Garment Defect Analysis, Remedies and Introduction To Machine Learning at A Retail Chain PDF

GARMENT DEFECT ANALYSIS, REMEDIES AND
INTRODUCTION TO MACHINE LEARNING AT A RETAIL

CHAIN
A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the

award of degree in
Bachelor of Fashion Technology (Apparel Production)
Submitted by
OJASVI SRIVASTAVA
M/BFT/11/15
Under the guidance of
Ms. Aboli Naik

Asst. Professor
NIFT Mumbai
Department of Fashion Technology

National Institute of Fashion Technology, Mumbai
May, 2015
Abstract
Most of the products in the garment industry have a short lifespan. With new products, new
defects arise. Even after knowing the products in & out, it is very hard to keep defects from
finding their way to the finished product. Pareto analysis and Ishikawa diagrams are great tools
for fixing problems that cause these defects, but these approaches are time consuming and by
the time they give substantial results, the effort and time consumed are not worth it. The
reason why defects always find a way through is largely human incompetency. Demand in
today's market has pushed humans to the limit where machine level efficiency is demanded
from them. Humans feel fatigue, boredom, complacency; and this hinders their performance.
With robots that sew garments already in beta phase, automation in garment industry will
arrive sooner than most expect. There is a need to shape the functioning of this industry for
what is about to come. Image analysis has reached new heights with the advent of machine
learning. Analysing defects using cameras, X-ray scanners and computers in today's world is
easier than most people think it to be. These powerful image analysis practices need to be
shaped for the garment industry, an introduction to which will be discussed in this project.
Keywords: Garment, Defects, Pareto, Ishikawa, Machine learning
i
Certificate
This is to certify that this Project Report titled “Garment defect analysis, remedies and
introduction to machine learning at a retail chain” is based on my (Ojasvi Srivastava's)
original research work, conducted under the guidance of Ms. Aboli Naik towards partial
fulfillment of the requirement for award of the Bachelor’s Degree in Fashion Technology
(Apparel Production), of the National Institute of Fashion Technology, Mumbai.
No part of this work has been copied from any other source. Material, wherever
borrowed has been duly acknowledged.
Signature of Author/Researchers
Signature of Guide
ii
Acknowledgement
I'd like to thank my faculty guide Ms. Aboli Naik, the other department faculty and the
administration of NIFT Mumbai for their support and guidance in this project. I extend my
thanks to my industry guide Mr. Sandipan Chakraborty for his insight into the topic and delivery
of critical information. I'm grateful to my family, friends and classmates for their constructive
criticism and humour.
iii
List of tables
Table 5.1: Format of pivot table for MajorDefect1 .................................................................................... 15

Table 5.2: Percentage weightage for defects in the found defects fields .................................................. 15
Table 6.1: Decision tree learning for broken stitch .................................................................................... 32
List of figures
Figure 5.1: Pareto analysis - Overall defects ............................................................................................... 17

Figure 5.2: Pareto analysis - Circular knits .................................................................................................. 17
Figure 5.3: Pareto analysis - Denim ............................................................................................................ 18
Figure 5.4: Pareto analysis - Ethnic ............................................................................................................. 18
Figure 5.5: Pareto analysis - Woven bottoms ............................................................................................. 19
Figure 5.6: Pareto analysis - Woven shirts .................................................................................................. 19
Figure 5.7: Pareto analysis - Woven tops.................................................................................................... 20
Figure 5.8: Pareto analysis - Woven misc ................................................................................................... 20
Figure 5.9: Fishbone - Oil/ Dirt mark........................................................................................................... 22
Figure 5.10: Fishbone - Open seam ............................................................................................................ 23
Figure 5.11: Fishbone - Puckered seam ...................................................................................................... 24
Figure 5.12: Fishbone - Uncut thread ends................................................................................................. 25
Figure 5.13: Fishbone - Broken lockstitches ............................................................................................... 26
Figure 5.14: Fishbone - Wavy stitches ........................................................................................................ 27
Figure 5.15: Fishbone - Colour stain ........................................................................................................... 28
Figure 6.1: Decision tree for broken stitch ................................................................................................. 33
Figure 6.2: k-nearest neighbours algorithm example ................................................................................. 34
iv
Contents
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................................... i
Certificate...................................................................................................................................................... ii
Acknowledgement ....................................................................................................................................... iii
List of tables ................................................................................................................................................. iv
List of figures ................................................................................................................................................ iv
1. Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 6
1.1 Scope ................................................................................................................................................... 6
1.2 Objective ............................................................................................................................................. 7
2. Literature review ....................................................................................................................................... 7
3. Methodology ........................................................................................................................................... 12
4. Data collection ........................................................................................................................................ 13
5. Analysis ................................................................................................................................................... 15
5.1 Defect frequency and score calculation............................................................................................ 15
5.2 Pareto analysis .................................................................................................................................. 16
5.3 Cause and effect diagrams ................................................................................................................ 22
6. Remedies................................................................................................................................................. 29
7. Limitations and scope of further study ................................................................................................... 35
8. Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................... 35
Works Cited ................................................................................................................................................. 36
Bibliography ................................................................................................................................................ 36
Annexure I ................................................................................................................................................... 38
Overall defects ........................................................................................................................................ 38
Circular Knits ........................................................................................................................................... 70
Denim ...................................................................................................................................................... 94
Ethnic .................................................................................................................................................... 107
Woven bottoms .................................................................................................................................... 124
Woven shirts ......................................................................................................................................... 140
Woven tops ........................................................................................................................................... 156
Woven misc........................................................................................................................................... 172
v
1. Introduction
Defects signify lack of quality. The products dealt with in the garment industry are ever-
changing and so are the defects. Analysing finished products gives probable problematic areas
for similar products in the future. Naturally, the bulk and array of data being dealt with requires
a Knowledge Based System. But such systems today are not pro-active, they are rarely updated.
If we know the product, then detecting defects is not hard. But defects are observed every day,
in every product. The problem lies in monitoring. Human beings are susceptible to boredom
and fatigue. Emotions hinder performance all the time.
The garment industry is heading towards automation. Machines will soon start manufacturing
clothes and the human contribution would be limited to supervision only (Drummond, 2012).
1.1 Scope
A knowledge based system of defects gets built by the end product. Such a system relies heavily
on assessment of the end product.
Although there are many ways of determining causes of defects, this project will focus on the
Association Search approach. This means raw factual data from production and process
capability has not been obtained or considered.
A real-time database grows quickly and that coupled with the exponential learning curve of
machine learning is the quickest and most efficient way of cracking down on defects.
6
1.2 Objective
To pick key defects, analyse their causes, and give remedies.

