Abstract
PurposeWool fiber is accepted as one of the natural and renewable sources and has been used in the apparel and textile industry since ancient times. However, wool fiber has the highest global warming potential value among conventional fibres due to its high land use and high methane gas generation. This study aimed to recycle the wool fabric wastes and also to create a mini eco-collection by using the produced yarns.Design/methodology/approachThis manuscript aimed to evaluate the fabric wastes of a woolen fabric producer company. Fabric wastes were opened with two different opening systems and fiber properties were determined. First, conventional ring yarns were produced in the company’s own spinning mill by mixing the opened fibres with the long fiber wastes of the company. In addition, opening wastes were mixed with different fibres (polyester, long wool waste, and Tencel fibres) between 25% and 70% in the short-staple yarn spinning mill and used in the production of conventional ring and OE-rotor yarns. Most of the yarns contained waste fibres at 50%. Recycled and virgin yarns were used as a weft and warp yarn and a total of 270 woven fabric samples were obtained and fabric properties were examined. Also, a fabric collection was created. A life cycle assessment (LCA) was made for one of the selected yarns.FindingsAt the end of the study, it was determined that it was possible to produce yarn and fabric samples from fiber blends containing high waste fiber ratios beyond 50%. All the woven fabric samples produced from conventional ring and OE-rotor yarns gave higher breaking, tearing and stitch slip strength values in the weft and warp direction than limit quality values of the company. In addition, abrasion resistance and WIRA steam stability properties of the fabric samples were also sufficient. Environmental analysis of the recycling of the wastes showed a possible decrease of about 9940034.3 kg CO2e per year in the global warming potential. In addition, fiber raw material expenses reduced yarn production cost about 50% in case of opened fabric waste usage. However, due to insufficient pilling resistance results, it was decided to evaluate the woven fabrics for the product groups such as shawls and blankets, where pilling resistance is less sought.Originality/valueThe original aspects of the article can be summarized under two headings. First, there are limited studies on the evaluation of wool wastes compared to cotton and polyester fibres and the number of samples examined was limited. However, this study was quite comprehensive in terms of opening type (rag and tearing), spinning systems (long and short spinning processes), fiber blends (waste 100% and blends with polyester, long wool waste and Tencel fibres) and yarn counts (coarser and finer). Recycled and virgin yarns were used as a weft and warp yarn and a total of 270 woven fabric samples were obtained using different colour combinations and weave types. All processes from fabric waste to product production were followed and evaluated. Life cycle assessment (LCA) and cost analysis was also done. The second unique aspect is that the problem of a real wool company was handled by taking the waste of the woolen company and a collection was created for the customer group of the company. Production was made under real production conditions. Therefore, this study will provide important findings to the research field about recycling, sustainability etc.
Reference69 articles.
1. Recycling textile cotton and wool waste for producing different counting of yarns;International Design Journal,2018
2. AFIRM Restricted Substances List (2024), available at: https://afirm-group.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/2024_AFIRM_RSL_2024_0131_EN.pdf
3. Comparative study on ring, rotor and air-jet spun yarn;European Scientific Journal,2015
4. Pilling performance and abrasion characteristics of selected basic weft knitted fabrics;Fibres and Textiles in Eastern Europe,2010
5. Altun Kurtoğlu, Ş. (2021), “Case study: textiles”, in Life Cycle Assessment: A Metric for the Circular Economy, Royal Society of Chemistry, pp. 178-211.