the perff) Comments on the results and performance of participants as a whole and, where
appropriate, groups of participants or individual participants;g) Provision of advice for participants (within limits of confidentiality), either individual
within the report; h) Responding to feedback from participants; and i) Planning or participating in technical meetings with participants.j) Arbitration of any dispute(s) between participating laboratory(ies) and the PT provider
Participants:
In all 56 participants from India, scheme
Proficiency Test Proceedings
The laboratory of Textiles Committee (PT Provider), Mumbai, procured quantity of fabric (PT item) from a reputed Laboratory Testing Scheme, on the basis of expected number of participants
Preparation of PT items:prepared ensuring the quantityparameters included in the schemewere numbered serially, packed in polyethylene bags and labeled
Allotments of PT items:appropriate Sampling procedures adopted computer, for Homogeneity testing, Stability testing and for distribution among participantThe remaining part of the population was kept asdamage. Henceforth, the allotted PT items
Homogeneity testing:homogeneity testing was conducted at the laboratory of Textiles Committee at MumbaiLudhiana and Tirupur for the test parameters covered in the scheme by adopting any one of the suggested methods. However, while conducting performance evaluation of the participants, the “between- samples SD” calculated during homogeneity testing by a particular method was used for calculating “SD of PT assessment” for different methods adopted by the participants, as the inherent variation in the sample (degree of non homogeneity) is independent of the test method adopted. The procedure given in ISO 13528:2005 was followed for conducting homogeneity testing
Dispatch of PT items:respective participants on 17th April 2013
(a) Form for Acknowledging the receipt of PT items(b) Instructions to the participants in the Inter Laboratory Testing Scheme (c) Form for reporting test results by the participants in the
Scheme The participants were requested to send the test results by 2
The terms of reference of the Advisory Group were as follows:
Identification and resolution of any difficulties expected in the preparation and maintenance of homogeneous proficiency test items, or in the provision of stable assigned value for a proficiency test item; Preparation of detailed instructions for participants Comments on any technical difficulties raised by participants Provision of advice in evaluating the performance of participants Comments on the results and performance of participants as a whole and, where appropriate, groups of participants or individual participants; Provision of advice for participants (within limits of confidentiality), either individual
Responding to feedback from participants; and Planning or participating in technical meetings with participants. Arbitration of any dispute(s) between participating laboratory(ies) and the PT provider
from India, Bangladesh and Vietnam were participated in this
Proceedings :
extiles Committee (PT Provider), Mumbai, procured from a reputed textiles mill for designing and conducting Inter
Laboratory Testing Scheme, on the basis of expected number of participants
of PT items: On receipt of the procured materials, PT itemsthe quantity of each PT item is adequate for the testing of all the
included in the scheme. The PT items thus prepared from the material procuredpacked in polyethylene bags and labeled
of PT items: Allotments of PT items were done by procedures adopted by using Random Numbers generated by
for Homogeneity testing, Stability testing and for distribution among participantThe remaining part of the population was kept as reserve for replacement in case of loss or
. Henceforth, the allotted PT items can be referred as sample
: To verify the homogeneity of the prepared was conducted at the laboratory of Textiles Committee at Mumbaifor the test parameters covered in the scheme by adopting any one of
the suggested methods. However, while conducting performance evaluation of the samples SD” calculated during homogeneity testing by a
method was used for calculating “SD of PT assessment” for different methods adopted by the participants, as the inherent variation in the sample (degree of non homogeneity) is independent of the test method adopted. The procedure given in ISO
05 was followed for conducting homogeneity testing
Dispatch of PT items: The Proficiency Testing items were dispatched to the April 2013, along with the following:
Form for Acknowledging the receipt of PT items Instructions to the participants in the Inter Laboratory Testing Scheme Form for reporting test results by the participants in the Inter Laboratory Testing
were requested to send the test results by 29th April 2013.
Identification and resolution of any difficulties expected in the preparation and proficiency test items, or in the provision of stable
Comments on the results and performance of participants as a whole and, where
Provision of advice for participants (within limits of confidentiality), either individually or
Arbitration of any dispute(s) between participating laboratory(ies) and the PT provider
and Vietnam were participated in this
extiles Committee (PT Provider), Mumbai, procured sufficient for designing and conducting Inter
PT items were adequate for the testing of all the
material procured
were done by following by using Random Numbers generated by
for Homogeneity testing, Stability testing and for distribution among participants. n case of loss or
prepared PT items was conducted at the laboratory of Textiles Committee at Mumbai, for the test parameters covered in the scheme by adopting any one of
the suggested methods. However, while conducting performance evaluation of the samples SD” calculated during homogeneity testing by a
method was used for calculating “SD of PT assessment” for different methods adopted by the participants, as the inherent variation in the sample (degree of non homogeneity) is independent of the test method adopted. The procedure given in ISO
The Proficiency Testing items were dispatched to the
Inter Laboratory Testing
The participants were also requested to
� Treat the samples in the same manner as regularly tested samples and accordingly, codify the samples such that the technical staff testing them are not aware that they are meant for PT purposes;
� Adopt the latest test method which is routinely used by the laboratory for the
testing of regular samples which may be any standard or validated inmethod;
� Forward (i) copy of the in
parameter and also (ii) specifyhas been done; and,
� Forward photo copy of Scope of
for the test method adopted (
The participants were informed thatparticipant’s value will not be considered for arriving at “Assigned Value” for the concerned test parameter, although, performance of the parameter. Further, it was also informed that the test results that may be inappropriate for statistical evaluation, for example, gross errors, miscalculations and transpositions may be excluded for calculation of summary statistics and performance evaluation of pa
Compilation of the Test Results:
In order to maintain the confidentiality of the participants of the PT Scheme, tindividual participants were given Code Subsequently, the test results reported by the participantanalyzed for the basic statisticsDeviation, etc., While doing so, test results evaluation, for example, gross errors, miscalculations
Determination Assigned Value:
To ensure the measurement traceability, only considered for evaluating the Assigned Values. Thus due weightage is given to the accredited participants. However, this weightage is given only when the submitted their Scope of accreditation and accredited for the specific test in which the ILPT is conducted
Initially, the robust average and the standard deviation of accredited participants (in respective testsaccordance with the procedure given in ISO 13528: 2005were calculated on the basis of the above. The test results of those laboratories which were found to be outliers (Z score more than +3 or less than of the remaining experts was assigned value for the concerned parameter
The Assigned Value of both the parameters thus arrived are given in
The participants were also requested to
Treat the samples in the same manner as regularly tested samples and accordingly, codify the samples such that the technical staff testing them are not aware that they are meant for PT purposes;
est method which is routinely used by the laboratory for the testing of regular samples which may be any standard or validated in
Forward (i) copy of the in-house method adopted (if applicable) for testing any parameter and also (ii) specify the standard method against which the validation
Scope of accreditation certificate as a proof of accreditation for the test method adopted (applicable to accredited laboratories only).
were informed that, in the absence of proof of accreditation, the ’s value will not be considered for arriving at “Assigned Value” for the concerned
test parameter, although, performance of the participants will be evaluated for this Further, it was also informed that the test results that may be inappropriate for
statistical evaluation, for example, gross errors, miscalculations and transpositions may be excluded for calculation of summary statistics and performance evaluation of pa
Compilation of the Test Results:
In order to maintain the confidentiality of the participants of the PT Scheme, twere given Code numbers which are generated by using
reported by the participants were tabulated and statistically statistics viz., Mean, Median, Mode, Maximum, Minimum, Standard
While doing so, test results were checked for inappropriate for statistical or example, gross errors, miscalculations and transpositions
Determination Assigned Value:
To ensure the measurement traceability, only accredited participants the Assigned Values. Thus due weightage is given to the
. However, this weightage is given only when the participantssubmitted their Scope of accreditation and accredited for the specific test in which the ILPT
Initially, the robust average and the standard deviation of values reported by the in respective tests) were determined for each parameter in
cedure given in ISO 13528: 2005. Subsequently, robust Z calculated on the basis of the above. The test results of those laboratories which were
found to be outliers (Z score more than +3 or less than -3) were deleted and Robust Average again calculated. This Robust average is tr
assigned value for the concerned parameter
The Assigned Value of both the parameters thus arrived are given in Table–4 .
Treat the samples in the same manner as regularly tested samples and accordingly, codify the samples such that the technical staff testing them are not
est method which is routinely used by the laboratory for the testing of regular samples which may be any standard or validated in-house
house method adopted (if applicable) for testing any the standard method against which the validation
accreditation certificate as a proof of accreditation .
in the absence of proof of accreditation, the ’s value will not be considered for arriving at “Assigned Value” for the concerned
will be evaluated for this Further, it was also informed that the test results that may be inappropriate for
statistical evaluation, for example, gross errors, miscalculations and transpositions may be excluded for calculation of summary statistics and performance evaluation of participants.
In order to maintain the confidentiality of the participants of the PT Scheme, the by using computer.
were tabulated and statistically viz., Mean, Median, Mode, Maximum, Minimum, Standard
inappropriate for statistical
(experts) are the Assigned Values. Thus due weightage is given to the
participants had submitted their Scope of accreditation and accredited for the specific test in which the ILPT
values reported by the ) were determined for each parameter in
. Subsequently, robust Z Score calculated on the basis of the above. The test results of those laboratories which were
3) were deleted and Robust Average again calculated. This Robust average is treated as the
Page 8 of 56
Table 4: Assigned Values
S.No. Test Assigned Value
Rob
ust S
D o
f A
ssig
ned
Val
ue
Unc
erta
inty
of
Ass
igne
d V
alue
No.
of L
abs
cont
ribut
ed
for
Ass
igne
d V
alue
Tot
al N
o. o
f A
ccre
dite
d pa
rtic
ipan
ts
avai
labl
e fo
r
the
Tes
t T
otal
num
ber
of
part
icip
ants
*
1 Quantitative analysis of fibre mixtures-Chemical Dissolution method
a) Identification of fibre – Warp Weft
b) Polyester % c) Cotton %
Polyester+Cotton Polyester+Cotton
69.2 30.8
NA NA
0.49 0.49
NA NA
0.12 0.12
NA NA 28 28
28 28 28 28
50 50 52 52
2 pH of aqueous extract of Textile Material
7.08 0.14 0.03 27 27 48
3 Dimensional Changes on soaking in water Relaxation Shrinkage (%)
Warp Weft
0.8 0.4
0.13 0.09
0.04 0.03
15 15
15 15
29 29
4 Dimensional Changes of Fabric
after Home Laundering Mechanical wash Shrinkage (%)
Warp Weft
2.3 1.1
0.45 0.18
0.12 0.05
21 20
21 21
39 39
5 Appearance of Fabrics after Home Laundering 4.0 0.0
0.5 rating 12 12 27
6 Skewness (%) Change in Fabric Resulting from Automatic Home Laundering
1.4 0.74 0.23 16 16 33
7 Colour fastness of Textile Materials to organic solvents a) Change in colour b) Staining on
Acetate/Cotton/Polyamide Polyester/Acrylic/wool
4-5
4-5/4-5/4-5 4-5/4-5/4-5
NA ½ grading 17 17 37
8
Quantitative analysis of fibre mixture by physical separation
a) Identification of fibre – Warp Weft
b) Polyester % c) Cotton %
Polyester Cotton 55.7 44.3
0.61 0.61
0.16 0.16
23 23
24 24
44 44
9
Determination of water repellency of fabrics by cone test Amount of leaked water (ml)
385.1 12.0 5.7 7 9 19
10 Moisture Content in cotton Textile materials (%) 6.4 0.67 0.22 15 15 40
11 Screening Test for Nickel release Positive NA NA 5 5 20 Remarks: * Total labs reported valid results in the respective method
NA: Not Applicable
Detection and elimination of Trivial Outliers:
From the extreme values theSuspected extreme values which satisfy Outlier and eliminated from performance evaluation. However, if it is not satisfy any one criteria, considered as ‘Qualified’ and included for performance evaluation
Criteria1: Suspected extreme value Criteria 2: Dixon’s Q test for detection of outlier at 5% level of significance
The list of such exclusions is placed in Table
Table 5: Details of Eliminations of Trivial Outliers from
S.No. Test
1 Determination of Moisture content in Cotton textile material
Total
Determination of Standard Deviation for Proficiency Assessment (
The robust average and the robust standard deviation reported by the participants were calculated for each of the test separately in accordance with the procedure given in ISO 13528:2005deviation (SS)” of homogeneity testing data was compared with the standard deviation of all the participants. If SS ≤ 0.3 σ1
robust standard deviation of values reported by Deviation for Proficiency Testing. That is
If SS > 0.3 σ1 , then the sample is considered as heterogeneous and Standard Deviation for Proficiency Assessment is calculated by adding allowance for heterogeneity of the sample as stipulated in ISO 13528:2005, by using the formula
Performance Evaluation of Participants:
The performance of the individual score technique given in ISO 13528:2005
where � is the test result reported by the standard deviation of the Proficiency Assessment
In case of Subjective test the deviation of laboratory result by more than ½ grade rating) compared to Assigned Value is taken as unsatisfactory (and outliers) and all other results are taken as satisfactory.
