DIY: high speed production wheel for high grist singles

Background:
In 2009, I decided that commercial gansey yarns were not as good as what they could be and that I should spin my own. (These singles are about 5,600 ypp grist.)  After some thought, I bought my Ashford Traditional (Traddy) in April 2010.  By August, I wanted more speed.  The Ashford Lace Flyer Kit was a step in the right directions, but I wanted more speed. The Ashford DD Kit actually provided more speed.  However, it became clear that belt slip was the big problem and at higher flier speeds, was the dominate issue. Then, I became interested in higher grist singles and the problem became acute.

A very careful reading of Chapter 8 from Alden Amos Big Book of Handspinning, suggested that the solution was a "one-yarn"  double drive wheel, where a precise relationship between the size of the flier whorl, the size of the bobbin whorl, and the diameter of the bobbin core allow the use of a tight drive band with limited slip.  Thus, in this setup of a DD wheel, there are two drive bands suppling power to the flyer/bobbin assembly.  Such wheel setups were common from circa 1600 until WWI.  However, they are notably absent from the famous "Canadian Production Wheels."  And, such DD setups are not offered by any of the manufacturers that mass market spinning wheels. That is because they take some skill to setup and keep operating correctly.  However, that extra effort is repaid with real spinning ease and speed.

It looks like an ordinary "Traddy", but it is wicked fast.


Procedure:

Understanding "DRS", as the term is used by Alden Amos in his Big Book of  Handspinning (or Preistman's discussion of Saxony Wheels in  his 1925 Principles of Worsted Spinning) is critical to making this work.

An  Ashford high speed flyer whorl and bobbins made for yarns in the 5,000 to 10,000 ypp range.

I started by turning new bobbins to work with the high-speed  Ashford DD whorl at specific DRS for specific yarns with twist calculated for the bobbin cores.  These did not have any bearings, so they chattered and were noisy. However, they proved the concept and allowed me to spin 560 yard hanks of 5,600 ypp single in about 4 hours, which was  faster than I had been spinning such singles with the Standard Ashford High Speed DD kit, and was faster than I had been spinning those singles with the Ashford Lace Flyer Kit.  Moreover, the spinning of such singles on a one-yarn DD wheel was less effort and provided a more consistent yarn.   I was hooked.  What opened my eyes to the possibilities of the technology was a bobbin that I made with a DRS of 1.02 that allowed the effortless production of 30,000 ypp singles.  Yes, it was slow, taking a full 8 hours to produce a hank, but still, it was not something that I considered to be within the range of a first year spinner.  It was an epiphany.

Then, one of my Ashford flyer whorls warped and I had to replace it. Afterward, I knocked the warped  wood off of the steel core and epoxied a piece of walnut burl onto it and turned it down to a (flier) whorl with a diameter of  0.6275", which gives a flier ratio of ~35:1. However, the bobbin whorl diameter for a DRS of 1.02 is 0.61" for a bobbin ratio of ~40:1.  Since this setup is run with a taut drive band I get a useful 2,200 twists per minute from the bobbin, which allows spinning a 560 yards of firm twist 5,600 ypp in a couple of hours or 560 yards of firm twist 9,000 ypp singles in well under 3 hours.

Ashford DD flier with whorls and bobbins to produce yarns in the 5,000 to 10000 ypp range with firm twist. These have a wheel to bobbin ratio of 40:1.  They are very fast.

Tools:
The required wood working tools are a small drill press, a small wood lathe, and turning chisels.  I cut the bottom of the flier whorls with the back of a skew chisel, and the bottom of the bobbin whorls with a skew chisel that has been rounded into a scraper.

The last sets of bobbins have either  plastic bearings from Ashford or sintered bronze bushings from my local industrial hardware store.  Both work, and I have not made up my mind yet as to which is better.

I wind off when there is half or a third of an ounce of single on the bobbin, and thus the bobbins do not need a large capacity, and there is a relatively small change in the bobbin diameter as a result of accumulated yarn on the bobbin to change inserted twist.  This program is for fine singles.  I have a little bobbin winder that supports very rapid wind off without taking the spinning bobbin out of the wheel.

My Traddy has vibration at about 1,600 rpm.  I put on a set of better hinges under the MoA, and I use a white rubber vibration damper under the tension screw, all of which help but do not solve the problem. I can either loaf along at less than 1,500 rpm or treadle hard and get the rpm over 2,000, when vibration dies down again.  Thus, I have a sweet spot for bobbin rpm between 2,000 and 2,200 which is fast with little vibration.

I had some problems with a prototype bobbin whorl swelling in unseasonably wet weather to the extent that it changed the DRS.  However, when both bobbin and flier whorls are made of similar materials (wood) , similar dimensions,  have similar finishes (oil/varnish);  then they expand and contract at similar rates and to similar extents and this ceases to be a problem.

In summary, this is an old, but recently neglected spinning technology that requires a good bit of knowledge and skill to implement.   However, it offers a way to easily spin very soft and very fine yarns that are very difficult to spin with any other technology, and it offers a way to spin  fine yarns very consistently and very fast.

9,000 ypp worsted singles and DRS

Last winter, I decided that (in the old days), there were spinners producing 8,960 ypp singles for weaving into cloth for garments and that these singles likely also got plied up into yarns for knitting.  I wondered what such yarns would be like for knitting.  I thought I would make up some such yarns and find out.  It has been harder than I thought.

And, I did not think that I would take so much criticism for trying to learn to spin better.

I had been spinning for (only) 9 months, and was having no trouble spinning singles from Cotswold ( a coarse wool)  to a  grist of 5,600 yards per pound (10 hanks per pound). I thought, "How much harder could 9,000 ypp be?"  Well, the local spinning teachers were not teaching spinning that fine, so I was on my own.

