w... t . ca“ .V.... .v. .V... V... .33 ..-
. :C . .

 
 

 

V
. V .1
V 2 ... V
- . 03‘ V) ... am 9 V .V... V n . V V. V V 9 ...V'
8 .1. V n .V. .. no. ..1 .Vu V- ... V 2:...
v V . . V V .V . V . . V .V
1 o v... ... V .1 V. V .11. v ...d-
.V . V V V . V ... ._ V V . V
o . . ‘- ... ... . 1v. 4...! V V. V .V .
1 V . .1 V V V V V V". V? . V. V
V .1. .~ V V 0 V... o.
V 1 V. V. ... ... , .1 ‘
I V I .-
1 V . o o ..V . . V
V V . . V. V. ~.. 1 V. . _
V .11 V V
1 V V. “V ". u: s V V V
.... t. . V V . .V.... .. ...
V V V. ... V V . o . .
. V o . V. V .. ... . V. V ..V.. .03. a.
. V V V. . V V -V
V ..V. _ V... V ...V ......IVVVVV
V .V V V V .- V 0.. .... V.
V _ V V . .0 VV V 1V
V V V ‘V V - ...VV 0
. . V V .
-— v o. v o O. _
V n V V V... . c
I . v V V . 9 V v. V . V. P
A u >
V o w u
. V ... . V. V.
C n
I s A I
a V .L' . ... 0-. 9.. V
‘0 .1. v -
o . V V . V a «I
V V . o .
C
.V V. V. V 0. . n. V 1 ... V V V V V
V . . V . .V . .V V . V . V . . V . V. V .
V. V. 0.. a... V ... .. V. . V . V V ... V . V . V VV V.. V V. .V V. V . . V V. mo
V .1 V. 1.. o . a VUWVVIVO ‘VcV I: n 1 .v1 Oat. V V . V V . V V . .V V. V . . V .V . . V _. V V. V. V V V V. . V ..V.. V V. . V V. V V” V \rlo
— 1 . .V . . . .u n V. - V ”V. . . .
... n 'V .- AV 1 . V _ a... :- n . 0 V ..V‘V. . V . V V VOV
I. V ... ...! . V V . . n V .V V V V . V V. . .V V. 1.. V . .3
. u s I .V vs. ... . V . V. V. V . V . . . V V V V . . V V V . V .5 vi. V
. . ... ... V . V V V _ . _ . . . _ . V. V V V .. V VV _ V . .V . . 110.4 0.1.21. . . .1... .VHHVdOVV
V V V P V V V V .Jvo- V. ... ... I ...V‘ V 1.11.». .V...
V c ‘ .V V Q 6: . ~VVV o o . n.... V. o u .3... V 1 (.C’OVIV 0.0.21. “170.)3
. V. V . v‘ . .
. 1 V . V V 1 . V 0 V... V a V ..F........O. V V .V :39“) L V V V 1— ud.“..;
.\ .V V V . 0 V V V... 1 . V . ... . V V. 1 V ... m... V .7 V V. . . tkvelfi.
1 V a . ‘0 . u . V c . V V. V. V 10:...
n- o p V n .... V V . V . .V
v 1. _ p u? . .Vs V V...... \ to. v I .0 .
V s .V V V . V. ...-q 0"... V . V n V V V V V . V . V V V V O. . ‘. .JVVVAVV
. V . V V. .. V V. p ... .9 V V V. V . .. V V V . .V V V V . .. V _ V . . V V ... V V V. . .V .V 9 .- .. 1“.
... V ..V. V ... V . .1. In . .V . V. . V . .. V .V . . . V V V . V V. . V V . VVVVhHVVVd .V....
o . . Y. n. ~ V . “1’. .o’. 1.. V . V V V V V . V . u 1 s..\.. .40}...
V V VVV ... . . V V . V .V . .V .V V V. . V. .VV
V ... 1. n V V . 0 .V . . V ... V. . V V .. V V V V V V V V V V. V . V . . . v V
V . a . V . V V. 1 .
V II. a. O
I . u 0 h A ....- ..I. V. p.‘ .4 O
. .. V. . . . V - V
1 .o < n n .o. o o. _ u L...
n u: .-
. ..V...V V . V V . V .n. 3..
. V V V . VI.1-.V.. V V V . . V . V .. V .
V V.. . V. V. ...-.0 V. ... 9.. .V V. V. . V V. . V. V . . .V. .
V O ...V V. v. ... V 1 V V V... V .V. V V. . V . V V. . V . V . V . V V . . . . . . . . .. V . .V....\JVUV. c VrVumV
. V VI . v.1 . 1 . a. ..V . V _ V V V V. . V. V. . V V . . V . V V .. . XVVVoVQV\ V
V ... .... V V .V V V... V... 9.. ... _ V . _ V . ... . V. .V .n V V ...VV. V V V .. . V .0fi..o.9
VV VV 0 1... . . V V... V V V. V. Y. ..V‘V... ’ V
... V. .V V V.. V V. . 9V V. V. V V . . V V V . .V V . V V V . . _ . . V ..V.....V‘PO? . (..V...V...at‘ltfl . “5
V V. ... V... V V . V . .. V... V V .. . . : . . V . V V . V. 5.. ... 19v .... «...... VI VA
. VV . . .V . V V V. . . . . V . V . . _ . V V .V . V V." 1.. AV .1. ‘u-‘oin .
V V V V . V- V V . V. .V V. V V V. V V. V V V. . V .V . :1. . ...
>. V . . V V V”; V_ . . v. V. .V _ V _ . . V a. .V V _ . . V _ . V V VV .. . . 1t V u .3”.....u J. Hi. I
V. V VV. I . I. V . .V. V a. V .V . . . V V V V V V V V V . V V V .V V V V . . . V t.
V I. V . . V... c n V 0. V... .a. V. VV V V V. V V .. VV V V. V . V VV V. .V. . trgflqoln .Ih‘IVu-V
r V VJ. . V . V. ._ o . . _ 4.} _ V _ .. . . _ . V V V V . V. V V .V V V . . VV . V V V V V V .. D. A: min ....
V _ .4 V V. V . V. ..."

. V . . V V 1 V V V .V... .... t V... ..V..... V V V .V V . . V . V .V . . V V . . V. V . V V . . V .V V . . V. .. V . . V V .. . .fifiiO! Yn\ft‘h¢‘..
.1 .V ..V. .V.-. .V V . ..V V. . V . V. VV . . V. .. V V V. .V V V. ... . . . . V V V V. V V . . V. V V V . . . .V _ ‘.“¢VQVV.PV
... . . .V V V . V .V _ V _ V . V V V V V . V . . . . _ .V V V __ V V . V Visa. uh.) 1..
V V s V. 7.1.. V . V. .V V VI... V . . . . . V .VV. V V . V V U . . V . . . V V. .V V . . _ . V V V . V V. V FL... t... ......V V . a. 1””...
v . ... V. 4... ‘0.... .V V. V . . V V V . V . V V . . V . . W V. . V . V . . V V. V. V . V V V .1voumv r {0 V.
. . V . gV .. V V V V V. V V. V V .4 H ..VV .V V . V V. V V .V .V.. H. V. ... V V V. V V . V V V V V . . . VV ..1 ‘OVVV’I’QQ . a .V. .
. V . . .V ..V.. ..V . ._ V. V”. . ._ ... V .V V V V V V V. V. .VVVVVV V V.

 

 

. V
. V V V . V V .o I. . o i 1‘).
. V 9
V V I O V .. . V. V. 1 ... .. ..u VVN... "u‘hka
l . _ V .. .... 1. 1 1 V V . V . V . . V V V V V V . V V H V V V V . V a. V a. kh‘
V V . 1. V 1 V ..V .. VV V V. V. . V. V V . . V. . . . V V V. V . . . .... -
V V. . V V V . . V. V V . V V V V V V . ...VV ... V V . V. V' 1 .1 o. I
Va . V.V.. .V...- V. V V. . . V V . . V . V . _ V V . V . . V V . V V V. V . .V V. .V V. V . . 51le.. PthVVV.“VV
. V V.. o . V I V“. V V. . . . . V . V . V . V. V V . . '0 13.1... I
o . V V. I... L- . ..Va" 04
. V V V . .
. . .. V . . . . V. V V V .VAVVVVVJV..V V.
V V _ . v. _ o a V . .V V V V . . . . . . V . .V V. _. .V . V V. .. . .V . V. . . - 713.10! 7.91.!
.1! . . V o. . . . V. . V V. V . V V . . V . . . V V V V. V V V .913...- (’6
o I u on V. V V. V V . V V V . V . V . :1 [...~
. n V V V 1: .V V. 1 . V V V V
f 1 v. 1 V V . . .7:
. V . V. V V V ....
. .. 1 V V V .V‘ V.
. V u a V V: 1 V. .0
. . V
V V V V V. V V. V- V V. V .
. h I. u 0
. u o 1.. . . . V . . V. . 1 V
- u a
u I V.
V
. .V V 1..
V .
O . n n. .V . V .9 0 V V. V V . V .V . V ..V. . VV V . V . .. V V V . . . V. V .V . V V V V .. . M...‘ vii-...”
. . V . V V . . ..V,

o . V V VV VVV V V . V . ... V . ... V .V V V V . V .. V . . . . . V V . V .V .2: V . V. V . . V. . V .V . . J
. V V V V V V V .V . V. . .V .V V. V .V . . V V V. . . _ . .V V V V V V .. . . V. O.
V . . . .

. a.

V. V . V V a V .V...!
V e V t
V. .o . c o X 0 . V

1 ..JJVV a V.

V V
V V

V I
V- .1 o 1 ‘ . V
w . V . . ..
V e V. ‘ V.
_v V V .V V: N
V V V . . V 3.25.1114?!

. V .V . . . V . V . V. . .Hu.o3«.v. V ’ov~1.u-V«VVV
V ._ ... V V . . V V _ V V V V VV . . V V V
V . u. . V.- . . V V . . . . . V . V V.
— o V V V
. V . o . n V '
wot! . .
. V
V V
‘1. O V I
w .1 V.. V V IVAOV‘H 0... Fit” LVVOVIV
V - V. l. C "I

w I V o 11 . _ . . V A . V V n V . V. V

V. V V . V V V . V V V . V V . V V . V. V . V V. .

_ .1 o . V V V . . layunqfi . ...: 1: o v ..Vo\..-V1‘V V
. . V .V. ’n.=.t..0 V
1‘1! ‘1 1| :1...

11:21:01..)

 

 

 

Q
'0 1
I v _ . VVV . V V . V ....Viirc
t V . V V. . V . . V V V V V . . VVV V . V . ..V V V V V
v V . . V. V . . _ . . V V . . V . V . V .!!IoԤ\n.l
. V . _ V V V V. . V V . _V _ . V. V V V . .V . V. . V . V V. .. _ V .V. V V I... o...“ a” .1
V. V. V V ._ V VV V .23..
n - .V‘
' ... n
V V V _
b v
. u .1 .V O . 3. V n. o
. _ O V .
v V | . V, o .
. 1 . V V . V V V V _ V I 3.
.V V V V . V . .. . V . V V V V V V V V V VV V V . .V . . . 1‘3... Juno... VIVVQVulhO
V. V V .“.V V... ...... .4634. V
V . 0 .V . . V V . V V . . . V). 1. .V o ..V11le
. V V. V . _
V V V V
_ u
a .0 th | 0
Q VVV
“V V . V . y . 1
A a

v V . .. V. . V . V. V . V. V . . . V V V . ..V V . VV V V V V . V .
A V . V . . . V . V V. V V . . . V .V . V VV V V V. V . V V ...-0"“...
V . . . V. . . . V V. V V. .. V . w. . . V V V .V . Ia. .aLVQ
V V V . . . V V V V V V V V .V . . V V V .00...)- O.
1 V v V V V V V . . V. V V. V V V V V. . V Lgtf VVI
. I o . V V V V V V .V V V . . V . V V . V V V V . 64"c';
A
.