Detection and elimination of Trivial Outliers:
From the extreme values the Trivial Outliers were identified and eliminatedwhich satisfy both of the following criteria are treated as Trivial
Outlier and eliminated from performance evaluation. However, if it is not satisfy any one criteria, considered as ‘Qualified’ and included for performance evaluation
Criteria1: Suspected extreme value lies outside of the interval of ± 25% of Assigned ValueCriteria 2: Dixon’s Q test for detection of outlier at 5% level of significance
The list of such exclusions is placed in Table – 5.
: Details of Eliminations of Trivial Outliers from Analysis
Test Assigned Value
Result Reported
by the participant
Moisture content in Cotton textile 6.4% 1.3%
Total 1
Determination of Standard Deviation for Proficiency Assessment (
The robust average and the robust standard deviation (σ1) of all qualified values were calculated for each of the test separately in accordance
with the procedure given in ISO 13528:2005. Subsequently, the “between-samples standard )” of homogeneity testing data was compared with the standard deviation of all
1 , then the sample is considered as homogenous and the alues reported by all the participants is treated as Standard
Deviation for Proficiency Testing. That is σ = σ1
, then the sample is considered as heterogeneous and Standard Deviation for Proficiency Assessment is calculated by adding allowance for heterogeneity of the sample as stipulated in ISO 13528:2005, by using the formula
� � ���� � �
Performance Evaluation of Participants:
The performance of the individual participant was evaluated by adopting given in ISO 13528:2005, as per the following formula:
� � � ��
is the test result reported by the participant; � is the Assigned Value and standard deviation of the Proficiency Assessment
In case of Subjective test the deviation of laboratory result by more than ½ grade compared to Assigned Value is taken as unsatisfactory (and outliers) and all other
results are taken as satisfactory.
were identified and eliminated. both of the following criteria are treated as Trivial
Outlier and eliminated from performance evaluation. However, if it is not satisfy any one
lies outside of the interval of ± 25% of Assigned Value
Analysis
Result Reported
by the participant
Lab Code
1.3% 14009
Determination of Standard Deviation for Proficiency Assessment ( σ):
qualified values were calculated for each of the test separately in accordance
samples standard )” of homogeneity testing data was compared with the standard deviation of all
, then the sample is considered as homogenous and the is treated as Standard
, then the sample is considered as heterogeneous and Standard Deviation for Proficiency Assessment is calculated by adding allowance for heterogeneity of
was evaluated by adopting Robust Z
is the Assigned Value and σ is the
In case of Subjective test the deviation of laboratory result by more than ½ grade (0.5 compared to Assigned Value is taken as unsatisfactory (and outliers) and all other
Test wise performance evaluation is given in Annexure.
Interpretation of Performance comment:
Table – 6: Interpretation of Performance comment
Range
Objective Tests
│Z - Score
2 <│Z - Score
│Z - Score
Subjective Test
│Reported Value – Assigned Value
│Reported Value - Assigned Value
Outliers and Stragglers:
Overall performance of all the rare and far. The Outlier and Straggler Analysis is given in Table outliers and stragglers are listed in Table
General Advise to the
If a participant is found to be after thorough investigation of the root cause of the problem. In case be “Straggler”, the method of testing, personnel error, use of correct materials / equipments, maintenance of environmental ensure that the test results being reported for the concerned test parameters are satisfactory
Test wise performance evaluation is given in Annexure.
Interpretation of Performance comment:
Interpretation of Performance comment
Range Performance of Laboratory
Score│≤ 2 Satisfactory
Score│< 3 Straggler
Score│≥ 3 Outlier
Assigned Value │≤ ½ grade Satisfactory
Assigned Value │> ½ grade Outlier
Outliers and Stragglers:
Overall performance of all the participants is good. Outliers and Stragglers are very The Outlier and Straggler Analysis is given in Table – 7. Parameter
outliers and stragglers are listed in Table-8
General Advise to the Participants on the performance:
is found to be “Outlier”, necessary corrective action should be taken after thorough investigation of the root cause of the problem. In case a participant
the method of testing, personnel error, use of correct materials / equipments, maintenance of environmental conditions etc., are have to be reensure that the test results being reported for the concerned test parameters are satisfactory
Performance of Laboratory
Satisfactory
Straggler
Outlier
Satisfactory
Outlier
is good. Outliers and Stragglers are very Parameter-wise the
corrective action should be taken a participant is found to
the method of testing, personnel error, use of correct materials / conditions etc., are have to be re-examined to
ensure that the test results being reported for the concerned test parameters are satisfactory
Page 11 of 56
Table – 7: Outlier and Straggler Analysis
S.
No Test
No. of
Participants*
Valid
Results
No. of
Stragglers
% of
Stragglers
No. of
Outliers
% of
Outliers
1a Identification of fibres- Warp 50 50 0 0 3 6.0
Identification of fibres- Weft 50 50 0 0 2 4.0
1b
Quantitative analysis of fibre mixtures-Chemical Dissolution method
% Polyester 52 52 0 0 0 0
% Cotton 52 52 0 0 0 0
2 pH of aqueous extract 52 52 0 0 0 0
3a
Dimensional Changes on soaking in water - warp 29 29 1 3.4 0 0
3b -weft 29 29 1 3.4 0 0
4a
Dimensional Changes of Fabric after Home Laundering - warp 39 39 0 0 0 0
4b weft 39 39 0 0 1 2.6
5
Appearance of Fabrics after Repeated Home Laundering 29 29 0 0 0 0
6
Skewness Change in Fabric Resulting from Automatic Home Laundering 33 33 0 0 0 0
7
Colour fastness of Textile Materials to organic solvents Change in Colour 35 35 0 0 0 0
St on Acetate 35 35 0 0 0 0
St on Cotton 35 35 0 0 0 0
St on Nylon 35 35 0 0 0 0
St on Polyester 35 35 0 0 0 0
St on Acrylic 35 35 0 0 0 0
St on Wool 35 35 0 0 0 0
8 Identification of fibre-warp 45 45 0 0 2 4.4
-weft 45 45 0 0 1 2.2
Quantitative analysis of fibre mixture by physical separation % Polyester 45 44 0 0 1 2.2
% Cotton 45 44 0 0 1 2.2
9
Determination of water repellency of fabrics by cone test 19 19 0 0 1 5.3
10
Moisture Content in cotton Textile materials 40 40 2 5 1 2.5
11
Screening Test for Nickel release 20 20 0 0 0 0
Total 958 956 4 0.42 13 1.36
*Inclusive of results rejected as Gross error.
Page 12 of 56
Table – 8: List of Outliers and Stragglers
S. No Test Straggler Lab codes
Outlier Lab codes
1
Quantitative analysis of fibre mixtures-Chemical Dissolution method
a) Identifying nature of fibre –warp Weft
b) Percentage composition
Nil Nil Nil
14030, 14038, 14048 14038, 14048
Nil
2 pH of aqueous extract of Textile Material Nil Nil
3
Dimensional Changes on soaking in water Warp Weft
14013, 14015
Nil Nil
4
Dimensional Changes of Fabric after Home Laundering Warp Weft
Nil Nil
Nil 14045
5 Appearance of Fabrics after Repeated Home Laundering Nil Nil
6 Skewness Change in Fabric Resulting from Automatic Home Laundering Nil Nil
7 Colour fastness of Textile Materials to organic solvents Nil Nil
8
Quantitative analysis of fibre mixture by physical separation
a) Identifying nature of fibre Warp Weft
b) Percentage composition
Nil Nil Nil
14017,14023 14017 14023
9 Determination of water repellency of fabrics by cone test Nil 14021
10 Moisture Content in cotton Textile materials 14016,14052 14009
11 Screening Test for Nickel release Nil Nil Total 4 12
Page 13 of 56
Annexure
PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF PARTICIPANTS - TEST WISE
1a. Identification of Fibres
Assigned
Value
Warp ‘Polyester + Cotton’ OR ‘Polyester and Cotton blend ed’
Weft ‘Polyester + Cotton’ OR ‘Polyester and Cotton blend ed’
Lab code Warp Weft Test Method Remark on performance
14001 Polyester / Cotton Polyester / Cotton AATCC 20 Satisfactory(2)
14003 Polyester + Cotton Polyester + Cotton ISO 1833-11:2006 Satisfactory
14004 Polyester + Cotton Polyester + Cotton IS 667:1981 Satisfactory
14005 Polyester + Cotton Polyester + Cotton IS 667:1981(RA 2008) Satisfactory
14006 Polyester + Cotton Polyester + Cotton IS 667:1981(RA 2008) Satisfactory
14007 Polyester + Cotton Polyester + Cotton IS 667:1981(RA 2008) Satisfactory
14008 Cotton + Polyester Cotton + Polyester AATCC 20 Satisfactory(1)
14009 Polyester + Cotton Polyester + Cotton IS 667:1981(RA 2008) Satisfactory
14010 Polyester + Cotton Polyester + Cotton IS 667:1981(RA 2008) Satisfactory
14011 Polyester + Cotton Polyester + Cotton IS 667:1981(RA 2008) Satisfactory
14012 Cotton/Polyester Cotton/Polyester IS 667:1981(RA 2008) Satisfactory(2)
14013 Polyester + Cotton Polyester + Cotton IS 667:1981(RA 2008) Satisfactory
14014 Polyester + Cotton Polyester + Cotton IS 667:1981(RA 2008) Satisfactory
14015 Polyester + Cotton Polyester + Cotton IS 667:1981 Satisfactory
14016 Polyester-Cotton Polyester-Cotton ISO 1833:11:2006(E) Satisfactory
14017 Cotton/Polyester Cotton/Polyester AATCC 20 Satisfactory(2)
14018 Polyester + Cotton Polyester + Cotton IS 667:1981(RA 2008) Satisfactory
14019 Polyester + Cotton Polyester + Cotton IS 667:1981(RA 2008) Satisfactory
14020 Polyester + Cotton Polyester + Cotton ISO 1833 Satisfactory
14021 Polyester / Cotton Polyester / Cotton IS 667:1981 Satisfactory(2)
14022 Polyester + Cotton Polyester + Cotton IS 667:1981(RA 2008) Satisfactory
14023 Polyester + Cotton Polyester + Cotton IS 667 Satisfactory
14024 Cotton + Polyester Cotton + Polyester ISO 1833 Satisfactory(1)
14025 Cotton + Polyester Cotton + Polyester IS 667:1981(RA 2008) Satisfactory(1)
14026 Polyester + Cotton Polyester + Cotton IS 667:1981(RA 2008) Satisfactory
14027 Polyester + Cotton Polyester + Cotton IS 667:1981(RA 2008) Satisfactory
14028 Polyester + Cotton Polyester + Cotton IS 667:1981(RA 2008) Satisfactory
14029 Polyester + Cotton Polyester + Cotton IS 667:1981(RA 2008) Satisfactory
14030 Cellulose + Synthetic Cotton + Polyester IS 667:1981
Not Satisfactory (3)
14031 Polyester + Cotton Polyester + Cotton ISO 1833:11:2006(E) Satisfactory
14034 Polyester / Cotton Polyester / Cotton IS 667:1981 Satisfactory(2)
14035 Polyester + Cotton Polyester + Cotton ISO 1833:2006 Satisfactory
14036 Polyester + Cotton Polyester + Cotton IS 667:1981 Satisfactory
14037 Polyester-Cotton Polyester-Cotton IS 667:1981(RA 2008) Satisfactory(2)
14038 Poly / Cotton Poly / Cotton IS 667:1981(RA 2008) Not Satisfactory (3)
Page 14 of 56
Lab code Warp Weft Test Method Remark on performance
14039 Cotton/Polyester Cotton/Polyester ISO 1833 Satisfactory(2)
14040 Polyester & Cotton Polyester & Cotton IS 667:1981(RA 2003) Satisfactory(2)
14041 Polyester + Cotton Polyester + Cotton IS 667:1981(RA 2008) Satisfactory
14042 Polyester + Cotton Polyester + Cotton IS 667:1981(RA 2008) Satisfactory
14043 Polyester + Cotton Polyester + Cotton IS 667:1981(RA 2008) Satisfactory
14044 Polyester + Cotton Polyester + Cotton AATCC 20 Satisfactory
14046 Cotton + Polyester Cotton + Polyester IS 667 Satisfactory(1)
14047 Polyester / Cotton Polyester / Cotton ISO 1833 Satisfactory(2)
14048 Blended Blended IS 3416 Part 2:1999 (RA 2003)
Not Satisfactory (3)
14049 Cotton + Polyester Cotton + Polyester IS 667:1981(RA 2008) Satisfactory(1)
14051 Polyester + Cotton Polyester + Cotton IS 667:1981(RA 2008) Satisfactory
14052 Polyester / Cotton Polyester / Cotton In House Satisfactory(2)
14053 Polyester - Cotton Polyester - Cotton IS 667:1981(RA 2008) Satisfactory(2)
14055 Polyester + Cotton Polyester + Cotton IS 667:1981(RA 2008) Satisfactory
14056 Polyester + Cotton Polyester + Cotton IS 667:1981(RA 2008) Satisfactory No. of participants 50
Remarks:
(1) As per IS 11195:1985(RA 2007) “Specification for Blend Composition of Textiles”, the order of fibres is expected to be reported on the basis of dominance. Accordingly, it is expected to be reported as “Polyester + Cotton” and not “Cotton + Polyester”. However, performance is given as "Satisfactory” as nature of fibres have been identified correctly.
(2) It is a de-facto standard to report blend of fibres by using the symbol ‘p lus(+)’ and
non blend by ‘coma(,)’. Accordingly, the fibre identification is expected to be reported as "Polyester + Cotton". Since, using ‘slash(/) ’ misleads the interpretation as “OR” . i.e., Polyester or Cotton, it should be avoided. Similarly, using ‘hyphen(-) ’ also need to be avoided. However, performance is given as "Satisfactory”, though the participants reported in different ways
(3) participant coded 14048 reported simply “Blended” in both direction without indication
of actual fibres. Participant coded 14038 reported as Poly / Cotton. The name of the fibre must be reported in full like Polyamide, Polyester, Polyacrylonitrile, Poly Vinyl Chloride, Polyurethane, Polypropylene etc. “Poly” indicate the Polymerisation process in which the fibre was manufactured. Participant coded 14030 reported as Cellulose + Synthetic that also not acceptable. Hence, performance is given as “Not Satisfactory”.
(4) According to ISO/IEC 17043:2010(E), one of the purpose of the ILPT is educating the
participants based on the outcomes. Hence, the participants who reported in different ways are requested to follow universally accepted methods while reporting the results
Page 15 of 56
1b. Blend Composition - Polyester Content
Lab code Reported value (%) Test method adopted Z-
Score Performance
Remark
14001 68.9 AATCC 20A : 2012 -0.5 Satisfactory
14002 69.6 IS 3416:1988 0.7 Satisfactory
14003 68.2 ISO 1833-11:2006 -1.7 Satisfactory
14004 69.3 IS 3416:1988 (RA 2008) 0.2 Satisfactory
14005 70.0 IS 3416:1988 (RA 2008) 1.3 Satisfactory
14006 68.9 IS 3416:1988 (RA 2008) -0.5 Satisfactory
14007 70.2 IS 3416:1988 (RA 2008) 1.7 Satisfactory
14008 68.9 AATCC 20A : 2012 -0.5 Satisfactory
14009 69.7 IS 3416:1988 (RA 2008) 0.8 Satisfactory
14010 69.2 IS 3416:1988 (RA 2008) 0.0 Satisfactory
14011 69.3 IS 3416:1988 (RA 2008) 0.2 Satisfactory
14012 69.6 IS 3416:1988 (RA 2008) 0.7 Satisfactory
14013 69.6 IS 3416:1988 (RA 2008) 0.7 Satisfactory
14014 70.1 IS 3416:1988 (RA 2008) 1.5 Satisfactory
14015 69.7 IS 3416:1988 (RA 2008) 0.8 Satisfactory
14016 68.6 ISO 1833:11:2006(E) -1.0 Satisfactory
14017 69.5 AATCC 20A : 2012 0.5 Satisfactory
14018 70.0 IS 3416(Part 1):1988 (RA2008) 1.3 Satisfactory
14019 70.3 IS 3416:1988 (RA 2008) 1.8 Satisfactory
14020 69.3 ISO 1833:2006 0.2 Satisfactory
14021 69.4 IS 3416:1988 0.3 Satisfactory
14022 68.5 IS 3416:1988 -1.2 Satisfactory
14023 68.2 IS 3416:1988 -1.7 Satisfactory
14024 69.4 ISO 1833:11:2006(E) 0.3 Satisfactory
14025 69.1 IS 3416:1988 -0.2 Satisfactory
14026 70.0 IS 3416:1988 1.3 Satisfactory
14027 70.1 IS 3416:1988 1.5 Satisfactory
14028 68.5 IS 3416(Part 1):1988 (RA 2008) -1.2 Satisfactory
14029 68.7 IS 3416(Part 1):1988 (RA 2008) -0.8 Satisfactory
14030 69.2 IS 3416:1988 0.0 Satisfactory
14031 68.9 ISO 1833:11:2006(E) -0.4 Satisfactory
14034 69.2 IS 3416:1988 0.0 Satisfactory
14035 69.1 ISO 1833:2006 -0.3 Satisfactory
14036 68.6 IS 3416:1988 -1.0 Satisfactory
14037 69.4 IS 3416:1988 0.3 Satisfactory
14038 69.9 IS 3416:1988 1.1 Satisfactory
14039 68.5 ISO 1833:2006 -1.2 Satisfactory
14040 69.3 IS 3416(Part 1):1988 (RA 2003) 0.2 Satisfactory
14041 69.3 IS 3416(Part 1):1988 (RA 2008) 0.2 Satisfactory
14042 69.1 IS 3416(Part 1):1988 (RA 2008) -0.2 Satisfactory
14043 69.3 IS 3416(Part 1):1988 (RA 2008) 0.2 Satisfactory
Page 16 of 56
Lab code Reported value (%) Test method adopted Z-
Score Performance
Remark
14044 68.8 AATCC 20A : 2012 -0.7 Satisfactory
14046 70.2 IS 3416:1988 1.7 Satisfactory
14047 70.0 ISO 1833:2006 1.3 Satisfactory
14048 69.5 IS 3416(Part 2):1999(RA 2003) 0.5 Satisfactory
14049 68.1 IS 3416(Part 1):1988 (RA 2008) -1.8 Satisfactory
14050 69.0 IS 3416:1988 (RA 2008) -0.3 Satisfactory
14051 69.2 IS 3416(Part 1):1988 (RA 2008) 0.0 Satisfactory
14052 69.7 In House 0.8 Satisfactory
14053 69.5 IS 3416(Part 1):1988 (RA 2008) 0.5 Satisfactory
14055 70.0 IS 3416(Part 1):1988 (RA 2008) 1.3 Satisfactory
14056 68.9 IS 3416(Part 1):1988 (RA 2008) -0.5 Satisfactory
No. of participants 52 Maximum 70.3 Minimum 68.1 Mean 69.3
Std Deviation 0.5597 Median 69.3
SUMMARY
Robust Average = 69.31%
Robust SD for valid results reported by all participants (σ1 ) = 0.60%
Between sample SD of Homogeneity testing ( SS ) = 0.0969%
SD for PT Scheme with allowance for the heterogeneity if any (σ) = 0.60%
No heterogeneity observed
Assigned Value ( X ) = 69.2% SD of PT Scheme ( σσσσ ) = 0.60%
Page 17 of 56
1c. Blend Composition - Cotton Content
Lab code Reported value (%) Test method adopted Z-
Score Performance
Remark
14001 31.1 AATCC 20A : 2012 0.5 Satisfactory
14002 30.4 IS 3416:1988 -0.7 Satisfactory
14003 31.8 ISO 1833-11:2006 1.7 Satisfactory
14004 30.7 IS 3416:1988 (RA 2008) -0.2 Satisfactory
14005 30.0 IS 3416:1988 (RA 2008) -1.3 Satisfactory
14006 31.1 IS 3416:1988 (RA 2008) 0.5 Satisfactory
14007 29.8 IS 3416:1988 (RA 2008) -1.7 Satisfactory
14008 31.1 AATCC 20A : 2012 0.5 Satisfactory
14009 30.3 IS 3416:1988 (RA 2008) -0.8 Satisfactory
14010 30.8 IS 3416:1988 (RA 2008) 0.0 Satisfactory
14011 30.7 IS 3416:1988 (RA 2008) -0.2 Satisfactory
14012 30.4 IS 3416:1988 (RA 2008) -0.7 Satisfactory
14013 30.4 IS 3416:1988 (RA 2008) -0.7 Satisfactory
14014 29.9 IS 3416:1988 (RA 2008) -1.5 Satisfactory
14015 30.3 IS 3416:1988 (RA 2008) -0.8 Satisfactory
14016 31.4 ISO 1833:11:2006(E) 1.0 Satisfactory
14017 30.5 AATCC 20A : 2012 -0.5 Satisfactory
14018 30.0 IS 3416 (Part 1): 1988 (RA2008) -1.3 Satisfactory
14019 29.7 IS 3416:1988 (RA 2008) -1.8 Satisfactory
14020 30.7 ISO 1833:2006 -0.2 Satisfactory
14021 30.6 IS 3416:1988 -0.3 Satisfactory
14022 31.5 IS 3416:1988 1.2 Satisfactory
14023 31.8 IS 3416:1988 1.7 Satisfactory
14024 30.6 ISO 1833:11:2006(E) -0.3 Satisfactory
14025 30.9 IS 3416:1988 0.2 Satisfactory
14026 30.0 IS 3416:1988 -1.3 Satisfactory
14027 29.9 IS 3416:1988 -1.5 Satisfactory
14028 31.5 IS 3416(Part 1):1988 (RA 2008) 1.2 Satisfactory
14029 31.3 IS 3416(Part 1):1988 (RA 2008) 0.8 Satisfactory
14030 30.8 IS 3416:1988 0.0 Satisfactory
14031 31.1 ISO 1833:11:2006(E) 0.4 Satisfactory
14034 30.8 IS 3416:1988 0.0 Satisfactory
14035 31.0 ISO 1833:2006 0.2 Satisfactory
14036 31.4 IS 3416:1988 1.0 Satisfactory
14037 30.6 IS 3416:1988 -0.3 Satisfactory
14038 30.1 IS 3416:1988 -1.1 Satisfactory
14039 31.5 ISO 1833 1.2 Satisfactory
14040 30.7 IS 3416(Part 1):1988 (RA 2008) -0.2 Satisfactory
14041 30.7 IS 3416(Part 1):1988 (RA 2008) -0.2 Satisfactory
14042 30.9 IS 3416(Part 1):1988 (RA 2008) 0.2 Satisfactory
Page 18 of 56
Lab code Reported value (%) Test method adopted Z-
Score Performance
Remark
14043 30.7 IS 3416(Part 1):1988 (RA 2008) -0.2 Satisfactory
14044 31.2 AATCC 20A : 2012 0.7 Satisfactory
14046 29.8 IS 3416:1988 -1.7 Satisfactory
14047 30.0 ISO 1833 -1.3 Satisfactory
14048 30.5 IS 3416 (Part 2):1999(RA 2003) -0.5 Satisfactory
14049 31.9 IS 3416 (Part 1):1988 (RA 2008) 1.8 Satisfactory
14050 31.0 IS 3416:1988 (RA 2008) 0.3 Satisfactory
14051 30.8 IS 3416 (Part 1):1988 (RA 2008) 0.0 Satisfactory
14052 30.3 In House -0.8 Satisfactory
14053 30.5 IS 3416 (Part 1):1988 (RA 2008) -0.5 Satisfactory
14055 30.0 IS 3416 (Part 1):1988 (RA 2008) -1.3 Satisfactory
14056 31.1 IS 3416 (Part 1):1988 (RA 2008) 0.5 Satisfactory
No. of participants 52 Maximum 31.9 Minimum 29.7 Mean 30.7 Std Deviation 0.5597 Median 30.7
SUMMARY
Robust Average = 30.69% Robust SD for valid results reported by all participants (σ1 ) = 0.60%
Between sample SD of Homogeneity testing ( SS ) = 0.0969%
SD for PT Scheme with allowance for the heterogeneity if any (σ) = 0.60%
