The stiffness of the sewn cloth depends on the (fusing material)/(reinforcing material) used during stitching.

Question

Is the following sentence correct?The stiffness of the sewn cloth depends on the (fusing material)/(reinforcing material) used during stitching.

Avangi · Accepted Answer

Hi,

This is fine grammatically, but I have some contextual questions. (I'd probably say, "The stiffness of the garment at/in the area of the seam (or, "at the seams") depends on the technique used during stitching.")

1. Can we assume that fusing/reinforcing material is used in sewing all seams of all garments? I think your version does.

2. Since this is a technical manufacturing question, it's important to use the exact terms currently used in the industry in the particular language in question. Generically speaking, "fusing" and "reinforcing" have different implications. I think of "fusing" as "bonding" the fabric by some means other than sewing - i.e., using some sort of adhesive. (Clearly, some are more flexible than others.) I think of "reinforcing" as adding something at the seam (possibly fabric) to guard against the seam pulling apart under stress, since a simple stitch is obviously less strong than the continuous fabric would be. And then, if you say "I'm going to reinforce the seam," you could simply mean to employ a very high density type of stitching; while "reinforcing material" clearly refers to something being added in addition to thread. (Of course that "something" could be adhesive.) Also, the addition of another piece of fabric would tend to prevent the edges of the joined pieces of fabric from pulling away. I'm sure both adhesive and additional fabric are used in some cases.

3. IMHO the expression "the sewn cloth" would refer to the entire garment. It's like saying "the nailed boards." Do you mean the entire boards, or just that part of them where they're nailed? If you say "the weakness of the nailed boards, then you encourage the reader to deduce that you mean "in the area of the nailing." But I think it's better to add "at the joint," or "at the seam," or "in the area of the joint/seam."

Best wishes, - A.

Jackson6612 · Answer

Hi Avangi:

Some garments, e.g.coats, have stiffness even in those parts where there is no stitching. The picture on the given link has stiff areas marked red.

I think fusing material is not the right term to use in the context of my sentence. You are right that fusing has implication of bonding the fabric by some means other than sewing. reinforcing material would be a better choice. Such material is not solely used for the purpose to guard against the seam pulling apart under stress. I have seen some shirts have plastic in theirs collars to add stiffness while others use bukhram. Many coat manufacturers insert plastic kind of thing between the layers of coat at different areas to add extra stiffness so you can look more stylish.

Thank you for the help.

Avangi · Answer

Right!  The inserts in the pointy part of the collars of dress shirts go way back (in time).  They used to be made of spring steel, covered by white enamel paint.  Of course they were never used in the button down collars. I think they got the idea from ladies' corsets/girdles.  Men also wore them at one time.  I recall that in the 30's my mother's had things called "bones," which were up to a foot long (as I recall) with a cross-section similar to what's in the current shirt collars.  These were removable for washing purposes, as are the shirt collar ones.

Jackson6612 · Answer

AvangiThe inserts in the pointy part of the collars of dress shirts go way back (in time).

Can insert be classified as one of the reinforcing materials?

padding is also used in the coats to enhance the look/structure of the different body parts such as around the shoulders. I remembered the line from the movie Sunset Boulevard where Norma was impressed by Gillis' body shape when he comes out in a new suit.

NORMA:
Joe, you look absolutely divine. Turn around!

GILLIS:
Please.

NORMA:
Come on!

NORMA:
Perfect. Wonderful shoulders. And I love that line.

GILLIS:
All padding. Don't let it fool you.

Why did you place in time inside the brackets?

Avangi I recall that in the 30's my mother's had things called "bones,"

30s and 30's both stand for the same thing. Right?

AvangiThese were removable for washing purposes, as are the shirt collar ones.

I would have written as are the shirt collars. Would it have been correct?

Avangi · Answer

Good questions. I'm probably too tired to answer them well. I may mix them all together in a salad.

In the physical world, I think of an insert as something designed for easy removal and reinsertion or replacement - such as a bushing, which is a very unsophisticated bearing. Such things are usually intended to impart strength. The bushing's strength would be provided against wear, or abrasion. In my earlier post I was thinking of the reinforcement of a seam as providing tensile strength, or strength against being pulled apart. In many such cases, stiffness would be an unwanted byproduct.

The addition of a stiffer "reinforcing" fabric in areas where stiffness is desired (as in your coat example with the red markings) would impart a different kind of strength. Let's call it "rigidity." Seams may or may not be involved in these areas. Such added fabric would not be removable, and therefore wouldn't be called "an insert." (I suppose that's arguable. One may insert an extra line into a poem, and just leave it there, but in my experience, an insert may be removed - but then, I've never been employed as a seemstress.

The reinforcing, insertable bones in my mother's corset and the collar of my dress shirt could well be described and classified as reinforcement. They may also be described as objects. It's possible to describe them as "material(s)," but that's sort of a grey area.

Padding, on the other hand, is often designed to be removable, but I'd describe it as "form enhancement" rather than "reinforcement," in agreement with what you said above.

Regarding my parenthetical addition of "in time," it was an afterthought. "To go way back" is something of a fixed expression. Two old friends may say, "We go way back," suggesting that their friendship dates from an earlier era. I thought you might be unfamiliar with the expression, and since I was speaking of insertables, I was afraid you might think I meant they went way (deep) back into the collar - back in space, not back in time. It was parenthetical by way of clarifying the expression.

Regarding my apostrophe in "the 30's," I prefer to use it when the number is not written out as a "word." Don't you think he makes his 7's funny? It's not a possessive, just a plural.

"These were removable (my mother's girdle bones) as are the shirt collar ones" equals "as are the ones in the shirt collar(s)." I guess I'm using "shirt collar" as a compound adjective. Is that permissible? I believe your suggested substitution presents a "parallel structure" problem. Yes, my mother's girdle was removable, thank ***, but I was speaking of the bones ("these").

Cheers, - A.

Nona the brit · Answer

I think the word you are searching for may be 'interfacing'.

I did try to check but dictionaries only seem to carry the technological modern meaning (at least the ones I checked). You could perhaps google 'sewing terms' or something to find relevant words. But, I'm sure I was taught 'interfacing' years ago when I was learning to sew.

Avangi · Answer

I remember "interfacing" from my youth. My mother was always sewing and working from patterns.  I seem to remember it as a sort of lining which was not always fully attached, or anchored.

The stiffness of the sewn cloth depends on the (fusing material)/(reinforcing material) used during stitching.

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions