1.1 本试验方法包括使用马丁代尔磨耗试验机测定织物的耐磨性。该方法通常适用于针织、机织和非织造织物；然而，由于试样架的容量，材料厚度可能会限制测试的适用性。 1.2 以英寸-磅单位表示的值应视为标准值。括号中给出的值是对SI单位的数学转换，仅供参考，不被视为标准值。 1.3 本标准并不旨在解决与其使用相关的所有安全问题（如有）。本标准的使用者有责任在使用前建立适当的安全、健康和环境实践，并确定监管限制的适用性。 注1: 有关测试纺织品耐磨性的其他现行测试方法，请参阅测试方法 第3884页 , 第3885页 , 第3886页 , 第4157页 , 第4158页 和AATCC TM93。 1.4 本国际标准是根据世界贸易组织技术性贸易壁垒（TBT）委员会发布的《国际标准、指南和建议制定原则决定》中确立的国际公认标准化原则制定的。 =====意义和用途====== 5.1 验收测试- 这种测试方法被认为不符合商业运输织物的验收测试要求。 这种测试方法的实验室间精度很差，而且由于磨损测试本身的性质，技术人员经常无法在实验室内部和实验室之间就同一类型的测试仪器获得一致的结果。虽然这种测试方法不建议用于验收测试，但它很有用，因为它被广泛使用，尤其是在美国以外的地区。 5.1.1 如果在使用该测试方法进行商业装运验收测试时，由于报告的测试结果存在差异而引起争议，买方和供应商应进行比较测试，以确定其实验室之间是否存在统计偏差。 建议为调查偏差提供合格的统计协助。作为最低要求，双方应采取一组尽可能均匀的试样，这些试样来自大量相关类型的材料。然后，应将相同数量的试样随机分配给每个实验室进行测试。两个实验室的平均结果应使用未配对数据的学生t检验和测试开始前双方选择的可接受概率水平进行比较。如果发现偏差，必须找到并纠正其原因，或者买方和供应商必须同意根据已知偏差解释未来的测试结果。 5.2 耐磨性也受到试验条件的很大影响，如磨料的性质；磨料对试样磨损区域的可变作用、试样上的张力、试样和磨料之间的压力以及试样的尺寸变化。 5.3 磨损试验都会因特定试验期间磨料的变化而发生变化。研磨剂必须定期更换或定期对照标准进行检查。对于一次性研磨剂，研磨剂只能使用一次或在有限使用后更换。对于使用硬化金属或等效表面的永久性磨料，假设该磨料在一系列特定测试中不会发生明显变化，但显然，不同实验室使用的类似磨料不会因使用不同而以相同的速率发生变化。 永久性磨料也可能因从测试织物中拾取整理或其他材料而发生变化，因此必须定期进行清洁。相对磨损量的测量也可能受到评估方法的影响，并且可能受到操作员的判断的影响。 5.4 在实验室的试验机上测量的纺织材料的耐磨性通常只是影响材料实际使用中磨损性能或耐久性的几个因素之一。虽然“耐磨性”（通常以特定机器上的循环次数表示，使用特定技术产生特定程度或数量的磨损）和“耐久性”（定义为在使用中承受退化或磨损的能力，包括磨损的影响）经常相关，但其关系因不同的最终用途而不同，并且在根据特定磨损数据计算预测耐久性时可能需要不同的因素。 5.4.1 在各种材料的耐磨损性差异较大的情况下，实验室测试可以可靠地作为相对最终使用性能的指示，但在实验室测试结果差异较小的情况下不应依赖实验室测试。一般而言，除非有数据表明实验室磨损试验与预期最终用途中的实际磨损之间的特定关系，否则不应依赖这些数据来预测特定最终用途的实际磨损寿命。 5.5 这些一般观察结果适用于所有类型的织物，包括机织、非织造和针织服装织物、家用织物、工业织物和地板覆盖物。 因此，发现有许多不同类型的磨损试验机、磨料、试验条件、试验程序、耐磨性评估方法和结果解释并不奇怪。 5.6 迄今为止为耐磨性开发的所有测试方法和仪器可能在不同操作员和不同实验室获得的结果中显示出高度的可变性；然而，它们代表了目前使用最广泛的方法。 5.7 由于确实需要测量相对耐磨性，因此标准化的测试方法是可取和有用的，可以澄清问题并减少混淆。

1.1 This test method covers the determination of the abrasion resistance of textile fabrics using the Martindale abrasion tester. The method is generally applicable to knit, woven, and nonwoven fabrics; however, material thickness may limit suitability for testing due to specimen holder capacity. 1.2 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to SI units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard. 1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. Note 1: For other current test methods of testing the abrasion resistance of textiles refer to Test Methods D3884 , D3885 , D3886 , D4157 , D4158 , and AATCC TM93. 1.4 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee. ====== Significance And Use ====== 5.1 Acceptance Testing— this test method is not considered satisfactory for acceptance testing of commercial shipments of fabric. The between-laboratory precision of this test method is poor and, because of the nature of abrasion testing itself, technicians frequently fail to obtain results in agreement on the same type of testing instrument, both within and between laboratories. Although this test method is not recommended for acceptance testing, it is useful because it is used widely, especially outside the United States. 5.1.1 In case of a dispute arising from differences in reported test results when using this test method for acceptance testing of commercial shipments, the purchaser and the supplier should conduct comparative tests to determine if there is a statistical bias between their laboratories. Competent statistical assistance is recommended for the investigation of bias. As a minimum, the two parties should take a group of test specimens that are as homogeneous as possible and that are from a lot of material of the type in question. The test specimens then should be assigned randomly in equal numbers to each laboratory for testing. The average results from the two laboratories should