No heterogeneity observed
Assigned Value ( X ) = 30.8% SD of PT Scheme ( σσσσ ) = 0.60%
-2.0
-1.0
0.0
1.0
2.0
14
00
1
14
00
2
14
00
3
14
00
4
14
00
5
14
00
6
14
00
7
14
00
8
14
00
9
14
01
0
14
01
1
14
01
2
14
01
3
14
01
4
14
01
5
Z -
Sco
re
Blend Composition
-2.0
-1.5
-1.0
-0.5
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
14
00
1
14
00
2
14
00
3
14
00
4
14
00
5
14
00
6
14
00
7
14
00
8
14
00
9
14
01
0
14
01
1
14
01
2
14
01
3
14
01
4
14
01
5
Z -
Sco
re
Blend Composition
14
01
5
14
01
6
14
01
7
14
01
8
14
01
9
14
02
0
14
02
1
14
02
2
14
02
3
14
02
4
14
02
5
14
02
6
14
02
7
14
02
8
14
02
9
14
03
0
14
03
1
14
03
4
14
03
5
14
03
6
14
03
7
14
03
8
14
03
9
14
04
0
Lab Code
Blend Composition - Polyester Content
14
01
5
14
01
6
14
01
7
14
01
8
14
01
9
14
02
0
14
02
1
14
02
2
14
02
3
14
02
4
14
02
5
14
02
6
14
02
7
14
02
8
14
02
9
14
03
0
14
03
1
14
03
4
14
03
5
14
03
6
14
03
7
14
03
8
14
03
9
14
04
0
Lab Code
Blend Composition - Cotton Content
Page 19 of 56
14
04
0
14
04
1
14
04
2
14
04
3
14
04
4
14
04
6
14
04
7
14
04
8
14
04
9
14
05
0
14
05
1
14
05
2
14
05
3
14
05
5
14
05
6
14
04
0
14
04
1
14
04
2
14
04
3
14
04
4
14
04
6
14
04
7
14
04
8
14
04
9
14
05
0
14
05
1
14
05
2
14
05
3
14
05
5
14
05
6
Page 20 of 56
2. pH of aqueous Extract It has been observed that performance of participants reported from pH 6.3 to 7.7, (Range = 1.4pH) all are Satisfactory. This implies that Acidic side pH 6.3 and Alkaline side pH 7.7, both are equal which is contradiction to Chemistry. This variation is due to the pH of extracting medium ie., distilled water and the temperature at which the measurement is made. Since, the pH is a function of the pH of extracting medium and temperature, the pH values of each laboratory is regressed by the reported pH of aqueous extract, temperature at which pH was measured and pH of distilled water used Assigned Value: 27 accredited participants contributed for the assigned value which is the robust average of estimated values using their regressed equation
pH = 5.0928 + 0.3582 (pH of extracting solution) – 0.0155(temperature in °C). The range of pH values reported by accredited participants is reduced from 0.81pH to 0.54pH and the robust average is 7.08pH. Performance Evaluation: The entire group of 52 participants was evaluated for performance using the estimated pH values derived by the their regressed equation
pH = 5.6408 + 0.3339 (pH of extracting solution) – 0.0331 (temperature in °C) The estimated pH is given in the last column. It varies from 6.71 to 7.26 only. The range of pH values reported by all the participants is reduced from 1.4 to 0.55.
Lab code Reported
pH value
pH of extracting
medium
(ie., distilled water)
temp °C Estimated
pH
14001 6.80 6.50 25.0 7.03
14003 6.70 6.12 31.2 6.80
14004 7.10 6.40 23.5 7.02
14005 6.90 6.55 24.3 7.06
14006 7.20 7.05 25.0 7.23
14007 6.74 6.60 25.0 7.07
14008 6.94 5.74 23.5 6.78
14009 6.85 6.63 28.0 7.03
14010 7.20 7.11 26.8 7.22
14011 7.30 6.80 26.0 7.13
14012 7.30 6.80 25.2 7.14
14013 6.75 6.85 25.2 7.16
14014 7.20 6.72 27.5 7.07
14015 6.70 6.20 25.0 6.93
14016 7.01 6.14 25.0 6.90
14017 6.70 6.90 23.6 7.20
14018 7.12 7.00 25.1 7.21
14019 7.20 7.00 25.0 7.21
14020 6.80 6.00 25.0 6.85
14022 7.10 6.30 20.1 7.04
14023 6.30 6.20 25.0 6.93
Page 21 of 56
Lab code Reported
pH value
pH of extracting
medium
(ie., distilled water)
temp °C Estimated
pH
14024 7.21 6.40 20.4 7.07
14025 7.00 6.80 25.0 7.14
14026 6.80 6.60 24.0 7.08
14027 7.11 6.95 25.0 7.19
14029 7.21 6.60 26.5 7.05
14030 7.30 6.60 21.2 7.13
14031 7.31 5.89 20.7 6.88
14033 7.65 6.48 21.0 7.09
14034 6.75 6.58 27.0 7.03
14035 7.00 6.15 25.0 6.91
14036 6.90 6.70 22.0 7.15
14037 7.30 7.00 27.0 7.18
14038 7.24 6.72 25.6 7.10
14039 6.81 6.51 25.0 7.04
14041 7.15 6.90 25.0 7.18
14042 6.90 6.50 26.0 7.02
14043 7.15 6.80 25.0 7.14
14044 6.82 6.40 23.1 7.03
14045 6.90 6.70 27.0 7.07
14047 6.50 5.51 23.2 6.71
14048 7.06 6.50 30.0 6.96
14050 7.18 7.12 25.0 7.26
14051 7.30 7.10 25.0 7.25
14052 6.90 6.81 25.0 7.14
14053 7.30 7.00 27.0 7.18
14055 7.03 7.00 25.0 7.21
14056 7.15 6.50 25.0 7.03
No. of participants 48 48 48 48
Maximum 7.65 7.12 31.20 7.26
Minimum 6.30 5.51 20.10 6.71
Range 1.35 1.61 11.10 0.55
Mean 7.02 6.59 24.93 7.07 Std. Deviation 0.25 0.37 2.17 0.13
Median 7.05 6.60 25.00 7.07
Page 22 of 56
Lab code Estimated pH value
Test method adopted Z- Score
Performance Remark
14001 7.03 ISO 3071:2005 -0.11 Satisfactory
14003 6.80 IS 1390:1983 (RA 2004) -0.60 Satisfactory
14004 7.02 IS 1390:1983 (RA 2004) -0.13 Satisfactory
14005 7.06 IS 1390:1983 (RA 2004) -0.04 Satisfactory
14006 7.23 IS 1390:1983 (RA 2004) 0.32 Satisfactory
14007 7.07 IS 1390:1983 (RA 2004) -0.02 Satisfactory
14008 6.78 ISO 3071:2005 -0.64 Satisfactory
14009 7.03 IS 1390:1983 (RA 2004) -0.11 Satisfactory
14010 7.22 IS 1390:1983 (RA 2004) 0.30 Satisfactory
14011 7.13 IS 1390:1983 (RA 2004) 0.11 Satisfactory
14012 7.14 IS 1390:1983 (RA 2004) 0.13 Satisfactory
14013 7.16 IS 1390:1983 (RA 2004) 0.17 Satisfactory
14014 7.07 IS 1390:1983 (RA 2004) -0.02 Satisfactory
14015 6.93 IS 1390:1983 (RA 2004) -0.32 Satisfactory
14016 6.90 ISO 3071:2005 -0.38 Satisfactory
14017 7.20 ISO 3071:2005 0.26 Satisfactory
14018 7.21 IS 1390:1983 (RA 2004) 0.28 Satisfactory
14019 7.21 IS 1390:1983 (RA 2004) 0.28 Satisfactory
14020 6.85 ISO 3071:2005 -0.49 Satisfactory
14022 7.04 IS 1390:1983 (RA 2004) -0.09 Satisfactory
14023 6.93 ISO 3071:2005 -0.32 Satisfactory
14024 7.07 ISO 3071:2005 -0.02 Satisfactory
14025 7.14 IS 1390:1983 (RA 2004) 0.13 Satisfactory
14026 7.08 IS 1390:1983 (RA 2004) 0.00 Satisfactory
14027 7.19 IS 1390:1983 (RA 2004) 0.23 Satisfactory
14029 7.05 IS 1390:1983 (RA 2004) -0.06 Satisfactory
14030 7.13 IS 1390:1983 (RA 2004) 0.11 Satisfactory
14031 6.88 ISO 3071:2005 -0.43 Satisfactory
14033 7.09 ISO 3071:2005 0.02 Satisfactory
14034 7.03 IS 1390:1983 (RA 2004) -0.11 Satisfactory
14035 6.91 ISO 3071:2005 -0.36 Satisfactory
14036 7.15 IS 1390:1983 (RA 2004) 0.15 Satisfactory
14037 7.18 IS 1390:1983 (RA 2004) 0.21 Satisfactory
14038 7.10 IS 1390:1983 (RA 2004) 0.04 Satisfactory
14039 7.04 ISO 3071 -0.09 Satisfactory
14041 7.18 IS 1390:1983 (RA 2004) 0.21 Satisfactory
14042 7.02 IS 1390:1983 (RA 2004) -0.13 Satisfactory
14043 7.14 IS 1390:1983 (RA 2004) 0.13 Satisfactory
14044 7.03 ISO 3071 : 2005 -0.11 Satisfactory
14045 7.07 ISO 3071 -0.02 Satisfactory
14047 6.71 ISO 3071 -0.79 Satisfactory
Page 23 of 56
Lab code Estimated pH value
Test method adopted Z- Score
Performance Remark
14048 6.96 IS 1390:1983(RA 2004) -0.26 Satisfactory
14050 7.26 IS 1390:1983 (RA 2004) 0.38 Satisfactory
14051 7.25 IS 1390:1983(RA 2009) 0.36 Satisfactory
14052 7.14 ISO 3071:2005 0.13 Satisfactory
14053 7.18 IS 1390:1983 (RA 2004) 0.21 Satisfactory
14055 7.21 IS 1390:1983 (RA 2004) 0.28 Satisfactory
14056 7.03 IS 1390:1983 (RA 2004) -0.11 Satisfactory
No. of participants 48 Maximum 7.26 Minimum 6.71 Mean 7.07
Std Deviation 0.1286 Median 7.07
SUMMARY
Robust Average = 7.08
Robust SD for valid results reported by all participants (σ1 ) = 0.12
Between sample SD of Homogeneity testing ( SS ) = 0.45
SD for PT Scheme with allowance for the heterogeneity if any (σ) = 0.47
No heterogeneity observed
Assigned Value ( X ) = 7.08 SD of PT Scheme ( σσσσ ) = 0.47
The participants coded 14002, 14021, 14040 and 14046 have not reported the numerical value of the pH of extracting solution. Hence they were not included to derive the regression equations. However, their performance is evaluated on their reported value with respect to the Assigned Value and SD of the remaining participants given in the summary.