First, I tried finer fibers rather than the coarse, long wools that I had been spinning.  9,000 ypp was still very hard.  So, I reread The Big Book of Handspinning by Alden Amos because that was the only modern text on spinning that I had, which addressed spinning fine.

He talks about differential rotation speed (DRS) as an aid to finer spinning.  In fact he spends a lot of space on DRS.  He thinks it is important.  So I took it to heart, and I learned the math.  Then, I went into the shop and I applied the math to making flier/bobbin assemblies - over and over.

The "Spinning Police" said, "Forget about all that DRS crap.  Just learn spinning skills"

With finer fibers and my flier/bobbin assemblies providing the correct DRS, I was able to spin 9,000 ypp singles. Soon after, I was able to spin 32 hanks per pound ( 18,000 ypp), and then with well prepared Shetland I was up to 50 or 55 hanks per pound (~30,000 ypp).  Today, I would say that kind of spinning is not really difficult.  Those singles need a lot of twist, so it is a bit tedious, but it is not really difficult. The correct DRS makes the process much easier.

After learning to spin finer with the aid of the right DRS, I am now able to spin rather fine, using Scotch Tension or Irish Tension.  This morning I was using an Irish Tension flier to spin a single from Cotswold wool  to a thickness of about .007".  That comes out to more than 125 wraps per inch, putting it in the range of  16,000 ypp.  Knowing DRS helped me learn some spinning skills.

How many students, studying under the Knitting Police learn those skills in their first year?

That single that I was spinning this morning is thin and strong, but otherwise, it is not "pretty".  It will get plied up into a multi-ply yarn, which will hide its imperfections, so I do not care.  If a pretty yarn was important, I would use a DD flier with the correct DRS.   Today, I can spin singles at 32 hanks per pound using ST at over 150 yards per hour. With a fairly fine wools, I would not even call such spinning difficult. However, the singles that I spin DD are higher quality for much less effort.  And, I doubt if ST will ever let me spin more than 50 hanks per pound with any wool.

No, that is not quite right.  Today, I just do all my spinning on DD with the correct DRS for the yarn being spun -- because it is a lot easier. I am lazy.  I am not even going to try spinning more than 50 hanks per pound using ST.  I would just spin it the easy way.

The moral of this tale is to choose your teachers with great care.  And, sometimes, a book is better than a classroom.

And, let's face it,  professional spinners have a financial interest in making spinning seem difficult and arcane. It increases their value as teachers, and it increases the value of their spun yarns.  Amos is not a spinner, he makes spinning wheels, thus he wants to make spinning accessible. What I really want are good woolens at a reasonable price.  Thus, I want to make both spinning and knitting accessible.  I want higher quality for much less effort in both spinning and knitting.

PS
The old Shetland "Lace weight" yarns were based on singles spun at 16 hanks per pound or ~9,000 ypp.
Modern commercial  "cobweb" lace is a single ply of ~7,000 ypp, thus the modern 2-ply Shetland lace is ~3,500 ypp.  The old 2-ply lace was ~4,000 ypp and the old 3-ply was ~ 2,700 ypp.  The English knitting lace weight yarns were based on singles of 5,600 ypp, so that English 2-ply lace weight was ~2,500 ypp or very similar to the Shetland 3-ply. However, a 3-ply yarn is a warmer and more durable yarn construction.  Shetland lace yarn was better.

The point is that you can spin really nice lace yarn without trying to spin "fine as frog hair".

Supporting your work

Basically, large objects get supported on the lap, whether you are working with circs, 3+1 x 14" DPN with a Shetland knitting pouch, 4+1 x 18" gansey needles, or 6+1 x 12" Scottish needles.

If you are knitting a gansey or rug for the Queen, then it helps to fold-up the completed work, and hold it together with a few stitches of waste yarn so it is easier to turn, and to keep it from dragging on the floor.

Very large pieces can be hung from a hook on a swivel attached to a belt, at or just below the waist or the bottom of the knitting sheath.  Again the object in progress is held in a compact shape with a few stitches of waste yarn.  This works for things like shawls and lace table cloths.  However, this is awkward, and you may have to adjust the yarn path or or switch to continental knitting, but it does allow working the edge of an object that is several feet in diameter and where the row you are working on contains thousands of stitches.  Normally, a modern knitter would think about doing such a object on circs with long cables (tucking the center bulk of the object into a bag to facilitate handling.)  

However, DPN with a knitting sheath allow finer and faster knitting, that cannot be sustained on circs.  And, the weight of the object hanging from a hook suspended from the bottom of the knitting sheath helps to counter balance the weight of the object on the needles.  If museum collections are any guide, then at one time such counter balance devices were fairly common.  Of course, if you are just knitting socks, a clew hanging from the bottom of your knitting sheath, will keep your yarn out of the mud as you knit on the quay and counter balance the weight on the needles.

I had better stop.  I have written too much about too little.

History of a knitting sheath

In the last post, there is a photo of some knitting sheaths and the top one is an open twist design - and one of the prettiest knitting sheaths that I ever made. The open twist design was an effort to reduce the weight of the knitting stick.

It gets tucked into apron strings or a waistband. There are needle holes in both ends.

Originally it was used with 6",  #1 needles.  However, it has been rebored and now fits #2 and #3 sock needles.   It gets used with wooden or bamboo needles.

The open twist was not turned, it was just whittled with a knife from a piece of black walnut firewood, some years ago.  In those days, people were telling me that knitting sheaths were not used in the old days because knitting sheaths were too  much trouble to make.  Thus, I did a long series of knitting sheaths to compare how much labor it took to make a good knitting sheath to how much labor could be saved by using a knitting sheath.