A‘a.-. v

v_w
I
o
o

7
'.

o

 

       
    

VV. . V n V
_V .
V ‘ o I
V. . - .
rvl . V I V n V a
V. V. V. V V V V . V . V V _ _ V V V. _ V. V . V. . . ... . V ...-...VV...
_ . ‘ V V V V V. V .. V . . . . V . . V V V 1 V -
VVVV V .
w . . ..
4V. V V V V .
1 _ . V V V .V ...1 V. n 1 n V
V - V _ V .V .. _ . TV V A. V; . ..V...V...VVHVV.”..V..,VVVVWMWVVVVVVVM"VV .V......VVV.
& . 6. V O . . V . V V V . V . 1| V... V . n V II... V V o-\... .c ... n .o v V . to. 1 Va: ‘51...” .1 it . ..Py
_ . V. V. V .V V .VVV . V V V. .VV\ V ..V.. V... . V . V. 1.! V. V. . .V .V......V.
1. V . \ .V....V Io. V . . . V 0 .xV .. V. V V. V ..‘V V. V 9. oV - .In T. ......V f .1... .I ...V. . 1 JV“. _ V. ... V. k. .V .’..s .VL-V-MVVVNVUQO-Vv' 1. ‘%3p flowuflww v1 . 4} . 3‘. 7'... 57“..
... v V 1 V ' ... V V . V V... V V. V ... V V... V .V... 0V V .V. V V _ V .V . ....L. n V V. .. VV. V 1 . V a V V . . o ....
V . V 3? .. ... V... V. _ V V V .. .... V, V . ...VV” V ...VVVUVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV.V V. ”V..." ...VVVVVHVV .V.....VVV ..V...V...VVVVJ.VV.5 V V, ..V.....V .VVVVV” VHV. .V...... V.V.VVV..._.VrVVV.VVHVVVuVTFVVVVVVVVVVV. .V....u . ...VV? V . V. V VVVVV.
V . o V Vr. . .

 
 

 

 

LIBRARY

 

Michigan State
University

 

 

PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record.
To AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DATE DUE

DATE DUE

DATE DUE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6/01 cJCIRC/DateDue.p65-p.1s

MICHIGAN STATE uNiv‘ERsrrY
TEXTILES, CLOTHING RELATED A'zr‘
COLLEGE or Eff-”i r ‘ ‘

Fl-‘f‘.[ ..o
h-slv‘, tor/“CS

/QUALI;I‘Y COMPARISON OF READY-MADE DRAW CURTAINS /

H

By

Rosalie Claris Budzinski

//

A PROBLEM

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF ARTS

Department of Textiles, Clothing and Related Arts

1969

Chapter

I.

II.‘

III.

IV.
V.

'TASLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION 0 O O O O O O O I O O '1. O 0

Background Information . . . . . . .
Statement of the Problem . . . . . .
Definition of Terms. . . . . . .
Importance of and Need for the Study

DEVELOPMENT OF CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING

READY-'MADE DRAW CIIRTAINS. o o o o o 0

Appearance Characteristics . . . . . .
Economic Factors . . . . . . . . . . .
Functional Requirements. . . . .

ANALYSIS AND FINDINOS'. . . . . . . . .

Appearance Characteristics of Low Cost
Curtains . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Economic Factors of Low Cost Curtains.
Functional Requirements of Low Cost
Curtains . . . .
Appearance Characteristics of High
Cost Curtains. . .
Economic Factors of High Cost Curtains
Functional Requirements of High Cost
Curtains . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

SIRMARY O O O I O O O O C C O O O O O O
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER STUDIES AND

RELATEDSTUDIES 0'. o o o o o o o o o

BIBLIOGRAPHY : . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . .
APPWDIX . O . . C . . . . O O O . 0 O C . C 0

ii

0 O O O

O 0 O O
o

Page

O‘UJUJ H H

ll
13

17
18
21
2%

27
28

31
33
39

.52

59

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

‘, Background Information'1

As early as the Renaissance period, windows were
small and made of thick, Opaque glass. There was little
concern for window coverings to secure privacy, to control
ventilation, to provide insulation, or to obstruct an un-

' desirable view. Only the wealthy attained aesthetic
enrichment by draping enormoug amounts of lavishly designed
velvets, brocades, and damasks throughout the rooms, with
the exception of the windows. During the seventeenth
century, country houses replaced the castles; larger win-
dows with a type of curtaining became fashionable. French
silks were used more extensively than the Oriental imports.
The luxurious fabrics were draped effectively on the walls,
as well as over and along the sides of windows. Light
cotton muslins imported from India became.more popular and
economical than the French and Oriental fabrics. The style
of window coverings also changed, with the sheer fabric
arranged across the complete window and along the sides.

In order to admit ventilation or disclose a view, the entire
curtain hadfto be drawn to one end. A later innovation was

to cut the curtain into two parts to achieve a more aesthetic

1

appearance when the curtain was drawn for various pur-
poses.l A

France set the fashion of interior design as a
result of the reign of the three Louis. Throughout each
sovereignty, full length curtains of elaborate fabrics
created a formal impression. However, the fashion changed
from the lambrequin of Louis XIV to an elaborate trimming
of loops and draping with fringes and laces by the reign
of Louis XVit Louis XVI established a more conservative
treatment, with lighter weight materials and smaller
amounts of fabric. All the European countries and the
British Isles followed the French fashion of window treat-
ment, but each country made its own adaptations. As a
result, numerous curtain styles as well as a variety of
fabrics have developed.

In 1760, with the beginning of the Industrial Revo-
lution in England, great strides in industrial developments
were taking place. Inventions such as the spinning jenny, .
the power loom, and the steam engine called for new produc-
tion methods. Products were no longer made in the homes
of the workers, because they could not afford the expensive
new machinery. werkers were brought into factories by
wealthy owners and supplied with the equipment and raw mate-
rials to produce a finished product. Division of labor and
specialization increased production and wealth. Throughout

the revolution, corporations were formed, with various
. .

 

1Helen Churchill Candee, w aves and Dre eries (New
York: Frederick A. Stokes Co., 1930 , p. 262.

3

rights and duties for employers and employees.2 Gradually,
automated machines replaced the earlier models. I

During this modernization process which spread to
other countries, furniture and fabrics became accessible
to the working class. It is possible that mass production
methods and consistency of window sizes made it practical
for curtains to be pre-constructed for immediate use.
Curtains were mass produced in Simplified construction and
style. Some basic styles included traverse curtains, tie-
back curtains, tier curtains, and cries-crossed curtains.
Variations Of basic styles were achieved by weight of the
fabric used and the pattern or type of design.

Statement of the Problem

The focus of this study was to develop the criteria
by which ready-made, living room draw curtains can be
analyzed for quality, using the information obtained from
the literature, a home furnishing specialist, and market
samples of various characteristics distinguishing the qual-
ity of ready-made curtains associated in different price
ranges in one retailing outlet, and among the three retail-

ing outlets.
Definition of Terms

Several terms will be defined to help clarify their

meanings, as used in this study.

2"Factory System, " Enc clo edia Americana, Inter-
national Edition, Vol. X (1955;, p. 569. .

 

1. Structural design - visual or tactile quality
derived from the intrinsic character of the materials, the
way in which they are fabricated, or the sensitivity with
which the object and its component parts are shaped.3

2. Applied design - adornment added to an object
after it is structurally complete.1+

Lumecialmmafimheiandmatmma- type
of finish incorporated into a fiber or applied to the fab-
ric to add desired properties.

A. .Disggunt_stgne - retail outlet originally
offering nationally advertised brands at retail prices
lower than those suggested by the manufacturer. However,
today nationally advertised brands as well as inexpensive
merchandise are sold at discount stores. The keynote of
the operation is mass production, with minimum service
and emphasis on bargains.5

5. Department store - retail outlet offering a
wide variety of merchandise, including wearing apparel and .
household furnishings for consumers of all ages and both
sexes. This collection of merchandise is offered for sale

in separated departments, each of which is administered

 

3Ray Faulkner and‘Sarah Faulkner, Inside Today's
Home (3rd ed.; New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston,
1968), p. 116.

'thid.
SJ. Gordon Dakins, The Buyers Manual (New York:

Merchandising Division of National Retail Merchants
Association, 1965), p. 6.

by a buyer or department store manager who is a specialist
in his field.6 '

6. Chain store - retail outlet selling the same
kind of merchandise as a department store. It is admin-
istered by a centralized management under a Single owner-
ship, but the number of store units varies.7

7.\,Branch_§tgre - retail Outlet differing from
chain store units in that it is dominated by the parent
store; its more specialized and smaller counterpart, the
"twig," is a natural development in view of the decen-
tralization of shopping areas. Branch operations are not
as autonomous as chain operations.8 .

8. ,Quztain_- any sizeable piece of fabric window
covering, light or heavy, sheer or opaque, constructed
with or without lining.

9. .Qrapgzy - commonly refers to a heavy weight
curtain, with or without lining, and made to hang in
folds, but sometimes restricted to a draped effect in a
window treatment.

fOperational definitions specific to this study
include the following:

10. Ready-made draw curtain - a general term des-
cribing a window treatment of the pull or draw type, with

 

61bid., p. 2.

 

' 7Fred M. Jones, Retail Management (Homewood, 111.:
Richard D. Irwin, Inc., 19637} p. llh.,

8Delbert J. Duncan and Charles P. Phillips, Retailing

Principles and Methods (6th ed.; Homewood, Illinois: Richard
D. Irwin, InCO, 19 3 ”po 11”. .

pinch-pleated heading, and made of opaque, unlined or self
lined fabric; suitable for use in a living room and ready-
for immediate use.

11. Eabrig_§2n§tzuctign_- refers to type of fiber,
and structural and applied design.

12., Curtain construction - regular three-inch pinch
pleated curtains with three- to four-inch spacing between
pleats.

13. Win - a representative sample.

curtain within the lowest price range in a given stOre.

'lh. ,Meginm_gg§§_gnztg;n - a representative sample
curtain within the middle price range in a given store.

15. .High_ggst_guntain - a representative sample
curtain within the highest price range in-a given store.

16. ,Qhazagtenistigs - in this study refers to
‘characteristics or individual properties of a curtain, such
as fiber or size of stitches.

17. .Quality - in this study refers to the property.

of the curtain due to a combination of characteristics.
Importance of and Need for the Study

, A comparison of curtains in a variety of retailing
outlets is important to any profesSional in the field who
wishes to keep informed of consumer choices and the services
that are available in retailing outlets. Home economists
such as interior designers, home furnishing specialists,
and consumer consultants_will be better prepared to advise

consumers in making more appropriate decisions in selecting

suitable ready-made curtains, if they have information
based on analysis of what is available. This informa-
tion could also be helpful to consumers themselves in
obtaining ready-made curtains that will be satisfactory to
them in appearance as well as being economical and funcéia
tional. .

Factors that might be considered to contribute the
most to low, medium, and high price levels are fiber con-
tent and size of the curtain. Some of the readings suggested
this was true; however, they gave no substantial evidence
to this effect. The characteristics of the material and

construction are related to the quality of appearance over

‘ a period of time, although these factors may not be evident

when the merchandise was initially displayed.* ,The per-
formance of curtains in daily use, in laundering, in dry
cleaning, and with change in humidity may affect the qual-
ity of appearance and serviceability. Therefore, it is
important that the consumer know the qualities to lobk

for in ready-made curtains.

 

*These factors are being considered under appear-
ance characteristics and economic factors because they
affect the length of satisfactory use.

CHAPTER II

DEVELOPMENT OF CRITERIA FOR EVALUATING
READY-MADE DRAW CURTAINS '

\

In each type of window treatment, the factors
emerging aSAgenerally important in making a decision are
the appearange characteristics, the economic factors, and
the functiofléfi requirements of the curtains. The critical

decision insthe choice of a curtain is to select the fac-

. tors that are most important to the particular installa-

tion. A number of factors are usually combined in order

to achieve a high level of satisfaction. In an article in
the 1966 issue of Progressive Architecture, the authOr men-
tioned that a balance between openness and view, on the

one hand, and insulation and privacy,.on the other, is
important. This effect depends upon the type and density
of the fabric. Selection of harmonious window coverings
from both the inside and the outside view contributes to

a pleasing appearance. In the review of window treatments,
the author found that the traverse curtains have remained
the most common type of window covering in residential

installations.9

 

9"Window Coverin s," Progressive Architecture,
‘VOlo ”7 (November, 1966 , p. l o

Appearance Characteristics

Appearance factors involved in curtain decisions
are: design features of fabric, dye process, general qual-

ity of the fabric itself, construction features, and over-

. i
all appearance of the curtain, including hanging quality.

Factors that contribute to the over-all appearance
of curtainsxare the design features of the fabric and the
curtain itSelf. Pattern that matches with the grain of the
fabric throughout the entire curtain contributes to the
over-all appearance of the window treatment. Curtains

may be cut off grain, or a pattern added to the fabric after

9 the material is constructed may not have been applied on

the straight of the grain. The curtain must be constructed
on the grain in order to hang evenly. An off-grain applied
design will be impossible to match because of the degree of
variation, and its unevenness will detract from the appear-
ance of the window treatment.