Lab
code
Reported
pH value
pH of
extracting
solution
temp
°C Test method
Z- Score
Performance Remark
14002 6.9 Not indicated 25.0 IS 1390:1983 -0.38 Satisfactory
14021 7.1 yes 25.0
IS 1390:1983
(RA 2004) 0.04 Satisfactory
14040 7.24 yes 33.5
IS 1390:1983
(RA 2004) 0.34 Satisfactory
14046 6.5 Grade-3 25.0 ISO 3071 -1.23 Satisfactory
-1.00
-0.80
-0.60
-0.40
-0.20
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
14
00
1
14
00
3
14
00
4
14
00
5
14
00
6
14
00
7
14
00
8
14
00
9
14
01
0
14
01
1
14
01
2
14
01
3
14
01
4
Z -
Sco
re
14
01
4
14
01
5
14
01
6
14
01
7
14
01
8
14
01
9
14
02
0
14
02
2
14
02
3
14
02
4
14
02
5
14
02
6
14
02
7
14
02
9
14
03
0
14
03
1
14
03
3
14
03
4
14
03
5
14
03
6
14
03
7
14
03
8
14
03
9
Lab Code
pH of aqueous Extract
Page 24 of 56
14
03
9
14
04
1
14
04
2
14
04
3
14
04
4
14
04
5
14
04
7
14
04
8
14
05
0
14
05
1
14
05
2
14
05
3
14
05
5
14
05
6
Page 25 of 56
3a. Dimensional Change to soaking in water Relaxation Shrinkage (%) - Warp
Lab code Reported
value (%)
Test method adopted Z- Score Performance Remark
14002 0.80 IS 2977:1989 0.00
14004 0.90 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) 0.67
14005 0.90 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) 0.67
14006 0.60 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) -1.33
14007 0.90 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) 0.67
14009 1.10 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) 2.00
14010 0.90 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) 0.67
14011 0.80 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) 0.00
14013 0.40 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) -2.67 Straggler
14014 0.64 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) -1.07
14015 1.00 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) 1.33
14018 0.70 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) -0.67
14019 0.80 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) 0.00
14025 0.70 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) -0.67
14026 0.90 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) 0.67
14027 0.90 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) 0.67
14028 0.90 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) 0.67
14030 0.70 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) -0.67
14036 0.70 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) -0.67
14037 0.60 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) -1.33
14040 0.90 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) 0.67
14041 0.70 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) -0.67
14042 0.90 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) 0.67
14043 0.80 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) 0.00
14050 0.60 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) -1.33
14051 0.60 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) -1.33
14052 0.60 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) -1.33
14053 0.60 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) -1.33
14056 0.80 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) 0.00
No. of participants 29 Maximum 1.10 Minimum 0.40 Mean 0.77 Std Deviation 0.1547 Median 0.80
Page 26 of 56
SUMMARY
Robust Average = 0.77 Robust SD for valid results reported by all participants (σ1 ) = 0.15
Between sample SD of Homogeneity testing ( SS ) = 0.00
SD for PT Scheme with allowance for the heterogeneity if any (σ) = 0.15
No heterogeneity observed
Assigned Value ( X ) = 0.8 SD of PT Scheme ( σσσσ ) = 0.15
Page 27 of 56
3b. Dimensional Change to soaking in water Relaxation Shrinkage (%) - Weft
Lab code Reported value (%) Test method adopted Z- Score Performance
Remark
14002 0.4 IS 2977:1989 0.00
14004 0.6 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) 1.67
14005 0.4 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) 0.00
14006 0.3 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) -0.83
14007 0.4 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) 0.00
14009 0.2 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) -1.67
14010 0.6 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) 1.67
14011 0.3 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) -0.83
14013 0.6 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) 1.67
14014 0.4 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) 0.17
14015 0.7 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) 2.50 Straggler
14018 0.4 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) 0.00
14019 0.4 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) 0.00
14025 0.3 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) -0.83
14026 0.3 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) -0.83
14027 0.6 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) 1.67
14028 0.3 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) -0.83
14030 0.2 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) -1.67
14036 0.4 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) 0.00
14037 0.3 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) -0.83
14040 0.3 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) -0.83
14041 0.4 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) 0.00
14042 0.5 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) 0.83
14043 0.4 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) 0.00
14050 0.4 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) 0.00
14051 0.4 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) 0.00
14052 0.4 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) 0.00
14053 0.3 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) -0.83
14056 0.4 IS 2977:1989 (RA 2005) 0.00
No. of participants 29 Maximum 0.70 Minimum 0.20 Mean 0.40 Std Deviation 0.1225 Median 0.40
Page 28 of 56
SUMMARY
Robust Average = 0.39 Robust SD for valid results reported by all participants (σ1 ) = 0.12
Between sample SD of Homogeneity testing ( SS ) = 0.000
SD for PT Scheme with allowance for the heterogeneity if any (σ) = 0.12
No heterogeneity observed
Assigned Value ( X ) = 0.4 SD of PT Scheme ( σσσσ ) = 0.12
Remark: The test method, ISO 6330-1984 “Domestic washing and drying procedures for textile testing” involves mechanical action on test specimen and hence is not the test ‘Dimensional Change to soaking in water’. The results reported by participants coded 1420, 1424, 1431 and 1447 using ISO 6330 method are excluded from evaluation.
-3.00
-2.00
-1.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
14
00
2
14
00
4
14
00
5
14
00
6
14
00
7
14
00
9
14
01
0
14
01
1
Z -
Sco
re
Dimensional Change
-2.00
-1.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
14
00
2
14
00
4
14
00
5
14
00
6
14
00
7
14
00
9
14
01
0
14
01
1
Z -
Sco
re
Dimensional Change
14
01
3
14
01
4
14
01
5
14
01
8
14
01
9
14
02
5
14
02
6
14
02
7
14
02
8
14
03
0
14
03
6
14
03
7
14
04
0
Lab Code
Dimensional Change - Relaxation Shrinkage - Warp
14
01
3
14
01
4
14
01
5
14
01
8
14
01
9
14
02
5
14
02
6
14
02
7
14
02
8
14
03
0
14
03
6
14
03
7
14
04
0
Lab Code
Dimensional Change - Relaxation Shrinkage - Weft
Page 29 of 56
14
04
1
14
04
2
14
04
3
14
05
0
14
05
1
14
05
2
14
05
3
14
05
6
Warp
14
04
1
14
04
2
14
04
3
14
05
0
14
05
1
14
05
2
14
05
3
14
05
6
Weft
Page 30 of 56
4a. Dimensional Change (Shrinkage) to Home Launderi ng-Warp
Lab code Reported value (%) Test method adopted Z-
Score Performance
Remark
14001 2.0 AATCC 135:2010 -0.68 Satisfactory
14003 2.8 AATCC 135:2010 1.14 Satisfactory
14004 2.8 AATCC 135:2012 1.14 Satisfactory
14005 2.0 AATCC 135:2010 -0.68 Satisfactory
14006 2.4 AATCC 135:2012 0.23 Satisfactory
14007 2.1 AATCC 135:2010 -0.45 Satisfactory
14008 1.7 AATCC 135:2012 -1.36 Satisfactory
14009 2.6 AATCC 135:2012 0.68 Satisfactory
14010 2.0 AATCC 135:2012 -0.68 Satisfactory
14012 2.4 AATCC 135:2010 0.23 Satisfactory
14015 1.9 AATCC 135:2010 -0.91 Satisfactory
14016 1.6 ISO 5077:2007 ISO 6330:2012 -1.59 Satisfactory
14017 2.0 AATCC 135:2012 -0.68 Satisfactory
14020 2.5 AATCC 135 0.45 Satisfactory
14022 2.6 AATCC 135:2010 0.68 Satisfactory
14023 2.1 AATCC 135:2010 -0.45 Satisfactory
14024 2.5 AATCC 135 0.45 Satisfactory
14025 1.8 AATCC 135:2010 -1.14 Satisfactory
14026 1.8 AATCC 135:2010 -1.14 Satisfactory
14028 2.2 AATCC 135:2010 -0.23 Satisfactory
14029 2.8 AATCC 135:2010 1.14 Satisfactory
14030 2.6 AATCC:135 0.68 Satisfactory
14031 2.5 AATCC 135:2010 0.45 Satisfactory
14033 2.1 AATCC 135:2012 OPTION 1 -0.57 Satisfactory
14035 2.8 AATCC 135:2012 1.14 Satisfactory
14036 2.1 AATCC 135 -0.45 Satisfactory
14039 1.6 AATCC 135 -1.59 Satisfactory
14040 2.2 AATCC 135 -0.23 Satisfactory
14041 2.0 AATCC 135:2010 -0.68 Satisfactory
14042 2.5 AATCC 135:2010 0.45 Satisfactory
14044 2.0 AATCC 135:2010 -0.68 Satisfactory
14045 2.2 AATCC 135 -0.23 Satisfactory
14046 2.0 AATCC 135 -0.68 Satisfactory
14047 2.7 AATCC 135 0.91 Satisfactory
14051 2.1 AATCC 135:2010 -0.45 Satisfactory
14052 1.6 ISO 5077:2007 ISO 6330:2012 -1.59 Satisfactory
14054 2.1 AATCC 135:2010 -0.45 Satisfactory
14055 2.2 AATCC 135:2010 -0.23 Satisfactory
14056 2.7 AATCC 135:2010 0.91 Satisfactory
Page 31 of 56
No. of participants 39 Maximum 2.80 Minimum 1.60 Mean 2.22 Std Deviation 0.360 Median 2.10
SUMMARY
Robust Average = 2.22
Robust SD for valid results reported by all participants (σ1 ) = 0.40
Between sample SD of Homogeneity testing ( SS ) = 0.1735
SD for PT Scheme with allowance for the heterogeneity if any (σ) = 0.44
Heterogeneity Accounted
