SPINNING TESTS OF MEADE AND SEA ISLAND COTTONS. 3 
MECHANICAL CONDITIONS. 
All of the test lots were run under the same mechanical conditions 
except for minor changes in the draft to secure the required weight 
of sliver. These changes were necessary because the Meade was 
slightly more wasty than the Sea Island. 
PERCENTAGES OF WASTE. 
Accurate records were kept of the amount of cotton fed to and de- 
livered .by each machine and of the waste discarded at each process. 
The invisible loss depends upon the grade of the cotton and the 
atmospheric conditions under which it is being manufactured. To 
offset the effect of the latter an attempt was made to maintain the 
relative humidity at 65 per cent, but because of the absence of humid- 
ifiers in the picker room it was not always possible to keep a constant 
humidity in that room, which caused slight variations in the invisible 
loss. 
Table 1 gives the percentages of visible waste obtained at the 
pickers, cards, and combers; the invisible waste; and the combined 
visible and invisible waste from both the Meade and Sea Island cot- 
tons tested. 
Table 1. — Percentages of waste obtained from Meade and Sea Island cotton 
during the seasons shown. 
1916-17 
1918-19 
1919-20 
Meade 
cotton. 
Sea 
Island 
cotton. 
Meade 
cotton. 
Sea 
Island 
cotton. 
Meade 
cotton, 
sandy 
soil. 
Meade 
cotton, 
clay 
soil. 
Sea 
Island 
cotton. 
Visible waste: 
Pickers 1 
1.80 
7.66 
22.45 
1.04 
7.04 
23.26 
1.63 
5.70 
19.39 
1.63 
5.32 
15.03 
2.34 
6.49 
18.85 
3.14 
10.01 
16.12 
1.05 
Cards*... 
5.03 
Combers 1 
15.20 
Total visible 2 
29.48 
.74 
29.34 
.27 
24.82 
2.12 
20.55 
.74 
25.51 
2.54 
26.19 
3.97 
19.79 
Invisible waste 2 
3.63 
Total visible and invisible waste from 
pickers, cards, and combers 2 
30.22 
29.61 
26.94 
21.29 
28.05 
30.16 
23.42 
1 Based on the net weight fed to the respective machines. 
2 Based on the net weight fed to the opener picker. 
These waste percentages show that the Meade and Sea Island 
cotton were practically equal in wastiness for the season of 1916-17, 
the percentages of visible waste being 29.48 and 29.34, respectively. 
The tests made on the cotton grown in the season of 1918-19 show 
that there was 4.27 per cent more visible waste in the Meade than in 
the Sea Island cotton. This difference was almost entirely due to the 
waste made on the comber. The tests made on the crop of 19r9-20 
showed a difference of 5.72 per cent more visible waste for the sandy 
soil and 6.40 per cent for the clay soil Meade than for the Sea Island. 