Evenness of dyeing throughout the fibers and the
fabric is important to the over-all quality of the window
covering. Solution dyeing is ideal because it ensures even
dyeing throughout the fiber, but it is limited to man-made
fibers. However, there are other satisfactory acceptable
color application processes such as screen printing, roller
printing, and piece dyeing. Fabrics that have been piece
dyed might vary in the amount of color absorption and fiber
penetration, depending on the type of fiber, fiber blend,
amount and quality of pigment, and length of dyeing time in
each dye bath.

.53»

10

General quality of the fabric itself will further_
influence curtain choice. Quality of the fabric is affected
by the fiber or fibers used in construction, yarn count,
spaces between yarns, weight of yarn, looseness or firmness
of weave, and the finish. These general components affect
texture of the fabric. Textures may look and feel smooth
or rough, pliable or stiff, slippery or harsh, lustrous or
dull, soft or hard, springy or limp, warm or cool, and
sheer or bulky. Textures also determine the drapability
of curtains-ewhether they fall in soft folds or whether
they hang in firm convolutions.lo Congruity of design

. according to lengthwise and crosswise grain further affects

l

fabric appearance. ;

Construction details that add to quality are: neat,
even stitching; correct thread tension; absence of loose
thread ends and puckers; even pleats; suitable hem finishes;
and adequate side and bottom hems, heading, and pleats.

Sufficient curtain fullness supplies beauty in the-
hanging quality of tailored curtains. In heavier weight I
draperies, plan for fabric width twice as wide as the win-
dow or the window and wall space to be cbvered, in order
for curtains to hang in generous, soft folds.ll To hang

evenly, a curtain must be constructed on the straight grain

 

loDorothy Clark, W n ow Treatment, Agricultural

' Extension Service (Pullman: Washington State University,

1960), p. 16.

11Martha L. Hensley and Bess V. Morrison, "Window
Curtains, Planning and Selection," Hopse and Garden Bul-
letip N9,“ (Washington, D. 0.: U. S. Department of Agri-

1)

ll

of the fabric. If not, the material will not hang evenly,
and the pleats will not fall in even folds. Self-lining12
adds body.and weight to light and medium weight fabrics;
therefore, they hang better and have greater dimensional

stability.

'Iasakmuai_fiastezs

\
\

Specific economic factors in the choice of ready-
made curtains include: initial cost of the curtains, main-
tenance costs, insulative properties of heat and sound,
and admission of exterior light.

One might expect that the initial cost of curtains

will be affectedi by their dimensions, fiber content, and

construction features. Larger curtains, although of the
same fabric, require additional fabric, additional con-
struction time, and larger amounts of special purpose
finishes than the smaller sizes. It would appear, then,
that the larger the dimensions of the same curtain type,

the greater the cost would be. Cost of the curtain is also
said to depend on the type and availability of its component
fibers, construction features of the fabric, quality and
type of dye process, and special purpose finishes and
treatments. Quality construction features of the curtain
might also influence cost. Such factors as absence of loose

thread ends, use of correct thread tension to avoid puckering,

 

L- Ilzself-lining as referred to in this-study includes
a sprayed acrylic backing or a woven backing as a result of
a double cloth.

12

and straight, even stitching indicate good quality con-‘
struction but might add to labor costs. Ample hems also
are an indication of good quality but conceivably could
add to construction costs beacuse of the additional fab-
ric used.

Maintenance cost is another economic factor in
the choicelof curtains. Stability of colOr is an impor-
tant characteristic influencing quality and maintenance.

Curtains that have a specified length color guarantee..

. assure to some extent the length Of color fastness and

replacement time. Solution or vat dyed fabrics are more

.color fast to sunlight, gas fading, and fading with wash-

ing and dry cleaning than aregother dye processes of the
same man made fiber. Research carried out by Todd pp p;

on fading properties of certain fiber substrate indicated

~that "the structure of dyes is the overriding factor in

regard to stability to light fading but fiber substrate,
delusterant and depth of shade do have some effect on the
stability of these dyestuffs.l3 Curtains with self-lining
and lined curtains may be more economical than unlined
curtains because they protect the face fabric from fading
and sun rot. Other maintenance costs include type of
cleaning and pressing necessary. Curtains that are wash-
able and require little or no pressing are more economical

than curtains that require dry cleaning and the added labor

 

13R.E. Todd R.S. Asquith, and A.T. Peters, "The
Influence of Fiber Substrate on the Fading Properties of
Nitrodiphenylamine Dyes,.Am n D s Re o te , Vol.
55 (July 18, 1966), p. 562. ‘ .

13

of pressing. Durable heading tape securely applied con-
tributes to the length of service of the curtain. .
Another economic factor in curtain choice is any
saving which might accrue from regulation of heat. Dark
colored fabrics, which tend to absorb and re-radiate solar
energy, are practical in the colder months due to possible ,
saving in heating costs. However, darker curtains would
possibly increase air conditioning costs in the warmer
months. 'Likewise, compact weaves and heavy fabrics are
more heat absorbent than light, airy fabrics. Also, self-
lined and lined draperies contribute to the insulative
,quality by retaining summer coolness and winter warmth.
A Light colors and light weight, open weave admit
more natural, diffused light to the room, thereby reducing
electricity costs.

Fppctional Reguirements

Physical requirements desirable in window coverings.
include: ~acoustical properties, ease of maintenance
resulting from resistance to sOil and “easy-care" properties,
abrasion resistance, and resistance to fading and sun
damage. '

Exterior and interior noises can be effectively
reduced by heavily textured fabrics. Adequate quantities
of textured fabric in deep folds are more effective in sound
absorption than flat coverings made of smooth material,
which are sound reflective. The amount of fullness provides

insulative properties in direct proportion to the depth of

1%

of the folds and the size of the curtain. Draperies with .
self-lining, such as acrylic backed fabric, and draperies
with a separate fabric sewn to the face fabric have greater
insulative properties than unlined draperies because of
air pockets formed between the face fabric and the self-
lining or lining. Sound transmission and absorption also
depend upon,the number of warp and filling yarns per inch
(yarn count), the amount of twist (turns per inch), the
thickness of the yarns, and the size of the spaces in the
fabric. The greater the yarn count, the closer the spaces
between the yarns; therefore, the greater the amount of
sound absorption.1h

Special purpose finishes and treatments may be
applied to fabrics or curtains once they are constructed
to impart certain performance characteristics. Some fin-
ishes add wrinkle resistance; spot and stain reSistance;
soil resistance; resistance to fire and mildew: «Others
impart wash and wear qualities, permanent smooth qualities,
dimensional stability, and body. These are referred to as
functiOnal finishes, as opposed to the general finishes
added to greige goods.

May mentions that the fluorochemical and extended
finishes such as Scotchgard and Zepel offer successful
protection against water and oil borne stains. These finishes
cling to each fiber by forming a chemical shield that pushes

away watery or oily substances and prevents them from being

 

11mm. Metzger, "Fiber Glass Fabrics Modify Environ-
ment," Apchippptppal Recopg (November, 196%),‘p. 219.

15

absorbed. Scotchgard and Zepel finishes are durable to
washing and dry cleaning, yet do not affect fabric hand or
appearance.15 Scotchgard and Zepel are two fluorochemical
stain repellents; however, there are other kinds of stain
repellents such as silicones, waxlike derivatives, and
pyridiniumgcompounds.

Normally, fluorochemical finishes are used in con-
junction with wash and wear resins and the permanent press
finishes. Wash and wear fabrics with themosetting resins
impregnated into the fibers or blends have produced fab-
rics with good wrinkle resistance, crease retention, tear
strength, and improved dimensional stability. Thus, a ‘

' fabric that is washable and treated with special purpose
finishes for minimum care is another functional quality that
is desirable in curtains.

Abrasion resistance and strength are additional
functional requirements of draw curtains. Faulkner speci-
fies that "fabrics used for draw curtains need sufficient
strength, durability, and flexibility to withstand being
pulled back and forth and to hang gracefully when stretched
or pulled together.“16 For this reason, glass fiber is not
used as extensively as other fibers in curtains because of
low abrasion and cracking resistance when rubbed or

creased.

 

' 15Michael J. May, "Water and Soil Repellent Fin-
ishes," American Dygsppff Repoppep, Vol. 5% (October 25,
1965), p. 0. .

16Faulkner, M” p. 267.

16

Another functional property to consider in the
selection of curtains is the resistance of the fabric to
fading and sun damage. Lustrous fabrics are more resistant
to the effects of light than delustered fabrics. Very fine
yarns and loose weaves are less resistant to light than
heavier yarns and firm weaves. Materials that are rela-
tively highly resistant to the effects of ultta violet rays
or a condition.called sun rOt include glass fibers, inert
mineral fibers, Polyester (Dacron and Fortrel), acrylic

(Creslan and Orlon), monocrylic (Verel), Saran, and nylon,

. which are highly resistant to sunlight and heat but will

react to sunlight and heat.17 Fire resistance was provided
only by the glass fibers; no additional flameproofing fin-
ishes were applied to the samples observed. Finishes added

to fabrics to reduce damage by mildew producing fungi were

' not evident in any of the samples observed.’ The curtains

.containing cotton fibers may be attacked by mildew. Since

there were no bases for discrimination among the curtain
samples, resistance to fire and resistance to mildew will.-

not be discussed further.
The above criteria relating to appearance char—

acteristics, economic factors, and functional requirements
were the classifications need to eValuate the quality of

ready-made draw curtains of three cost levels,18 in three
retail outlets.

 

l7HThe Institute Answers Your Questions on Draperies,"

Qppg_flpp§ekggpipg, Vol. 156 (February, 1963), p. 160.
18Although data were obtained for three cest levels

.only two were analyzed; this is explained on page 17;

CHAPTER III
ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS

The concern of this study was to determine the
criteria thét contributed to quality in ready-made cur-
tains. Infgrmation found in the literature, observations
of market samples, and conSultation with a home furnish-
ings specialist provided a guide for constructing a data
' sheet for categorizing, recording, and analysing the data.
Data are presented in their entirety in the Appendix.

_ Because one type of each curtain available was
displayed in Store A and Store B, it was difficult to
determine which curtain was the most representative curtain
in each price range. The manager was consulted in each
retail outlet to determine the most representative cur-
tain in each price range. In Store C, the most represent-
ative sample was determined by choosing the curtain with
the largest number of samples in a particular design, color,
and dimension in each price range.

Because of the over lapping of costs among the
stores, it was impossible to define clearly the middle
price range. Therefore, for the purposes of this study
representative samples in the low and high cost ranges in
each retail outlet were selected for evaluation and comp

parison.

17

18

In Store A, a locally managed, international
department store chain, the low cost range was considered
to be from $3.99 to $6.98. The most representative sample
in this price level sold for $6.98. High cost range in
Store A was from $9.99 to $12.98. The most representative
sample in this cost range sold for $12.98.

In Store B, a locally managed department store with
two branches, low cost range was considered to be from
$h.99 to $6:Q9. The most representative sample in the..
low cost range sold for $6.99. High cost range in Store B '
was from $2,99 to $10. 99. The most representative sample
' in the high cost range sold for $10.99.

I In Store C, a discount store and a member of a

chain, low cost range was considered to be from $2.hh to

$3.22. $2,99 was the price of the most representative low

cost sample. 'High cost range in Store C was from $h.99

to $6.99, and the most representative sample in this range

was $5.88. A .
Appearance Cparacteristics of

Low Cost Curtains

Under the category of appearance characteristics,
factors that constituted the criteria were: design fea-
tures, dye processes, general construction of the fabric,
construction features of the curtain, and over-all appear-
ance of the curtain, including hanging quality.

In Store A, the low cost sample was constructed

in.a structural Jacquard design, with a loose, closed

 

{5"

I.
II

'n.

MD

19

weave. Yarn count was 100 warp yarns by 32 pick yarns
per square inch. The quality of the dye application
appeared even throughout the fabric. A heavy weight yarn
composed of 67 per cent cotton and 33 per cent rayon was
used in construction, imparting a non-lustrous, rough
textured surface quality to the fabric. The fabric hand
appeared flexible, resilient, and compresSible. .In general,
construction details appeared to be of fair quality.
Stitching was neat and even, done with matching thread~in
a basting length stitch. However, side hems were puckered

slightly, probably as a result of incorrect thread tension.