Sub-objectives:
 Identifying key defects using Pareto analysis
 Analyse root causes of the defects using Ishikawa diagrams
 Give immediate remedies and introduce the concept of machine learning
2. Literature review
A “defect” is any state of unfitness for use or nonconformance to specification. Examples are
illegible invoice, oversizing, and low mean time between failures. Other names include “error”,
“discrepancy”, and “nonconformance.”
A “symptom” is the outward evidence of a defect. A defect may have multiple symptoms. The
same word may serve as a description of both defect and symptom.
A “theory” is an unproved assertion as to reasons for the existence of defects and symptoms.
Usually, multiple theories are advanced to explain the presence of defects.
A “cause” is a proved reason for the existence of a defect. Often there are multiple causes, in
which case they follow the Pareto principle—the vital few causes will dominate all the rest.
A “dominant cause” is a major contributor to the existence of defects and one that must be
remedied before there can be an adequate improvement.
“Diagnosis” is the process of studying symptoms, theorizing as to causes, testing theories, and
discovering causes.
A “remedy” is a change that can eliminate or neutralize a cause of defects.
The basic concept behind diagnosis is the factual approach—to make decisions based on fact
rather than on theory. This concept enables amateurs in the technology nevertheless to
contribute usefully to the project. Thus the teams must learn to distinguish theory from fact.
Facts are supported by suitable evidence. Theories are unsupported assertions. Sometimes the
7
distinction is subtle.
One of the most frequent questions raised by improvement team members refers to “process
capability.” Some members contend that “this process is inherently unable to meet the
specifications.” The opposing contention is that “the process is capable but it isn’t being run
right.” In recent decades, tools have been devised to test these assertions, especially as applied
to manufacturing processes.
A common test of why a capable process isn’t being run right is “process dissection.” This
strategy tries to trace defects back to their origins in the process. There are multiple forms of
such process dissection:
1. Test at Intermediate Stages

2. Stream-to-Stream Analysis
3. Time-to-Time Analysis
In “defect concentration analysis”, the purpose is to discover concentrations that may point to
causes. This method has been used in widely varied applications.
Some diagnosis consists of relating data on symptoms to some theory of causation such as
design, process, worker, and so on. Possible relationships are examined using various statistical
tools such as correlation, ranking, and matrixes. This is “association search”. (Juran & Godfrey,
1999)
The Pareto principle (also known as the 80–20 rule) states that, for many events, roughly 80%
of the effects come from 20% of the causes. (Pareto principle, 2015)
Pareto analysis is a formal technique useful where many possible courses of action are
competing for attention. In essence, the problem-solver estimates the benefit delivered by
8
each action, then selects a number of the most effective actions that deliver a total benefit
reasonably close to the maximal possible one.
This technique helps to identify the top portion of causes that need to be addressed to resolve
the majority of problems. Once the predominant causes are identified, then tools like the
Ishikawa diagram or Fish-bone Analysis can be used to identify the root causes of the problems.
(Pareto analysis, 2015)
Ishikawa diagrams (also called fishbone diagrams, herringbone diagrams, cause-and-effect

diagrams, or Fishikawa) are causal diagrams created by Kaoru Ishikawa (1968) that show the
causes of a specific event. Causes are usually grouped into major categories to identify these
sources of variation (Ishikawa diagram, 2015). The categories typically include:
 People: Anyone involved with the process

 Methods: How the process is performed and the specific requirements for doing it, such
as policies, procedures, rules, regulations and laws
 Machines: Any equipment, computers, tools, etc. required to accomplish the job
 Materials: Raw materials, parts, pens, paper, etc. used to produce the final product
 Measurements: Data generated from the process that are used to evaluate its quality
 Environment: The conditions, such as location, time, temperature, and culture in which
the process operates
Machine learning is a subfield of computer science that evolved from the study of pattern
recognition and computational learning theory in artificial intelligence. Machine learning
explores the construction and study of algorithms that can learn from and make predictions on
data. Such algorithms operate by building a model from example inputs in order to make data-
driven predictions or decisions, rather than following strictly static program instructions
(Machine Learning, 2015).
9
Machine learning is closely related to and often overlaps with computational statistics; a
discipline that also specializes in prediction-making. It has strong ties to mathematical
optimization, which deliver methods, theory and application domains to the field. Machine
learning is employed in a range of computing tasks where designing and programming explicit,
rule-based algorithms is infeasible. Example applications include spam filtering, optical
character recognition (OCR), search engines and computer vision.
Machine learning has a number of approaches:
 Decision tree learning

 Association rule learning
 Artificial neural networks
 Inductive logic programming
 Support vector machines
 Clustering
 Bayesian networks
 Reinforcement learning
 Representation learning
 Similarity and metric learning
 Sparse dictionary learning
 Genetic algorithms
The scope of this project is limited to Decision tree learning.
Decision tree learning uses a decision tree as a predictive model which maps observations
about an item to conclusions about the item's target value. It is one of the predictive modelling
approaches used in statistics, data mining and machine learning. Tree models where the target
variable can take a finite set of values are called classification trees. In these tree structures,
leaves represent class labels and branches represent conjunctions of features that lead to those
10
class labels. Decision trees where the target variable can take continuous values (typically real
numbers) are called regression trees (Decision tree learning, 2015).
In pattern recognition, the k-Nearest Neighbors algorithm (or k-NN for short) is a non-
parametric method used for classification and regression. In both cases, the input consists of
the k closest training examples in the feature space. The output depends on whether k-NN is
used for classification or regression:
 In k-NN classification, the output is a class membership. An object is classified by a

majority vote of its neighbors, with the object being assigned to the class most common
among its k nearest neighbors (k is a positive integer, typically small). If k = 1, then the
object is simply assigned to the class of that single nearest neighbor.
 In k-NN regression, the output is the property value for the object. This value is the
average of the values of its k nearest neighbors.
k-NN is a type of instance-based learning, or lazy learning, where the function is only
approximated locally and all computation is deferred until classification. The k-NN algorithm is
among the simplest of all machine learning algorithms (k-nearest neighbors algorithm, 2015).
11
3. Methodology
 Study of final inspection reports to identify key fields of information
 Compiling, cleaning and consolidating data from the reports
 Quantifying severity of defects
 Selecting key defects using Pareto analysis
 Identifying root causes of the key defects
 Suggesting immediate remedies
 Introducing the concept of machine learning in defect analysis
12
4. Data collection
Primary data was obtained from the final inspection reports generated by Quality Inspectors for
the collection of Spring-Summer 2015. The reports were read and required fields were
identified. Please refer to the enclosed Excel workbook for details. The records created
correspond to inspections. The fields identified were:
 ID: The ID of each record
 Zone: The geographical area (zone) in which the vendor concerned is situated
 ResponsibleQA: The name of the employee in charge of inspection
 Day: The day of inspection
 Date: The date of inspection
 Vendor: Name of the vendor
 Brand: Brand of the retail firm for which the order is intended
 ProductCategory: The product category name (as defined by the retail firm) the order
caters to
 OrderType: The broader class of products to which the order caters
 Style: The style number/code
 Color: The colors in which the product will be made
 QtyOffered: The number of pieces offered by the vendor for inspection
 SampleSize: Size of the sample for inspection
 MajorDefect1: The major defect with the highest frequency
13
 MajorDefect2: The major defect with the second highest frequency
 MajorDefect3: The major defect with the third highest frequency
 MajorDefect4: The major defect with the fourth highest frequency
 AllowedMajorDefect: The allowed number of pieces with major defects
 FoundMajorDefect: The number of pieces found with major defects
 MinorDefect1: The minor defect with the highest frequency
 MinorDefect2: The minor defect with the second highest frequency
 MinorDefect3: The minor defect with the third highest frequency
 MinorDefect4: The minor defect with the fourth highest frequency
 AllowedMinorDefect: The allowed number of pieces with minor defects
 FoundMinorDefect: The number of pieces found with minor defects
 OverAllResult: The result/verdict of the inspection
14
5. Analysis
5.1 Defect frequency and score calculation
Depending upon size and position, a defect could be a major defect and/or a minor defect for
an order. Further, a defect could lie under "MajorDefect1", or "MajorDefect2", or
"MajorDefect3", or "MajorDefect4"; and/or similarly for minor defects. Hence, to know how
many times a defect has been a "MajorDefect1", a pivot table has been used.
Table 5.1: Format of pivot table for MajorDefect1
MajorDefect1 Count of MajorDefect1 Sum of FoundMajorDefects