While knitting sheaths/sticks do allow knitting dramatically faster so that the time required to make a knitting sheath becomes trivial -- the real advantage of a knitting sheath/stick is that it allows the production of fabrics that cannot be produced with hand held needles.  Modern knitters, not only cannot produce such fabrics, they have forgotten that such fabrics can be produced.  When I tell or write of the fabrics I knit with a knitting sheath, other knitters do not believe such knitting is possible.

Knitting sticks with spiral designs want an "S" twist.  "Z" twist designs tend to slip out, or slide down. This is a Z twist, and it tends to slide down. There is crack on in it where I had a belt threaded through it, trying to keep it from sliding out of my apron strings.   It is not one of my more  functional designs.

Note, that many old Dutch style knitting sticks had a "X" twist.  This works even better than an S twist, but is harder to generate by hand.  There is a special tool for generating these patterns on a lathe.



Above is much more functional knitting stick.  It is not as pretty. It is  not as traditional, but much more functional. It was rapidly produced on a wood lathe from cherry and maple.

However, it really is possible to whittle a very good knitting sheath from firewood in a matter of a few hours.  If you do not have a drill, you can heat a bit of steel wire to burn the needle holes.

Belts

A knitting group that I belong to teases me about my having more belts than Imelda Marcos has pairs of shoes.

Yes, I have a lot of belts.  Having the right belt for for your knitting sheath or knitting stick or having the right knitting sheath or stick for your belt is critical.  And, just as there is no knitting sheath, that works perfectly on all belts, there is no belt that works perfectly with all knitting sheaths.

If you are working with very stiff needles, then the knitting sheath should be able to pivot. Examples include Dutch knitting sticks:

 

and Yorkshire goose wings

used with stiff needles.  Here apron strings or an elastic waist band or a nylon belt work very well.

On the other hand, a Cornish fish 

used with long gansey needles wants a good leather belt to hold it in place.  However, shorter "Cornish fish" made so the needle placed less leverage on the belt work very well with lighter, narrower, (and slipperier) nylon belts.  For example, this:
 

worked well with leather belts, but very poorly with the nylon belts.

Your knitting sheath and your belt need to work together as a team.

My favorite belt for use with knitting sheaths that hold the needles firmly: 

My favorite belt for Dutch style knitting sticks and Yorkshire goosewings used with rigid needles:

I just warp it around my waist and knot it in place.

I buy leather belts from LL Bean (and every outlet mall), wear them with my jeans and knitting sheaths get tucked into them or threaded onto them.  Knitting sheaths that thread on to belts are a pain to put on and take off, but they do not get lost.

knitting sticks in the Dutch Style

knitting sticks 1Q10, a photo by agres@sbcglobal.net on Flickr.

Tucked into apron strings, knitting sticks were used with short needles for knitting small objects such as socks and mittens

More Plies

How many plies does it take to make a good knitting yarn?

More! Modern knitters have forgotten that more plies are warmer and more durable. If you are going to put that much labor into something, make it good! I came to spinning, because I wanted better yarn.

Modern mill spun is prepared for knitters that knit in accordance with Yarn Craft guidelines (http://www.craftyarncouncil.com/ ). Such knitting is loose. There are gaps between every each stitch and the next. No matter how warm the yarns, heat is going to escape between the strands of yarn, so there is no reason to make the yarns warm.   In other words, if you are going to knit loosely, then there is very little warmth advantage from putting in the effort to spin all those plies. And, spinning more plies is does cost more. Knitters have price-points and the yarn industry is very competitive, so the mills cut cost by designing yarns with as few plies as possible. The existing, competitive, yarns then become the standard for most knitters . 

However, I want better yarns.  In the yarn life-cycle of sheep to to sock,  while finer plies do take extra spinning time, it is not a lot considering overall effort.

How fine a ply? I aim for about about 1/3 of the spin count. For example, Cotswold has a spin count of 30+ hanks per pound, so I aim for 10 hanks per pound (5,600 ypp) for my singles. (Five such plies gives you to 5-ply gansey yarn @ 1,000 ypp.) Jacob has a spin count of 48++, so I aim to spin my Jacob singles at 16 hanks per pound/ 9,000 ypp.

Ok, the 2 ply takes 6 hours to spin and the 5 ply at the same overall grist takes 16 hours to spin. However, whether I knit with 2-ply or 5-ply of the same grist, a pair of socks takes 20 hours to knit. The 5-ply lasts much longer. So by investing an extra 10 hours spinning (or about 25% of total yarn preparation time), I can save myself several days of spinning and knitting replacement socks. This goes double for an elaborate fisherman’s knit-frock. This becomes an overwhelming factor for fine lady's gloves with fancy patterns that might require a hundred hours to knit.

I assert that 9,000 ypp singles are good for weaving garment weight fabrics. Thus, for the last thousand years, spinners have been spinning linen, silk, worsted, and woolen singles at grists near 9,000 ypp for the use of weavers. Some of these singles would have been diverted, and plied up into knitting yarns, well because, knitting yarns with fine plies really are warmer and more durable.  It makes a nice  knitting yarn.  In the context of traditional spinning, 9,000 ypp just is not a big deal.

The other day, I ran across an old pattern for Shetland Shawls. There was a center panel of tightly knit fabric (Shetland 2-ply lace weight (22 wpi) knit on UK #16 needles) that was actually much warmer than any of the fabrics produced from the patterns in Knitting Ganseys with Beth Brown-Reinsel.  I find it funny that the old lace shawls were warmer than the modern fisherman’s sweaters.

A gansey by any other name

I have been going through old sources on knitting, looking at what they made, what the material was, and what they called it. The results have been eye opening.

