female figure identification technique (ffit)

16 Pages·2004·0.98 MB·English

Volume 4, Issue 1, Summer 2004

FEMALE FIGURE IDENTIFICATION TECHNIQUE
(FFIT) FOR APPAREL
PART I: DESCRIBING FEMALE SHAPES

Karla Simmons, Ph.D. University of Missouri
Cynthia L. Istook, Associate Professor, North Carolina State University
Priya Devarajan, Marketing Research Analyst, Lectra USA Inc.

Abstract

Sizing standards used in the United States that identify the body measurements used in the design
and development of clothing were established from identified “best practices” of the apparel
industry. However, the industry as a whole has not adopted a single system of clothing sizing. We
know that manufacturers and retailers use their own sizing systems as a marketing tool,
convinced that this is a differential advantage of their product for their market. Regardless of the
sizing systems used, however, almost all are based on the myth that humans have mathematically
proportional bodies and that they grow in proportional ways. In addition, the shapes and
proportions of today’s American population differ greatly from the shapes of the generations
before. So a variety of issues impact our inability to ‘fit’ the American customer of today. These
fit issues continue to be a growing concern.

This article, as Part One of two, describes the historical process involved in describing the body
shapes of humans. In addition, it lays the theoretical framework for the development of an expert
shape sorting system using 3D body scan data.

Keywords: FFIT for Apparel, shape sorting, sizing standards, mass customization, fit, female
figure types

FEMALE FIGURE IDENTIFICATION resulted in the formation of several size
TECHNIQUE groupings.
(FFIT) FOR APPAREL
PART I: DESCRIBING FEMALE Additionally, the shapes and
SHAPES proportions of today’s American population
differ greatly from the shapes of the
Introduction generations before. Because the clothing
sizing system is based on a study from the
Currently, clothing sizes are based on 1940s, many fit problems are occurring with
a biased study that is over 6 decades old. consumers. These fit issues continue to be a
This method of sizing does not conform to growing concern (Cotton Inc., 2002a, 200b,
the diversity of human shapes that currently 1998, 1997). Regardless of how one defines
exist in the United States. Attempts to fit exactly, it must always start from basic
classify body shapes into analogous types, in human proportional truths. The fact that our
order to establish size standards, have current sizing systems strays so far from this
Article Designation: Refereed 1 JTATM
Volume 4, Issue 1,Summer 2004
fact is a significant problem for retailers and (cid:137) “A correspondence in three-
manufacturers, alike. dimensional form and in placement
of detail between the figure and its
New and improved technologies are covering to suit the purpose of the
now available that allow realistic images of garment, to provide for activity, and
human bodies to be classified into categories to fulfill the intended style (Berry,
that will better reflect the differential 1963).”
proportions of the true American population. (cid:137) ‘Simply a matter of length and
Mega-computing power, three-dimensional width in each part of the pattern
body scanning, dimensional design being correct for your figure
programs, and computer-aided-design (Minott, 1978).”
software are allowing advances in the
product development process that will lead Much research has been conducted over
to a seamless technology of customized the years on the topic of fit of apparel
clothing and ready-to-wear garments that (AAMA, 1975; Croney, 1977; O’Brien &
can provide fit, as they have been designed Shelton, 1941). In general, consumers have
to do. Some attempts have been made to been dissatisfied with fit for some time.
chart the body in two dimensions but they Some of this dissatisfaction could be
do not yield a satisfactory illustration of true associated with the fact that the current
body shape. sizing system for the manufacturing of
garments is based on body measurements
Research Purpose and Methodology that are more that 60 years old (Salusso-
Deonier, 1982). Dissatisfaction with fit can
The research of this study focused on also be attributed to several factors that have
two basic objectives: 1) to determine if the changed the average body types: diets
current sizing systems actually meet the (Meek, 1994; Tamburrino, 1992a), physical
needs of today’s female population and 2) to exercise and activities (LaBat, 1987;
develop preliminary subgroups for the Tamburrino, 1992b), increased immigration
female population that might aid in the (Meek, 1994), disproportionate growth rates
description of their various shapes. The first in minority groups (Meek, 1994), sedentary
part of the research methodology involved lifestyles (CNN, 2001), and changes in
the development of software that would ideals of masculinity and femininity (Meek,
allow for comparison of 3D body scan data 1994).
of female subjects to recognized standards
for body measurements. The second part of The United States population
the research methodology was to find out distribution has gone through dramatic
how female shapes are currently described physiological and demographic
and to identify ways that they might be more transformations since the 1940s when the
appropriately described when using 3D body O’Brien and Sheldon study (upon which our
scanned data. current sizing system is based) was
undertaken. For many years, the United
Literature Review States population has been a mixture of
ethnic origins. But over time, the
Fit and Sizing Issues configuration of this mixture has changed.
Minority groups have become larger and
The purpose of a sizing system for new groups of immigrants have been added
apparel should be to make clothing available to the mixture (LePechoux, 1998; US
in a range of sizes that fits as many people Census, 2000). With consumer trends and
as possible (Ashdown, 1998; LaBat, 1987). products becoming universal, free trade is
Apparel design and production experts opening an increasing number of foreign
believe that the fit of a garment is one of the markets to U.S. commerce. Worldwide
most important factors in producing interaction and travel are heading toward
garments that flatter the individual (Minott, increased interracial mixes. Projections for
1978). Fit has been defined as: the number of multiracial Americans will be
Article Designation: Refereed 2 JTATM
Volume 4, Issue 1,Summer 2004
released in a report in 2005 (FOXNews, three numerals is called the somatotype” of
2004). These progressions have had direct the individual (Sheldon et al, 1940, p3).
impact on body measurements of the Sheldon and his colleagues had worked out
international consumer. Many studies have a system to measure these components and
been conducted around the idea that body express them numerically (Inner
proportions differ according to their racial Explorations, 1999). These components
origin (Abesekera & Shahnavaz, 1989; Al- were called endomorphy, mesomorphy, and
Haboubi, 1992; Hertzberg, 1972; ectomorphy. Carter and Heath (1990)
Hutchingson, 1981; Miller, 1993; NASA, maintained that “the procedure (of
1978). The racial mixture in the United somatotyping) was laborious and obviously
States is definitely different than in the not feasible for general use” (p. 31). Tanner
1940s when the body measurements used to (1964) said “this system does not work, and
develop the current standard were taken. has never, in fact, been used” (p. 37).

