Discussion on Issues Related to Fibre Generic Names and Content Labelling (1) Issues Related to the Application of Fibre Generic Names

Introduction

Fibre content labeling is key in textiles and clothing. Clear labels boost consumer willingness to buy. Accurate labeling affects consumers’ choices and the manufacturer’s credibility. If a manufacturer knows the label is false and continues to sell, it is a problem. So, correct labeling of fiber name and content is crucial for consumers and producers.

‘The Labelling of Textile Fibre Content’ has detailed labelling rules. It covers fibre content, labelling principles, expression methods, and conformity checks. However, many problems remain in its implementation. The cause is a lack of consistent understanding among all parties. For example, the names of fibres, especially new ones, are unclear. New materials and production firms seek novelty and uniqueness. This raises issues with how to label these fibres. Also, the attributes of fibre products and their content are not well-defined. This leads to different understandings of basic concepts, like fibre content labelling. The standard is not a testing standard; it has no testing provisions. This has confused different institutions and personnel. It has led to mixed results and insights, which confuse firms and law enforcement. In practice, the fibre name and content identification problems are more.

1. On the application of the fibre genus name of the relevant issues

The standard says the fibre label name must use the standard name. If there is no standard name, it must refer to the appendix label. In practice, we will encounter various situations, and it is easy to deviate.

1.1 The standard also requires caution when using some fibre names in the labelling.

The standard defines the main textile natural fibres and chemical fibre names. In principle, you can use these names on various occasions. However, some fibres are rarely seen in trade or are not widely produced. Others lack a method of identification. This makes it hard to determine the true attributes of the fibres used. If the product’s instructions rush the fibre names, it may cause trade disputes. So, we advise caution when using fibre names in product labels. In trade disputes or market checks, using these names may cause issues. So, use them with caution. It has natural fibers in monga silk, Alafi wild silk, weasel hair, seal hair, croton fibers, Shovan Tianhua hemp, Hernacunnan hemp, and Danding Crane feathers. It also includes chemical fibers in polyurea, tri-vinyl, and polybenzimidazole fibers. This is unless the inspection agency has a reliable way to identify them.

Some product and method standards do not identify the fibre’s name. They do not specify a way to identify the fibre. But, there are standards for the names of these fibres. They are easy to mark. Examples include: bamboo charcoal polyester staple fibre, bamboo charcoal viscose staple fibre, bamboo viscose fibre printing and dyeing cloth, hemp viscose staple fibre, selenium-enriched viscose staple fibre, and chalcone viscose staple fibre. If the instructions for use label the above viscose staple fibres.

If the instructions for use mark those fibres, there is no mistake. But, the risk is high. Under regular circumstances, we can’t confirm their authenticity. So, I suggest the following:

▶ Common natural fibres are cotton, kapok, flax, ramie, hemp, jute, and silks from rooibos, mulberry, and quassia. Also, sheep’s wool, cashmere, camel’s hair, and yak’s hair are common. So are mohair, alpaca’s hair, rabbit’s hair, and angora rabbit’s hair. If a natural fibre is rare, and you can only confirm its major category, you cannot label it as cotton, hair, hemp, or silk. Mark it as: other hemp, silk, special animal hair, or plant fibres. The ‘other’ refers to common fibres outside the other categories. Also, the processing of natural bamboo produces bamboo fibre. Some companies label bamboo pulp viscose as bamboo fibre. This is wrong. Others label cotton or hemp viscose as natural cellulosic fibre. This is also wrong.

▶ A special case of natural fibres is in the process of fibre treatment or textile finishing (such as mercerization, de-scaling, pulling fine, functional finishing, etc.). The fibre morphology can determine the fibre class. It can show serious damage or large changes. But, it has been difficult to identify the specific categories. In this case, you can also label it with a major class, but add the ‘class’. , such as cotton, hemp, wool, or silk, to show the distinction for unconventional fibers.