Workmanship/ Seam - Uncut thread ends 63 446
This table, in the field "Count of MajorDefect1", gives the number of times "Workmanship/
Seam - Uncut thread ends" has been MajorDefect1. This number can be called the number of
instances of "Workmanship/ Seam - Uncut thread ends" in MajorDefect1. Also, the total
number of defective garments that correspond to the inspections yielding "Workmanship/
Seam - Uncut thread ends" as MajorDefect1 is given in the field "Sum of FoundMajorDefects". A
certain percentage of this sum can considered the frequency of "Workmanship/ Seam - Uncut
thread ends" as MajorDefect1. This percentage is given by Table 5.2.
Similar pivot tables have been used for rest of the MajorDefect fields and the MinorDefect
fields. Refer to Annexure I for all pivot tables.
Table 5.2: Percentage weightage for defects in the found defects fields
% of FoundMajor/MinorDefects Major defect Minor defect

40% MajorDefect1 MinorDefect1
15
This implies that 40% of "FoundMajorDefects" gives the frequency of "MajorDefect1" and 40%
of "FoundMinorDefects" gives the frequency of "MinorDefect1", and so on. Thus the formula
for approximate frequency of a Major/Minor defect is
Approx frequency = i x p x FoundMajorDefects
or
Approx frequency = i x p x FoundMinorDefects
Where i is the number of instances of the defect
p is the percentage as specified in Table 5.2
After finding the frequencies, each defect is scored. A major defect is given a weightage of 1,
while a minor defect gets a weightage of 2. The total score for each defect is thus given by the
product of the approximate frequency and the weightage assigned.
5.2 Pareto analysis
After calculating grand total of each defect's score (from MajorDefect1 to MinorDefect4),
Pareto analysis was carried out for the entire list of defects and separately for product
categories (Circular knits, Denim, Ethnic, Woven bottoms, Woven shirts, Woven tops, Woven
misc). The calculation worksheet and complete Pareto diagrams are too wide to be presented
in a document. Please refer to the enclosed Excel workbook "Sheet.xlsx". Shown below are
portions of those Pareto diagrams.
16
250 90
80
200 70
60
150
50
40 Total Score
100
30 Cumulative %
50 20
10
0 0
Workmanship/ Fabric- Oil/ dirt Workmanship/ Workmanship/
Seam- Uncut mark on surface Seam- Open seam Seam- Puckered
thread ends seam
Figure 5.1: Pareto analysis - Overall defects
100 90
90 80
80 70
70
60
60
50
50
40 Total Score
40
30 Cumulative %
30
20 20
10 10
0 0
Fabric- Oil/ dirt Workmanship/ Workmanship/ Workmanship/
mark on surface Seam- Open seam Seam- Uncut Seam- Puckered
thread ends seam
Figure 5.2: Pareto analysis - Circular knits
17
140 90
80
120
70
100
60
80 50
60 40 Total Score
30 Cumulative %
40
20
20
10
0 0
Workmanship/ Workmanship/ Fabric- Oil/ dirt Workmanship/
Seam- Uncut Seam- Open seam mark on surface Seam- Broken lock
thread ends stitches
Figure 5.3: Pareto analysis - Denim
180 90
160 80
140 70
120 60
100 50
80 40 Total Score
60 30 Cumulative %
40 20
20 10
0 0
Workmanship/ Workmanship/ Workmanship/ Fabric- Oil/ dirt
Seam- Uncut Seam- Open seam Seam- Puckered mark on surface
thread ends seam
Figure 5.4: Pareto analysis - Ethnic
18
600 90
80
500
70
400 60
50
300
40 Total Score
200 30 Cumulative %
20
100
10
0 0
Workmanship/ Workmanship/ Fabric- Oil/ dirt Workmanship/
Seam- Uncut Seam- Open seam mark on surface Seam- Puckered
thread ends seam
Figure 5.5: Pareto analysis - Woven bottoms
350 90
80
300
70
250
60
200 50
150 40 Total Score

30 Cumulative %
100
20
50
10
0 0
Workmanship/ Workmanship/ Workmanship/ Fabric- Oil/ dirt
Seam- Uncut Seam- Open seam Seam- Puckered mark on surface
thread ends seam
Figure 5.6: Pareto analysis - Woven shirts
19
350 90
80
300
70
250
60
200 50
150 40 Total Score

30 Cumulative %
100
20
50
10
0 0
Workmanship/ Workmanship/ Workmanship/ Pressing- Colour
Seam- Uncut Seam- Open seam Seam- Puckered stain
thread ends seam
Figure 5.7: Pareto analysis - Woven tops
400 90
350 80
70
300
60
250
50
200
40 Total Score
150
30 Cumulative %
100
20
50 10
0 0
Workmanship/ Workmanship/ Workmanship/ Workmanship/
Seam- Open seam Seam- Uncut Seam- Puckered Seam- Wavy
thread ends seam stitches
Figure 5.8: Pareto analysis - Woven misc
20
The intersection of these Pareto analyses revealed the following key defects, as per 80-20
principle:
 Fabric- Oil/ dirt mark on surface
 Pressing- Colour stain
 Workmanship/ Seam- Broken lock stitches
 Workmanship/ Seam- Open seam
 Workmanship/ Seam- Puckered seam
 Workmanship/ Seam- Uncut thread ends
 Workmanship/ Seam- Wavy stitches
21
5.3 Cause and effect diagrams
Machine/ Man
Equipment
Greasy hands
Oil bed not cleaned Leaning against bundles
Oil creeping up to thread take up hook Consumption of food at workplace