In the 1960s, the research team of
History of Figure Typing/Somatotyping
Lindsay Carter and Barbara Heath

collaborated on continuing the modification
In the pre-Christian era, the Greeks
of Sheldon’s somatype methodology (Heath,
dominated the scientific and philosophical
1963). The validation of the modifications
studies of the time. As early as 400 BC, the
and the presentation of the Heath-Carter
founder of modern medicine, Hippocrates,
modified somatotype method were products
had proposed that certain physical types
of this joint effort (Heath & Carter, 1967).
were susceptible to certain diseases (Wells,

1983). In the fourth century BC, Aristotle
Also influenced by Sheldon, another
attempted to additionally elaborate and
researcher became interested in
develop Hippocrates’ ideas (Tsang, Chan, &
somatometry with respects to the clothing
Taylor, 1940). Around the seventeenth
industry. Dr. Helen Douty, a clothing
century, anthropometry started to be used in
specialist in the School of Home Economics
combination with morphology. At the
at Auburn University, believed a greater
University of Padua, Elsholtz documented a
understanding of the body and of the
method for taking body measurements. It
principles of aesthetics could allow students
would be two hundred years later before
to become more successful at solving
Quetlet would be a pioneer in studying the
problems and creating illusions in relation to
measurements of man statistically (Carter &
the fit of clothing. Realizing the difficulty of
Heath, 1990).
measuring the body visually in three

dimensions, Dr. Douty believed that a
The twentieth century had the most
silhouette projected onto a graph simplified
significant contributions of any time period
the entire process. It showed the body mass
before that concerning the figure typing and
and shape in graph form, where the
classifications of the human body. In the
characteristics were clearly visible and could
early 1920s, a German psychiatrist, Ernst
be analyzed objectively and classified into
Kretschmer, grouped the human body-build
figure types (Douty, 1968).
in four basic categories. His bodily