I started with Weldon's Practical Knitter, The Delineator, and the resources of the Rutt library (http://www.soton.ac.uk/library/bopcris/wsa.html ).  This does not go back as far as I would like as some of the resources in Rutt are more recent than the dates on the homepage suggest.

The first thing I noticed was how many things were knitted from wool.  Convention is to assume that undergarments named in old inventories and wills were woven linen. This may have been the general rule, but Weldon in particular makes it clear that "gents drawers",  gent's and lady's under vests, knickerbockers, gent's, lady's & children's vests, baby's dresses, Spencers, chest protector, lady's under sleeves, girl's and lady's petticoats, lady's under bodice, lady's leggings (for riding), and various chemises were all knit from wool on occasion. While these sources are 19th century, it would seem that that they reflect older traditions.  

Then, I looked at what various garments are called. Fishermen's sweaters knit of wool are called: Jersey Jacket, Sailor Jersey, short-waisted jacket, Guernsey frock, fisherman's Jersey, Boating Jersey, Boating Sweater, and warm undervest.  Again, I expect  that these reflect older naming traditions, and when we see these any of terms in older wills and inventories, we can not be sure that they do not refer to a knit fisherman's garment -- a gansey if you will.

I found it most interesting that the term "gansey" for a fisherman's sweater came into circulation in Great Britain about the time the old Guernsey knitting technique called gansey died out.  And, of course, modern books on ganseys and gansey knitting do not instruct on  the old Guernsey knitting technique.  This is a bit sad.

Other things that I have been reading, and which are available as free digital  editions include:

Old-time tools and toys of needlework

 By Gertrude Whiting

The rural life of England

 By William Howit

How long did it take to make a Seaman's sweater?

When I first asserted that knit "sweaters" were a regular part of a seaman's regular wear, I was told that they took too long to knit to be practical.  However, I have shown that using gansey needles and a knitting sheath such a weatherproof garment can be knit in well under a hundred hours.

Then, I was told that such garments could only have been made after the advent of mill spun because it would have taken too long to spin the appropriate yarn by hand. So, I got a spinning wheel and learned to spin.  In my tests, it is quite possible to hand spin worsted 5-ply (gansey) yarn, and it takes well under a hundred hours to prepare the yarn for one good seaman's sweater.  Thus, the total time from sheep to sweater for a hand-spun, hand-knit seaman's sweater is well under 200 hours.

Assuming uncoated long wool such as Kent, this includes, a day to wash the wool, a day to dye the wool, 16 hours to comb the wool, 50 hours of spinning and plying, and 20 hours of  "yarn management".  I am confident that the spinning could be done in this time on either a flier type spinning wheel or drop spindles.  Yarn management tools in my calculation are limited to niddy-noddies and hand wound balls.  Groups working together (i.e., neighbors) could reduce the required time substantially.  For example, 4 house holds working to together could easily dye 4 lots of wool in one day, reducing that time requirement by 6 hours.  Professional textile workers or well to do households would have had other tools to  improve productivity.

Never the less, it might well have taken 800 hours of hand labor (spinning & knitting) to produce the knit contents of a 15th century seaman's bag including: 2 knit frocks, socks, mittens, hood, and neck warmer. Some of these items would have to be renewed each year, and some would last for several seasons.  Some items such as fisherman's nipper's would have been cut from old socks. And, there would have been pants made of woven wool.  Seaman required specialized clothing to pursue their trade. This clothing was the seaman's tools of the trade,  like a blacksmith's forge and tools or a carpenter's tools.

In addition, the bag would contain clothes to wear ashore, as the clothes worn on-board would have become  highly soiled.

Cable needles and knitting sheaths

Single point needles and cable needles do not work with knitting sheaths.

At one point, I put a lot effort into thinking about ways it could be done.  Then, I asked, "Why do it?"  What are the advantages of SPN and cables?

Well the cable's advantages are that it folds up and is not "pokey" in the knitting bag.  I kid you not, that is a really big advantage - for knitters that take their knitting to tea parties.  I often sit by my kitchen window, drink my tea, and knit. Then, cables have no advantage for me.  If I go out to a tea party, I take shorter needles that fit in my knitting bag without being pokey.



Pocket sock needle case that doubles as knitting sheath.
  Invite me to tea, and I will bring my knitting!

Virtues of Scotch Tension

Previously, I noted that Double Drive (DD) spinning wheels can go faster because they have two drive bands to transmit that power from the drive wheel to the flier assemble. However, you may not really need to go that fast.

If you do not have a real need for speed, “Do you want a DD spinning wheel?” I suggest, not likely.

With DD wheel, the ratio between differential rotation speed (DRS) strongly affects the kind of yarn that you spin. A set DRS can help you spin a very consistent yarn if you are working with the same kind of wool and want to spin miles and miles of the same kind of yarn (production spinning).

On the other hand, if you to work with different kinds of fibers/wools, or you want to spin a different kind of yarn, with a DD wheel you need to change the DRS. This means changing your bobbin or changing your flier whorl or both. If you want to spin different yarns with a DD wheel you need a whole set of bobbins and flier whorls.

Now, some of this can be done by working with a partially filled bobbin to fine tune DRS, and some can be done by adjusting belt tension. However, these steps only take you so far. If you do not have a bobbin/flier whorl combination to give you the DRS that you need for the yarn that you want to spin, you are going to have to fight your wheel for every inch of that yarn that you produce. This takes away from the joy of spinning. This is one reason that people have different DD wheels. Each has a (set of) different DRS, and thus different yarns that they spin easily.