Oil/ Dirt
Proximity to oil containers mark
Performing checks/ maintenance Hot environment leading to
with pieces nearby excess sweating
Method Environment
Figure
Figure5.C1:
5.9: Fishbone
Fishbone--Oil/
Oil/Dirt
Dirtmark
mark
22
Material Man
Inconsistent/ insufficient Plies not aligned properly

seam allowance
Inattentive operator
Weak thread
Unskilled operator
Open seam
Incorrect threading
Faulty feed dog
Tension of sewing
thread not right
Incorrect hook set timing
SPI not suitable
Insecure seam end Machine
Method
Figure 5.C2:
5.10: Fishbone - Open seam
23
Machine/ Man
Equipment
Faulty feed dog Incorrect handling
Dirty/Rusty eyelets & thread guides
Puckered
Pulling and breaking instead of cutting thread Incorrect needle-thread- seam
fabric combination
Incorrect tension of sewing thread
Incorrect presser foot pressure Poor quality thread
Incorrect SPI
Material
Method
Figure 5.C3:
5.11: Fishbone - Puckered seam
24
Machine/ Man
Equipment
UBT not present/ working Negligence
Uncut
Pulling and breaking instead
thread ends
of cutting
Incorrect finishing checking

sequence
Method
Figure 5.C4:
5.12: Fishbone - Uncut thread ends
25
Machine/ Man
Equipment
Needle plate, presser foot may Incorrect needle eye position

be rusty/ have sharp edges
Faulty feed dog

Broken
Incorrect tension of sewing thread Weak thread lockstitches
Abrasion during washing Wrong needle-thread-fabric
combination
Incorrect threading
Method Material
Figure 5.C5:
5.13: Fishbone - Broken lockstitches
26
Machine/ Man
Equipment
Faulty feed dog Incorrect handling
Unskilled operator
Wavy
Incorrect tension of sewing thread stitches
Incorrect pressure of
presser foot
Inherent shrinkage
Guides not provided
Method Material
Figure 5.14:
5.C6: Fishbone - Wavy stitches
27
Machine/
Equipment
Water leakage from iron
Colour impurities on
the surface of iron
Colour stain
Using water spray instead

of steam
Method
Figure 5.C7:
5.15: Fishbone - Colour stain
28
6. Remedies
Immediate remedies for the key defects are as follows:
Oil/Dirt mark
 Regular machine maintenance
 Lubricant free, Teflon coated thread take up hooks
 Operator cleanliness and discipline
 Gloves
 Organised, clean and well ventilated workplace
Open seam
 Pattern needs to be correct
 Clear markings for stitch line
 Good quality or D-core thread should be used
 Worker training
 Threading, SPI and backtack settings should be checked oftenly
 Tension should be quantifiable
 Feed dog and hook set timing should be checked periodically
Puckered seam
29
 Feed dog, eyelets and thread guides should be checked periodically for damages
 Operator training
 Tension, SPI and presser foot pressure should not be fiddled with much
 UBT/trimmer should be used instead of pulling and breaking thread
 Needle-thread-fabric combination should be well judged
Broken lockstitches
 Needle plate, presser foot and feed dog should be checked periodically for damages
 Tension and threading should not be fiddled with much
 Washing parameters should be strictly followed
 Good quality or D-core thread should be used
 Needle-thread-fabric combination should be well judged
 Needle alignment should be right
Wavy stitches
 Shrinkage should be taken into account beforehand and suitable thread should be used
 Guides should be provided
 Tension, SPI and presser foot pressure should not be fiddled with much
 Feed dog should be checked periodically
30
Uncut thread ends
 UBT/thread trimmer should be used
Colour stain
 Iron should be regularly checked for dirt/impurities and malfunctions
 Steam should not be substituted with water
A relatively permanent solution would be to develop vendors as brands and hence unify the
supply chain. If the vendors feel their presence and their competitor’s presence in the market
by name, it would be a more grounded and realistic competition which will yield better quality
products.
With ongoing research and development, in a couple of years we'd be seeing robots
manufacture garments. Machines are controlled by programs or algorithms, the latter being
instrumental in machine learning. Machine learning is, in its essence, pitting an algorithm
against itself in order to explore all outcomes and hence learn from them. With machines
sewing garments, there will be a need for a system that can monitor the end results (finished
products) and learn from them. This project is limited to such a monitoring system and does not
venture into but will borrow from the machine learning processes of manufacturing.
The easiest way to make computers learn about the products is image analysis. Computers
today can find patterns, figure out colours and many other details that the human eye can't
see, all owing to machine learning. The more data and time given, the more accurate the results
are. Naturally, in order to recognise defects, computers must first be taught about fabrics,
threads and needles. That data can be borrowed from the manufacturing processes. Once
31
computers are well versed in the materials and tools involved, they can be taught how to
detect defects.
As mentioned earlier, we'd be applying Decision Tree Learning and k Nearest Neighbours
algorithm. For a given problem, decision tree learning involves stating all possible set of values
and finding a path that covers all outcomes but requires the minimum number of
computations.
E.g. Broken stitch
The key here is to make the algorithm understand what the details obtained from the image
mean.
Table 6.1: Decision tree learning for broken stitch
Effective Thread colour Stray trail of Verdict Remarks

