Textile Research Journal Article

Effects of Woven Fabric Construction and Color on

Ultraviolet Protection
Polona Dobnik Dubrovski1 and Darko Golob
Abstract This paper presents the effects of Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, University of Maribor,
woven fabric construction and color on the ultra- Maribor, Slovenia
violet protection factor. Weave type, fabric tight-
ness, cover factor, volume porosity and color of
lightweight summer woven fabrics were observed
in this research. Color had the biggest influence
on the ultraviolet protection factor of fabrics,
whereas woven fabric construction was essential
when light pastel colored fabrics were used as
ultraviolet protection. This work provides guide-
lines for engineering woven cotton fabrics with
sufficient ultraviolet protection.

Key words color, UV protection, woven fabric

construction

Ultraviolet (UV) radiation is one of the many types of radi- Decreases of 1 % in ozone lead to increases in the solar
ation emitted by the sun which we can not see or feel. UV UV radiation at the Earth’s surface and may eventually
radiation is electromagnetic radiation of a wavelength lead to a 2.3 % increase in skin cancer [3].1
shorter than that of the visible region, but longer than that The demand for data on solar UV radiation has mark-
of soft X-rays. The range of UV wavelengths is further sub- edly increased and, in addition, many researches are also
divided into UVA (380–315 nm), UVB (315–280 nm) and attempting to establish adequate or sufficient UV protec-
UVC (under 280 nm) radiation. The effects of UV radia- tion, which includes recommendations on behavior, envi-
tion on human health depend on the UV wavelengths [1]: 1. ronment, legislation and personal protection [4–6].
UVA radiation is thought to contribute to premature age- Fabrics provide simple and convenient protection
ing and wrinkling of the skin and has been recently impli- against UV radiation, but not all fabrics offer sufficient UV
cated as a cause of skin cancer; 2.UVB radiation has been protection. To assign the degree of UV radiation protection
implicated as the major cause of skin cancers, sun burning of clothing materials, the Ultraviolet Protection Factor
and cataracts; and 3. UVC radiation is extremely danger- (UPF) is commonly used. From previous research publica-
ous, but much of the dangerous UV radiation is absorbed in tions, information has been provided to produce fabric with
the atmosphere’s ozone layer before it reaches the ground. good UV protection [5, 7–10].
It is worth mentioning that the biological effectiveness Our experiment was focused on the woven fabric con-
of UV radiation increases by a factor of over 1000 as the struction and color and their influence on UPF of light-
wavelength changes from UVA to UVB [1]. The differ- weight summer fabrics. We wanted to establish which
ences between UVA and UVB radiation are presented in parameters, determining the woven fabric construction,
Table 1 [2]. showed the best correlation with UPF. The results will help
In actual fact, 99 % of the UV radiation that reaches
the Earth’s surface is UVA radiation. However, this is valid
for the situation where there is no ozone depletion. Global
depletion of stratospheric ozone is one of the serious envi- 1
Corresponding author: Faculty of Mechanical Engineering,
ronmental and living problems. A reduction in ozone will University of Maribor, Maribor, Slovenia. e-mail: polona.dubrovski
lead to an increase in solar UVB at the Earth’s surface. @uni-mb.si

Textile Research Journal Vol 79(4): 351–359 DOI: 10.1177/0040517508090490 www.trj.sagepub.com © 2009 SAGE Publications
Table 4 appears in color online: http://trj.sagepub.com Los Angeles, London, New Delhi and Singapore
TRJ 352 Textile Research Journal 79(4)

Table 1 Differences between UVA and UVB radiation.

UVA radiation UVB radiation
λ = 380-315 λ = 315-280
Mean energy: 333 kJ/mol Mean energy: 400 kJ/mol
2
Intensity: 27 W/m Intensity: 5 W/m2
Represents 5.6 % of solar radiation Represents 0.5 % of solar radiation
Necessary for vitamin D metabolism Causes erythema of the skin
Responsible for tan Responsible for deeper tan of longer duration
Creates skin ageing Causes sunburn and skin cancer
Penetrates under the skin Dangerous for the eyes
It has 1.6 times bigger mean energy regarding visible radiation It has 2.0 times bigger mean energy regarding visible radiation
Large doses destroy DNA
Its intensity represents 5.4 % of the intensity of visible radiation Its intensity is less than 1.0 % of the intensity of visible radiation

the woven fabric’s designer in developing a new product Table 2 Protection categories of fabrics according to
with optimum UV protection. ASTM D 6603.
Protection category UPF range Rating