DD wheels come with a very limited selection of bobbin/flier whorl combinations that allow the easy spinning of a very limited number of different yarns. If you have an Ashford Traddy with a (Fast) DD kit, you will find it easy to spin lace singles at about 5,000 ypp. However, spinning 11,200 ypp singles leads to cuss words that cannot be said in public – until you get the right whorl (custom made), and then it goes like butter on warm toast. (Oh, yes, it can be done, but it is not as easy as it is when you have the bobbin/flier whorl combination to produce the correct DRS for that yarn.) If you want to spin 22,400 ypp singles (easily), then you need a different (custom) bobbin/flier whorl combination. Thus, if I want to spin a new kind of yarn, I start by going into the shop and turning a new spinning bobbin that gives me the correct DRS for the yarn that I want to spin. And, when I am spinning ST, I put a lot of yarn on my spinning bobbin. When I am spinning DD, I stop and wind off frequently, because as the bobbin fills, my DRS changes.

Scotch tension (ST) on the other hand will allow you to produce almost any yarn that you want from almost any wool. Small changes in drafting technique, or treadle rate or brake tension are all that is required to easily produce a wide variety of yarns. Thus, Scotch tension is better for people that want to work with a variety of different wools/fibers to produce a variety of different yarns. The downside of ST is that it has lower limits on speed and it is harder to produce a very consistent yarn.

The virtues of DD are ease of producing a consistent yarn very rapidly. The vices of DD are the extreme difficulty of producing yarns for which you do not have an appropriate bobbin/flier combination to produce the correct DRS, and the difficulty of obtaining appropriate bobbin/flier combinations for specialty or unique yarns (particularly for old wheels.)

A New Twist on Lace Fliers

I came to spinning not as a spinner, but as a person interested in yarns that I could not get from commercial sources. As a good student, I asked, “What is the best way to spin fine, high twist singles?” The conventional wisdom that I received was to use a “Lace Flier”.

Lace fliers are Scotch tension flier and bobbin assemblies ostensible designed for the rapid production of lace singles. They tend to be “balanced”, and have low friction bearings to allow them to spin at very high speed. They are flier lead and have small whorls resulting in “high ratios” so that they can turn very fast with a limited treadle rate. Or, at least that is the conventional wisdom.

In fact, at lower speeds (400 – 800 rpm) this is how lace fliers work. As a beginning spinner starts wanting to spin faster, a lace flier helps them insert more twist into their fine singles, and for the beginning spinner, it seems like a lace flier is the ultimate answer to rapidly spinning fine singles.

At slightly higher speeds, things start to fall apart. At low speeds, it takes very little power to drive the flier and bobbin. Windage is minimal. Energy to accelerate the flier is minimal. Energy going into twisting the yarn is minimal. And, (if you oiled your wheel) friction is minimal. However, windage is proportional to the cube of the speed and acceleration is proportional to the square of the speed, with the power dissipated as friction and going into twist being directly proportional to the speed. Together these represent a power consumption function. All the power to the flier is supplied to the flier and bobbin by the drive belt.

Thus, if “windage” consumes 1 watt at 400 rpm, it will consume 8 watts at 800 rpm, 27 watts at 1,200 rpm, 64 watts at 1,600 rpm, and 125 watts at 2000 rpm. This power must be delivered by the drive band. A piece of kitchen string tied with a square knot can easily transfer 8 watts, even if it is sweeping a small whorl. To get that kitchen string to transfer 125 watts (i.e., 2,000 rpm) you are going to have to ply it up into a cable and douse it in a high-friction belt compound, otherwise that belt is going to slip or break. You will be treadling like like crazy, and you wheel will be making all the noises that say it is going fast, but drive belt will be slipping against that little lace flier whorl, so that the flier and bobbin are not going as fast as you think they are going.

Wheel wrights have put great effort into reducing the windage of their lace fliers, but that cubed function for windage is against them. And, in a Scotch tension system, the bobbin cannot go any faster than the flier. In fact, the bobbin speed (and hence twist) will be between 10 % and 30 % less than the flier speed.

The truth is that a high-speed double drive system will provide higher bobbin speed and hence insert more twist into the yarn, allowing faster spinning than a lace flier. There are several reasons for this. Double drive wheels have more than twice as much contact surface with the drive band to transfer more than twice as much power. In a double drive system the bobbin goes 10 % to 30 % faster than the flier. Thus, if you have a Scotch tension wheel and a double drive wheel with the fliers going at the same speed, the double drive wheel will be putting 20 % to 60% more twist into the yarn. I did not know this when I looked at the ratios of various fliers as I prepared to buy my first wheel.

Last summer, I spun 10 miles of 5,600 ypp singles with a lace flier on my Ashford Traddy, and I guessed much of the above. In December, I got a Neiko Digital Tachometer (NDT). That confirmed my worst fears. I was wasting effort. I was treadling and my drive belt was slipping like crazy. (Despite that fact that I have long experience with drive belts in the power range of 0.5 to 800 hp, and I know how to minimize belt slip.) The bottom line is that the small swept area of the lace flier whorl is not capable of handling the power required to drive the flier at much over 2,000 rpm.

The NDT tells me that if I treadle diligently, I can insert a lot more twist into my yarn using the high-speed double drive (ratio stated as 17:1) than I can using the lace flier that Ashford tells me has a ratio of 40:1. For example, the NDT tells me that the Ashford Turbo dive band starts slipping at ~2,000 rpm. It does not matter how much tension I put on it, the band does not drive the Ashford Lace Flier faster, no matter how fast I treadle. From my treadle pace, I think my flier is flying, but the NDT is there to keep me honest.

The NDT tells me that much of what is tossed around about speed of spinning is not accurate. And, it tells me that much of the conventional wisdom about spinning is wrong.



A faster DD bobbin/whorl set for my Traddy that I made by hand.

