FORT WORTH, Texas — The Association for Contract Textiles (ACT) has found through a survey of industry professionals, that abrasion results can be highly deceptive and in fact there is much more at play than double-rub tests when determining a fabric’s durability. ACT discovered upon gathering evidence that abrasion is not even in the top three claims of performance failure — pilling rates number one, with seam slippage and cleaning issues following as number two and three, respectively.

“The third area of claim has to do with all issues of cleaning problems and we don’t have documented or codified standards at this time,” said Joe Kilby, Director of Contract for Schumacher and Vice President of ACT. “And that is our new big project for 2010, 2011 and 2012. It will take time to [codify these issues]. We recognize that we need to look at that.”

ACT is now embarking on a mission of reeducation in regards to performance standards for abrasion, upending the status quo with its durability survey that included 24 out of 36 members of ACT, all key players in the contract industry. While the double-rub Wyzenbeek test is often the first and only thing a specifier looks at to determine potential durability, abrasion results are very misleading in terms of actual endurance in the field.

“One of the things that happens in a specifying marketplace is when it comes to assessing the potential durability of any product, people tend to only look at the [doublerub] number,” said Kilby. “As an industry we’ve been unhappy with that. It’s a very narrow aspect of the product. If you want to assess how a product performs in a marketplace, you talk to various companies and ask them what sort of claims they get when a product is out in the field and somebody comes back and says, ‘There is something wrong.’ What’s interesting is that the abrasion test is the thing that people look at but in reality, it’s not the indicator of how a product will perform in a true setting.”

One of first things ACT ran up against when trying to cultivate a newfound attitude and understanding of durability was the overly technical specifications sheets which prohibit a true understanding of the information at hand.

“In school we learn that in math, two is better than one, but it doesn’t work that way here,” said Janan Rabiah, Executive Director of ACT. “We are really trying to educate our own members, close to home. A lot of companies have technical people but a lot of [companies] don’t."

"Let’s say I have a great sales person and one of my competitors has a great sales person and they are out showing fabrics to a designer,” said Kilby. “The designer likes it and selects it but then someone else comes along with a fabric [the designer] likes. There is a temptation to look and say, ‘30,000 isn't as good as 40,000. So I’ll choose 40,000.’ It confuses the designers. We are writing these documents with an eye to the fact that if a designer or someone not in our industry directly, could read it and it could have some meaning.”

ACT initially made attempts to improve the durability test through a calibration study, but soon realized that it was largely futile and decided to refocus its energies, reeducating designers about the different aspects of durability and how to assess a product without looking at one number.

“We tried to find a fabric that you put on a machine where if it tests at a certain level you would know your machine was working properly, but how is the product going to be cared for?” asked Rabiah. “All we can do is learn how wide that variability is.”

Both Rabiah and Kilby emphasized that they have no plans to change the abrasion standard because as the standards rise, the choices available to a designer begin to drop, dampening creativity and perhaps eliminating a lower price point for clients.

“We are not changing the standard,” said Kilby. “It’s merely one piece of the puzzle. There is no reason to increase it. The idea is that sometimes all you are really doing when raising a standard is eliminating choices of product and that is not what we intend to do. We need to educate people on how this test is not perfect due to variability.”

Despite frustrations for the common perception of abrasion performance tests, Rabiah and Kilby are confident in their survey’s results, as well as the majority of fabrics available today for the contract market.

“The point is, in the long run, the fabrics are all out [in the field] performing and they are doing well,” said Kilby. “The thing that strikes us when we do these surveys is that millions of yards of fabric per year come from distributors and we actually have so few problems it’s amazing. [The survey] is not being done by the few, it’s being done by the trade association and it really represents our industry.”