▶ For new chemical fibers with unknown properties, label them as ‘new xxx fibers.’ For modified fibers, use ‘modified xxx fibers.’ This includes new, regenerated cellulose, viscose, and synthetic and polyester fibers. Synthetic fibres, new polyester and polyolefin fibres, modified nylon, and viscose with bamboo charcoal. We will discuss modified and new fibres later.

Label the above suggestions as “can not be abused.” But, existing tech can’t identify cases accurately. Someone should explain this. We should exclude issues due to inability to identify them. These should not be an excuse for some companies to raise product prices. Also, for both natural and chemical fibres, if it insists on marking the fibre with a name similar to the aforesaid partial, new, strange, and special fibre, it must provide the relevant identification, verification method, or approved certification report.

1.2 Issues related to the application of chemical fibre genus name

The standard lists the industrial production of various chemical fibers. It uses the main polymers of their genus names, the basic chemical fiber names. In principle, the labels should mark the basic names. However, some cases deserve attention.

1.2.1 The use of subdivided names of chemical fibre genus names

The standard lists a genus name. It’s the basic genus name. But, some names are not the ‘smallest fibre unit’. They’re only the ‘basic class genus name’ or ‘generic property name’. We can subdivide these names. Each subcategory has a different chemical formula.

For example, polyester fibre (PES) includes:

polyethylene terephthalate fibre (PET, or polyester for short)

polypropylene terephthalate fibre (PTT)

polybutylene terephthalate fibre (PBT)

Polyester is the most common polyester fibre. It has a large volume and a wide range of uses.

Next, we can subdivide polyamide fibre (nylon) into:

Polyamide 6 (nylon 6)

And polyamide 66 (nylon 66)

Polyamide 1010 (nylon 1010)

Aromatic polyamide fibres (aramid) include:

para-aramid fibres (aramid 14, aramid 1414)

meso-aramid fibres (aramid 1313)

Also, we divide polyvinyl alcohol fibres into:

acetalated polyvinyl alcohol fibres (vinyl alcohol fibres)

non-acetalated polyvinyl alcohol fibres

Lastly, chlorine-containing fibres include:

polyvinyl chloride fibres

chlorinated polyvinyl chloride fibres

Vinyl chloride fibre, polyvinyl chloride fibre, and chlorinated polyvinyl chloride fibre. Also, perchloroethylene fibre, among others.

If a way exists to confirm a ‘genus name’ under a sub-class of fibre properties, we can label it directly. If not, it’s safer to label the basic genus name. For example, the basic genus names are polyester fibre, polyamide, and aramid. They can be directly marked. If necessary, and if you can, mark them as polyester, polyester fibre (PBT), polyamide 66, and aramid 1313. Some years ago, some claimed you can’t mark polyester, only the polyester fibre. That was a one-sided statement.

Incidentally, in a similar situation, natural fibres include cotton, kapok, and sheep wool. They are in fine wool, modified wool, and merino wool. Cashmere is in some velvets, like white, green, and purple. In the raw materials trade, these names are common. Companies often want to mark their products to show a ‘special identity.’ But, after general processing, it’s hard to distinguish these fibres in finished products. So, avoid marking these subdivided fibre names. If there is a reliable way to identify them, it’s fine to mark them. Of course, if there is little certainty in identifying the basic fibre, it’s best to minimize the risk.

1.2.2 Practical application of chemical fibre genus names

Scientists base the genus name of chemical fibres on their ‘main characteristics’. This mainly means the chemical properties of the main polymers. It also includes other traits from the production process. So, the fibre’s chemical structure or formula is not the only factor in deciding the genus name. So, the fibre’s chemical structure and formula do not solely determine its genus name. The same chemical structure can have different traits. This is due to various processing techniques, and so on.