Ultraviolet Protection Factor of Excellent 40-50, 50+ 40, 45, 50, 50+

Fabrics Very good 25-39 25, 30, 35

Good 15-24 15, 20
The UPF of fabric is, according to EN 13758-1, determined
from the total spectral transmittance as follows: than light pastel shades and will consequently have higher
UPFs); 4. stretch (the greater the stretch, the lower the UPF
λ = 400
rating); 5. moisture (wet fabrics provide less UVR protec-
∑ E ( λ )ε ( λ ) ∆λ
tion); and 6. finishing (UV absorbing chemicals improve
λ = 290
UPF = --------------------------------------------------------- (1) UPF).
λ = 400

∑ E ( λ )T ( λ )ε ( λ ) ∆λ It is also known that worn and faded fabrics may have

reduced UPF ratings, while washed cotton and polycotton
λ = 290
fabrics, because of fabric shrinkage, slightly improve UPF.
where E(λ) is the solar irradiance expressed in Wm–2nm–1,
γ(λ) is the erythema action spectrum, λ is the wavelength
interval and T(λ) is the spectral transmittance at wave- Woven Fabric Construction
length λ.
The UPF is actually the measure of UV radiation (UVA Parameters
and UVB) blocked by the fabric. Higher UPF value means
more blocked UV radiation. UPF is measured by a spec- Woven fabric construction is one of the basic factors that
trophotometer. The UPF value represents the mean value have a direct effect on UPF. Woven fabric construction is
of UPF calculated for a set of fabric specimens, rounded altered by three primary constructional parameters, namely:
down to the nearest 5. Regarding UV protection, fabrics yarn fineness, weave type (weave factor) and warp/weft den-
are classified as shown in Table 2. sity. Primary parameters of fabric construction are depend-
In engineering woven fabric with good UV radiation ent variables, where the choice of one parameter influences
(UVR) protection, the following factors must be consid- the effect of the others. Therefore, yarn fineness influences
ered [1, 5]: 1. composition of the fibers (most natural fibers fabric densities over the weave type. Via the defined selec-
transmit UV radiation more than synthetic ones); 2. tight- tion of primary parameters of fabric construction, all other
ness of the weave (the more closely woven the fabric, the fabric construction parameters (cover factor, fabric poros-
less UV radiation is transmitted); 3. color (dark colors of ity, crimp, mass, thickness, etc.) may be seen as constant
the same fabric type will absorb UV radiation more strongly and dependent on primary parameters.
 Effects of Woven Fabric Construction and Color on Ultraviolet Protection P. D. Dubrovski and D. Golob 353 TRJ

In assessing UPF of woven fabrics with different con- d d1 ⋅ G1 d d2 ⋅ G2

structions, there is a need to define those constructional K 1 = ----1- = ---------------- K 2 = ----2- = ---------------- (8)
p1 10 p2 10
parameters which have a direct connection with UPF. The
following constructional parameters of woven fabric were
where K is cover factor in %, K1 is warp cover factor, K2 is
taken into account during our research: 1. fabric tightness
weft cover factor, d is yarn thickness in mm, p is distance
– t in % [11]; 2. cover factor – K in % [12]; and 3. volume
between neighborhood yarns in mm and G is actual density
porosity – PV in % [13], determined according to the equa-
in threads per cm. Subscripts 1 and 2 denote warp and weft
tions (2) to (9):
yarn, respectively.