Ample side and bottom hems with blind stitched finish were

provided. Heading tape was of h" buckram and its applica-
tion was neat and secure. The curtains contained 3" pinch
pleats with k" spacing between pleats. Double fullness
construction provided generous folds. The over-all hang-
ing quality of the curtain was poor. It sagged to one
side because the curtain was constructed off grain.

In Store B, the low cost sample was constructed
in a structural_novelty design, having a loose, open weave.
The yarn count was not stated. Dye applicatibn appeared
consistent throughout the fabric. A medium weight yarn
composed of 100 per cent cotton was used in construction.
The fabric had a rough, non-lustrous texture; it was flex-
ible but appeared limp and lacked resilience. Construc-
tion details generally appeared to be of high quality.
Easting-length stitching done with matching thread was

neat, even and secure throughout; correct thread tension

20

was used. Side and double bottom hems were ample and were
finished with blind stitching. Heading tape was no buck-
ram, and was applied securely and evenly. The curtains
contained 3" pinch pleats with H" spacing between pleats.
' Curtains were constructed with double fullness and fell in
even folds. Hanging quality was good because the curtain -
was constructed on grain.

The low cost sample in Store 0 had a structural
novelty construction with a loose, open weave. Yarn
count was not given. The fabric appeared to have an even
dye application. A medium weight yarn was used in con-
struction, compOsed of 57 per cent rayon and #3 per cent
acetate. Surface quality was/rough in texture and non- _
lustrous. The fabric hand was limp and lacked dimensional
stability. Construction features were of poor quality
throughout. Stitching was uneven, and some places were
stitched twice. There were many loose thread ends, as
'well. Matching thread in a basting-length stitch and cor- .
rect thread tension were used. Side and double bottom
hems were skimpy. The bottom hem was poorly constructed
and the inside of the hem was stretched and showed on the
outside of the curtain. Heading tape was 3" flexible card-
board paper; it was applied securely, but with uneven -
stitching and loose thread ends. The curtain contained 3"
pinch pleats with h" spaces between pleats. Double fullness
pleating was used; however, the curtains did not hang in

even folds because they were not constructed on grain.

21
Economic Factors of Low Cost Curtains

Within the major category of economic factors
are included the factors of initial cost of the curtain,
maintenance costs, insulative properties of heat and sound,
and admission of exterior light.

The initial cost of the most representative curtain
in the lowneost category in Store A was $6.98. It was
composed of cotton and rayon, two readily available
fibers. Thggfabric was constructed in a firm, Jacquar.
weave.which i? costly as a result of expensive machinery
that is complicated to operate.19 Low cost samples in
' Store B and Store C were both constructed in loose, open
weaves with a novelty design./ It is likely that the nov-
elty design technique is less costly with less complex
operating machinery than the Jacquard design technique.
DimenSions of the low cost curtain in Store A were #8"

'x 8%"; the length was 21-inches more than the low cost cur-
tains in Store B and in Store C. Special purpose finishes I
and_treatments included a perma-smooth finish, a two-year
fade resistance and less than 3 per cent shrinkage guar-
antee. Quality of construction reached an acceptable
standard as stated in the description under appearance,
indicating that a reasonable amount of care and labor had
gone into the construction process.- Maintenance costs would

also affect the choice of curtains. The "easy-care" features

and fade resistance guarantee added to the economy of this

 

- -
‘ u. H :

"HLWL19Joseph ‘op. pit., p. 276.

fin.

22

particular sample. Dimensional stability was provided by
less than 3 per cent shrinkage control; therefore, the cur-'
tains would be less affected by changes in humidity and

washing than untreated curtains. As a result of dimensional

'control, the curtains would appear attractive for a con-

siderable period of time. Heading tape made of A" buckram,
neatly andxeecurely applied contributed to the service-
ability of the curtain. This curtain was judged to pos-
sess.fairly.edequate heat retention value due to the medium
weight, closély woven fabric used in construction. ’The
rather dark pelored fabric would make it more suitable for

colder weather because of heat absorption. However, these

same features would limit itsyfunctionality as a source of

diffused Tight. The delustered surface and the loose weave
would increase slightly the effects of light.

, Original cost of the most representative sample in
the low cost level in Store B was $6.99. Fiber content was
100 per cent cotton, a readily available fiber; dimensions .

were #8" x 63". Special purpose finishes and treatments

- included a perma-press finish which decreased maintenance

cost because it was washable and required little or no

ironing. Construction features indicated a reasonable

(amount of time and labor were involved in making the cur-

tains, thereby increasing the serviceability of the curtain.
There was no indication of treatment to increase dimensional
stability; consequently,.the amount of shrinkage could not
be ascertained. The type of dye process and colorfastness

were not specified; therefore, the stability of color could

23

not be determined. Self-lining was not present in the low
cost curtain in Store B, but the cotton fibers are fairly
resistant:to sun damage. However, the curtain itself and
the constpuction of the curtain indicated a long length

of service. Serviceability of the curtain was provided by
heading tape made of h" buckram securely applied. The most
representative sample in Store B was a rather dark colored,
medium weight fabric which would give it a small amount

of heat absorption. However, properties of diffusion of
natural light would be minimal in spite of the fairly open
weave because of the dark colored, medium weight fabric.

Original cost of the most representative curtain in

the low cost level in Store C/was $2.99. Fiber content

included 57 per cent rayon and #3 per cent acetate, both
readily available fibers. Price of the low cost curtain

in Store C was less than one-half the cost of the other two
curtains in Store A and in Store B. Dimensions were #8"

x 63". Absence of special purpose finishes and treatments,-
as well as inexpensive fibers likely accounted for the low
price. Poor quality construction features described under
the section of appearance characteristics would indicate
lower serviceability. Heading tape made Of non-durable
cardboard would shorten the life of the curtain. Mainten-
ance costs of this curtain would be expected to be higher
than the two low cost samples in Store A and Store B
because it required more-frequent cleaning, dry cleaning,
and pressing. Evidence of dimensional stability was not

specified; therefore, the degreecof fabric change could not

A“

2%

be predicted. Some rayon fibers tend to stretch in use and
care and may shrink in high humidity. Lack of special pur4

pose finishes and treatments as well as absence of the

type of dyeing process and guarantee of dye fastness made

the life of the curtain questionable. Lack of self-lining
and weak fibers would make the curtain susceptible to sun
damage and fading. This curtain was light colored, with a
loose, open weave, thereby making it poor in heat reten-
tion properties. However, the light color of the fabric,
as well as its loose, open structure, would make it excel-

lent in the diffusion of natural light.

Fppctional Reguirements of
Lon Cost 9' pgptains

Functional requirements, another major factor in
curtain choice, consisted of acoustical properties, ease
of maintenance resulting from resistance to soil and "easy-
care" properties, abrasion resistance, and resistance to
fading and sun damage. A

In Store A, the most representative low cost sam-
ple appeared to be fairly sound absorbent. The medium to

heavy weight fabric with a closed weave and a rough textured

,surface would absorb noise» Ease of maintenance as a result

of resistance to sdil and "easy-care" properties would be
provided by the cotton and rayon fibers. The closely woven

fabric would allow little penetration of soil and stains;

-however, the rough textured surface would attract and hold

soil and water and oil-borne stains. The curtain was

25

washable and required little pressing as a result of the
perms-smooth finish. No additional spot and stain repel-
lent finishes were provided. '

Abrasion resistance was increased by the strength
and flexibility of the cotton and rayon fibers. The closed
weave and the heavy weight of the fabric further added sup-
port. On the other hand, the rough surface texture and the
loose weave may become easily snagged. A twe-year fade
resistance gharantee, specified on the label, would tend
to indicate the dye was fairly stable.l There was no indi-
cation of the type of dye process that was uSed. Although

the low cost curtain in Store A did not have a lining-like

treatment, the high percentage content of cotton fibers that
have fairly good resistance to heat would prevent excessive
sun damage. Therefore,tthe curtain should not require early
replacement. .

' The most representative low cost curtain in Store B
possessed some insulative properties of sound from the rough
texture and the medium weight of the fabric, although the
loose, open weave would tend to decrease the amount of sound
absorption. A backing was not present which would contrib-
ute to the insulative value. "Easy-care" features would be
provided by the cotton fibers; the curtain was washable and
required little pressing because of the perms-smooth finish.
However, the loose, open weave and the rough textured sur-
face would likely allow penetration of Soil and oil and
water-borne stains into the fabric. No additional spot and
stain repellent finishes were provided to improve the

if Q

26

performance of the curtain. Dimensional stability was not
controlled. I

Abrasion resistance was provided by the strength
and flexibility of the cotton fibers and the medium weight
of the fabric. In Store B, the low cost sample would likely
be more reedily damaged by abrasion because of the loose,
open weavexend the rough textured surface. There was no
guarantee te,cover fading and suanamage; the cotton fibers
have fair réeistance to sunlight and the medium.weight.of
the fabricggeuld lessen sun damage. Alloose, open weave
and a deleeéered surface would contribute to fabric deter-
ioration.fil ‘

The low cost sample most representative in Store C
would appear to have certain sound absorption properties
as a result of the rough textured, medium weight fabric.
Lack of a self-lining and a loose, open weave prevented
extensive sound absorption. '

, Curtains in the low cost level in Store C required
dry cleaning and pressing which would add to the cost and
upkeep. Surface characteristics contributed to penetration
of soil.and stains because of a loose, open weave fabric‘
construction with a rough_surface texture. Absence of spot
and stain resistant or "easy-care? finishes decreased the
performance of the curtain. Dimensional stability was not
controlled in the sample and the rayon fibers might shrink I
or stretch with fluctuations in humidity. Abrasion resist-
ance of the curtain would be low, due to the comparative

weakness of the fibers, themedium weight fabric, the loose

27

and open weave;iand the rough surface area. Fading was not
controlled by a fade resistant finish; the lOose, open weave
fabric with a delustered finish contributed to sun damage
of the poor quality fibers. '

WWW
High Cost Captains

 

- Thexhigh cost sample in Store A was constructed
A in a structural, two-tone Jacquard design and a firm,
compact weave. Yarn count was 100 warp yarns by 28 piek
yarns per square inch. A heave weight of yarn made of 5%
per cent cotton and #6 per cent rayon created a semi-

- lustrous and smooth appearance; the highapercentage of

rayon fibers contributed to tHe shiny finish. Fabric hand
seemed flexible and resilient. Additional body, as a result
of the sprayed acrylic backing, made the febric appear
bulkier.than the actual weight of the fabric. Dye applica-
tion appeared consistent in each Of the yarn types in the
curtain; however, it was difficult to ascertain the evenness
of dyeing because of the muted colors. ~Over-all construction
details seemed to be of high quality. Neat, straight
beating-length stitches, executed with matchingxthreadiandu'
correct thread tension, were consistent in the curtain.
Blind stitching on adequate width side and double bottom
hems indicated good qua'llit, .. , Corners were mitered neatly..-

A h" buckram heading tape was applied carefully. Three-
inch pinch pleats with a H" spacing between pleats supplied
double fullness. The pleats hung in even folds, indicating

the curtain.was constructed on straight grain.

. 28

The high cost sample in Store B was constructed in
an antique satin weave. A heavy slub was created on the
surface by the double cloth and yarn left untwisted at
irregular intervals. A firm, compact weave resulted in a
flexible, resilient and bulky texture. Added dimensional
stability was provided by the double cloth. Medium weight
yarns of 61.per cent rayon and 39 per cent acetate produced
a non-lustrous, rough textured appearance. Yarn count was
not labelled. Fabric hand seemed flexible and resilient.

. Dye application appeared consistent throughout the fabric,
but it was difficult to ascertain the evenness of dyeing
because of the rough slub texture. Over-all construction
I details appeared to be of high quality. Easting-length
stitch that was neat and straight, done with matching thread
and correct thread tension, was consistent throughout the
curtain. Side and double bottom hems were adequate in
width and finished off with blind stitching. A h" buckram
heading tape was applied carefully. Three-inch pinch pleats
with a h" spacing between pleats supplied double fullness.
Pleats hung evenly, indicating the curtain was constructed
on the straight 6f the grain.

Egoupmig FgngIS‘pf Higu Cost Curtains

The initial cost of the most representative curtain
in the high cost level in Store A was $12.98 and in Store B
was $10.99. The high cost sample in Store 0 was almost one-
half the cost of the high cost sample in Store B and less than.
one-half the cost of the high cost sample in Store A.. High

29

cost samples in Store A and Store B had a self-lining which
would add to the cost; the high cost sample in Store C

did not have_a self-lining and consequently it gas lower in
price. Dimensions of all the three high cost samples in
the three retail outlets were h8"-50" wide by 8M" long.