Count continuity thread color
Variable Non-rhythmic Yes Fail Broken, unravelling
Variable Rhythmic Yes Fail Broken, unravelling
Variable Non-rhythmic No Fail Broken
Variable Rhythmic No Pass Not broken
Constant Non-rhythmic Yes Fail Broken, unravelling
Constant Rhythmic Yes Pass Not broken, untrimmed
thread
Constant Non-rhythmic No Fail Broken
Constant Rhythmic No Pass Not broken
32
Figure 6.16: Decision tree for broken stitch
Figure 6.1 shows the computations required for identifying a broken stitch. The part in blue
helps identify an untrimmed thread. While this is not helping the problem at hand, it is an
example of how deep learning starts.
Deep learning is how the human mind learns. Any entity has certain characteristics that help us
understand it. But those characteristics may lead to certain other entity and unless the path is
traced, the link cannot be established. Human beings are able to establish such links easily
because we possess "common sense" which machines don't. In this example, the machine
won't understand why or how an untrimmed thread is helping the cause of a broken stitch
because it isn't, but link the part of algorithm in blue with the algorithm that finds untrimmed
threads, and it gives the basic building block of deep learning.
For classifying the results obtained, the easiest algorithm is k-NN. This algorithm returns a class
which helps in recognition, classification and regression of objects.
33
Figure 6.2: k-nearest neighbours algorithm example
The test sample (green dot) should be classified either to the first class of blue squares or to the
second class of red triangles. If k = 3 (solid line circle) it is assigned to the second class because
there are 2 triangles and only 1 square inside the inner circle. If k = 5 (dashed line circle) it is
assigned to the first class (3 squares vs. 2 triangles inside the outer circle). Naturally, for
garment defects these shapes will represent data set values of the variables used in Decision
Tree Learning.
In order to achieve deep learning, an excruciating amount of data is required. The major
problem today is the dearth of pictorial evidence of defects. Good quality images are required
by computers in order to analyse those properly.
34
7. Limitations and scope of further study
The absence of actual frequencies of defects was the biggest limitation. For root cause analysis,
Association Search approach was used which does not give detailed insights into the concept
and production of the garment. For machine learning, only one out of the existing 12
approaches has been explored. Out of the numerous image analysis and classification
algorithms, k-NN was used.
The scope of further study is vast. Machine learning is being used in various fields today as a
result of which, new approaches are coming up rapidly. The greatest advantage of machine
learning is its flexibility. There are not just a handful of ways to solve a problem, there are
innumerable. Using machine learning, the boundaries of human senses and analysis can be
pushed to previously unachievable standards.
The most fascinating aspect of machine learning is its self sustenance. As computers learn to do
things better and better, they can become aware of their own limitations and help create
better computers. Due to this cycle, it is very hard to quantify or even give a rough prediction
for how quickly machine learning will surpass human understanding.
8. Conclusion
With impending automation in the garment industry, machine learning is the future. Soon there
will be a need of manpower that understands the products in & out and can also translate that
knowledge to machine language. It is imperative that data collection begins immediately and a
Knowledge Based System is put in place. With machine learning, the more time you give it, the
better it gets.
35
Works Cited
Decision tree learning. (2015, April 15). Retrieved April 15, 2015, from Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decision_tree_learning
Drummond, K. (2012, August 06). Clothes Will Sew Themselves in Darpa’s Sweat-Free
Sweatshops. Retrieved April 12, 2015, from Wired: http://www.wired.com/2012/06/darpa-
sweatshop/
Ishikawa diagram. (2015, April 15). Retrieved April 15, 2015, from Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ishikawa_diagram
Juran, J. M., & Godfrey, A. B. (1999). Juran's Quality Handbook. McGraw-Hill.
k-nearest neighbors algorithm. (2015, April 15). Retrieved April 15, 2015, from Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K-nearest_neighbors_algorithm
Machine Learning. (2015, April 15). Retrieved April 15, 2015, from Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_learning
Pareto analysis. (2015, April 15). Retrieved April 15, 2015, from Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_analysis
Pareto principle. (2015, April 15). Retrieved April 15, 2015, from Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_principle
Bibliography
Alvarez, J. C. (n.d.). New Approach in Quality Training Techniques. p. 16.
Decision tree learning. (2015, April 15). Retrieved April 15, 2015, from Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decision_tree_learning
Deming's 14-Point Philosophy - A Recipe for Total Quality. (n.d.). Retrieved February 9, 2015,
from Mind Tools: http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newSTR_75.htm
Dr. Hermann Hill, S. (n.d.). Quality and Performance Management in the 21st Century - A New
Approach. p. 20.
Drummond, K. (2012, August 06). Clothes Will Sew Themselves in Darpa’s Sweat-Free
Sweatshops. Retrieved April 12, 2015, from Wired: http://www.wired.com/2012/06/darpa-
sweatshop/
36
Ishikawa diagram. (2015, April 15). Retrieved April 15, 2015, from Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ishikawa_diagram
Islam, M. M., Khan, A. M., & Khan, M. M. (2012). MINIMIZATION OF REWORKS IN QUALITY AND
PRODUCTIVITY IMPROVEMENT IN THE APPAREL INDUSTRY. International Journal of Engineering
and Applied Sciences , 147-164.
Juran, J. M., & Godfrey, A. B. (1999). Juran's Quality Handbook. McGraw-Hill.
k-nearest neighbors algorithm. (2015, April 15). Retrieved April 15, 2015, from Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K-nearest_neighbors_algorithm
Machine Learning. (2015, April 15). Retrieved April 15, 2015, from Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_learning
Pareto analysis. (2015, April 15). Retrieved April 15, 2015, from Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_analysis
Pareto principle. (2015, April 15). Retrieved April 15, 2015, from Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_principle
Quality Assurance vs. Quality Control. (n.d.). Retrieved February 9, 2015, from ASQ:
http://asq.org/learn-about-quality/quality-assurance-quality-control/overview/overview.html
Rahman, M. M., & Masud, A. (2011). QUALITY IMPROVEMENT IN GARMENTS INDUSTRY

THROUGH TQM APPROACH., (p. 7). Dhaka, Bangladesh.
Wescott, R. T. (2006). The Certified Manager of Quality/Organisational Excellence Handbook.

Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
37
Annexure I
Overall defects
Table A.1: MajorDefect1
Values
Row Labels Count of Sum of
MajorDefect1 FoundMajorDefects
Accessories- Accessory dimensions, colour, art work or content not as 3 22
specified
Accessories- Broken buttonhole stitches 11 90
Accessories- Button and buttonhole not aligned causing bulge 33 189
Accessories- Button inside out 3 17
Accessories- Button thread easily pulled out 64 469
Accessories- Buttonhole too big 3 26
Accessories- Damaged button 8 60
Accessories- Fusing bubbles/ wrinkled fuse on interlining 6 38
Accessories- Incomplete adhesive on interlining 1 4
Accessories- Insecure shoulder pad attachment 2 10
Accessories- Missing accessory 6 27
Accessories- Non-smooth zipper function 6 30
Accessories- Ragged edges at buttonhole 17 86
Accessories- Uncut/ partially cut buttonhole 1 6
Assembling- Asymmetrical/ uneven collar/ neck opening 114 688
Assembling- Facings pulling up 28 151
Assembling- High-low pockets 1/4" or more 31 188
Assembling- Lining exposed 9 34
Assembling- Misaligned cuff/ neck 1/4" 37 187
Assembling- Missing embroidery/ print 8 32
Assembling- Pocket not smoothened/ squared 21 122
Assembling- Poor quality of print/ embroidery 63 290
Assembling- Slanted embroidery/ print 40 234
Assembling- Slanted placket 57 261
Assembling- Sloping shoulder 13 70
Assembling- Tight lining 5 26
Assembling- Twisted body/ sleeve/ leg 24 142
Assembling- Uneven leg length 1/2" or more 22 87
Assembling- Uneven sleeve length 1/2" or more 99 432
Bottoms- Different lots of shade from garment to garment 1 5
Bottoms- High-low waistband ends 1/4" or more 31 173
38
Bottoms- Holes at hem after stone washing 1/4" or more 2 14
Bottoms- Inclined belt loops 5 41
Bottoms- Missing bar tack 1 13
Bottoms- Pocket bag caught in tack 2 10
Bottoms- Twisted leg 1/2" or more 7 38
Bottoms- Uneven washing effect 5 28
Bottoms- Waistband corners not folded in right shape 7 34
Circular Knits- Asymmetric body shape 14 101
Circular Knits- Coloured thread shown at back of the neck 7 32
Circular Knits- Mismatched stripes/ checks at shoulder/ side seam 1/8" or 7 72
above
Circular Knits- Missing shoulder seam strap 2 16
Circular Knits- Neck opening/ collar not symmetrical 19 124
Circular Knits- Needle cutting at cuff seam 1 5
Circular Knits- Twisted body at side seam 1/2" or more 7 47
Circular Knits- Twisted seam at cuff/ bottom 4 29
Circular Knits- Twisted/ slanted/ curved/ pleated placket 8 51
Circular Knits- Unlevelled hem 12 90
Circular Knits- Untrimmed seam allowance at inside hem (inside garment) 5 26
Fabric- Barrenness on knitted fabric 8 63
Fabric- Colour shade difference within same garment 36 271
Fabric- Fabric flaw/ run more than 1" in B or C zone of a garment 2 14
Fabric- Fabric flaw/ run more than 1/2" in A zone of a garment 13 73
Fabric- Hole 111 752
Fabric- Neps/ pills/ knots on surface 19 107
Fabric- Oil/ dirt mark on surface 517 3024
Fabric- Permanent crease mark 48 330
Fabric- Printing fault: Color out/ smear/ blade streak 24 135
Fabric shade variation within garments same cartons 1 8
Fabric- Wrong or slanted grain line 26 178
Found chalk marking Stain @ cuff pleat area 1 6
Found spotlifter ring mark Stain @ front A zone area 1 10
Heavy puckering at front placket 1 15
Jacket/ Outerwear- Loose quilting stitches 3 17
Jacket/ Outerwear- Unlevelled hem 1 3
Labeling- Incorrect size, main & care label affixed/ stitched 101 577
Labeling- No warning clause on polybag if required 1 3
Labeling- Printed matter on label(s) not legible 7 80
Ladder stitch width uneven@ bottom hem 7 46
Observed blue color Stain @cami inner body area 1 15
Packaging- Missing price ticket/ hangtag/ label/ clips/ cardboard paper/ 5 32
tissue paper etc
39
Packaging- Wrong placement of price ticket/ hangtag/ label etc 2 9
Packaging- Wrong size set 1 8
Packaging- Wrong size/ colour assortment 23 129
Pressing- Burn mark 1 4
Pressing- Colour stain 76 453
Pressing- Crease mark 30 225
Pressing- Glazed/ scorched mark 1 3
Pressing- Melt 1 9
Pressing- Pleated press 7 53
Pressing- Ring from cleaning gun 5 33
Pressing- Seam not fully pressed open 12 75
Pressing- Water spot 17 114
Pressing- Wrinkle 6 44
Pressing- Zip/ button mark made by improper pressing 1 5
Puckering @ neck seam area 2 14
Relaxed waist dimension found -2" across all sizes 1 11
Shirt/ Blouse- Collar not symmetrical in size, shape or length 10 50
Shirt/ Blouse- Dart ends not stitched to a fine point 1 8
Shirt/ Blouse- Front placket hiking 40 254
Shirt/ Blouse- Open seam at collar points 85 530
Stain 2 14
Sweater (Flat Knits)- Glazed or scorched press at seam 1 4
Sweater (Flat Knits)- High-low placket 1/4" at bottom 1 6
Sweater (Flat Knits)- Knots 1 7
Sweater (Flat Knits)- Pull-out loop 3 12
Sweater (Flat Knits)- Shiny press at seaming 1 5
Sweater (Flat Knits)- Tight armhole 1 3
Sweater (Flat Knits)- Untrimmed seaming thread 1 6
Unsecured 1/8" 1ndl chain stitch around the neck 1 8
Washcare label unsecured 1 10
Washing- Broken collar/ cuff and hem 46 216
Washing- Different lots of shade 16 92
Washing- Different washing effect 4 33
Washing- Pills/ hair on garment surface 1 10
Washing- Sand on garment surface 1 5
Washing- Streak marks 20 102
Washing- Uneven washing effect 8 31
Workmanship/ Seam- Abrasion feed mark 3 21
Workmanship/ Seam- Blind stitching visible 4 20
Workmanship/ Seam- Broken chain stitches 43 199
Workmanship/ Seam- Crooked stitches 25 133
40
Workmanship/ Seam- Exposed underply seam 12 82
Workmanship/ Seam- Insufficient seam allowance 12 53
Workmanship/ Seam- Irregular stitch density 31 202
Workmanship/ Seam- Loose/ tight stitches 34 185
Workmanship/ Seam- Needle cutting 19 91
Workmanship/ Seam- Open seam 705 3732
Workmanship/ Seam- Pleated seam 59 318
Workmanship/ Seam- Puckered seam 262 1340
Workmanship/ Seam- Puckering at neck 1 6
Workmanship/ Seam- Run-off stitches 1/4" 10 48
Workmanship/ Seam- Seam not fully opened before stitching 15 61
Workmanship/ Seam- Skipped chain stitches 22 148
Workmanship/ Seam- Skipped lock stitches 1/4" 38 211
Workmanship/ Seam- Snarled stitches 4 20
Workmanship/ Seam- Wavy stitches 55 279
Workmanship/ Seam- Uncut thread ends 63 446
Workmanship/ Seam- Broken lock stitches 110 725
Grand Total 3774 21641
41
Values
specified
Accessories- Buttonhole too small to allow button to pass through 3 28
Accessories- Gap at zip top/ end 3 26
Accessories- Paint peel off on stud, snap and buckle 1 3
Accessories- Rusted stud, snap, rivet, buckle, zipper, hook & bar 6 35
Accessories- Wordings upside down on button/ snap 2 19
Assembling- Large, hollow, high or low bust point 5 24
Bottoms- Bulged fly 2 12
42
Bottoms- Mismatched belt loop colour 1 6
Bottoms- Zip exposed when buttoned 6 32
Circular Knits- Mismatched rib colour 10 75
above
Circular Knits- Stretched/ enlarged buttonhole 2 13
Fabric- Hole 113 764
Front button placket stitch visible at top side 2 12
Jacket/ Outerwear- Uneven fullness at armhole 2 6
Joined stitch at front fly J stitch 1 4
Ladder stitch too tight at bottom 6 39
43
Oil Stain at front body and back body 2 14
Packaging- Empty space 2" or more inside carton 1 7
Packaging- Incorrect carton marking 1 5
tissue paper etc
Pressing- Wet 1 14
Shade variation in buttons of the same garment 1 10
Shirt/ Blouse- Exposed under collar at outside of top collar 1 3
Shirt/ Blouse- Flap points not fully turned out 1 5
Shirt/ Blouse- Foreign matter sewn inside the finished collar/ yoke/ cuff 1 8
SIDE SEAM WRONG FOLD.AT BACK SIDE 1 10
Sweater (Flat Knits)- Dropped stitches 1/4" or more 2 12
Sweater (Flat Knits)- Hole 1 6
Sweater (Flat Knits)- Irremovable crease line 1 5
Sweater (Flat Knits)- Mending place 1 22