t = t1 ⋅ t2 (2)
1053 -
P V = --------------------------- (9)
0.076 0.615
T ⋅t
G1 G2
- ⋅ 100
t 1 = --------- - ⋅ 100
t 2 = --------- (3)
G lim G lim
where PV is volume porosity in %, T is yarn fineness in tex
and t is fabric tightness in %.
G lim = g ⋅ V ⋅ 1000
------------ (4)
T
Experimental
g = 5,117 ⋅ ρ fib ⋅ i (5)
We focused our research on the effects of woven fabric con-
1.732 ⋅ R
V = -------------------------------------------------------------------- (6) struction and color on the UPF. Our experiment involved
a ⋅ ( 2.6 – 0.6 ⋅ z )
R + ---------------------------------------- ⋅ 0.732 forty-five woven fabrics for summer weight clothes made
f from 100 % cotton yarns with fineness of 14 tex. The cotton
fabrics were grouped into five groups according to the color
where t is fabric tightness in %, G is actual density in e.g. finishing processes: white – W (bleached samples),
threads per cm, Glim is limit density of fabrics with the beige – G (samples in a gray state), red – R, marine blue –
same threads and the same weave parameters in warp and M and black – B (colored samples). Within each group sam-
weft directions, in threads per cm, g is basic density in ples varied according to weave type (plain, twill, satin) and
threads per cm, V is weave factor, T is yarn fineness in tex, fabric tightness (from 55 % to 95 %). The following weaves
∆fib is bulk density of fibres in gcm–3, i is yarn packing fac- were chosen (marked according to ISO 9354): plain 10-01
tor, R is number of threads in weave repeat, a is number of 01-01-00; twill 20-02 02-01-01; satin 31-01 04-01-02.
passages of yarn in weave repeat from face to back and vice The constructional parameters of tested fabrics were
versa, z is the smallest weave shift, f is yarn flexibility. obtained from equations (1)–(8) and according to the
measured values of actual densities (Table 3). The yarn
K = ( K 1 + K 2 – K 1 K 2 ) ⋅ 100 (7) packing factor and the yarn flexibility were determined

Table 3 Constructional parameters of woven samples and results of UPF measurements.

Weave Limit density, Actual warp-weft Warp-weft-fabric Warp-weft-fabric- Volume
Ref Color UPF
type threads/10 cm density, threads/10 cm tightness, % cover factor, % porosity, %
1 G Plain 428 387-182 90-43-62 48-22-59 68 4
2 G Plain 428 394-230 92-54-70 48-28-63 63 6
3 G Plain 428 395-325 92-76-84 49-40-69 57 7
4 G Twill 563 511-240 91-43-62 63-30-73 68 9
5 G Twill 563 502-308 89-55-70 62-38-76 63 14
6 G Twill 563 516-396 92-70-80 63-49-81 58 26
7 G Satin 653 569-265 87-41-59 70-33-79 70 16
8 G Satin 653 569-357 87-55-69 70-44-83 64 29
9 G Satin 653 571-466 87-71-79 70-57-87 59 51
10 W Plain 428 413-232 97-54-72 51-29-64 62 4
TRJ 354 Textile Research Journal 79(4)

Table 3 Constructional parameters of woven samples and results of UPF measurements. (Continued)
Weave Limit density, Actual warp-weft Warp-weft-fabric Warp-weft-fabric- Volume
Ref Color UPF
type threads/10 cm density, threads/10 cm tightness, % cover factor, % porosity, %
11 W Plain 428 400-294 94-69-80 49-36-67 58 5
12 W Plain 428 410-367 96-86-91 50-45-72 54 6
13 W Twill 563 510-283 91-50-67 63-35-75 65 6
14 W Twill 563 527-368 94-65-78 65-45-80 59 7
15 W Twill 563 532-414 95-74-83 65-51-83 57 13
16 W Satin 653 585-301 90-46-64 72-37-82 67 9
17 W Satin 653 588-424 90-65-76 72-52-86 60 12
18 W Satin 653 621-543 95-83-89 76-67-92 55 16
19 R Plain 428 396-230 93-54-71 49-28-63 63 10
20 R Plain 428 404-295 94-69-81 50-36-68 58 17
21 R Plain 428 410-346 96-81-88 50-43-71 55 21
22 R Twill 563 412-355 73-63-68 51-44-72 64 80
23 R Twill 563 485-409 86-73-79 60-50-80 59 563
24 R Twill 563 493-467 87-83-85 61-57-83 56 926
25 R Satin 653 493-323 76-49-61 61-40-76 69 392
26 R Satin 653 599-452 92-69-80 74-56-88 58 965
27 R Satin 653 624-526 96-81-88 77-65-91 55 1000
28 M Plain 428 400-234 93-55-71 49-29-63 62 15
29 M Plain 428 411-281 96-66-79 51-35-67 58 29
30 M Plain 428 426-360 99-84-91 52-44-73 54 24
31 M Twill 563 423-341 75-61-67 52-42-72 65 46
32 M Twill 563 445-352 79-63-70 55-43-74 63 663
33 M Twill 563 491-425 87-75-81 60-52-81 58 1000
34 M Satin 653 527-309 81-47-62 65-38-78 68 695
35 M Satin 653 575-429 88-66-76 71-53-86 60 979
36 M Satin 653 583-510 89-78-84 72-63-89 57 1000
37 B Plain 428 417-220 97-51-71 51-27-64 63 17
38 B Plain 428 423-297 98-69-83 52-37-69 57 28
39 B Plain 428 427-358 99-84-91 53-44-73 54 45
40 B Twill 563 438-272 78-48-61 54-33-69 69 81
41 B Twill 563 459-394 82-70-76 56-48-77 60 994
42 B Twill 563 498-420 88-75-81 61-52-81 58 1000
43 B Satin 653 573-312 88-48-65 70-38-81 66 1000
44 B Satin 653 578-437 89-67-77 71-54-86 60 1000
45 B Satin 653 585-521 90-80-85 72-64-90 56 1000
G = beige, W = white, R = red, M = marine blue, B = black.
 Effects of Woven Fabric Construction and Color on Ultraviolet Protection P. D. Dubrovski and D. Golob 355 TRJ