characteristics were, like those of most early
An Italian company called CAD
physicians, associated with particular
Modeling believes that body-scanning
disease susceptibilities.
technology is very useful in its output of

data, but all data should be relative to the
The most significant contribution to the
mathematical model of the volume of the
existence of body type classifications began
naked body, the 3D volume. They also think
in the 1930s by American psychologist
that within a population, only a few
William Sheldon. In 1940, Sheldon, with
consumers have a body type, which exactly
Stevens and Tucker, introduced the concept
fits the standard forms. CAD Modeling has
of “somatotype” in their book The Varieties
proposed the idea that it is possible to
of Human Physique. “The patterning of the
individualize all possible human physical
morphological components as expressed by
Article Designation: Refereed 3 JTATM
Volume 4, Issue 1,Summer 2004
structures with a few parameters that Table 1. Common Shape Groupings.
correspond to the most important and
irregular body features with respect to Figure Type Traits Illustration
clothing needs (Quattrocolo & Holzer, Trianglec, h, I, j, Shoulders
1992). Those parameters include the n, o, p narrower
physical base, height, and size. “A” Framel, m, than hip.
Peara, b, d, e Bottom
When descriptions of different body or Spoong, k heavy with
figure types are being discussed, the terms
Christmas weight
“endomorph, mesomorph, and ectomorph” Treef mainly in
are not usually the most common. Most
buttocks,

often, terms are divided into two separate
low hips
groups of “apple, pear, triangle, oval” or
and thighs.
“Missy, Junior, Women’s, Half-Size”. All of
Bust is
these terms can be very confusing. Some
small to
appear misleading because they seem to
medium.
indicate the age of the person. Others just
Upper
seem to be saying the same thing (isn’t the
body
shape of a pear the same as a triangle, being
smaller
proportionately larger on the bottom than the
than lower
top?).
body.

Inverted Heaviest
All of these terms are associated with Triangle c, p, h, I, part of
the pattern industry. Unlike ready-to-wear j, o, n body is on
apparel manufacturers, American pattern Coneg, k top.
companies agreed on the body “V” Framed, m Shoulders
measurements that were used for each size,
wider than
even though, they changed the standard
hips.
measurements four times before 1972
Weigh gain

(Palmer & Alto, 1998). The pattern industry
in upper
then devised its own standard set of figure
body and
types and sizes. Many pattern making and
stomach.
sewing books (Armstrong, 2000; Liechty,
Usually
Pottberg, & Rasband, 1995) reference these
large chest.
figure types as having differences in height
Very
and contour according to its designation.
narrow

hips.
The other grouping of terminology for
Rectanglec, p, h, No
figure types is categorized by names of
I, j, o, n definition
shapes, letters/numbers, and
Rulerg, k at the
fruits/vegetables. Apple and pear are
“H” Framem, l waistline.
identifiers in the fruits/vegetables category.
Shoulders
Oval, circle, round, hourglass, diamond,
and hip
rectangle, straight, ruler, triangle, inverted
about the
triangle, spoon, Christmas tree, and cone
same

belong to the shapes category. In the letters/
width.
numbers category, “O”, “X”, “H”, “A”, and
Equal body
figure 8 are included. These lists are not
proportions
exhaustive as other terms may apply. Table
.
1 characterizes these figure types.