A sprayed acrylic backing added to the cost of the.
curtain in Store A, but provided crease resistance and
dimensional stability. The backing provided less soil and
stain penetretion and therefore, the curtain required less
maintenance. iThe curtain was washable with a permaésmooth,
"easy-care" finish requiring little or no ironing, thus

decreasing the cost of upkeep. Pleats were supported by
in" buckram accurately and neatly applied, thereby increas-
ing the length of service of the curtain. Quality of con-
struction was high as stated under appearance characteristics
section, giving promise of long service. The curtain was
constructed of a dark colored fabric. These qualities would
favorably affect the.insulative value of the curtain.in warm
and cold seasons. However, because of dark color, close
and firm weave,bheavy weight fabric, and self-lining the
amount of diffusion of natural light would be minimal.

The most representative curtain in the high cost
level in Store B was compoSed of 61 per cent rayon and 39 per
cent acetate, which are easily produced. A self-lining

backing as a result of the double cloth added to the cost
V but provided crease resistance, fade resistance, and dimen-
sional stability; There was no color guarantee specified

or any indication of the type of dye processes used. .No

it}

30

additional special purpose finishes and treatments were
provided besides the self-lining. Less soil and stain
penetration would take place as a result of the self-lining;
consequently, the curtain would require less maintenance.
But maintenance cost would be increased with the required
dry cleaning and pressing. High quality construction fea-
tures mentioned under appearance characteristics added to
the initial cost, but the curtain would appear to be ser-
viceable for a substantial period of time. Life of the cur- -
tain was increased by pleats supported with A" buckram tape
securely applied. Because of the firm, compact double cloth,
this curtain would have good insulative properties of heat.

’ The dark colored fabric wouldybe more suitable for celder

months because it would act as a barrier to both heat and

.cold. Conversely, as a result of the dark color, close

and firm weave, and self-lining, the diffusion of natural
light would be minimal. ‘ ‘ '

The original cost of the most representative curtain
in the high cost category in Store C was $5.88. It was com-
posed of low cost 100 per cent glass fibers. No special
purpOse finishes and treatments were added, thus contributing
to the low cost of the curtain. Properties possessed
by the glass fibers, however, include fade resistance and
dimensional stability. Serviceability of the glass fiber
curtains over a period of time was questioned due to the
low abrasion resistance of the fibers. Dyeing process was
not stated but would most likely be solution dyeing because

the fibers are man-made. Because the curtains were washable

1&5

31

and required no ironing, maintenance costs would be minimum.
Quality construction as stated in the description under
appearance characteristics indicated an acceptable standard
was reached due to considerable amount of care and labor
involved in the construction process. Heading tape was
made of h" flexible plastic in the high cost sample in Store 0
which wouldhprovide less support than the'h" firm, buckram
heading tape in the high coat samples in Store A and Store B.
The loose, open weave, and light weight fabric as well as the‘
absence of ambacking would make this curtain low in heat
retentiOn valfie. But the light colored fabric would give it

a small amount of heat absorptiOn. Similarly, because of

the loose, upon weave, the light weight fabric, and light

color, thefcurtain would be excellent in diffusion of natural,

.light.

Fuuctiong; Requirements of
High 005; Cuppains

In Store A, the most representative high cost sample
curtain had a firm, compact weave, imparting good sound
absorption qualities. A considerable amount of sound would
be absorbed by the heavy weight of the fabric and the addi-
tional insulation of the sprayed acrylic backing. Noise
wouldlfurther be controlled by folds of double fullness in
the curtains. Dimensions of all samples were N8"-50" wide
by 8%" long.. Special purpose finishes and treatments such
as the perms-smooth finish required little pressing after
the curtains were laundered. The sprayed backing, the smooth
texture, and the firm compact weave would inhibit penetration

32 '

[of soil and stains; therefore laundering would be less

frequent. Dimensional stability was provided by the firm,
compact weave and the backing. Resistance to abrasion would
be provided by the strong, flexible cotton and rayon fibers;‘
the firm and compact weave; the smooth texture; the heavy
weight fabric; and the sprayed acrylic backing. 'Heat damage
and fading would tend to be minimal because of heat resistant
fibers, lustrous surface, heavy weight fabric, firm.and comp
pact weave and a sprayed backing in spite of the fact there
was lack of agcolorfastness guarantee. '

I

'The curtain most representative in the high cost

range in Store B was a double cloth curtain. A considerable

amount of sound would be absorbed by the firm and compact

,double cloth, the rough surface texture, and the heavy

weight of the curtain. Acoustical control would be increased
as a result of the folds of double fullness in the curtain.
Maintenance cost would be considerable because the curtain
required dry cleaning as well as additional pressing due

to lack of "easy-care" finishes. Some degree of wrinkle
resistance would be provided by the self-lining of the

double cloth. 8011 and stain penetration would be inhibited
by the compact and firm double cloth; the rough surface tex-
ture would attract soil and stains.' Dimensional change of
the fabric would be inhibited by the firm, compact double
cloth although the rayon fibers would change with changes

in humidity. Abrasion was controlled to some extent by the
fiber flexibility, the firm and compact double cloth, and

the heavy weight of the fabric; weakness of the acetate fibers,

33

a non-lustrous and rough textured surface would increase
abrasion damage. Fading would be inhibited by the firm,
double cloth fabric of heavy weight. However, the delustered
surface and the low heat resistant acetate fibers would
increase the possibility of color fading and sun damage.
The flass fiber curtains in the high cost range in

Store C would provide little in acoustical absorption because
the fabric was light in weight, with a loose, open weave

and a smooth, shiny surface. Lack of self-lining also...
decreased sound control. Some sound insulation would be
provided by folds of double fullness. Economy of maintenance
was minimal as a result of little soil and stain absorp-

tion by the smooth and slippery surface. The curtains were

washable but would require care in handling to avoid damage
due to abrasion; no pressing was required. Dimensional
stability was provided to some extent by the glass fibers.
Resistance to abrasion was low because glass fibers have a
natural tendency to break. The smooth surface would resist.
snags. There would probably be little sun damage because of
the lustrous glass fibers which are highly resistant to heat

‘and fading; the loose, open weave, and light weight of the

fabric would only slightly increase the chance of damage to
the curtain from.intense sunlight. I

Endings.

L o s s

A Although the low cost sample in Store_A had the

_ highest appearance quality of fabric as a result of the high

3%

quality fiber and larger number of special purpose finishes
and treatments, the low cost sample in Store B had the best
general hanging quality of the curtains because it was cOn-
structed on grain. In general, the over-all construction
quality of the sample in Store B was higher than that of the
sample in StoreSA. In Store C the low cost sample had poor
quality fabric, no special purpose finishes and treatments,

Band poor quality constructiOn.

Both the low cost samples in Store A and Store.B
were similarly priced, but the curtain in Store B was of

a smaller dimension. The curtains in Store A and Store B

were washable, with perma-smooth finishes, requiring little

upkeep. However, the curtaingin Store A had additional

“qualities, including fade resistance guarantee and dimen-

sional stability, which would likely make it more economical
because the curtains would not require replacement as soon
as those from Store B. The low cost'curtain in Store C was
less than half the price of the samples in Store A and
Store B. However, it required dry cleaning and pressing,
therefore adding to maintenance cost. It was made of poor
quality fabric with no special purpose finishes and treatments,
and poor quality construction. Therefore, this curtain would
require replacement sooner than the samples from Store A
and Store B.

The samples in Store A and Store B were Judged to
be nearly equal in heat retention value. Both were rather

dark colored, medium weight fabrics. But the sample in

, Store B had a more open weave, somewhat lowering its heat

35

regulation properties. The low cost sample in Store A
appeared to possess the best acoustical properties as a
result of a closed weave, heavy to medium weight fabric, and
the large dimensions. The sample in Store C was light
colored, with a loose, open weave, thereby making it the
poorest of the samples in heat retention properties. Least
acoustical properties were present in the low cost sample

in Store 0 because of the leose open weave and the light to
medium weight fabric. However, because of this construction,
diffusion of natural light would be the greatest in the
sample in Store C.

The characteristics of the low cost curtain sample

in Store A appeared to be theggreatest in functional and

economical qualities; however, these positive attributes

were greatly offset by the fact that it was cut off grain

and detracted from the quality of its appearance. This
fundamental deficiency meant that additional attributes are
of little value unless the sample was not representative of.
all the curtains of this type. In a comparison of the same
ple in Store A with the sample in Store B,which possessed
fewer positive characteristics in the categories of functional
and economic qualities, the fact that it was cut on grain
would seem to make the sample in Store B the curtain with
the most important characteristics of quality. Because the
sample curtain from Store C was so much lower in cost than
either the curtain from Store A or Store B, it is unfair to-

make comparisons. However, the quality of this sample was

. low in every dimension which would make it seem appropriate

36

only in a very temporary situation and only if no other
curtain with superior attributes in this price range could
be located.

High cost samples
The representative high cost curtainLinSStore A had
the best over-all appearance. It was composed of a higher

, \ .
quality fabric, had a more luxurious weave and more special

.purpose finishes and treatments than the other two samples.

Both the samples in Store A and Store B had self-lining,
contributing to a good over-all hanging appearance of the

curtain. The sample in Store C was unlined but hung in

- fairly even folds; over-all hanging quality was not as good

as for the samples of Store Aland Store B. In general,
construction features such as neat, even stitching, correct
thread tension, and ample hems appeared consistent through-
out the three samples.

The high cost curtain in Store A had the largest
number of "easy-care" features, including washability and .-
a perma-smooth finish, and dimensional stability provided by
the acrylic backing which made this curtain the most econom-
ical to maintain. The curtain in Store B designated dry
cleaning, which would increase maintenance costs. The high
cost curtain in Store C was one-half the cost of the other
two samples, but had a poor over-all appearance as a result
Qf slightly uneven hanging quality and low quality fibers
used in construction. Because of poor abrasion resistance,
the curtain in Store 0 would probably have to be replaced

earlier than the other two samples.

37

Savings accruing due to the sprayed acrylic backing
in the high cost curtain in Store A acted as an insulator,
retaining winter heat and summer coolness. In Store B the
high cost curtain, with backing of the double cloth, also
provided insulative quality. Both samples were dark colored,
heavy fabrics with a firm weave, further contributing to
heat insulation. The sample in Store C was constructed of
a light colored, unlined, open weave fabric; thus its insue
lative properties would be far lower than those of_the.other
two samples. This sample, though, would provide the greatest
diffusion of natural light.

The high cost samples in Store A and Store B both
possessed adequate acousticalfcontrol, dimensional stability,
and serviceability as a result of self-backing. The sample
in Store A was washable, whereas the sample in Store B
required dry cleaning. The sample in Store C had less acous-
tical control because it was lighter in weight, had a loose, ‘
open weave, and was unlined. Because it was unlined, dimen-
sional stability and length of life would also be lower. The
curtain was washable; however, care would be required in
maintenance to avoid abrasion of the_glass fiber fabric.

All three samples were Judged to be fade resistant. The
samples in Store A and Store B had self-backing, which would
reduce sun damage.’ Since glass fiber is impervious to sun-
light, the sample in Store 0 would probably be the most
resistant to sun damage of the three samples.

In the samples from Store A and Store B, soil and

stain penetration would be inhibited because of the self-baa

38

backing, and compact, firm weave. In Store C, soil and
stain penetration would be minimal because of the smoothness
of the fiber and the fabric.

The price was higher in the curtain in Store A than
Store B, but the high cost sample in Store A had the best
appearance, the largest number of functional attributes, and
it was morexeconomical to maintain. Sample from Store C
was approximately one-half the cost of the samples from
Store A and Store B, but it would be fairly comparable-in
qualities of appearance but inferior in functional attributes

and economical.factors.

‘“5

CHAPTER IV
SUMMARY

Criteria were developed for evaluating readyLmade
draw curtains according to appearance characteristics,
economic factors, and functional requirements of the cur-
tains..

‘Criteria involved in rating appearance factors were:

design features of the fabric, dye process, general quality

of the fabric itself, construction features, and over-all
appearance of the curtain, including hanging quality.
Criteria used to appraise economic factors were:
initial cost of the curtains, maintenance costs, and saving
which would accrue from regulation of heat, and admission
of exteriOr light.-
Functional requirements were rated by the following
criteria:' acoustical properties, ease'of maintenance result-
ing from resistance to soil and "easy-care" properties,

abrasion resistance, and resistance to fading and sun damage.

Appggrgncg ghargctezistics
General findings showed. the following similarities

among the curtain samples: ,
1. All curtains were structural in design only.
2. Results of the dyeing process appeared even in
all the samples. '

39

HO

3. All curtains were constructed with double full-
“J‘ ness pinch pleats, 3" - h" spacing between
pleats, application of heading tape, side hems
blind stitched. .
i Differences whichfwere found in the curtains
included:
1. wFiber content, fabric weave and fabric weight,
and special purpose finishes and treatments.
2. Construction features such as type of heading
. tape, width of side hem and bottom double hem,
neatness and care of stitching, and construction

of curtain on the grain of the fabric.

I
y

f

o o s
'1 Differences among the samples included the following
considerations: :

1. Initial cost of curtains varied as a result of
fiber content, special purpose finishes and treat-
ments, quality of construction, and dimensions.'

2. Maintenance costs of various samples would vary
according to type of cleaning and stability of
color.

3. Savings accruing from heat regulation and admis-
sion of exterior light would vary according to

color, weave, backing, and texture.

o e em ts
,4. ‘ Functional requirements of the curtain samples differed

in four general categories:

. .n A Q 0 ‘
f‘ ”'l"."|.. I '1 Al:‘ rhurnpgfi‘n" } ‘3 \.‘:fl~"l,“§
-0 '4‘~"!\4-".‘-J .-. ,- .- 14'.‘-"'.;A -.I.....-‘ £41. \:\'

1.1

q l. Acoustical properties varied according to weave,
4-3 texture, and weight of fabric. .

2. Ease of maintenance varied according to special

purpose finishes and_treatments added to the
; fabric and the amount of soil and stain penetra-
tion of the curtain.

3. uAbrasion resistance varied according to fiber
content, weave, fabric construction; service-
ability varied according to the fiber content,
weave, fabric construction, dimensional stabil-

7 ity, and the general construction quality of the
curtain.‘

h. Resistance to fading and sun damage also varied
according to fiber content, fade resistance
guarantee, luster of the fabric, weaves, and
backing. '

This study focused on developing the criteria for
evaluating ready-made draw curtains by using information
obtained from the literature, a home furnishing specialist,
and market samples of various factors contributing to appear-
ance characteristics, economic factors, and functional
requirements. The primaryrobjective was to compare char-
acteristics distinguishing the quality of ready-made draw
curtains in different cost ranges in one retail outlet and
among the three retail outlets.‘ Because of overlapping of
cost ranges the middle cost range was eliminated and only,

«r; the low cost range and the high cost range were analyzed.

#2

It was assumed that the quality factors that might
be indicative of consumer satisfaction included appearance
and ease of maintenance. Factors such as characteristics
of construction of curtains, performance in daily use, and
ease of maintenance were not related to price.

The curtain in Store A appeared to have the highest
quality in\appearance. Special purpose finishes and treat-
ments varied in theh high and low cost curtains in each
retail outlet, so that these attributes would have to.be
chosen on an individual basis. The sample in Store C gave

evidence of being inferior in all three categories. When

the high cost sample in Store C was compared with the low

cost curtains in Stores A and/B on appearance character-
istics, they seemed similar. Samples in Stores A and B of
the low cost and high cost, and Store C of the high cost

had comparablerconstruction features. The difference between
the high and low cost samples was largely to be found in
weave and fiber.

This eXploratory study indicated that there was con-
siderable variation in qualities in both the low and high
cost samples of ready-made draw curtains in all three stores.
The amount of variation, however, should not be considered
necessarily negative. ,Some desirable attributes are made
available at the sacrifice of others. For example,Lboth
light diffusion and insulative properties are not supplied in _
one type of curtain. - The study indicates that workmanship
is not the determining factor in the costoof a curtain as
one might be prone to believe.

“3

In Store A, the price of the low cost curtain was
approximately one-half the cost of the high price curtain.
However, both the low and the high cost samples were of
Jacquard weave of the same dimensions and double fullness;
although the same type of fibers appeared they were present
in different amounts. The high cost curtain was finely
woven and had a sprayed acrylic backing which should add
to the hanging quality. The low cost curtain lacked body
due to the absence of any lining and its loosely woven.con—
struction.‘ Both curtains appeared to have had an even dye
application but laboratory tests would have to be conducted

to determine the degreerof color fastness. Over-all con-

struction features of the high cost sample were Judged to be

superior because this curtain was constructed on grain,

.while_the low cost sample was slightly off grain.

In spite of the fact that the initial cost of the
high price sample in Store A was almost twice the amount of
the low price sample, both curtains were washable, with
"easy-care" features. The sprayed acrylic type of lining
which was added to the high cost curtain might or might not
contribute to the ease of maintenance because there is vari-
ation in the degree of soil penetration according to specific
material used. The high cost curtain could-be predicted to
require less pressing, to contribute to increased insulative
value, but it would permit less light diffusion.

The low cost sample in Store A possessed fewero.

functional attributes than the high cbst sample. Because

£1"

at

the low cost sample did not have a lining, such as the
acrylic backing, this curtain would be predicted to provide
less acoustical insulative properties. In appearance char—
acteristics, and functional features, the high cost sample
was superior in most respects to the low cost sample. Except
for the fact that the low cost sample was constructed off
grain, consequently detracting from its appearance, both
curtains would have made acceptable choices depending: on the
situation.

In Store B, the high cost sample had a lustrbus

appearance, created by the antique satin slub weave, the

. rayon and acetate fiber content, and the filament-fiber

'yarns. The low cost sample in the'same store differed in

the weave and fiber content; it was constructed of cotton~
fibers in a loose, open weave with a novelty design and ”
without the addition of a type of lining material. The
high cost'curtain gave promise of being dimensionally stable
as the result of a firm, compact weave. 'For this reason,
and the addition of the backing, hanging appearance was
improved. Both curtains were constructed to have double full-
ness. Construction features of these two curtains appeared
to be of similar quality workmanship and the curtains were
cut on the straight of the grain. .

The initial price of the lower cost curtain in Store
B was about half the price of the higher cost curtain. How-
ever, as mentioned above,tthehhigher coat curtain was 21 .
inches longer than the lower cost curtain, thereby making
it less costly than the actual price would indicate._ The low

#5

price sample, becausecof washability and "easy-care” features,
would have a lower maintenance cost because the_high cost
sample would require dry cleaning and pressing. Additional
heat retention was provided by the lining in the high cost
curtain, but admission of exterior light would undoubtedly be
decreased. While the acrylic lining in the high cost sample
increased-dimensional stability, the admission of exterior
flight was sacrificed. Some backings retain soil and there-
fore the soil resistant properties could not be assessed.

Insulative sound properties would likely be increased
with the acrylic backing; thus the.low cost curtain held
less value for acoustical properties. The high cost curtain
‘was made of low abrasion resistant rayon and acetate fibers,
but abrasion resistance was probably increased by the firm
weave. The low cost sample had strong cotton fibers which
possess fairly high abrasion resistance. The high cost.
curtain possessed better appearance characteristics and
functional attributes; the low cost curtain was superior in.
several economic factors.‘

In Store C, the high cost curtain had better appear-
ance characteristics as a result of a more lustrous surface
created by the shiny glass fibers; the low cost curtain was
made of delustered rayon and acetate fibers that gave the
impression of being limp. _Both curtains were constructed
inaa loose, novelty weave in the same size and with double
fullness. Construction features for the more costly curtain
were Judged to be higher in quality than those of the low.
cost curtain. Stitching in the high cost curtain was neat,

“T3

#6

with absence of loose thread ends; uneven stitching and loose
thread ends were evident in the low cost sample. Conse-
quently, the general appearance of the high cost sample

was Judged to be better.

As in the case of previous comparisons, the high
cost sample was almost twice the price of the low cost
sample in Store C. The high cost sample seemed to be dimen-
sionally more stable and more economical in upkeep.' The.
high cost sample was washable and possessed an inherent
wrinkle resistance. Dry cleaning and pressing would be
desirable in the low cost sample; dimensional stability was
questionable. Heat retention would be negligible in these

OSamples and light admisSion great, due to the loose or open

type of weave..

In Store C, insulative sound properties were slightly
greater for the low cost sample due to a rough-textured
surface. The high cost sample would probably require less
upkeep than the low cost sample because the smooth surface .
of the glass fibers would soil less readily than the rough-"
textured surface of the acetate and rayon fabric. Resistance
to“ sun deterioration would be higher for the glass fibers
than for the rayon and acetate fibers. Length of service
due to abrasion was loweriin the high cost sample because
glass fibers are somewhat lower in abrasion resistance than
the rayon and acetate fibers of the low cost sample.

In a comparison of the low cost samples in all the
retail outlets, the curtains in Store A and B were similar
in price. However, the curtain in Store A was 21 inches

‘+7

longer than the curtain in Store B, thereby lowering its

cost per yard. The low cost sample in Store C was one-half
the cost of the other two samples, but the quality was infer-
ior in all aspects and it would be unfair to compare it

with the other two low cost curtains inSStore A and Store B.
The classified high cost sample in Store C compared most
favorably to\the actual low cost samples in Store A and

Store B in both price and quality; therefore, the low cost
sample in Store C could be considered most comparable...When
the low cost samples in Store A and Store B and the‘reclassi-

fied sample from Store C were compared, the sample in Store B

was Judged to have the highest quality in total appearance

factors. Fiber content varied among all the low cost samples
the curtains in Store A and B were assessed as having more
positive properties than Store C. Type of weave varied as‘
well. The curtains in Store A were made by a Jacquard weave
with rayon and cotton yarns;;the other two samples were con-
structed in a novelty weave with the sample in StoreiB made.
of cotton yarns and the sample in Store C made of glass yarns.
All the low cost samples were of a relatively loose.weave
type of construction._

The characteristics-of construction of the curtains
varied.' The sample in Store A was constructed slightly off
grain, while the cuntains in' Stores B and C were constructed
on the straight grain of the fabric. From an initial cost
point of view, the lowkcost sample in Store A was within a
price range similar to the low cost sample in Store B and the
high cost sample in Store C. However, the low cost sample in

#8

Store A was longer than the curtains in Stores-B and C,
thereby making the cost for the amount of material lower than
the price would indicate. All the curtains were washable,
'with some "easy-care" features present. Heat retention was
estimated to be similar in all the samples; the curtain in
Store C probably admitted the greatest amount of exterior
light. Functional attributes would appear consistent.
Acoustical properties would likely be fairly equal between
the samples in the low and high cost levels. 'The curtain
‘in Store C would likely soil the least, due to the smooth
surface of the fiber, whereas the curtains in Store A and B
had a rough textured surface that would attract and hold
‘ soil more readily. Color fastness was indicated by the fade
resistance guarantee in the sample from Store A,and the sam-
ples from Stores‘B and C lacked a sun fast guarantee. Abra-
sion resistance was-Judged to be the lowest in the high cost
curtain in Store C due to the glass fibers used inconstruc-
tion,while the other two curtains were made of somewhat ;
higher abrasive resistant fibers.

High cost samples in Store A and Store B were regarded
as having higher appearance quality. Both the fiberscontent
and the type of weave varied between the samples and both
curtains had a lining. Construction of the curtains was
good in each case. The curtains were cut on grain and
stitched securely with an even thread tension. The initial
price of the curtain in Store A was slightly higher than that
‘for the curtain in Store B, but the first curtain exhibited

other economic-related factors such as washability and Sassy-

.40 ,
r

“9

care" features. Insulative value and admission of exterior
light would likely be similar as a result of the lining in
both curtains. The functional factors referred.to acoustical
properties and abrasion resistance would be predicted to be
fairly equal. Ease in maintenance would probably by the
greater for the sample in Store A than the curtain in Store B
because of the smoother fibers employed. '

There was considerable range in the price of the low
cost curtains and the high cost curtains, as well as in.the
characteristics under each quality category. Fiber content

differed among both the low cost curtains and the high cost

curtains, but all were constructed from relatively inexpen-

sive fibers. The high cost samples in Store A and B had a
type of lining which contributed to their appearance. Con-
struction features of the high cost curtains were generally
of better quality than those of the low cost curtains; the
high cost curtains were all constructed on the straight

grain of the fabric, while some low cost curtains were found.
to be constructed off grain. The length of the curtains.
varied in the low cost samples, but the length was consistent
in the high cost curtains. Estimates of maintenance costs
varied among the high and the low cost curtains. Wash-
ability was present in both the high and the low cost samples
in Store A, the low cost sample in Store B, and the high cost'
sample in Store C; dry cleaning was required in the high cost
sample in Store B and the low cost sample in Store C. Heat
and sound insulative properties were generally greater in the

f

high cost samples as Opposed to the low cost samples.; iharw

50

Therefore, these data suggest that a choice of curtain would
best be made from a combination of factors most appropriate
for the particular appearance and functional purposes'
demanded. It was osberved that the economic properties were
found to be less associated with cost than were the-functional
and appearance properties. ,

When considering quality of merchandise present in
each type of retail outlet, several generalizations could be
suggested. The low cost sample with the highest number of
quality characteristics contributing to the functional andl‘
economical factors was found in Store A, the international

department store chain. The low cost curtain.with the

' highest quality characteristics contributing to appearance
was in Store B, the locally managed department store with
two branches. The. high cost curtains in both Stores A and B
had a higher total number of qualitative features than in
Store C. However, the sample in Store A had a greater num-
ber of quality factors contributing to functional requirements
and economic properties than Store B. Consequently, data from
this study appeared to indicate that Store A, the inter-
national department store chain, had the best overall quality
as Judged from the curtain~samples observed. Store B, the
locally managed department store, appeared to have acceptable
.quality curtains. Store C, the discount department store
chain, had curtains with the fewest quality characteristics,
but at the lowest prices.

