This research involved the development of a laboratory procedure, consisting of two variations, and a wear test method for wrinkling fabrics. The intent of the laboratory testing was to have the results obtained simulate those received from the wear test, thus alleviating the need for future wear testing.

The· fabrics tested were three Dacron® polyester/wool blends and one 100% wool from Burlington Worsteds Division.

The laboratory method consisted of balling the wet or dry samples, wrapping them in commercial plastic wrap, securing the packages with elastic bands and subjecting them to centrifugal force in the Bock Extractor.

The wear test utilized 14-inch squares of the fabrics, which were hand basted to the fronts of four nylon tricot half slips, and were worn by four subjects for.sit hour ·periods.

Rating, to the nearest tenth, was performed by a panel of three trained judges using AATCC Method 88A-1964. The samples were evaluated immediately following laboratory wrinkling or removal of test garment and again following a twenty minute recovery period in a conditioning room exhibiting 70 ± 2 degrees Fahrenheit and 65 ± 2 per cent humidity.

Statistical analysis involved Analysis of Variance and Duncan’s New Multiple Range Test.

Major conclusions of this research were:

1. Dry laboratory testing and wear testing showed no significant differences among original sample ratings. All recovery ratings were above a 4.2.

2. All four fabrics received extremely lower ratings when tested wet.

3. The 100% wool fabric received the best overall ratings when dry and the worst ratings when wet.

4. The two lighter weight blends behaved similarly throughout testing.

5. The dry laboratory results correlate with those of the wear test. All four fabrics showed a slight degree of muzziness. Therefore, based on this research data, a prediction cannot be made as to how a fabric with severe muzziness characteristics would perform.