Moreover, the industry has a odd way of calculating the ratios for DD spinning wheels.  The actual drive wheel/ bobbin ratio affecting spin insertion for the high-speed Ashford DD bobbin/whorl set is closer to 22:1.  The drive wheel/ flier ratio is ~ the stated 17:1, but in practice the bobbin turns faster than the flier, and thus twist insertion is greater than would be expected by comparing the ratios of the DD kit with the ratios of the lace flier kit.

DD is the smart spinner's way to fast twist insertion.

Modern Knitting as Art

Back in art school, I learned that: Art is something that makes people think about their world. In general, art is a non-functional representation of an object, i.e., paintings, sculpture, textile art, jewelry, decorations on objects (color patterns in functional textiles), and public architecture. In the “Art World” functionality has no value. Decoration is everything.

And then we had “crafts”, which were functional objects. We were pushed to find the perfect tea pot, the perfect wine chalice and so forth. If we were going to make a perfect tea pot, we had to learn how to make tea. We had to test our tea pot(s) to ensure that they were perfectly functional. In the craft world, decoration without function is nothing.

I think that most hand knitting over the last 80 years falls into the category of: “Art”. Consider the fisherman's sweater.

Long ago, a fisherman's sweater displayed his social status, but mostly it kept him warm. Warmth was the core function of such a sweater. A representation of the sweater that did not function to keep the wearer warm was, and is “art”. This would include a textile representation that does not provide the warmth of the original sweater. Worsted weight yarn knit on # 6 needles will never come close to providing that kind of warmth, and thus is “art”. Modern hand knit sweaters are decorative – they are knit on big needles, and the wind blows right through them taking body heat with it. If you want a real fisherman's sweater, knit it on #1 needles.

A lot of knitters shout that, “Oh, my lace shawls are so warm!” or “my hand knit socks are completely functional.” Statements that one's woolen objects are “warm” are disingenuous, because the really remarkable thing about this knitting is how little warmth these objects do provide for the amount of wool used to construct them. Yes, lace shawls are light weight and provide detectable warmth and protection from drafts, but their primary purpose is as objects of personal adornment. They are badges that wearer does not have to work (and stay) outside when the weather turns foul. Originally they were worn as badges of a Shetland woman's great skill in domestic chores. A lace shawl showed that she could could do her chores and still have time to spin and knit decorative items for herself. Then, ladies form the south started buying such shawls to show the wearer's family was rich enough to afford a heated environment. If you are wearing a lace shawl as your primary outer garment and you have to stay outside in a cold rain squall, you are going to get wet and cold. In contrast, the Shetland women wore warm clothing under their lace shawls. Shawls are a display of status display rather than for practical warmth. Lace shawls are “warm” only in a culture that thinks that a “fisherman's sweater” knit on US 6 needles from [4] weight yarn is warm.

Hand knitters recite the myth that “any hand-knit wool is warm”, (but that if you go out side, you have to put a jacket on to stay warm.) By commenting on how warm their hand knit objects are, these knitters are saying, “My art is to produce a little warmth from a lot of wool!” In early Victorian times, that was indeed very clever art. It took the concept of “warm wool” and stood it on its head. It made people think. Now, that clever art has become the norm, and warm, hand-knit wool has become the rarity.

Most modern hand knit socks are not durable enough to be particularly functional – in truth, they are no more functional than a painting of socks. (Do not tell me how long your socks last.  Consider the the fresco on the wall.)  Those socks function as personal adornment, as a statement that I can waste my time knitting non-functional objects. The knitter says, “My hand knit socks are more functional than the store bought socks.” Ok, but are the store bought socks functional?

I had a good bit of time in the big department stores over the weekend, and the socks that I saw therein were designed for personal adornment. Thus, saying that your hand knit sock is more functional than what you can buy at Needless Markup, is just not saying much. Those socks are primarily for personal adornment – jewelry made out of textiles. I look at the sock yarns that are being sold to knitters and the sock patterns that are popular, and together these produce more textile jewelery than functional socks. They are not people that walk much. These yarns and patterns produce socks that scream, I am well to do, I do not have to walk, I can drive or take a taxi. I mean they are buying sock yarns made from fine, short staples and they are knitting it loosely. Does the knitter really expect the resulting sock to be “durable”?

One more point, in those department stores, the cheap knit sweaters and hats had gauges similar to that of most modern hand knitting. However, the very expensive (machine knit) sweaters and hats had gauges and textures similar to what I knit. It was what I consider to be warm and durable. It seems that Needless Markup and its suppliers concur with me on what makes a good knit fabric.

In the Begining

I wore a very nice hand knit fisherman's sweater, and I about froze, so I asked the question, “How did the old fishermen stay warm?”

As late as 1844, it was hand knit sweaters. Why were their sweater warmer then our sweaters? I tried different wools and stitch patterns. None of theses were particularly warm. Then in 2004, I came across Gladys Thompson, Patterns for Guernseys, Jerseys, & Arans. Careful reading showed that all the patterns were knit much, much tighter than any of the modern hand knitting patterns.

In those days, I knit on circs – Addi Turbos. However, the Gladys Thompson gauges were so tight they were very difficult for me to knit. So the question became, were those very tight fabrics worth the effort to knit. Were they so much warmer, that they would be worth effort?

I knew from the literature and basic physics that advection (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advection, Air is a fluid that can advect heat ) was a major source of heat loss through clothing. I set out to measure air flow through knit fabrics. I took an old vacuum cleaner and made a little device to measure the pressure drop across a small sample of fabric. I also turned an old water bed heater into a heat source to measure conduction across small samples of fabric by measuring how long it took to melt a standard ice cube. Then I knit and tested hundreds of samples. I tested commercial fabrics and products.

The results were fairly straight forward.

