Yesterday I was able to press the latest load of towels, which also had a sample to find out what the next yarn in the stash I want to focus on in order to weave it up.
The current towels are being woven with 2/15 cotton (manufacturer's marking, not mine) and I'm quite pleased with the quality of cloth. But it's a very old batch of yarn, which I've been ignoring until lately, and once this warp comes off I'll beam another to use up more (the rest?) of the 2/15. But I don't think there is enough of the 2/15 so I cast my eye around the storeroom, and noted the 3 large cones (kilo? would have to weigh them to be sure) which I bought in part because of the high degree of twist in the yarn. I suspect it was spun to be plied, then wasn't. It is (according to the manufacturer's notes) singles 6.
If it had been plied/twisted, I doubt I would have kept it, but when it arrived (in error) I kept a case to play around with the high energy in it, sold some to other weavers also interested in weaving with 'energized' yarn, and used up some myself. Now there are these 3 lonely cones. Time to deal with them.
Before I cut the first section of towels off the warp beam, I wove a sample with the singles 6 in the same weave structure, so I could compare the results. There is only a mild difference, with the biggest change the dimensional loss. Instead of 20" in width after wet finishing, the weft finished width using the singles 6 is 18".
I had pondered using a waffle weave to really push the 3D development, but after weaving this sample and fiddling around with a few weaving drafts in Fiberworks, I decided that the dimensional loss would be larger than I would prefer and would create a very thick towel.
Instead I came up with a rough draft which is a tweak on the current warp. I'm still having words and things disappear into brain sink holes, so keeping it 'simple' seems like the prudent thing to do.
In the above photo I wet finished the sample while it was attached to the last towel in the section, then cut it off the damp towel and then cut it half width-wise so that I could compare using a hard press vs *not* applying a hard press.
The difference is subtle (surprised?) but there is a difference.
Perhaps surprisingly (until I thought it through), the dimensional loss was more than what was in the half that was just left to air dry, But here's the thing. When you apply compression, you smash the warp and weft down into each other. While this reduces the thickness of the cloth, it *increases* the stability. Once the warp and weft are 'locked' into each other, the tendency is to reduce the thickness and increase the resistance to abrasion. The unpressed sample dried with no tension applied in any direction, so since warps and wefts were not pressed down, the threads are less integrated.
The difference between them is not so much seen, but felt. The pressed sample feels smoother; the unpressed sample has way more texture. Although I would have to do studies, I suspect that the unpressed sample will be slightly more absorbent than the pressed, given the difference in density and how much closer and 'locked' into the pressed sample is compared unpressed 'partner' cloth is.
I will do another sample on the next warp, which should be going into the loom later this week. I had two days of mostly 'light duties' - so far. I am hoping I feel able to weave again by tomorrow, given I was such a Very Good Girl after my procedure this morning.
Finally learning to be kind to my body - and brain - in hopes of being able to keep weaving and ask myself questions like these.
Keeping on, keeping on.
No comments:
Post a Comment