Assigned Value ( X ) = 2.3 SD of PT Scheme ( σσσσ ) = 0.44
Page 32 of 56
Lab code Reported
value (%)
Test method adopted Z- Score
Performance Remark
14001 0.8 AATCC 135:2010 -1.00 Satisfactory
14003 1.4 AATCC 135:2010 1.00 Satisfactory
14004 1.3 AATCC 135:2012 0.67 Satisfactory
14005 0.9 AATCC 135:2010 -0.67 Satisfactory
14006 1.1 AATCC 135:2012 0.00 Satisfactory
14007 1.2 AATCC 135:2010 0.33 Satisfactory
14008 1.0 AATCC 135:2012 -0.33 Satisfactory
14009 1.2 AATCC 135:2012 0.33 Satisfactory
14010 1.2 AATCC 135:2012 0.33 Satisfactory
14012 1.2 AATCC 135:2010 0.33 Satisfactory
14015 0.8 AATCC 135:2010 -1.00 Satisfactory
14016 0.8 ISO 5077:2007 ISO 6330:2012 -1.00 Satisfactory
14017 0.9 AATCC 135:2012 -0.67 Satisfactory
14020 1.1 AATCC 135 0.00 Satisfactory
14022 1.5 AATCC 135:2010 1.33 Satisfactory
14023 0.8 AATCC 135:2010 -1.00 Satisfactory
14024 1.2 AATCC 135 0.33 Satisfactory
14025 0.9 AATCC 135:2010 -0.67 Satisfactory
14026 0.8 AATCC 135:2010 -1.00 Satisfactory
14028 1.2 AATCC 135:2010 0.33 Satisfactory
14029 1.1 AATCC 135:2010 0.00 Satisfactory
14030 1.6 AATCC:135 1.67 Satisfactory
14031 1.3 AATCC 135:2010 0.67 Satisfactory
14033 0.9 AATCC 135:2012 OPTION 1 -0.67 Satisfactory
14035 1.2 AATCC 135:2012 0.33 Satisfactory
14036 1.0 AATCC 135 -0.33 Satisfactory
14039 1.0 AATCC 135 -0.33 Satisfactory
14040 1.0 AATCC 135 -0.33 Satisfactory
14041 0.9 AATCC 135:2010 -0.67 Satisfactory
14042 1.1 AATCC 135:2010 0.00 Satisfactory
14044 0.8 AATCC 135:2010 -1.00 Satisfactory
14045 0.2 AATCC 135 -3.00 Outlier
14046 1.0 AATCC 135 -0.33 Satisfactory
14047 1.1 AATCC 135 0.00 Satisfactory
14051 1.0 AATCC 135:2010 -0.33 Satisfactory
14052 0.8 ISO 5077:2007 ISO 6330:2012 -1.00 Satisfactory
14054 0.8 AATCC 135:2010 -1.00 Satisfactory
14055 1.0 AATCC 135:2010 -0.33 Satisfactory
14056 1.1 AATCC 135:2010 0.00 Satisfactory
4b. Dimensional Change (Shrinkage) to Home Launderi ng-Weft
Page 33 of 56
No. of participants 39 Maximum 1.6 Minimum 0.2 Mean 1.03
Std Deviation 0.244 Median 1.00
SUMMARY
Robust Average = 1.03 Robust SD for valid results reported by all participants (σ1 ) = 0.21
Between sample SD of Homogeneity testing ( SS ) = 0.2215
SD for PT Scheme with allowance for the heterogeneity if any (σ) = 0.30
Heterogeneity Accounted
Assigned Value ( X ) = 1.1 SD of PT Scheme ( σσσσ ) = 0.30
-2.00
-1.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
14
00
1
14
00
3
14
00
4
14
00
5
14
00
6
14
00
7
14
00
8
14
00
9
14
01
0
14
01
2
14
01
5
Z -
Sco
re
Dimensional Change
-4.00
-3.00
-2.00
-1.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
14
00
1
14
00
3
14
00
4
14
00
5
14
00
6
14
00
7
14
00
8
14
00
9
14
01
0
14
01
2
14
01
5
Z -
Sco
re
Dimensional Change
14
01
5
14
01
6
14
01
7
14
02
0
14
02
2
14
02
3
14
02
4
14
02
5
14
02
6
14
02
8
14
02
9
14
03
0
14
03
1
14
03
3
14
03
5
14
03
6
14
03
9
14
04
0
14
04
1
Lab Code
Dimensional Change - Shrinkage to Home Laundering
14
01
5
14
01
6
14
01
7
14
02
0
14
02
2
14
02
3
14
02
4
14
02
5
14
02
6
14
02
8
14
02
9
14
03
0
14
03
1
14
03
3
14
03
5
14
03
6
14
03
9
14
04
0
14
04
1
Lab Code
Dimensional Change - Shrinkage to Home Laundering
Page 34 of 56
14
04
1
14
04
2
14
04
4
14
04
5
14
04
6
14
04
7
14
05
1
14
05
2
14
05
4
14
05
5
14
05
6
Shrinkage to Home Laundering - Warp
14
04
1
14
04
2
14
04
4
14
04
5
14
04
6
14
04
7
14
05
1
14
05
2
14
05
4
14
05
5
14
05
6
Shrinkage to Home Laundering - Weft
Page 35 of 56
Lab code Reported value (Rating)
Test method adopted
Performance Remark
14001 4.5 AATCC 124:2011 Satisfactory 14003 4.5 AATCC 124:2009 Satisfactory 14004 4.0 AATCC 124:2011 Satisfactory 14005 3.5 AATCC 124:2009 Satisfactory 14007 3.5 AATCC 124:2009 Satisfactory 14008 4.0 AATCC 124 Satisfactory 14012 4.0 AATCC 124:2009 Satisfactory 14015 4.0 AATCC 124:2009 Satisfactory 14016 3.5 AATCC 124:1996 Satisfactory 14017 4.5 AATCC 124:2011 Satisfactory 14020 4.0 AATCC 124 Satisfactory 14022 4.0 AATCC 124:2009 Satisfactory 14024 3.5 AATCC 124 Satisfactory 14025 4.0 AATCC 124:2009 Satisfactory 14026 4.0 AATCC 124:2009 Satisfactory 14028 4.0 AATCC 124:2009 Satisfactory 14030 3.5 AATCC 124:2011 Satisfactory
14031 3.8 AATCC 124:2009 Satisfactory 14033 3.8 AATCC 124:2011 Satisfactory 14035 3.5 AATCC 124:2011 Satisfactory 14039 4.0 AATCC 124 Satisfactory 14040 3.5 AATCC 124 Satisfactory 14044 4.0 AATCC 124 Satisfactory
14046 4.0 AATCC 124 Satisfactory 14047 4.0 AATCC 124 Satisfactory 14051 4.0 AATCC 124:2010 Satisfactory 14052 3.5 AATCC 124:2009 Satisfactory 14054 4.0 AATCC 124:2009 Satisfactory 14055 3.5 AATCC 124:2009 Satisfactory
No. of participants 29 Median 4
Rating Frequency
3.5 9
3.8 2
4.0 15
4.5 3
Total 29
Mode 4.0
Assigned Value 4.0
5. Appearance after Home Laundering
Page 36 of 56
Lab code Reported value (%) Test method adopted Z-
Score Performance
Remark
14001 0.8 AATCC 179:2004 -0.89 Satisfactory 14003 1.0 AATCC 179 : 2010 -0.60 Satisfactory 14004 0.6 AATCC 179:2012 -1.19 Satisfactory 14005 1.0 AATCC 179:2010 -0.60 Satisfactory 14007 1.1 AATCC 179:2010 -0.45 Satisfactory 14008 0.6 AATCC 179 -1.19 Satisfactory 14009 2.2 AATCC : 179 1.19 Satisfactory 14010 1.2 AATCC:179:2010 -0.30 Satisfactory 14012 0.5 AATCC 179:2010 -1.34 Satisfactory 14015 1.1 AATCC 179:2010 -0.45 Satisfactory 14016 1.6 AATCC 179:1996 0.30 Satisfactory 14017 2.3 AATCC 179:2012 1.34 Satisfactory 14020 2.2 AATCC 179 1.19 Satisfactory 14022 1.2 AATCC 179:2010 -0.30 Satisfactory 14023 2.5 AATCC 179:2010 1.64 Satisfactory 14024 2.0 AATCC 179 Option - 1 0.89 Satisfactory 14025 1.7 AATCC 179:2010 0.45 Satisfactory 14026 1.1 AATCC 179:2010 -0.45 Satisfactory 14028 1.4 AATCC 179:2010 0.00 Satisfactory 14030 0.6 AATCC 179 -1.19 Satisfactory 14031 1.9 AATCC 179:2010 0.74 Satisfactory 14035 2.0 AATCC 179:2012 0.89 Satisfactory 14036 1.1 AATCC 179 -0.45 Satisfactory 14039 0.9 AATCC 179 -0.74 Satisfactory 14040 1.0 AATCC 179 -0.60 Satisfactory 14044 1.1 AATCC 179 -0.45 Satisfactory 14045 2.6 AATCC 179 1.79 Satisfactory 14046 1.3 AATCC 179 -0.15 Satisfactory 14047 2.1 AATCC 179 1.04 Satisfactory 14051 1.2 AATCC 179:2010 -0.30 Satisfactory 14052 1.6 AATCC 179:2010 0.30 Satisfactory 14054 0.8 AATCC 179:2010 -0.89 Satisfactory 14055 1.5 AATCC 179:2010 0.15 Satisfactory
No. of participants 33 Maximum 2.60 Minimum 0.50 Mean 1.39
Std Deviation 0.58989 Median 1.20
6. Skewness of fabric after washing
Page 37 of 56
SUMMARY
Robust Average = 1.35
Robust SD for valid results reported by all participants (σ1 ) = 0.59 Between sample SD of Homogeneity testing ( SS ) = 0.32
SD for PT Scheme with allowance for the heterogeneity if any ( σ ) = 0.67
Heterogeneity Accounted
Assigned Value ( X ) = 1.4 SD of PT Scheme ( σσσσ ) = 0.67
-1.50
-1.00
-0.50
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.001
40
01
14
00
3
14
00
4
14
00
5
14
00
7
14
00
8
14
00
9
14
01
0
14
01
2
Z -
Sco
re
Skewness of fabric after washing
14
01
2
14
01
5
14
01
6
14
01
7
14
02
0
14
02
2
14
02
3
14
02
4
14
02
5
14
02
6
14
02
8
14
03
0
14
03
1
14
03
5
14
03
6
14
03
9
14
04
0
Lab Code
Skewness of fabric after washing
Page 38 of 56
14
04
4
14
04
5
14
04
6
14
04
7
14
05
1
14
05
2
14
05
4
14
05
5
Page 39 of 56
7. Colour Fastness to organic Solvent
(a) Change in Colour
Lab Code
Test Method
Change In Colour
Performance Remark
14002 IS 688:1988 4 Satisfactory
14004 IS 688:1988 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14005 IS 688:1988 4 Satisfactory
14006 IS 688:1988 (RA 2004) 4 Satisfactory
14007 IS 688:1988 4 Satisfactory
14008 ISO 105 X 05 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14009 IS 688:1989 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14010 IS 688:1988 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14011 IS 688:1988 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14012 IS 688:1988 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14014 IS 688:1988 (RA 2009) 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14015 IS 688:1988 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14018 IS 688:1988 4 Satisfactory
14019 IS 688:1988 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14020 ISO 105 X05 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14022 IS 688:1988 4 Satisfactory
14024 ISO 105 X 05 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14025 IS 688:1988 4 Satisfactory
14026 IS 688:1988 4 Satisfactory
14027 IS 688:1988 4 Satisfactory
14028 IS 688:1988 (RA 2004) 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14030 IS 688 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14031 ISO 105 X05:1994 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14035 ISO 105 X05:1994 4 Satisfactory
14036 IS 688 4 Satisfactory
14037 IS 688:1988 4 Satisfactory
14039 BSEN ISO X 05 4 Satisfactory
14040 IS 688:1988 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14042 IS 688 : 1988 (RA 2004) 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14044 ISO 105 X05:1994 4 Satisfactory
14047 ISO 105 X 05 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14048 IS 688:1988 (RA 2004) 5 Satisfactory
14051 IS 688:1988 (RA 2009) 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14053 IS 688:1988 4 Satisfactory
14056 IS :688:1988(RA 2009 4 - 5 Satisfactory
Number of Participants 35
Minimum 4
Maximum 5
Page 40 of 56
Grade Frequency
4 15
4 - 5 19
5 1
Total 35
Mode 4 - 5
Assigned Value 4 - 5
Remark: Participants 14016 and 14052 carried out the test as per and ISO 105 D01:2010 which is not the test in which PT is conducted. Hence the results are not evaluated.