- From.this study there was support to indicate that
price bears a relationship to quality in readybmade curtains.

“ .
i 4
f

51
There was also an indication that different retail outlets

carry ready-made draw curtains which vary in their total

qualities.

CHAPTER V

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER STUDIES
AND RELATED STUDIES

In\light of the findings of this study, the researcher
believes there is need to investigate further the criteria
defining the quality of curtains in order to assess the
merchandise available in retail outlets. Therefore, sug-
gestions for improvement of the present study might include:'

1. Using only high cost and low cost categories .
because of the difficulty of establishing a middle range.
The narrow range among the costs within one retail store
as well as the amount of variation in characteristics among

curtains suggests that establishing any clear patterning is

~unlikely within the middle range included.

2. Devising simple rating scales to assure greater-
reliability and validity because gross Judgements were used
and consequently the possibility of subJective evaluations
of characteristics were great. Rating scales could be .
designed to measure, for example, such factors as quality
of construction of the curtain, degree of dimensional sta-
bility of the fabric, and aesthetic quality of the curtain.

3. Laboratory teats of various factors such as

fiber content, fade resistance, breaking strength, and abra-

' sion resistance which would contribute to concrete evidence a

and decrease subJectivity of the study. Such a procedure

(0

9

53

would be possible if sufficient time and money were
available. I
h. Reliability Of findingsuwould increase if the
sizes of the sample were increased.
. 5. Hold cost factor constant which would allow the
investigation of quality comparison according to a classifi-

cation of high and low cost ranges.

Suggestions for related studies which might be
developed are:

1. Using representative custom-made and made-to-
measure curtains as sources of data.

2. Comparing of applied and structural design
fabrics in curtains. ;

3. Comparing custom-made, made-to-measure, and ready-
made curtains available in a number of each type of local
retail outlets.

The researcher also recommends that a market survey
be randomly conducted in a local area to determine the per-.
centage of curtains that are custom-made, made-to-measure,
ready-made, and made at home. Included in the survey could
be questions on consumer opinions of the curtain department

according to type and dependability of consumer information,

merchandise quality, display, and services.

/

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Books
Ball, Victonia Kloss. The Art of Iategloz Dealga.' New
York: The Macmillan Co., 19 O.
\ .
Candee, Helen Churchill. ‘Weayas and Drapazlas. New York:
Fredrick A. Stokes Co., 19 3. ..

Dakins, J. Go don. The Buyers Maaaal. The Merchandising

Handb ok for All Retailers. New York: The Mer-

'chandising DiviSion of National Retail Merchants
Association, 1965.

- Duncan, Delbert J., and Phillips, Charles F. Retalling

Pnlnglplaa and Methods. 6th ed. Homewood, Illinois:
Richard D. Irwin, Inc., 1963.

Faulkner Ray, and Faulkner, Sarah. W.
3rd. ed. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and W ston,
1968.

Gillies, Mary Davis. .ZERBLB:4§QQ§.2E£QI§£$QB~ Neijork:
Wm. H. Wise and Co. Inc., 19 0.

Jones, Fred M. Ratall Management. Homewood, Illinois:
Richard D. Irwin, Inc., 196 7.

Obst. Frances Melanie. W-
New York: The Macmillan Co., 1963.

Ringo, Fredonia Jane. .Qzapazlaa. New York: AtW. Shaw Co.,

1967 .
Staudt, Thomas A., and Taylor, Donald A. A Managerial Iatzg-
dagtion to Markatln g. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey:

Stepat-De.Van, Dorothy. .lntroguctloa to Hoaa Faanlsalngs.
' New York: The Macm“1an Co., 19 l. 4

Wale

"Arkansas Offers New wash-wear Reactant."._2§§£n__23111§§:
til" (Septo, 1963), 30'

 

 

 

' L5

55.

56

Baker, Cameron A. "Flammability Testing: Recent Develop-
.ments in Testing and Law Enforcement," Amezlcaa
W (March 30. 196%). 259-2 1.

Batchelder, James H., Thayer William S., and Schultz,
Theodore J. "Sound Absorption of Draperies," T
1967 . 73- 7 .

Clark, Dorothy M. "Window Treatment," Pullman: Agricultural
Extension Service,'Washington State University, 1960.

"Comparative Performances of Drapery Upholstery Fabrics,"
(MimGO) , 19660 _ ' -

"Cool, Cool‘Window Treatments," Be e Ho e G s,
1.2 (Jme, 196”), 66-69. . .

"Curtain Excitement Ready-Made!" ,Goo Ho 3 e , 160
. (April. 1963), l36-1h3, lug—W

"Curtains and Draperies," WWW
Published by Consumers Research Inc., Weshington, 62C.

"Curtains and Draperies," Coasaaer Ballatln Annaal 1962-é3

Published by Consumers Research Inc., Washington, 21.

"Drapery Services that Simplify Shopping," W
Gaggeas (October, 1963 , 129.

"Du.Pont Offers New Stain-Resistant Finish: Zepel Fabric
Fluoridizer,".MQdazn;laxtlla§, an (Feb., 1963), 28.

"Fire Hazards of FabricS." W. 53
~(May, 196k), #03.

Gardner, Charlotte "How to Make a Drapery Decision," Betta;
W. is (April. 1966). 36+.

"Heavy TV Campaign Launches New, Sheerest Ever Fiberglas
Curtains," s' , 288 (June 26/July 3, 196%),
13.

Banks, T. "Outlook Bright for Buoyant Sales of Carpets
Draperies, Upholstery Cloths; Chicago Home Furnish-
ings Market," M Te 3, h6 (Jan., 1965), 1h+.

Hensley, Martha L., and Morrison, Bess V. "Windows and
Curtains: Planning and Selection," Home and Garden
BulletinrNo. N (Washington D.C.§ U.S. Department
of Agriculture, February, 1951).

Houseman Robert W. "Ready-Medea Rate You An him
9 67 (March, 19610), ‘46-‘19.

Howard, Robert E. "Flame-Resistant Drapery Fabrics,?nlax&lla
' - .W 131 (July, 1967), 10%. ,

r“,

57

"How to Make Curtains and Draperies," Ruth B. Comstock
Specialist in Interior Design, New York State College
of Home Economics. Cornell University, Ithaca, New
York 0

"How to Make Your Windows Beautiful," (Sturgis, Michigan:
Kirsch Company, 1965).

Maleng, Norman.K. "Flammable Fabrics Congress Takes a New
- Look," Ame c s f R , 56 (June 19, 1967),
MHB-MSO 0
May, Michael J. "Water and Soil Repellent Finishes'

W’ 9+ (Oct. 25. 1965).

"Merchandise Information Pages Ready-Made Curtains," J.C.
Penny Co., April 15, 1967, No. 730-179.

Metzger, A. W. "Fiber Glass Fabrics Modify Environment,"
Archlaectagal Racorg (Nov., 196%), 219-220.

"Outlook.Bright for Home Furnishings Fabricsi"M Mo e

Tsaiilas_hagazia_s 5 (Feb., 196%), sezo.

Peters, Jane Spence, and Seville, Dorothy. "Fabric Deteriora-
.lc tion: A Test Chamber for Exposure of Fabrics to a

Contaminated Atmosphere, " Amegicaa 21a stag: Rapgztaz,
Vol. 56, Pt. 2 (May, 1967), 3 0-3 2.

"Sears Introduction to the Merchandise in Division 2%, "
(Chicago: Sears Roebuck and Company, 1966).

"Sears Quick Facts: the 1967-68 Drapery Shop, " (Chicago.

Sears Roebuck and Company, 196

"Sears Quick Facts: the 1968 Curtain Shop," (Chicago:
Sears Roebuck and Company, 19668.

Sherwood Peter W. "The Profit Potential for l*Flameproofinfi
Finishes," Mode Te 11 3 Me a no,“ 6(Feb., 196 ),

23-2%.
Shippee,B F.B., and Moss,‘W. .D. "Soil Release Finishes: The
fig Push Is On, ' T :Ind st es, 131 (Sept.,
7), 10h+.

"Shopping Notes: Curtains and Draperies, " Michigan State
University C00perative Extension Service, Extension
Bulletin 60%, Home and Family Series, East Lansing,
Michigan. . ,

Solomon, G.L. "Quality and Taste Levels Rise for Cargets,

Draperies and Upholstery " Wiles
(Jan., 1963), 23-2h+ . ’ ’

#W_

58

Stavrakas E.J. "Wash-and-Wear Test Methods, " A
W. (August 15. 1966), 63%33'13. ‘

"The Institute Answers Ybur Questions on Draperies, " Goog
Hoaskeeping, 156 (Feb., 1963), 160.

Todd, R. E., Asquith, R. S., and Peters A.T. "The Influence
of Fiber Substrate on the Fading Properties of Nitro-

diphenylamine Dyes, " W

55 (July 18,1966), 0- 3. ’
"Window Coverings " P ,h7 (Nov.

1966), 196- f3.MEL'flW’ ’

"Window Treatments, " W, 70 (Nov.,é 1967), 78-79.7

"Windows and‘Window'Treatments," Michigan Cooperative .
Extension Service, May, 196 5. .

APPENDIX

60
‘Appcndix

Table 1. Data Sheet for Observation and Analysis of Ready-Made Draw
Curtains

s
a
.

Type of Store - Store A. a locally managed. international department

store chain.
Price Hangs _L_o_w_ ~ Medium 6 High
$3 a 99.6 s 98 ‘ $6 a 99.98 . $9 c 99.12 s 98
Most Representeue - ' -
ative Prics' ‘\$6.98 $9.98 . ' ‘ $12.98
Fiber Content 67% cotton I .71% cotton Sufi cotton
,?3% rayon 29% rayon ‘ “6% rayon
Dimensions I} . ‘ .
unit volume #8" x.8#' 50” x 8h” 50" x 8“"
Fabric . atructural . structural structural
Construction Jacquard weave: 'Jacquard weave: Jacquard weave:
7; loose weave ‘ firm weave (two-tons)
. 100 warp x" 100 warp yarns firm weave
' , 32 pick yarns/ 'of 150 denier x 100 warp yarns:
square inch 5 28 pick yarns of 28 pick yarns/ sq.
3500 denier/sq. ‘ inch
inch sprayed acrylic
. backing A
Applied
Design Process none none none
Color Range . amber gold I ‘whitc nugget (dark gold)
white . amber gold bluegrass '
fern groan ivory dessert bronze
fern grccn ‘whitc -
cherry rcd' sand
manadarin orange russst
Hanging sags a little. straight grain straight grain
Appearance near side hem

Special Pur- fads resistancc;‘ fads resistance perms-smooth

pose Finishes qucar guar- 2-yoar guarantee —ndliun.acrylic
and Treatments antes: pcrma- perms-smooth sprayed backing '
smooth: shrink-_ shrinkage loss,
ago loss than than.l per cent
3 per cent

CONSTRUCTION OF‘CURTAINS

Sissof 3” pleats; . sale ' sans
alt-tins u- 01mins

61.