1. Tighter was warmer. (in the range possible by hand knitting)
2. Some stitch patterns (in very tight knitting) dramatically increased the warmth of the fabric.
3. Hand knitting could produce fabrics that were as warm as the best commercial products.
4. Knitting such tight fabrics on circ needles was not practical. (Yes, it could be done but many who tried it, ended up requiring wrist surgery.)

Since science is the systematic collection and organization of information by the making of observations, formulation of hypothesis, and testing of those hypothesis, this was good science. However, there were nothing here that was any more deserving of a peer reviewed publication than any high school student's assigned science lab exercise. This had all be done, and published long before. My work simply calibrated my materials and techniques.

The early posts of this blog describe how I then worked out (un-vented) the old knitting sheath technologies so that I could easily knit much tighter and faster without damaging my wrists. The various garments that I have knit, tested, and used confirm and validate all of the testing that I did on the swatches. The proof of my swatch testing is the garments I knit on a daily basis. The proof of that swatch testing is when I do a demonstration; and, the oldest and most experienced knitters in the room, squeal, “Oh, My God! How do you knit such objects?”

People that have not seen my fabrics, simply do not believe such fabrics can be hand knit. And, they call me a liar, or worse. It is slander and liable, but I know they are just ignorant. And, it is OK! As long as they disbelieve, I know I am knitting much better than they are. If they started believing, they would use these techniques to produce objects that are better than anything I can dream.

The a view of the other side of my world is at : http://climatecrocks.com/2010/12/08/more-ben-santer/

I got it wrong on spindles

I looked at videos of Peruvian spinners, and thought they were using the Berber spiral groove on their bottom whorl spinners.

They were not.  One of those spinners assures me that they were using a half-hitch, and there was no grove on the spindles.

Turns out, that half-hitches on bottom whorl spindles can be set and released faster than the eye can see.  And, it can be done by feel, in any position.  No need for even the Berber Spiral Groove.  What is takes is a lesson and practice.

On the other hand, the ancient Egyptian spinners that were spinning linen threads only 4 fibers thick, did use the spiral groves that the modern Berbers use.

The state of yarn

Knitters talk about how warm a lace shawl is -- that is silly.  Lace shawls are only "warm" in the context of a very mild environment, generally the result of central heat and heated transport.

Ladies that think lace shawls are "warm" have been the primary market for yarn mills for the last 100 years.  The yarn companies have adapted.  For the last 100 years, few people have worn hand knit work clothes, and the wool industry has adapted.  The ladies want softer yarns, so the yarn companies make softer yarns. Now, if you go to a ski resort, you do not see wool sweaters on the ski slopes, you see them in the (heated) restaurants and in the (heated) lodge in the evening sitting by the fire.  Nobody is asking for the more durable fibers, so the wool industry stops growing them, and the yarn industry has stopped spinning them into yarns for hand knitting.

The result is that there are likely 20 good yarn stores within 30 miles of my house, and not one of them carries a a single yarn containing any of the high luster, traditional British long wools. Even if I mail order "5-ply gansey yarn" from the UK, none of the 4 brands in my stash have any long wool in them.  However, if we look at the pictures in Gladys Thompson's Patterns for Guernseys, Jerseys and Arans, we see that high luster long wool was used for every object except the Aran patterns.  This tells us that yarns really have changed in the last 55 years since GT was first published.  What does this mean?

It means that if you buy a "5-ply gansey yarn", it will be spin from fine, short fiber.  It will not be nearly as durable as a yarn spun from long wool. The fibers are thiner and will not tolerate abrasion as well as the coarser long wool fibers.  The fibers are shorter and more likely to pull out of the yarn, and the yarn will fall apart if the object is worn for an extended period of time while wet.  To hold the shorter fibers in place the yarn has more twist and ply and thus is stiffer and requires more effort to knit into a weatherproof fabric.  On the other hand, the high twist yarn shows off cables even when knit loosely. These are yarns that have evolved to meet needs of personal adornment, rather than the practical needs of a waterman.  These are yarns of status rather than for warmth.

Seeking more durable yarns for outer wear, you are likely to find MacAusland's Woolen Works and Cottage Craft in the Atlantic Provinces of  Canada.  These are 2-ply and 3-ply yarns that are spun semi-woolen or semi-worsted. With their coarser fibers and woolen nature, these yarns do have a certain itch factor when worn next to the skin. With their thick plies, these yarns require great effort to knit tight enough to be weatherproof.  And, when knit tight enough to be really warm, these yarns produce a fabric that is stiff.  On the other hand, I have worn sweaters that were hand knit from these yarns to keep me warm and comfortable while pruning apple trees in fierce storms. With their coarse fiber, these yarns are relatively durable. And, over all, they are the most comfortable garments that I have ever worn skiing.

What were the virtues that caused the old knitters to use long wool 5-ply gansey yarn when knitting "ganseys"?  First there was cost, long wool was plentiful and less expensive.  There was durability; both the thickness of the fiber and the length of the fiber contributed to produce a very durable fabric that was tough enough to be workman's clothing in an industrial environment (ships).  The yarn was very supple which allowed it to be knit tight enough to be weatherproof and yet the fabric remain flexible and elastic, and thus very comfortable. The worsted spun structure resulted in a smooth surface, that while not soft, was pleasant to the touch.  Thus, it produced a relatively thin fabric that was light in weight, flexible, and very durable. This met the needs of a sailor working in the rigging above deck, or sleeping in his hammock, or indeed anyone working on the water.

There are a lot of farm stores selling yarns spun from long wools. Some are even an appropriate "sport' weight.  However, they are 2 and 3-ply, which do not have the durability or suppleness of 5-ply. Further more, the the fibers for these yarns "have been through the mill".  That is, they have been commercially processed to remove vegetable matter, and subjected to aggressive picking and carding.  This is much harder on fibers than hand combing.  Thus, the fibers in the yarns sold by "farm stores' tend to be shorter than the fibers in the fleeces sold by the same farm stores.  There are two reasons for this.  The fleeces with shorter fibers tend to be the ones sent to the mill for spinning into yarn, while fleeces with longer fibers are sold to hand spinners.  And, mills tend to break fibers.