Page 41 of 56
Lab Code
Test Method
(b) Staining on adjacent fabrics
Acetate Performance Remark Cotton Performance
Remark Polyamide Performance Remark Polyester Performance
Remark Acrylic Performance Remark Wool Performance
Remark
14002 IS 688:1988 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14004 IS 688:1988 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14005 IS 688:1988 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14006 IS 688:1988 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory
14007 IS 688:1988 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14008 ISO 105 X 05 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14009 IS 688:1989 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14010 IS 688:1988 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14011 IS 688:1988 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14012 IS 688:1988 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14014 IS 688:1988 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14015 IS 688:1988 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14018 IS 688:1988 4 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory
14019 IS 688:1988 4 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14020 ISO 105 X05 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14022 IS 688:1988 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14024 ISO 105 X 05 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14025 IS 688:1988 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14026 IS 688:1988 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14027 IS 688:1988 4 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14028 IS 688:1988 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14030 IS 688 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14031 ISO 105 X05 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14035 ISO 105 X05 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14036 IS 688 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14037 IS 688:1988 4 - 5 Satisfactory 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory
Page 42 of 56
Lab Code
Test Method
(b) Staining on adjacent fabrics
Acetate Performance Remark Cotton Performance
Remark Polyamide Performance Remark Polyester Performance
Remark Acrylic Performance Remark Wool Performance
Remark
14039 BSEN ISO X 05 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14040 IS 688:1988 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14042 IS 688 : 1988 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14044 ISO 105 X05 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14047 ISO 105 X 05 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14048 IS 688:1988 5 Satisfactory 5 Satisfactory 5 Satisfactory 5 Satisfactory 5 Satisfactory 5 Satisfactory
14051 IS 688:1988 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14053 IS 688:1988 4 - 5 Satisfactory 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory
14056 IS 688:1988 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory 4 - 5 Satisfactory Number of
Participants 35 Number of
Participants 35 Number of
Participants 35 Number of
Participants 35 Number of
Participants 35 Number of
Participants 35
Minimum 4 Minimum 4 Minimum 4 Minimum 4 - 5 Minimum 4 - 5 Minimum 4 - 5
Maximum 5 Maximum 5 Maximum 5 Maximum 5 Maximum 5 Maximum 5
Staining on Acetate Cotton Polyamide Polyester Acrylic Wool
Grade Frequency Grade Frequency Grade Frequency Grade Frequency Grade Frequency Grade Frequency
4 3 4 6 4 7 4 2 4 4 4 2
4 - 5 30 4 - 5 26 4 - 5 27 4 - 5 30 4 - 5 29 4 - 5 32
5 2 5 3 5 1 5 3 5 2 5 1
Total 35 Total 35 Total 35 Total 35 Total 35 Total 35
Mode 4 - 5 Mode 4 - 5 Mode 4 - 5 Mode 4 - 5 Mode 4 - 5 Mode 4 - 5
Assigned
Value 4 - 5 Assigned Value 4 - 5 Assigned
Value 4 - 5 Assigned Value 4 - 5 Assigned
Value 4 - 5 Assigned Value 4 - 5
Page 43 of 56
8a. Identification Of Fibres
Assigned Value
Warp Polyester
Weft Cotton
Lab code Warp Weft Test Method Remark on performance
14001 Polyester Cotton AATCC 20 Satisfactory
14003 Polyester Cotton AATCC 20 Satisfactory
14004 Polyester Cotton AATCC 20 Satisfactory
14005 Polyester Cotton AATCC 20 Satisfactory
14006 Polyester Cotton AATCC 20 Satisfactory
14007 Polyester Cotton AATCC 20 Satisfactory
14008 Polyester Cotton AATCC 20 Satisfactory
14009 Polyester Cotton AATCC 20 Satisfactory
14010 Polyester Cotton AATCC 20 Satisfactory
14011 Polyester Cotton AATCC 20 Satisfactory
14012 Polyester Cotton AATCC 20 Satisfactory
14015 Polyester Cotton AATCC 20 Satisfactory
14016 Polyester Cotton ISO 1833-1:2006 Satisfactor y
14017 Cotton / Polyester Cotton / Polyester AATCC 2 0 Not Satisfactory
14018 Polyester Cotton AATCC 20 Satisfactory
14019 Polyester Cotton AATCC 20 Satisfactory
14020 Polyester Cotton AATCC 20 Satisfactory
14022 Polyester Cotton AATCC 20 Satisfactory
14023 Polyester + cotton Cotton AATCC 20 Not Satisfactory
14024 Polyester Cotton AATCC 20 Satisfactory
14025 Polyester Cotton AATCC 20 Satisfactory
14026 Polyester Cotton AATCC 20 Satisfactory
14027 Polyester Cotton AATCC 20 Satisfactory
14028 Polyester Cotton AATCC 20 Satisfactory
14029 Polyester Cotton AATCC 20 Satisfactory
14030 Polyester Cotton AATCC 20 Satisfactory
14031 Polyester Cotton AATCC 20 Satisfactory
14035 Polyester Cotton AATCC 20 Satisfactory
14036 Polyester Cotton AATCC 20 Satisfactory
14037 Polyester Cotton AATCC 20 Satisfactory
14039 Polyester Cotton AATCC 20 Satisfactory
14040 Polyester Cotton AATCC 20 Satisfactory
14041 Polyester Cotton AATCC 20 Satisfactory
14042 Polyester Cotton AATCC 20 Satisfactory
14044 Polyester Cotton AATCC 20 Satisfactory
14045 Polyester Cotton AATCC 20 Satisfactory
14046 Polyester cotton AATCC 20 Satisfactory
14047 Polyester Cotton AATCC 20 Satisfactory
Page 44 of 56
Lab code Warp Weft Test Method Remark on performance
14049 Polyester cotton In House Satisfactory
14051 Polyester Cotton AATCC 20 Satisfactory
14052 Polyester Cotton ISO 1833-1:2006 Satisfactor y
14053 Polyester Cotton AATCC 20 Satisfactory
14054 Polyester Cotton Not indicated Satisfactory
14055 Polyester Cotton AATCC 20 Satisfactory
14056 Polyester Cotton AATCC 20 Satisfactory No. of participants 45
Page 45 of 56
8b. Composition by Physical Separation - Polyester Content
Lab code Reported
value (%)
Test method adopted Z- Score
Performance Remark
14001 55.8 AATCC 20A 0.1 Satisfactory
14003 55.4 AATCC 20A -0.4 Satisfactory
14004 56.8 AATCC 20A 1.3 Satisfactory
14005 55.0 AATCC 20A -0.9 Satisfactory
14006 55.9 AATCC 20A 0.2 Satisfactory
14007 56.5 AATCC 20A 1.0 Satisfactory
14008 55.6 AATCC 20A -0.1 Satisfactory
14009 56.0 AATCC 20A 0.4 Satisfactory
14010 55.6 AATCC 20A -0.1 Satisfactory
14011 56.3 AATCC 20A 0.7 Satisfactory
14012 55.1 AATCC 20A -0.7 Satisfactory
14015 55.0 AATCC 20A -0.9 Satisfactory
14016 55.3 ISO 1833-1:2006 Annex B -0.5 Satisfactory
14017 55.2 AATCC 20A -0.6 Satisfactory
14018 56.0 AATCC 20A 0.4 Satisfactory
14019 56.0 AATCC 20A 0.4 Satisfactory
14020 55.4 AATCC 20A -0.4 Satisfactory
14022 56.5 AATCC 20A 1.0 Satisfactory
14023 52.7 AATCC 20A -3.7 Outlier
14024 55.3 AATCC 20A -0.5 Satisfactory
14025 55.6 AATCC 20A -0.1 Satisfactory
14026 55.6 AATCC 20A -0.1 Satisfactory
14027 55.5 AATCC 20A -0.2 Satisfactory
14028 56.7 AATCC 20A 1.2 Satisfactory
14029 56.2 AATCC 20A 0.6 Satisfactory
14030 54.8 AATCC 20A -1.1 Satisfactory
14031 56.2 AATCC 20A 0.6 Satisfactory
14035 54.9 AATCC 20A -1.0 Satisfactory
14036 55.2 AATCC 20A -0.6 Satisfactory
14037 55.8 AATCC 20A 0.1 Satisfactory
14039 55.3 AATCC 20A -0.5 Satisfactory
14040 55.8 AATCC 20A 0.1 Satisfactory
14041 56.0 AATCC 20A 0.4 Satisfactory
14042 55.6 AATCC 20A -0.1 Satisfactory
14044 56.7 AATCC 20A 1.2 Satisfactory
14046 55.8 AATCC 20A 0.1 Satisfactory
14047 56.1 AATCC 20A 0.5 Satisfactory
14049 55.7 In House 0.0 Satisfactory
14051 55.7 AATCC 20A 0.0 Satisfactory
14052 55.6 ISO 1833-1:2006 Annex B -0.1 Satisfactory
Page 46 of 56
Lab code Reported
value (%)
Test method adopted Z- Score
Performance Remark
14053 55.9 AATCC 20A 0.2 Satisfactory
14054 56.0 AATCC 20A 0.4 Satisfactory
14055 55.0 AATCC 20A -0.9 Satisfactory
14056 56.2 AATCC 20A 0.6 Satisfactory
No. of participants 44 Maximum 56.8 Minimum 52.7 Mean 55.67
Std Deviation 0.67946 Median 55.70
SUMMARY
Robust Average = 55.70 Robust SD for valid results reported by all participants (σ1 ) = 0.54
Between sample SD of Homogeneity testing ( SS ) = 0.62
SD for PT Scheme with allowance for the heterogeneity if any ( σ ) = 0.82
Heterogeneity Accounted
Assigned Value ( X ) = 55.7 SD of PT Scheme ( σσσσ ) = 0.82
Page 47 of 56
8b. Composition by Physical Separation - Cotton Con tent
Lab code Reported
value (%)
Test method adopted Z- Score
Performance Remark
14001 44.2 AATCC 20A -0.1 Satisfactory
14003 44.6 AATCC 20A 0.4 Satisfactory
14004 43.2 AATCC 20A -1.3 Satisfactory
14005 45.0 AATCC 20A 0.9 Satisfactory
14006 44.1 AATCC 20A -0.2 Satisfactory
14007 43.5 AATCC 20A -1.0 Satisfactory
14008 44.4 AATCC 20A 0.1 Satisfactory
14009 44.0 AATCC 20A -0.4 Satisfactory
14010 44.4 AATCC 20A 0.1 Satisfactory
14011 43.7 AATCC 20A -0.7 Satisfactory
14012 44.9 AATCC 20A 0.7 Satisfactory
14015 45.0 AATCC 20A 0.9 Satisfactory
14016 44.7 ISO 1833-1:2006 Annex B 0.5 Satisfactory
14017 44.8 AATCC 20A 0.6 Satisfactory
14018 44.0 AATCC 20A -0.4 Satisfactory
14019 44.0 AATCC 20A -0.4 Satisfactory
14020 44.6 AATCC 20A 0.4 Satisfactory
14022 43.5 AATCC 20A -1.0 Satisfactory
14023 47.3 AATCC 20A 3.7 Outlier
14024 44.7 AATCC 20A 0.5 Satisfactory
14025 44.4 AATCC 20A 0.1 Satisfactory
14026 44.4 AATCC 20A 0.1 Satisfactory
14027 44.5 AATCC 20A 0.2 Satisfactory
14028 43.3 AATCC 20A -1.2 Satisfactory
14029 43.8 AATCC 20A -0.6 Satisfactory
14030 45.2 AATCC 20A 1.1 Satisfactory
14031 43.8 AATCC 20A -0.6 Satisfactory
14035 45.1 AATCC 20A 1.0 Satisfactory
14036 44.8 AATCC 20A 0.6 Satisfactory
14037 44.2 AATCC 20A -0.1 Satisfactory
14039 44.7 AATCC 20A 0.5 Satisfactory
14040 44.2 AATCC 20A -0.1 Satisfactory
14041 44.0 AATCC 20A -0.4 Satisfactory
14042 44.4 AATCC 20A 0.1 Satisfactory
14044 43.3 AATCC 20A -1.2 Satisfactory
14046 44.2 AATCC 20A -0.1 Satisfactory
14047 43.9 AATCC 20A -0.5 Satisfactory
14049 44.3 In House 0.0 Satisfactory
Page 48 of 56
Lab code Reported
value (%)
Test method adopted Z- Score
Performance Remark
14051 44.3 AATCC 20A 0.0 Satisfactory
14052 44.4 ISO 1833-1:2006 Annex B 0.1 Satisfactory
14053 44.1 AATCC 20A -0.2 Satisfactory
14054 44.0 AATCC 20A -0.4 Satisfactory
14055 45.0 AATCC 20A 0.9 Satisfactory
14056 43.8 AATCC 20A -0.6 Satisfactory
No. of participants 44 Maximum 47.3 Minimum 43.2 Mean 44.33 Std Deviation 0.6795 Median 44.30
SUMMARY
Robust Average = 44.30
Robust SD for valid results reported by all participants (σ1 ) = 0.54
Between sample SD of Homogeneity testing ( SS ) = 0.62
SD for PT Scheme with allowance for the heterogeneity if any ( σ ) = 0.82
Heterogeneity Accounted
Assigned Value ( X ) = 44.3 SD of PT Scheme ( σσσσ ) = 0.82
Remark: Participant 14045 reported as 100% Polyester and 100% cotton and hence performance is not evaluated.
