With the improvement of people's living standards, people's demand for functional textiles is very large, especially the protective functional textiles are more and more popular. Protective functional textiles include flame retardant textiles, UV resistant textiles, radiation resistant textiles, etc. [1]. With the popularity of functional textiles, the corresponding testing standards need to be further improved. This paper briefly discusses the current standard of UV testing and testing standards at home and abroad.
At present, there is no global standard for testing UV-resistant textiles. The main domestic and international testing standards include EU standards (EN13758-1:2001), Australia/New Zealand standards (AS/NZS4399:1996), and US AATCC standards (AATCC183-2010). And Chinese national standards (GB/T18830-2009) and so on. These standards mainly generate ultraviolet rays with a wavelength of 290 nm to 400 nm through a stable UV light source, irradiate the sample through a monochromator, collect the total spectral projection rays, determine the total spectral projection ratio, and calculate the ultraviolet transmittance of the sample. And protection factor UPF value.
The standards set by each country only specify the requirements of the light source, integrating sphere and filter, and there is no specific requirement for the transmission of light. There are various brands and models of spectrophotometers on the market for testing ultraviolet light, which results in differences in instruments used between domestic testing organizations, and the results of different testing instruments may be different. This paper also briefly analyzes the effects of different test instruments on UV protection performance.
2. UV protection performance testing standard system
2.1 Australian and New Zealand standards
Australia and New Zealand have taken the lead in developing the “AS/NZS4399:1996[2] (Sunprotective clothing-Evaluationandclassification) sun protection clothing assessment and grading standard, which is mainly used to determine protective textiles, clothing and other protective equipment (such as hats) that are in close contact with the skin. The UV transmittance is also raised by the requirements for UV-resistant radiation labels. Fabric samples must be tested in dry and slack conditions. Each sample is required to measure four pieces. After two passes, the sample does not need to be pre-conditioned, but it has different requirements for the test environment, such as relative humidity ( 50 ± 20)%. The UV transmittance at each wavelength obtained by the test can calculate the average transmittance of UV-A and UV-B and the UPF value of the sample by wavelength, and then correct according to a given formula to finally obtain the UPF value of the sample. The standard proposes the classification of textile protection grades and labeling requirements, as shown in Table 1.
Table 1 UPF values ​​and protection levels determined by Australian/New Zealand standards
2.2 EU standards
EU standard EN13758-1:2001[3]((Textiles-SolarUVprotectiveproperties-Part1: Methodoftestforapparelfabrics) textiles - UV protection of sunlight - Part 1: Test methods for fabrics" is mainly for the test of UV protection properties of apparel fabrics, not applicable Products that provide long-range UV protection such as umbrellas, sunshades, etc. The tested samples were divided into two types: homogeneous and non-homogeneous. For homogeneous fabrics, four pieces were tested. For non-homogeneous fabrics, two pieces were tested according to the color or structure. The average UVA and UVB transmittances were measured. The UPF value, which specifies that the tensile state and the wet state will reduce the UV protection of the textile.
2.3 American AATCC Standard
AATCC 183-2010 [4] "(TransmittanceorBlocking ofErythemally WeightedUltravioletRadiationthroughFabrics) Textiles pass or block UV performance test" is used to test the ability of UV-resistant fabrics to block or transmit UV radiation. The tested samples were divided into dry and wet samples. The samples were prepared according to different requirements and tested three times in the area with the highest UV projection rate on the fabric samples. The average UV transmittance was obtained, and the UPF value and UV- were calculated accordingly. The average transmittance of A and UV-B, and the UV blocking rate of UV-B.
2.4 Chinese National Standards
China's national standard GB/T18830-2009 [5] "Textile - UV protection performance" specifies the test method for the anti-sunlight UV performance of fabrics, the level of protection, evaluation and identification. This standard requires four samples for each homogeneous sample to be tested, and two for each non-homogeneous sample by color or structure. The UV-A, UV-B average transmittance and average UPF value and the UPF value of the sample were calculated according to the measured spectral transmittance. For homogeneous materials, when the UPF value of the sample is lower than the lowest value of the measured UPF value of a single sample, the lowest UPF value of the sample is reported as the UPF value of the sample; for the non-homogeneous material, the sample is tested. The lowest UPF value is used as the UPF value of the sample. When the UPF value of the sample is greater than 50, it is expressed as "UPF>50". When the sample has a UPF > 40 and T (UVA) AV < 5%, it may be referred to as an "anti-UV product".
The national standards for testing and judgment of textile UV protection are different, as shown in Table 2.
Table 2 Differences between national anti-UV test method standards
AATCC 183 EN 13758 AS/NZS 4399 GB/T 18830 Scope dry, untreated textile fabric garment wet and dry fabrics stretched state and a non-stretched state of all textile test wavelength range of 280 nm ~ 400 nm 290 nm to 400 nm 290 nm to 400 nm 290 nm to 400 nm Number of samples 2 (one dry and one wet) 4 2 latitude 2 4 Inhomogeneous samples of each color and the structure of at least one sample of each color and the structure of at least two samples of at least one sample of each color of each color at least two samples and the structure of the humidity test environments need need need not need to dry again Sample, temperature (21 ± 1) oC relative humidity (65 ± 2)% Temperature (20±2)oC relative humidity (65±2)% Temperature (20±5)oC relative humidity (50±2)% Temperature (20±2)oC relative humidity (65±4)% Modifying the standard deviation No Yes Yes Yes daylight reference spectral irradiance United States Albuquerque, New Mexico on July 3 at noon in summer Albuquerque, New Mexico July 3 summer noon Melbourne, Australia January 1 winter noon Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA July summer noon reported value UPF value 3, T (UVA) AV T ( UVB) AV 100% - T (UVB) AV Sample UPF value UPF single value T (UVA) AV T (UVB) AV UPF correction value UPF average value Sample UPF value UPF average value T (UVA) AV T (UVB) AV UV resistance UPF≥15, divided into three categories of protection UPF>40, homogeneous sample UV-A average transmittance <5% UPF≥15, divided into three categories of protection UPF>40, UV-A average transmittance <5%3. Test plan and data analysis
3.1 Influence of different method standards on UV protection performance
3.1.1 Test plan
Sample: A piece of homogenous knit fabric was randomly selected.
Protocol: The UPF average, the UPF value of the sample, the T(UVA)AV and T(UVB)AV of the sample were tested using the method standards EN13758-1:2001, AS/NZS4399:1996, AATCC183-2010 and GB/T18830-2009, respectively. Analyze the data.
3.1.2 Test data results and analysis
Table 3 Differences between different standard UV protection test values
AATCC 183 EN 13758-1 AS/NZS 4399 GB/T 18830 UPF average 45.2 41.4 45.3 41.25 Sample UPF value 45.2 35.1 34.9 35 T(UVA)AV/% 3.04 3.24 2.99 3.18 T(UVB)AV/% 1.75 2.31 2.02 2.24It can be seen from Table 3 that the UPF value of the sample measured by AATCC183-2010 is significantly different from the other three standards; the anti-UV performance results measured by EN13758-1:2001 and GB/T18830-2009 are more consistent; AS/NZS4399:1996 The UV protection results were slightly different from EN13758-1. The reason is mainly due to the difference between the standards. AATCC183-2010 does not require correction of the UPF value of the sample. Therefore, the UPF value of the sample tested by AATCC183-2010 is significantly different from the other three standards; AS/NZS4399:1996 The reference solar spectrum irradiance is different from the other three standards, so the UPF average value is significantly different from the EU standard and the Chinese standard test value [6].
3.2 The impact of different instruments against UV test results
3.2.1 Test plan
Sample: Five pieces of homogenous knitted fabric were randomly selected.
Test standard: GB/T18830-2009.
Instrument selection: According to the instruments commonly used to test the UV protection performance of each testing institution, four more commonly used test instruments: Cary50 ultraviolet spectrophotometer, cary100 ultraviolet spectrophotometer and uv1000 ultraviolet visible spectrophotometer are selected.
Protocol: UPF average, sample UPF value, T(UVA)AV and T(UVB)AV were tested using different instruments and the data were analyzed.
3.2.2 Test data results and analysis
Table 4 Differences in test values ​​of UV protection performance of different instruments
1 sample test items Instruments Sample 2 Sample 3 Sample 4 Sample 5 UPF average Cary50 20 twenty four 31 8 125 Cary100 19 twenty two 27 7 71 Uv1000 20 twenty two 28 6 57 Sample UPF value Cary50 20 twenty three 29 7 >50 Cary100 18 20 27 6 >50 Uv1000 20 20 26 6 49 T(UVA)AV/% Cary50 23.23 2.79 7.02 16.16 1.07 Cary100 24.20 3.10 7.95 16.66 1.46 Uv1000 29.94 3.92 8.50 24.56 2.33 T(UVB)AV/% Cary50 0.88 3.93 2.12 12.05 0.63 Cary100 1.15 4.42 2.56 13.42 1.32 Uv1000 0.65 4.43 2.66 14.89 1.66The four different test instruments selected in this test meet the requirements of the standard GB/T18830-2009. As can be seen from Table 4, there are significant differences in the UV protection properties measured by different types of instruments. The instrument type is not clearly defined in the national UV protection test standards. In order to ensure the consistency of data between different laboratories, it is best to use the same brand of instruments when comparing tests.
4 Conclusion
4.1 GB/T18830-2009 and EN13758-1:2001 are basically the same in content; AATCC183-2010 has obvious differences in sample selection, data processing and other three standards; AS/NZS4399:1996 in test principle, sample preparation The test process and data processing are very similar to those of EN13758-1:2001, but they have distinct characteristics in the selection of parameters such as humidity control conditions and solar irradiance E(λ).
4.2 The measured UPF value of AATCC183-2010 is significantly different from the other three standards; the anti-UV performance results measured by EN13758-1:2001 and GB/T18830-2009 are more consistent; AS/NZS4399:1996 measured UV protection The performance results are slightly different from EN13758-1.
4.3 There are significant differences in the UV resistance measured by different types of instruments.
Intelligent Spring Cabinet,43 Inch Spring Mechanism Storage Cabinet,Storage Cabinet With Spring Mechanism,Spring Operation Tool Cabinet
Jiangsu Xicang Intelligent Technology Co., Ltd. , https://www.xciwarehousing.com