Table 4 Weave parameters of woven samples.

Type of weave Plain Twill Satin
Weave presentation

No. sample 1–3, 10–12, 19–21, 28–30, 37–39 4–6, 13–15, 22–24, 31–33, 40–42 7–9, 16–18, 25–27, 34–36, 43–45
No. of warp (weft) threads 2 4 5
in weave repeat – R
No. of doubled passages of 1 1 1
yarn in weave repeat – a
Smallest weave shift – z 1 1 2

according to the values given in existing literature [11]. All was possible to compare the UPF values of samples with
woven samples were woven with the threads with the same approximately the same value of fabric tightness. Color
constructional parameters in warp and weft direction e.g. plays an important role in UPF rating. The common rule
yarn fineness was 14 tex, bulk density of fibers was 1.5, yarn states that dark shaded fabrics offer a better protection
thickness was 0.122 mm, yarn packing factor was 0.8 and against UV radiation than light colored fabrics. Our results
yarn flexibility was 0.8. Consequently, also basic density showed that all black, blue and the majority of red colored
was the same for all samples (5.605 threads per cm). Weave fabrics offered not only good, but even excellent UV pro-
parameters needed to calculate equation (6) are detailed tection if they were woven in twill or satin weave. It was
in Table 4. obvious that all values of UPF for plain fabrics were below
Samples from 10 to 18 were bleached with enzymatic 45, while the UPF values for twill and satin fabrics were
treatment, while the samples from 19 to 45 were colored very high (over 400).
with bi-functional reactive dyestuffs Cibacon LS in red, Bleached (white) fabrics did not possess any UV pro-
blue and black colors. Afterwards, the warp and weft densi- tection, even if they were woven very tightly. Only woven
ties were measured according to ISO 7211-2, and UPF values sample No. 17, which represented the satin fabrics with 89
according to EN 13758-1 using UV-VIS spectrophotometer % tightness, reached UPF 15.
Varian Cary50. The UV-VIS spectrophotometer recorded Beige fabrics (fabrics in a gray state) offered a different
the transmittance between 290 nm and 400 nm at every UV protection, which depended on woven fabric construc-
5 nm. For each woven sample, four measurements of trans- tion. The results showed that beige fabrics also offered an
mittance were recorded and then UPF of individual meas- excellent protection if the proper weave and tightness were
urement, the average UPF of woven sample, standard achieved (sample No. 9, UPF 51).
deviation of the mean UPF and sample UPF were calcu- Figure 2 presents the results of UPF measurements with
lated according to the equations described in the stand- regard to cover factor. The results could be shown with one
ard. diagram, but for better presentation three diagrams are
presented regarding the color of woven samples. While the
samples No. 38 and No. 40 had the same cover factor, but
different UPF, the average UPF value is shown on diagram
Results and Discussion 2c. We should keep in mind that woven samples were all
woven with yarn of 14 tex. If we had woven samples with dif-
Effect of Color on UPF ferent yarn fineness, we could have had a situation that the
When comparing woven samples regarding the color, we woven samples with different pore size would have had the
observed samples with similar construction (the same type same cover factor. The results supported the common rule
of weave and density). Figure 1 presents the results of that higher cover factor meant higher UPF, but this corre-
measured UPF values for three fabric groups: plain, twill lation was not linear and depended on the color of the fab-
and satin fabrics, separately. Within each type of weave it rics.
TRJ 356 Textile Research Journal 79(4)

Figure 1 The results of UPF measurements regarding the fabric tightness (1a, plain fabrics; 1b, twill fabrics; 1c, satin fabrics).

Effect of Weave and Fabric Tightness on UPF ble due to fewer thread passages or interlacings, and tend to
group together which further reduces the free space area.
As mentioned above, UPF depends on the type of weave. Higher actual warp/weft density by each weave means higher
From the thermo physiological point of view, it is better to fabric tightness and consequently higher UV protection.
use light shaded clothes which reflect the IR radiation. Due Results for beige fabrics showed that none of the plain
to this, the influence of weave on UPF is presented in Fig- fabrics offered minimum UV protection (values below 15)
ure 3 for fabrics in a gray state only (pastel shaded fabrics). or the least beneficial UV protection, even if they were
The conclusions for the other colored fabrics were the same. tightly woven. Twill fabrics had good UV protection if
Within the same fabric tightness, the following decreasing they were woven with tightness above 70 %, while satin
rate of UPF values could be seen: satin – twill – plain. It is fabrics offered good UV protection already by 60 % tight-
known that with satin weave it is possible to achieve higher ness.
warp/weft density than with twill or plain weaves, so the Blue and dark fabrics in plain weave offered good UV
macropores are smaller and UV radiation has less free protection at 70 % tightness level, very good protection at
space to pass through than in twill or plain weaves. Besides 80 % and excellent protection at 90 % tightness level.
that, the macropores in plain fabrics have very stable and These fabrics also offered excellent UV protection at lower
uniform form as a consequence of higher thread passages. fabric tightness (from 60 % upwards) when they were
On the other hand, the pores in satin fabrics are not as sta- woven in twill and satin weave.
 Effects of Woven Fabric Construction and Color on Ultraviolet Protection P. D. Dubrovski and D. Golob 357 TRJ

Figure 2 The results of UPF measurements regarding the cover factor (2a, white and beige fabrics; 2b, red and blue fab-
rics; 2c, black fabrics).

Red fabrics in plain weave had good UV protection tion if cover factor was above 80 % for beige fabrics, 90 %
above 80 % tightness. Red fabrics in twill and satin weave for white fabrics, 68 % for red fabrics, and 63 % for blue
also had excellent UV protection at lower fabric tightness and black fabrics.
(from 60 % upwards).

Effect of Volume Porosity on UPF

Effect of Fabric Cover Factor on UPF From the literature it is known that UPF depends on fabric
The fabric cover factor is one of the parameters represent- weight as well as on fabric thickness. We decided to include
ing the woven structure, but its disadvantage is the absence volume porosity as an indicator of the woven structure, cal-
of weave influence. The dependence between cover factor culated according to equation (8). The results of the rela-
and UPF is shown in Figure 4 for beige fabrics. The rela- tionship between volume porosity and the UPF of beige
tionship between cover factor and UPF followed the expo- fabrics are shown in Figure 5. It was obvious that there was
nential function, with very high index of correlation (0.97). no direct correlation between volume porosity and UPF.
The higher the cover factor, the greater the UV protection. Results clearly indicated that volume porosity depended on
The results showed that fabrics offered good UV protec- the type of weave and affected UPF as well. This was in
TRJ 358 Textile Research Journal 79(4)

Figure 3 The effects of weave and fabric tightness on Figure 5 The effect of volume porosity on UPF of beige
UPF of beige fabrics. fabrics.