Lg!_ Medimm
Type of
pleats ‘ pinch ‘ pinch
Thread ’v matching matching
Length of ,
stitch basting basting
Heading tape h” buckram. h” buckram

Application of
heading tape_ tape basted to
' “\bottcm edge of
double heading.
'Top stitched at
sides with bast- same
basting stitched
along fold length
and across bottom
Widthe Hut ‘lfl

secure.
' Width of ‘
side hem. l" 1 Ii”
Side hem. ‘

finish blind stitched blind stitched

Size of'bottcm
double hem. 3" A 3'

Bottom hen blind stitched blind stitched

finish mitered corners
. neat and secure neat and secure
Pressing - side hem.slightly
'. . puckered ‘well pressed
Labels . trade name ‘ trade name

registered iden- registered iden-
tification no. , tification no.

% fiber content ' % fiber content
in package not ‘ in package not

 

_ on sample . on sample
special treat-1t: special treat-
ments - ments
construction , Washing Instrucé
f3&tn1089pinch tions: wash and
pleats. blind hang drapery.
stitched hem, Hush automatiofi

. at bottoaxand A ally through

3%"
blind stitched

3.

blind stitched
mitered corners

‘neat and secure '

well pressed

trade name

registered iden-
tification no.

% fiber content

in package not'

on sample

special treat-

ments

Acrylic foam backing
insulation '
Construction features-
b" heading. side hem.’
blind stitched:

62

Low__ Medium High
sides: spin cycle. Use Ray'be hand or

Washing Instruc- gentle action machine washed.
tions: Washable setting. Do not Drip-dried. tumble-
by hand or mach- overload machine. ; dried. or dry clean-
ine at medium Use mild soap or ed. Do not use bleach.
temperature . detergent and thread count
Tumble dry (med- warm water. No
in). Touch up bleach. Hang full
ironing. - length to dry
thread count pleats when damp.

Little or no iron-

\. ing needed. Tumble
0' dry.
thread count
denier

22° and Dependability of Consumer Information and Services

The manager of the drapery department was well informed about his
merchandise. He provided accurate information corresponding to the in-
formation supplied in the purchasing manual. in pamphlets. in bulletins.
on the labels. and in newspaper advertisements. The type of information
' supplied included color range of curtains in stock and special order
curtains. dimension. prices. types of dyes. fullness. fiber content of
heading tape. curtain construction features, special purpose finishes
- and treatments. fiber content ($), and fabric construction.

If the customer was in doubt. the department manager estimated the
size of curtains needed when the dimensions of the windows were given.
Consumers are granted the privelege of taking a pair of ready-made curtains
home on a traial basis to check color and pattern harmony. dimensions. and
A the over-all effect with the rest of the household furnishings and room
- accessories. The type of hardware is suggested if requested: however. there

are no installation services provided.

Customers were not informed of the type of guarantee or the time
limit of the guarantee except the guarantee that was stated on the label.
However. the manager provided a 100 per cent money refund guarantee on
fading and fabric deterioration during the first year of ”normal” usage.
Each additional year. up to five years . there was an estimated percentage
refund. depending on the manager's assessment.

T‘bl. 2 e

63

Data Sheet for Observation and Analysis of Readyehade Draw ‘
Curtains

 

Type of Store- Store B. a locally managed department store with two

and.Treatments

branches.
Price Range ng_
saw-6.99
Host Represent-
ative Price $6.99
0 \ .
\
Fiber Content 100% cotton
Dimensions . 1+8” are: 63"
Construction structural
‘ of Fabric novelty weaves
loose construc-
tioneopen weave .
Applied Design
Process none
Color Range 'avacado green
pale gold
beige
antique gold
special order:
bone _
tangerine
wedgewood blue
royal blue
pink
Hanging
"Appearance pleats even
Special Purr perma-preas
pose Finishes

CONSTRUCTION'OF’CURTAINS

Size of
Pleating

3" plate

.h' spacing

Mbdiun

‘ $6.99-7.99

$7.98

_ 65% rayon
‘ 35$ acetate

“8” x 8h"

structural
antique satin.
With slab
(raised slight-
ly9-firmuweave

j

none

antique gold

:white
. avacado green “

oyster
beige

fern green
royal

pink
orange

on grain

fade resistance;
‘ ' for life of

fabric

High
$7.99-1o.99.

$10.99

6l$ rayon
39%acetate

#8” x.8“”

structural
antique satin
with heavy slub:
double cloth
firm. compact

‘ weave

DOD.

antique gold
white

‘avacado green

light gold
peacock
fern
royal

on grain

Type of
pleats

Thread

Lenfth of
stitch

Heading tape
Application

of Heading \\

Tape

Width of
Side Hem

Side Hem
Finish

Size of bottom

double hem

BOttOILh‘.
finish

Pressing
Labels

"th and

l5

pinch
matching

basting
#’ buckram
Tape basted to

bottom edge of
double heading e

3, Top stitched at '
. sides with bast-

ing stitch.
Pleat basting ’
stitched along

length and across
bOttOI “the Heat

and secure.
1}"
blind stitched

um

blind stitched:
corners not
mitered

well pressed

trade name(Cort-
ina) : registered
identification .
number: fl fiber

‘ content
special treatments“

dimensions
color

Instructions

6%»

Easy!!!

pinch
matching

h” buckram

in"
blind stitched

3.

blind stitched:
corners nct
mitered: hem
width uneven.
weights in hem

well pressed

trade name
(Coronet):
registered
identification

% fiber content
special treatments dimensions

dimensions
color

.3232.

pinch

basting
hfi'buckram

1i"
blind stitched

u-'
blind stitched!

‘ corners not

mitered: neat~
-.and secure

well pressed

trade name (Kenneth):
registered identifica-
tion number: % fiber
content

special treatments

color

Low- Shake lightly before laundering: machine wash in lukewarm water
. using mild soap: rinse thoroughly: do not use bleaching agents:
tumble dry using wash.and wear drying cycle: romove immediately

65

at completion of cycle: do not leave in warm dryer. This ”No-
iron" fabric neverr::needs ironing if instructions are followed.

Medium-Dry clean only.

High— Dry clean only. Ironing instructions: use cool iron or set iron
on acetate setting: excessive heat damages fibers.

Tm and Dependability of Consumer Information and Services

The manager of the ready-made curtain department provided informa-
tion on sizes, dyes, colors. fullness. heading tape. construction of cur-
tains, special purpose finishes and treatments. which corresponded with
the information in the sales manual. pamphlets. labels, and newspaper
advertisements. He stressed the aesthetic aspects fo the draperies more
than the functional and economic factors. Information on the type of drap-
ery to fulfill a specific purpose. as well as the dimension of the ready-
made drapery required, were provided by the manager when size of .windows
and the desired effect were stated. Customers were not informed of any
guarantee. There was no specific guarantee but a percentage of the money
was refunded, depending on the length of time since the curtains were
purpased and on the individual circumstances. The manager stressed a fair
store policy. Consumers were allowed to obtain curtains on a trail basis
to determine whether they harmonized with their. interiors. No installation
services were provided with the purchase of ready-made curtains.

I .

Advertisements were printed in' the local newspaper two to four times
a month, with fairly' complete information on quality features, prices. sizes.
colors. and special orders. Consumer information on coordination of house-
hold furnishings and accessories was attempted in the advertisements. Labels
were provided with the merchandise. An inventory was taken every thirty days -
to insure accurate stock control and availability of merchandise. If the
store did not have" the merchandise in stock. it was obtained from another
branch or a hpecial order was made. - ‘

 

66

Table 3. Data Sheet for Observation and Analysis of Ready-Made Draw

Curtains

 

Type of Store- Store C . a discount department store and a member of a

chain.
Price Range ' 1.31
sum-3.21
Most Represent-
ative Price \ $2.99
\
Fiber Content 57% rayon
“3% acetate
Dimensions 1&8“ x 63"
Construction ’ structural
of Fabric designs novelty '
weave: loose '
weave
' Applied Design none
Process
Color Range white
~ beige
fern green
orange
Hanging Not on grain
Appearance Pleats don't
hang evenly
Specihl Pur- none
' pose Finishes
and Treatments

CONSTRUCTION OF CURTAINS

Size of
Floating

3" pleats: ,
4" spacing

Medium
33.22-15.98

$3.88

. 100 s 31... fiber

.48'x8lt"

structural
design: novelty
weave: loose
weave

machine applied

floral design

blue and green
floral design on
a white back-
muffle Rad Cid
green floral I
design on white
background

Hem puckered:
Bottom hem top
stitched uneven
and tension too
tight: Curtain
sags to one side

Shrink proof
Wrinkle proof
Hand washable
Fire safe

Sun. safe

No ironing ever

3" 910“?!
1:“ spacing

£1.1in
34.99-45.99

$5.88
100% glass fiber

Santana:

structural
design: novelty.
nubby weave:
loose weave

' none

white
beige
gold
moss
rust

Fairly, even
folds of fabric

Shrink proof
Mildew resistance
Fade proof

Fire proof

3" pleats
‘0' spacing

Ls".

Type of
Pleats pinch
Thread matching
Length of ‘L‘“'
Stitch basting
Heading Tape Flexible card-

board paper 3"

. \
Application df Tape bested to ?-
Heading Tape 3 bottom of in- '

g . side fold of
heading. Pleats
down 3" down and

' across bottom.of
pleat. Top stitch-
ed at sides. Bast-
ing stitches un-.
even: stitched
twice. loose .
thread ends

'Width of Side
Hem. é”
Side Hem

Finish: ' blind stitched

I
D

Size of Bot-
tom.Hem. ' 1%”
Hem top stitched
basting stitch:
uneven: corners
not mitered:
Turned inside
hem stretched-
shows on outbide:
loose thread ends.

Bottom.Hem
Finish

Pressing Not well pressed .

Creases

Labels Pinch pleated
draw draperies:
Style #00

Size 48" x 63"
Fiber content ‘
Made in U.S.A.

No washing or
cleaning instruc-
tions. Registered
identification
number ‘

677

Medium

pinch
matching

basting
3” bonded fiber

Tape basted to
bottom of
heading. Pleats
sewn 3” down
and across bot-
tom of pleat
with basting
stitches. Top

pinch
matching

basting
h" plastic

Tape basted to

bottom of heading.
Pleats sewn 4” down
and across bottom.
Top stitched at sides.
lest stitching e

stitched at sides.

Double row of

basting stitches:

pension too tight.

R"

blind stitched.‘

1%"

Top stitched-

uneven: Tension
too tight-seam
puckering: Cor-

ners not mitered.
Loose thread ends.

Not required

Registered
identification
number: Owensd?
Corning Fiber-
glass: Fiber

content: Special

treatments:
launder and dry

easily

1%“
blind stitched

3'

Blind stitched
Corners mitered
Fairly'neat

Not required

Steven'Wonder
Glass fabric
2-year money back
guaranteeon fabric:

. never needs ironing:

will not shrink or
stretch:‘willcnot
burn: moth.proof: heat
and fading rdsistant

68

.Wasgng and Dmg Instructions

Law--

No washing or cleaning instructions

Medium- Hand wash by dipping gently in warm water. Use any mild soap. J

Higher ’

Rinse thoroughtly in clear. warm water. Squeeze gently to re-
move excess water. Dry draperies and curtains by hanging them
over a rod. Rehang while still damp. Smooth hem and let drap-
eries and curtains hang naturally. Remember: hang fabrics so they
clear ceiling. floor. and window projections. not against edges
where they will be constantly rubbed. hit or handled. Just hand
washing these fine fabrics keeps then beautiful since dirt can-
not penetrate the glass fiber yarns. Do not bleach. Do not iron
and do not dry clean. Do not machine wash. Do not machine dry.

Hand wash separately—mot with other fabrics. Rinse tub/basin
thoroughly after each washing. Remove hooks . Wash separately
in mild soap or detergent.» no bleach. Please do nut scrub -
rub - twist. Rinse in clear water - do not wring. Hang over
curtain rod or clothes line to dry - do not use clothespins.

‘ Rehang at window while damp - no ironing needed. Caution: Do

not dry clean: do not machine wash: do not machine dry: do not
bleach. Washing or handling this glass fiber product may result
in temporary skin irritation or discomfort. It is important.
therefore . to follow instructions.

;

Depgndability of Consumer Information

Labels provide the only consumer information available. The label

8 on the lowest price sample contained very little information. There is

no manager in the curtain department. A sales clerk orders samples needed.
No additional services.

SOIWONOOB BWCSH 30 3931109
SLUV GHlVU’J 036V Si-IlHLO'IJ 'STILleI
AJJSHBAIND BlViS NVSIHOWO

 

M
w

llljlllllllllllllllltlllllillIIIHHIHI

 

1293 02237 1680