Washing- Mildew or heavy odour 1 6
44
45
Values
Accessories- Any sharp point/ sharp edge on accessories 2 17
46
Circular Knits- Exposed blind stitching at cuff/ hem 4 24
above
Cuff button and sleeve placket centre off up to 1 1/2" 2 12
Fabric- Hole 89 626
Front body chest print off position 2 14
IMPROPER NECK SHAPE 1 10
Jacket/ Outerwear- Malfunctioning of buckle/ snap/ zipper 1 4
Jacket/ Outerwear- Missing bar tack 1 6
Jacket/ Outerwear- Puckering seam at hood facing 1 7
tissue paper etc
47
Pressing- Wet 1 5
Puckering in lining seam at bottom 2 6
Raw overlock edge at crotch area (inside garment) 1 4
Sweater (Flat Knits)- Dust 1 7
Sweater (Flat Knits)- Loose linking 2 10
Sweater (Flat Knits)- Shoulder seam/ side seam/ underarm seam shown at 1 9
front
Washing- Rocks inside pockets 1 4
48
49
Values
Accessories- Non-smooth snap fastener operation 2 13
50
above
Fabric- Hole 72 580
Jacket/ Outerwear- Color yarn caught inside shell fabric but seen from 1 8
outside
Jacket/ Outerwear- Exposed drill hole 1 4
Jacket/ Outerwear- Front placket not down to hem 1/4" or more 1 5
Jacket/ Outerwear- Wrong way insertion of zip 1 5
Open seam 1 10
tissue paper etc
51
Packaging- Soiled/ dirty polybag 1 8
Skipped stitch at armhole 2 14
Sweater (Flat Knits)- Insufficient elasticity at rib cuff/ hem 1 7
Sweater (Flat Knits)- Pull-out loop 1 8
Sweater (Flat Knits)- Twisted sleeve 1/2" or more 1 6
Sweater (Flat Knits)- Wrong knitting pattern 1 6
52
53
Table A.5: MinorDefect1
Values
MinorDefect1 FoundMinorDefects
54
above
Fabric- Hole 8 14
outside
Nubmering sticker found under inner layer 2 8
Packaging- Improper folding 48 397
Packaging- Infestation of live insect 1 2
Pressing- Melt 1 6
55
UN CUT THRREADS 2 14
56
57
Values
58
above
Fabric- Hole 8 31
outside
LOOSE THREADS 2 14
tissue paper etc
59
Sweater (Flat Knits)- Dirty yarn 2 15
Sweater (Flat Knits)- Insufficient elasticity at rib cuff/ hem 1 11
Sweater (Flat Knits)- Yarn run 1 6
Uncut thread @side slit and placket box 2 24
60
61
Values
specified
Accessories- Wrong way insertion of belt 1 6
62
above
Fabric- Hole 20 113
Found brocken stitch@ bottom 2 24
HANDLING Stain 2 14
outside
Jacket/ Outerwear- Down leakage 2 8
Jacket/ Outerwear- Uneven or loose elasticity on rib/bottom 1 4
63
Pressing- Melt 1 6
Pressing- Wet 3 26
Sweater (Flat Knits)- Laddering 1 6
Sweater (Flat Knits)- Slub yarn/ split yarn 3 15
Sweater (Flat Knits)- Zigzag seaming at armhole 1 6
64
65
Values
66
above
DOUBLE STITCH 2 14
Fabric- Hole 37 238
Found raw edge@C.front waist band area 1 6
outside
Neck shape crooked 2 24
tissue paper etc
67
68
The defect score calculation table and Pareto analysis chart is too wide to be accommodated in
a document. Please refer to the enclosed Excel workbook "Sheet".
69
Circular Knits
Table A.9:CircularKnitsMajorDefect1
Values
specified
above
Fabric- Hole 66 494
70
Fabric shade variation within garments same cartons 1 8
Labeling- No warning clause on polybag if required 1 3
tissue paper etc
71
72
Table A.10: CircularKnitsMajorDefect2
Values
above
73
Fabric- Hole 53 402
Oil Stain at front body and back body 2 14
Packaging- Empty space 2" or more inside carton 1 7
tissue paper etc
Sweater (Flat Knits)- Irremovable crease line 1 5
Washing- Mildew or heavy odour 1 6
74
75
Values
above
76
Fabric- Hole 47 344
Front body chest print off position 2 14
tissue paper etc
Pressing- Wet 1 5
Sweater (Flat Knits)- Shoulder seam/ side seam/ underarm seam shown at 1 9
front
77
78
Values
above
Fabric- Hole 37 319
79
tissue paper etc
Skipped stitch at armhole 2 14
80
81
Table A.13: CircularKnitsMinorDefect1
Values
above
Fabric- Hole 3 2
82
Packaging- Infestation of live insect 1 2
83
84
Values
above
Fabric- Hole 2 1
85
Uncut thread @side slit and placket box 2 24
86
87
Values
specified
above
88
Fabric- Hole 18 97
Found brocken stitch@ bottom 2 24
Pressing- Wet 2 10
Sweater (Flat Knits)- Zigzag seaming at armhole 1 6
89
90
Values
above
Fabric- Hole 31 198
91
Neck shape crooked 2 24
tissue paper etc
92
93
Denim
Table A.17: DenimMajorDefect1
Values
Row Labels Count of MajorDefect1 Sum of FoundMajorDefects
Fabric- Hole 4 24
94
Grand Total 172 998
95
Values
Fabric- Hole 6 48
96
Grand Total 168 998
97
Values
Fabric- Hole 2 9
98
Grand Total 158 967
99
Values
100
Grand Total 116 782
101
Table A.21: DenimMinorDefect1
Values
Row Labels Count of MinorDefect1 Sum of
FoundMinorDefects
Circular Knits- Untrimmed seam allowance at inside hem (inside 1 12
garment)
102
Table A.22:DenimMinorDefect2
Values
Row Labels Count of MinorDefect2 Sum of FoundMinorDefects
103
104
Values
Grand Total 101 803
105
Values
garment)
Grand Total 66 541
106
Ethnic
Table A.25: EthnicMajorDefect1
Values
Fabric- Hole 11 54
107
tissue paper etc
Pressing- Melt 1 9
108
Values
specified
Fabric- Hole 9 36
109
110
Values
Fabric- Hole 10 51
111
tissue paper etc
112
113
Values
Accessories- Non-smooth snap fastener operation 2 13
Fabric- Hole 7 51
outside
Jacket/ Outerwear- Wrong way insertion of zip 1 5
tissue paper etc
114
115
Table A.29: EthnicMinorDefect1
Values
garment)
Fabric- Hole 3 12
outside
116
Pressing- Melt 1 6
117
Values
outside
118
Sweater (Flat Knits)- Yarn run 1 6
119
Values
specified
Fabric- Hole 1 6
outside
120
Pressing- Melt 1 6
Sweater (Flat Knits)- Laddering 1 6
Sweater (Flat Knits)- Slub yarn/ split yarn 3 15
121
Values
garment)
Fabric- Hole 1 4
outside
122
123
Woven bottoms
Table A.33: WovenBottomsMajorDefect1
Values
specified
Fabric- Hole 17 113
Found spotlifter ring mark Stain @ front A zone area 1 10
124
tissue paper etc
Relaxed waist dimension found -2" across all sizes 1 11
125
Values
Fabric- Hole 22 138
126
tissue paper etc
Pressing- Wet 1 14
127
Values
Fabric- Hole 19 156
128
129
Values
Fabric- Hole 9 77
130
131
Table A.37: WovenBottomsMinorDefect1
Values
132
133
Values
garment)
134
135
Values
garment)
Pressing- Wet 1 16
136
137
Values
garment)
Fabric- Hole 2 20
Found raw edge@C.front waist band area 1 6
138
139
Woven shirts
Table A.41: WovenShirtsMajorDefect1
Values
Fabric- Hole 5 12
Heavy puckering at front placket 1 15
Stain 1 10
Washcare label unsecured 1 10
140
141
Values
Fabric- Hole 12 65
Shade variation in buttons of the same garment 1 10
Shirt/ Blouse- Foreign matter sewn inside the finished collar/ yoke/ 1 8
cuff
142
SIDE SEAM WRONG FOLD.AT BACK SIDE 1 10
143
Values
Cuff button and sleeve placket centre off up to 1 1/2" 2 12
Fabric- Hole 7 49
IMPROPER NECK SHAPE 1 10
tissue paper etc
144
145
Values
Fabric- Hole 15 102
Open seam 1 10
146
147
Table A.45: WovenShirtsMinorDefect1
Values
Fabric- Hole 2 0
148
UN CUT THRREADS 1 7
149
Values
Fabric- Hole 4 12
LOOSE THREADS 1 7
tissue paper etc
150
151
Values
garment)
HANDLING Stain 1 7
152
153
Values
DOUBLE STITCH 1 7
Fabric- Hole 2 9
Shirt/ Blouse- Foreign matter sewn inside the finished collar/ yoke/ 1 14
cuff
154
155
Woven tops
Table A.49: WovenTopsMajorDefect1
Values
specified
Fabric- Hole 8 55
156
157
Values
Fabric- Hole 8 58
158
159
Values
garment)
Fabric- Hole 3 12
160
161
Values
garment)
Fabric- Hole 3 24
162
163
Table A.53: WovenTopsMinorDefect1
Values
garment)
164
165
Values
garment)
Fabric- Hole 2 18
166
167
Values
garment)
Fabric- Hole 1 10
Jacket/ Outerwear- Uneven or loose elasticity on rib/bottom 1 4
168
169
Values
garment)
170
171
Woven misc
Table A.57: WovenMiscMajorDefect1
Values
Grand Total 140 634
172
Values
Fabric- Hole 3 17
173
Grand Total 128 619
174
Values
Fabric- Hole 1 5
Grand Total 98 527
175
Values
garment)
Grand Total 51 324
176
Table A.61: WovenMiscMinorDefect1
Values
garment)
Grand Total 141 773
177
Values
garment)
Grand Total 127 746
178
Values
Accessories- Wrong way insertion of belt 1 6
179
Grand Total 90 604
180
Values
garment)
Fabric- Hole 1 7
Grand Total 51 371
181