-4.0
-3.0
-2.0
-1.0
0.0
1.0
2.0
14
00
1
14
00
3
14
00
4
14
00
5
14
00
6
14
00
7
14
00
8
14
00
9
14
01
0
14
01
1
14
01
2
14
01
5
Z -
Sco
re
Composition by Physical Separation
14
01
5
14
01
6
14
01
7
14
01
8
14
01
9
14
02
0
14
02
2
14
02
3
14
02
4
14
02
5
14
02
6
14
02
7
14
02
8
14
02
9
14
03
0
14
03
1
14
03
5
14
03
6
14
03
7
14
03
9
14
04
0
14
04
1
Lab Code
Composition by Physical Separation - Polyester Content
Page 49 of 56
14
04
1
14
04
2
14
04
4
14
04
6
14
04
7
14
04
9
14
05
1
14
05
2
14
05
3
14
05
4
14
05
5
14
05
6
Polyester Content
-2.0
-1.0
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.01
40
01
14
00
3
14
00
4
14
00
5
14
00
6
14
00
7
14
00
8
14
00
9
14
01
0
14
01
1
14
01
2
14
01
5
Z -
Sco
re
Composition by Physical Separation
14
01
5
14
01
6
14
01
7
14
01
8
14
01
9
14
02
0
14
02
2
14
02
3
14
02
4
14
02
5
14
02
6
14
02
7
14
02
8
14
02
9
14
03
0
14
03
1
14
03
5
14
03
6
14
03
7
14
03
9
14
04
0
14
04
1
Lab Code
Composition by Physical Separation - Cotton Content
Page 50 of 56
14
04
1
14
04
2
14
04
4
14
04
6
14
04
7
14
04
9
14
05
1
14
05
2
14
05
3
14
05
4
14
05
5
14
05
6
Cotton Content
Page 51 of 56
9. Water Repellency - Cone Test
Lab code Reported
value (%)
Test method adopted Z- Score
Performance Remark
14002 385.0 IS 7941 : 1976 0.0 Satisfactory
14003 400.0 IS 7941 : 1976 0.4 Satisfactory
14004 385.0 IS 7941 : 1976 0.0 Satisfactory
14005 370.0 IS 7941 : 1976 -0.4 Satisfactory
14007 375.0 IS 7941 : 1976 -0.3 Satisfactory
14010 378.0 IS 7941 : 1976 -0.2 Satisfactory
14011 360.0 IS 7941 : 1976 -0.7 Satisfactory
14014 395.0 IS 6803:1972(RA 2001) 0.3 Satisfactory
14019 372.0 IS 7941 : 1976 -0.4 Satisfactory
14021 248.0 IS 7941 : 1976 -4.0 Outlier
14026 365.0 IS 7941 : 1976 -0.6 Satisfactory
14032 377.0 IS 7941 : 1976(RA 2004) -0.2 Satisfactory
14037 397.0 IS 7941 : 1976 0.3 Satisfactory
14038 395.0 IS 7941 : 1976 0.3 Satisfactory
14040 400.0 IS 7941 : 1976 0.4 Satisfactory
14043 382.0 IS 7941 : 1976 -0.1 Satisfactory
14051 376.0 IS 7941 : 1976 -0.3 Satisfactory
14053 398.0 IS 7941 : 1976 0.4 Satisfactory
14055 400.0 IS 7941 : 1976 0.4 Satisfactory
No. of participants 19 Maximum 400 Minimum 248 Mean 377 Std Deviation 34 Median 382
SUMMARY
Robust Average = 382.58 Robust SD for valid results reported by all participants (σ1 ) = 15.76
Between sample SD of Homogeneity testing ( SS ) = 30.6
SD for PT Scheme with allowance for the heterogeneity if any ( σ ) = 34.44
Heterogeneity Accounted
Assigned Value ( X ) = 385 SD of PT Scheme ( σσσσ ) = 34
Remark: The participant Coded 14039 had carried out the test by BSEN 24920 (Spray Test) and which is not equivalent to IS 7941. Hence, the result is not evaluated.
-4.5
-4.0
-3.5
-3.0
-2.5
-2.0
-1.5
-1.0
-0.5
0.0
0.5
1.0
14
00
2
14
00
3
14
00
4
14
00
5
14
00
7
14
01
0
Z -
Sco
re
14
01
0
14
01
1
14
01
4
14
01
9
14
02
1
14
02
6
14
03
2
14
03
7
14
03
8
14
04
0
Lab Code
Water Repellency - Cone Test
Page 52 of 56
14
04
0
14
04
3
14
05
1
14
05
3
14
05
5
Page 53 of 56
10. Moisture Content in Cotton Textile Material
Lab code Reported value (%) Test method adopted Z-
Score Performance
Remark
14002 5.3 IS 199:1989 -1.36 Satisfactory
14003 5.9 IS 199:1989 -0.64 Satisfactory
14004 6.4 IS 199:1989 0.00 Satisfactory
14005 5.6 IS 199:1989 -1.03 Satisfactory
14006 6.4 IS 199:1989 (RA 2005) 0.00 Satisfactory
14007 5.9 IS 199: 1989 -0.64 Satisfactory
14008 5.6 ASTM D 2495 -1.03 Satisfactory
14010 7.1 IS 199:1989 0.90 Satisfactory
14011 6.3 IS 199: 1989 -0.13 Satisfactory
14012 6.0 IS 199:1989 -0.51 Satisfactory
14014 5.8 IS 199: 1989 -0.72 Satisfactory
14015 5.8 IS 199: 1989 -0.77 Satisfactory
14016 4.2 IS 199:1989 -2.82 Straggler
14017 6.0 AATCC 20A :2012 -0.51 Satisfactory
14018 6.8 IS 199:1989(RA 2005) 0.55 Satisfactory
14019 6.2 IS 199:1989(RA 2005) -0.26 Satisfactory
14021 5.9 IS 199 : 1989 -0.64 Satisfactory
14022 6.9 IS 199:1989 0.64 Satisfactory
14025 5.4 IS 199:1989 -1.28 Satisfactory
14026 5.5 IS 199:1989 -1.15 Satisfactory
14027 6.1 IS 199:1989 -0.38 Satisfactory
14028 6.6 IS 199:1989(RA 2005) 0.26 Satisfactory
14029 7.1 IS 199:1989 0.90 Satisfactory
14030 6.3 IS 199 -0.13 Satisfactory
14032 6.6 IS 199:1989(RA 2005) 0.26 Satisfactory
14034 6.9 IS 199 0.64 Satisfactory
14036 6.3 IS 199 -0.13 Satisfactory
14037 5.0 is199:1989 -1.79 Satisfactory
14040 5.2 IS 199:1989(RA 2005) -1.54 Satisfactory
14041 6.4 IS 199:1989(RA 2005) 0.00 Satisfactory
14042 7.0 IS 199:1989(RA 2005) 0.77 Satisfactory
14043 6.5 IS 199:1989(RA 2005) 0.13 Satisfactory
14044 5.6 IS 199:1989(RA 2005) -1.03 Satisfactory
14049 5.8 IS 199:1989 -0.78 Satisfactory
14051 6.0 IS 199:1989(RA 2010) -0.51 Satisfactory
14052 4.3 IS 199:1989 -2.69 Straggler
14053 5.0 IS 199:1989 -1.79 Satisfactory
14055 5.8 IS 199:1989 -0.77 Satisfactory
14056 7.2 IS 199:1989(RA 2011) 1.03 Satisfactory
Page 54 of 56
No. of participants 39 Maximum 7.2 Minimum 4.2 Mean 6.02 Std Deviation 0.7145 Median 6.0
SUMMARY
Robust Average = 6.05 Robust SD for valid results reported by all participants (σ1 ) = 0.65
Between sample SD of Homogeneity testing ( SS ) = 0.43
SD for PT Scheme with allowance for the heterogeneity if any ( σ ) = 0.78
Heterogeneity Accounted
Assigned Value ( X ) = 6.4 SD of PT Scheme ( σσσσ ) = 0.78
Remark: Extreme values reported by participants are detected as Trivial Outlier and hence, the same are excluded from Performance Evaluation. Details are given in the following table
Participant Code
Extreme Value reported by
the Participant
Criteria for Trivial Outlier
Test the reported value for the
criteria Conclusion Remark
14009 1.3%
Dixon’s Q Test Null Hypothesis: Extreme value is Not an Outlier
Q calculated = 0.5172 Q n=7;α=5% (tabulated) = 0.462
Q cal > Q n=7;α=5%. Reject the Null Hypothesis.
Extreme value falls within ±25% of Assigned Value
Assigned Value:6.4%
Acceptable Range 4.8 < x < 8.0
1.3 does not falls in the acceptable range. Hence, reject the value.
-3.50
-3.00
-2.50
-2.00
-1.50
-1.00
-0.50
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
14
00
2
14
00
3
14
00
4
14
00
5
14
00
6
14
00
7
14
00
8
14
01
0
14
01
1
14
01
2
14
01
4
Z -
Sco
re
Moisture Content in Cotton Textile Material
14
01
4
14
01
5
14
01
6
14
01
7
14
01
8
14
01
9
14
02
1
14
02
2
14
02
5
14
02
6
14
02
7
14
02
8
14
02
9
14
03
0
14
03
2
14
03
4
14
03
6
14
03
7
14
04
0
Lab Code
Moisture Content in Cotton Textile Material
Page 55 of 56
14
04
0
14
04
1
14
04
2
14
04
3
14
04
4
14
04
9
14
05
1
14
05
2
14
05
3
14
05
5
14
05
6
Page 56 of 56
11. Screening Test for Nickel Release
Assigned Value: Positive
Lab code value Test Method Performance
Remark
14003 POSITIVE BSEN 12471:2002 Satisfactory
14005 POSITIVE BSEN 12471:2002 Satisfactory
14007 POSITIVE BSEN 12471:2002 Satisfactory
14008 POSITIVE BSEN 12471:2002 Satisfactory
14010 POSITIVE BSEN 12471:2002 Satisfactory
14016 POSITIVE FD CR 12471:2002 Satisfactory
14017 POSITIVE CR 12471:2002 Satisfactory
14020 POSITIVE EN 12471 Satisfactory
14022 POSITIVE BSEN 12471:2002 Satisfactory
14024 POSITIVE BSEN 12471:2002 Satisfactory
14025 POSITIVE BSEN 12471:2002 Satisfactory
14026 POSITIVE BSEN 12471:2002 Satisfactory
14028 POSITIVE BSEN 12471:2002 Satisfactory
14030 POSITIVE BSEN 12471:2002 Satisfactory
14031 POSITIVE BSEN 12471:2002 Satisfactory
14035 POSITIVE BSEN 12471:2002 Satisfactory
14044 POSITIVE BSEN 12471:2002 Satisfactory
14047 POSITIVE EN 12471 Satisfactory
14051 POSITIVE BSEN 12471:2002 Satisfactory
14054 POSITIVE BSEN 12471:2002 Satisfactory
No. of participants 20