be compared using Students t-test for unpaired data and an acceptable probability level chosen by the two parties before the testing is begun. If a bias is found, either its cause must be found and corrected or the purchaser and the supplier must agree to interpret future test results in light of the known bias. 5.2 The resistance to abrasion also is affected greatly by the conditions of the tests, such as the nature of abradant; variable action of the abradant over the area of specimen abraded, the tension on the specimen, the pressure between the specimen and abradant, and the dimensional changes in the specimen. 5.3 Abrasion tests are all subject to variation due to changes in the abradant during specific tests. The abradant must be changed accordingly at frequent intervals or checked periodically against a standard. With disposable abradants, the abradant is used only once or changed after limited use. With permanent abradants that use hardened metal or equivalent surfaces, it is assumed that the abradant will not change appreciably in a specific series of tests, but obviously similar abradants used in different laboratories will not likely change at the same rate due to differences in usage. Permanent abradants also may change due to pick up of finishing or other material from test fabrics and must accordingly be cleaned at frequent intervals. The measurement of the relative amount of abrasion also may be affected by the method of evaluation and may be influenced by the judgment of the operator. 5.4 The resistance of textile materials to abrasion as measured on a testing machine in the laboratory is generally only one of several factors contributing to wear performance or durability as experienced in the actual use of the material. While “abrasion resistance” (often stated in terms of the number of cycles on a specified machine, using a specified technique to produce a specified degree or amount of abrasion) and “durability” (defined as the ability to withstand deterioration or wearing out in use, including the effects of abrasion) frequently are related, the relationship varies with different end uses, and different factors may be necessary in any calculation of predicted durability from specific abrasion data. 5.4.1 Laboratory tests may be reliable as an indication of relative end-use performance in cases where the difference in abrasion resistance of various materials is large, but they should not be relied upon where differences in laboratory test findings are small. In general, they should not be relied upon for prediction of actual wear-life in specific-end uses unless there are data showing the specific relationship between laboratory abrasion tests and actual wear in the intended end-use. 5.5 These general observations apply to all types of fabrics, including woven, nonwoven, and knit apparel fabrics, household fabrics, industrial fabrics, and floor coverings. It is not surprising, therefore, to find that there are many different types of abrasion testing machines, abradants, testing conditions, testing procedures, methods of evaluation of abrasion resistance, and interpretation of results. 5.6 All the test methods and instruments so far developed for abrasion resistance may show a high degree of variability in results obtained by different operators and in different laboratories; however, they represent the methods now most widely in use. 5.7 Since there is a definite need for measuring the relative resistance to abrasion, standardized test methods are desirable and useful and may clarify the problem and lessen the confusion.