Viscose, modal, lyocell, and copper fibres are the same. They share the same chemical formula and properties. Their different processing methods result in different physical structures and properties. Thus, they have different names. PE fibre and UHMWPE fibre have the same basic formula. The manufacturer makes the UHMWPE fibre using the same formula as the UHMWPE fibre. But, this is not the only factor in naming them. A special process made UMPE. It gives the fibre ultra-high molecular weight, crystallinity, and orientation. It has high strength and a high modulus. Acetate fibre (di-acetate) and tri-acetate fibre have the same chemical formula. They differ only in their degree of esterification and their genus names. Chitin fibre and chitosan fibre differ in their deacetylation and genus names.

The standard of the above groups of fibres has a separate genus name for each fibre. Under normal circumstances, we can distinguish them. The product instructions should clearly mark this on the label. However, in some cases, raw materials and fiber processing may cause issues. So may product post-treatment. This can lead to atypical fibre structures, variations, fuzzy boundaries, or fibre damage. We may not be able to confirm the genus or to tell apart mixed fibres. In such cases, use names from some major or similar categories, such as:

▶ It’s hard to tell apart mixed viscose, Lycra, modal, and copper-ammonia fibers. A label can combine them or use the broad category ‘regenerated cellulosic fibers.’ For example, ‘viscose fiber + modal 100%’ or ‘(Lycra + copper fibers) 55%, 45% cotton.’ ‘Re-fibre 55%, cotton 45%’ is a classification term in the standard, though not in its basic attribute name. ‘Regeneration of protein fibre’ is the same as the classification name. You can use it in specific cases.

▶ If a product has any viscose, Lycra, modal, or copper-ammonia fiber, we can call it “regenerated cellulosic fibers.” But, some of the above reasons make it impossible to know its properties. If you modify the fibers, employ new materials or processes, and if the fibers exhibit mixed traits, use “regenerated cellulosic fibers” or “new regenerated cellulosic fibers.” Alternatively, use “new regenerated cellulose fibres” and other names.

▶ Acetate fibre is the same as di-acetate and tri-acetate fibres. If manufacturers do not test a product with di-acetate or tri-acetate fibres, they may label it as acetate or cellulose acetate. The only difference between di-acetate and tri-acetate fibres is their esterification degree. It is about 2.76. So, some fibres may have mixed or atypical traits. They may also modify or use new materials or processes. Labeling of acetate fibers, new acetate fibers, or other names should allow for changes, new raw materials, or processes.

▶ Chitin fibre and chitosan fibre are the same. Chitin, also known as chitin, undergoes deacetylation to become chitosan. So, it is also called deacetyl chitin, soluble chitin, and chitosan. Generally, chitin is about 1.5 times more deacetylated than chitosan. So, it is unnecessary to label chitosan fibre. Chitosan has a chitin deacetylation degree of 55% or more. But, different standards define it differently. For chitosan fibre, the deacetylation degree must be over 90%. For chitosan, it must be 75% or more. The production, due to the degree of deacetylation, is not neat. The chitosan and chitin fibres have the same deacetylation level. So, some chitosan and chitin fibres are not very different in their characteristics. In this case, do not distinguish between chitin and chitosan fibres.

These factors, plus the fibres’ similar performance, led to a small difference. So, consumers felt it. Testing should consider all practical factors. Be cautious in issuing a ‘does not meet’ conclusion. Tests identify ‘re-fibre’ as viscose, Lycra, modal, and other ‘re-fibre’ fibres. They should not rule it as ‘does not comply with’. Tests marked ‘Viscose fibre’ are for lexan, modal, or re-fibre. It is not appropriate to judge non-conformity. Tests marked ‘three vinegar fibre’ are hard to confirm. Those marked ‘acetate fibre’ are also questionable. We should not judge it as non-conforming.

Polyethylene fibre (ethylene) and ultra-high-strength polyethylene fibre have very different forms and properties. Do not confuse them. The labels must match the actual products.

Polyester film, polyamide film, and polyethylene film are the same as their fibres. However, different processing methods result in large differences in their appearance and properties.

 

For more information on textile testing methods/standards or textile testing machines, contact us:
What’s App: +86 180 2511 4082
Tel: +86 769 2329 4842
Fax: +86 769 2329 4860
Email:  [email protected]