Garment Defect Analysis, Remedies and Introduction To Machine Learning at A Retail Chain PDF

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Garment Defect Analysis, Remedies and Introduction To Machine Learning at A Retail Chain PDF

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

GARMENT DEFECT ANALYSIS, REMEDIES AND

INTRODUCTION TO MACHINE LEARNING AT A RETAIL

A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the

Bachelor of Fashion Technology (Apparel Production)

Under the guidance of

Ms. Aboli Naik

Department of Fashion Technology

Keywords: Garment, Defects, Pareto, Ishikawa, Machine learning

Table 5.1: Format of pivot table for MajorDefect1 .................................................................................... 15

Figure 5.1: Pareto analysis - Overall defects ............................................................................................... 17

To pick key defects, analyse their causes, and give remedies.

1. Test at Intermediate Stages

Ishikawa diagrams (also called fishbone diagrams, herringbone diagrams, cause-and-effect

 People: Anyone involved with the process

Machine learning has a number of approaches:

 Decision tree learning

The scope of this project is limited to Decision tree learning.

 In k-NN classification, the output is a class membership. An object is classified by a

 Study of final inspection reports to identify key fields of information

 Compiling, cleaning and consolidating data from the reports

 Quantifying severity of defects

 Selecting key defects using Pareto analysis

 Identifying root causes of the key defects

 Suggesting immediate remedies

 Introducing the concept of machine learning in defect analysis

 ID: The ID of each record

 ResponsibleQA: The name of the employee in charge of inspection

 Day: The day of inspection

 Date: The date of inspection

 Vendor: Name of the vendor

 OrderType: The broader class of products to which the order caters

 Style: The style number/code

 Color: The colors in which the product will be made

 QtyOffered: The number of pieces offered by the vendor for inspection

 SampleSize: Size of the sample for inspection

 MajorDefect1: The major defect with the highest frequency

 MajorDefect3: The major defect with the third highest frequency

 MajorDefect4: The major defect with the fourth highest frequency

 AllowedMajorDefect: The allowed number of pieces with major defects

 FoundMajorDefect: The number of pieces found with major defects

 MinorDefect1: The minor defect with the highest frequency

 MinorDefect2: The minor defect with the second highest frequency

 MinorDefect3: The minor defect with the third highest frequency

 MinorDefect4: The minor defect with the fourth highest frequency

 AllowedMinorDefect: The allowed number of pieces with minor defects

 FoundMinorDefect: The number of pieces found with minor defects

 OverAllResult: The result/verdict of the inspection

5.1 Defect frequency and score calculation

Table 5.1: Format of pivot table for MajorDefect1

MajorDefect1 Count of MajorDefect1 Sum of FoundMajorDefects

% of FoundMajor/MinorDefects Major defect Minor defect

Approx frequency = i x p x FoundMajorDefects

Approx frequency = i x p x FoundMinorDefects

Where i is the number of instances of the defect

p is the percentage as specified in Table 5.2

5.2 Pareto analysis

Figure 5.1: Pareto analysis - Overall defects

Figure 5.2: Pareto analysis - Circular knits

Figure 5.3: Pareto analysis - Denim

Figure 5.4: Pareto analysis - Ethnic

Figure 5.5: Pareto analysis - Woven bottoms

150 40 Total Score

Figure 5.6: Pareto analysis - Woven shirts