Conclusions
Due to ozone depletion, protection against harmful UV
radiation is important. Apparel fabrics offer a simple and
effective or adequate UV protection, which depends on
several factors. In this study, the influence of fabric con-
struction and color of the cotton woven fabrics for summer
clothes on ultraviolet protection factor was presented. The
results showed that dark colored fabrics offered mostly
excellent UV protection, but they are not preferable for
summer clothes. As they absorb much more IR radiation,
the person wearing such a fabric will feel uncomfortable.
Figure 4 The effect of cover factor on UPF of beige fab- Therefore, when light pastel colored fabrics are used for
rics. garments, in order to protect the wearer against UV radia-
tion, the optimum woven fabric construction is essential.
The woven fabric constructional parameter which had
direct effect on UPF was cover factor. Higher cover factor
meant better UV protection. Fabric tightness and volume
accordance with previously mentioned discussion about the
porosity showed indirect connection with UPF through the
macropores. The macropores as three-dimensional forms
type of the weave structure. For the fabric developer, three
are bigger, more stable and uniform in plain fabrics com-
woven fabric constructional parameters are essential e.g.
pared with macropores in twill or satin fabrics at the same
type of weave, yarn fineness and warp and weft densities
volume porosity. Lower volume porosity means higher
(fabric tightness) to develop fabrics with acceptable UPF.
UPF. Beige plain fabrics did not have any UV protection,
The presented research provides guidelines for engineer-
while beige twill and satin fabrics offered good UV protec-
ing woven cotton fabrics to achieve adequate UPF on the
tion when volume porosity was less than 58 % and 70 %,
basis of woven fabric construction.
respectively.
White plain fabrics offered good UV protection when
volume porosity was lower than 58 %, while white twill and
satin fabrics offered good UV protection already at 70 % Literature Cited
of volume porosity. Blue and black plain fabrics offered
good UV protection at 62 % of volume porosity, while blue 1. http://www.arpansa.gov.au.
and black twill and satin fabrics offered excellent UV pro- 2. Zambetakis, A., Textiles for Protection Against Solar UVR,
tection already at 65 % of volume porosity. Weather Conditions and Fire, in “Book of Proceedings –
 Effects of Woven Fabric Construction and Color on Ultraviolet Protection P. D. Dubrovski and D. Golob 359 TRJ

International Textile, Clothing and Design Conference,” Uni- 8. Hoffmann, K., Hoffmann, A., Hanke, D., Bohringer, B.,
versity of Zagreb, Faculty of Textile Technology, pp. 152–157 Schindling, G., Schon, U., Klotz, M. L., and Altmeyer, P., Sun
(2002). Protected from Optimally Designed Fabrics, Hautarzt 49(1),
3. Roy, C. R., Gies, H. P., and Toomey, S., The Solar UV Radia- 10–16 (1998).
tion Environment: Measurement Techniques and Results, J. 9. Hoffmann, K., Kaspar, K., Gambicher, T., and Altmeyer, P., In
Photochem. Photobiol. B, Biol. 31, 21–27 (1995). Vitro and In Vivo Determination of the UV Protection Factor
4. Edlich, R. F., Cox, M. J., Becker, D. B., Horowitz, J. H., for Lightweight Cotton and Viscose Summer Fabrics: A Prelim-
Nicher, L. S., Britt, L. D., Edlich, T. J., and Long, W. B., Revo- inary Study, J. Am. Acad. Dermatol. 43(6), 1009–1016 (2000).
lutionary Advances in Sun-protective Clothing – an Essential 10. Wang, S. Q., Kopf, A. W., Marx, J., Bogdan, A., Polsky, D.,
Step in Eliminating Skin Cancer in our World, J. Long Term and Bart, R. S., Reduction of Ultraviolet Transmission
Eff. Med. Implants 14(2), 95–105 (2004). Through Cotton T-shirt Fabrics with Low Ultraviolet Protec-
5. Gies, P. H., Roy, C. R., Toomey, S., and McLennan, A., Pro- tion by Various Laundering Methods and Dyeing: Clinical
tection Against Solar Ultraviolet Radiation, Mutat. Res. Implications, J. Am. Acad. Dermatol. 44(5), 767–774 (2001).
422(1), 15–22 (1998). 11. Kienbaum, M., Woven Fabric Geometry and Product Devel-
6. Turnbull, D. J., and Parisi, A. V., Increasing the Ultraviolet opment, Melliand Textilber. 71, 737–742 (1990).
Protection Provided by Shade Structures, J. Photochem. Pho- 12. Lord, P. R., and Mohamed, M. H., “Weaving: Conversion of
tobiol. B, Biol. 78(1), 61–67 (2005). Yarn to Fabric,” Merrow Publishing Co. Ltd., Shildon, Eng-
7. Ghosh, S. B., Bajaj, P., and Kothari, V. H., Effects of Dyes and land (1992).
Finishes on UV Protection of Jute/Cotton Fabrics, Indian J. 13. Dubrovski, P. D., and Brezocnik, M., Using Genetic Program-
Fibre Textile Res. 28(4), 431–436 (2003). ming to Predict the Macroporosity of Woven Cotton Fabrics,
Textile Res. J. 72(3), 187–194 (2002).