Thus, at this instant, if you want to understand why people made such a fuss over British seaman's ganseys, you are going to have to hand spin your own yarn and knit it yourself.  In fact the whole British tradition of  knitting yarns consisting of long wool spun into fine singles and plied up into 3-ply fingerling, 4- ply, and 5-ply is well worth investigating for anyone that is interested in light weight, but very warm and supple clothing.  

Drop spindles do gansey yarn

Spindles for testing

A friend, who is a very experienced spinner with a large collection of good spinning equipment, "demanded" that I make her a better drop spindle.  I thought that very odd as there are lots and lots of drop spindles on the market and this woman attends all the wool shows, and I was not really making drop spindles.

A little experimentation showed why she made her demand.  Most drop spindles on the market are not really suitable for production spinning.  In fact, I had assumed that it was not possible to make any useful amount of worsted spun 5-ply gansey yarn on a drop spindle.   I thought that because drop spindle spinning was so slow, prior to around the year 1500 there would have been no worsted spun yarn.  Fishermen (and others) would have had to rely on semi-worsted yarns spun on a great wheel.  I had heard that the sails of Columbo's ships were woven form yarns that were drop spun.  However, the reality that drop spinning could be "fast" never crossed my mind.

The problem is that when spinning became fashionable, spindles started being made to be pretty rather than functional.  The other day, I had a student who owns 80 drop spindles.  They are all beautiful.  They are all jewelry - articles of personal adornment.  Not one those spindles is particularly functional for rapidly spinning high quality yarn

Moreover, I hear spindle makers spouting all kinds of  nonsense about their spindles and the new owners of those spindles reciting the same stupidity.  As I get deeper into this, I even see silly statements by experts, who really should know better.

For example, a bottom whorl drop spindle can be spun with an elegant "Princess Twinkle" flick in the drawing room.  Or, you can use a thigh roll with a bottom whorl spindle and it is is just as fast as any Egyptian drop spindle.  Or, you can use a two-handed toss on your bottom whorl spindle and it will be faster than an Egyptian drop spindle.  With a two-handed toss on your bottom whorl  drop spindle, you can spin very fast. It is not elegant, but it is fast.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6FpO_bbbinc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i4lzA_aBHCI

In short, it was perfectly feasible to spin worsted 5-ply yarn for fine knitting on drop spindles. It is even feasible to ply 5-ply with the proper drop spindle (and lazy kate with singles guides from LK to plier. In addition, you need a spindle that is made for doing that sort of thing, rather than a spindle design that is made to be easy (cheap)  to produce, or a spindle design that is mostly for personal adornment.

And, Oh! yes, I like that spindle standing in front with the bit of white single on it.  Does it look like any commercially produced spindle you have seen recently?  Sadly, I think not.

Why 5-ply?

Alden Amos says in his, Big Book of Handspinning, that there is no reason to spin 5-ply yarns.

In fact, 5-ply yarns are more supple for their thickness, and thus easier to knit into weatherproof fabrics.

5-ply yarns are also more durable than a 2 or 3-ply yarn of the same fiber and grist.

Those issues may not enter into your decision making, but if you are thinking about knitting a sweater that will keep a seaman warm on a long sea voyage, they are valid reasons.

Handspun gansey yarn

I have not posted for a bit, because I was learning to spin my own gansey yarn.

I had been told that NOBODY ever spun gansey yarn by hand because it was impossible.  The required plies were so fine that they could not be spun by hand and that it was impossible to ply 5 singles together by hand.

Well, lots of pre-mill spun woven cloth had very fine singles - that were spun by hand.  Plying 5 singles together is not that hard.

Thus, after a 3-month learning curve with my little Ashford Traditional, I am turning out my own handspun gansey yarn, and I am very impressed with its competence.

It is stronger and more durable than any of the modern commercial gansey yarns.  I spin it softer, so it is more friendly. It is warmer than modern commercial gansey  yarns.  I like it.

Why in the world would somebody bother to make a 5-ply yarn when it would be easier to spin 3 thicker plies? Well, 5-ply is warmer and more durable.  It is the compromise that provides the most warmth for the least amount of wool.  Given all the effort to prepare the fiber and knit, it is also the compromise that provides the most warmth for the least amount of effort.

Here is the pix taken in November.  The blue on the left is hand combed, hand spun 5-ply at 16 wpi, and the darker yarn on the right is is 5-ply at 14 wpi being knit up as boot socks.

An apology about waterproofing wool

A couple of years ago, a yarn supplier told me that a drop of baby oil would oil ,and waterproof wool. I tried it, and it has worked very well for me on a large number of swatches and objects. I have repeated the advice often.
I now find that the situation is more complex, and the baby oil was acting a carrier for other materials with which I inadvertently contaminated the yarns and/or objects. Thus, the waterproofing that I see in my knit woolens requires more than just baby oil.
Other materials in my crafting environment which may be causing the effect include:

• Spinning oil on a yarn that I frequently use

• Bees wax,

• Petrolatum

• Lanolin.
One, or all of these, is likely contributing to the weatherproof qualities of the objects that I make.
In any case, my weatherproof fabrics are not noticeably oily or waxy, nor do they smell like sheep when wet. Thus, I am taking bout trace quantities of contamination. The advice to knit very tightly, full completely, and oil the wool stands. The ambiguity is what “oil” is best.
Anyway, I am sorry for any confusion or problems that this may have caused.