Article Designation: Refereed 4 JTATM
Volume 4, Issue 1,Summer 2004
Hourglassc, g, h, Equally (Lajoie, 1999). In 2000, Lands’ End
I, j, k, n, o, p broad on sponsored the “My Virtual Model Tour
Figure 8m top and 2000” as the world’s first body scanning
“X” Framel hips. truck. Individuals were scanned with a (TC)2
Thin at the scanner and a realistic, size accurate virtual
waist, model was created with the scan
usually 10 measurements and could be used to try on
or more clothes, create outfits, and determine what

inches size to buy through the Lands’ End catalog
smaller and website (Lands’ End, 2001).
than chest
and hips. Large, well-organized groups are
using 3D body scanning technology to
Ovalc, h, I, j Top and gather anthropometric data. One project was
the Civilian American and European
Circle/Rounde bottom are
do narrow. Anthropometry Resource (CEASAR)
Applea, e Chest and project. This effort attempted to gather data
Diamondp, o belly are relating to the various shapes and sizes of
“O” Framel where the Western world’s 18- to 65-year-old
population using a Cyberware WB-4 whole
weight is
body scanner (Ponticel, 1999).
found.

Skinny
In the Fall of 2001, Size UK, a
legs.
comprehensive national sizing survey of the

United Kingdom (UK), was completed
Note: (a) Self, 2000 (b) iVillage.com, 2001
utilizing the 3D body scanning technology
(c) la.assortment.com, 2001 (d)
by (TC)2 . This was the first national sizing
teraformahealth.com, 2001 (e)
survey in over 50 years, and the first time
tinajuanfitness.com, 1999 (f) Farro, 1996 (g)
that shape data will have been collected of
Jackowski, 1995 (h)betterhalf.com, 2001 (i)
the UK population ([TC]2, 2001). SizeUSA,
carlamathis.com, 2001(j) Beauty Is, 2001 (k)
a collection of 3D body measurement data
exude.com, 2001 (l) Duffy, 1987 (m) Your
of over 10,000 men and women in the US,
Total Image, 2001 (n) Palmer & Alto, 1998
was completed in the Fall of 2003 and
(o) Rasband, 1994 (p) eswimmers.com,
findings reported in the Winter of 2004
2001
([TC]2, 2004). SizeMexico is planned in for

late 2004 and SizeCanada is in the
Three-Dimensional Body Scanning
developmental stage. The combination of

these surveys provides significant
During the 1960s, research began on
opportunities for the evaluation and
technology that would revolutionize the
development of sizing systems on a more
study of human measurement. It wasn’t until
international basis.
the early 1990s, however, that three-

dimensional (3D) body scanning technology
Several studies have been completed
would make significant contributions to the
concerning 3D body scanning. A 2000 study
apparel industry.
by McKinnon investigated the effect of

respiration and foot stance in a whole body
As the current, most advanced user of
scanner on critical measurements of the
this technology, the apparel industry has
body. An analysis of differing types of
noteworthy potential for its use while the
scanners and scanner manufacturers was
concept is still in its early stages of
revealed in a study by Simmons and Istook
development. There are some retailers and
(2001). A comparative analysis of the
manufacturers who have adopted 3D body
Textile/Clothing Technology Corporation
scanning with open arms. Levi Strauss
(TC)2 scanner models 2T4 and 3T6 was also
premiered a body scanning program for
conducted (McKinnon & Istook, 2001).
custom jeans called Levi’s Original Spin
Article Designation: Refereed 5 JTATM
Volume 4, Issue 1,Summer 2004
From a 2001 study comparing the body • Knowing more than we can tell
measurement techniques of three different (Polanyi, 1966).
scanners, it was found that the (TC)2 scanner • Found in the heads of an
was the most appropriate for the use of organization’s employees being far
measurement extraction in the more difficult to access and use for
manufacturing of clothing (Simmons & obvious reasons (bestbooks.biz,
Istook, 2002). 2002).
• The personal knowledge in people’s
Full body scanning has the potential to heads, which has not been written
provide the data needed to identify and down or documented. It is largely
characterize the segments of the population gained through experience and is
not being served well with current sizing influenced by beliefs, perspectives,
systems. Development of models that use and values. Tacit knowledge usually
three-dimensional body scan data to identify requires joint, shared activities in
different body types can provide the industry order to transmit it. Personal (tacit)
with tools to identify and design for these skills such as expertise, gut feel,
market segments that are not being provided subjective insights, and intuitions
with well-fitting clothing. are not easily communicated and
documented (hyltonassociates.com,
Theoretical Framework 2002).

• Knowledge that is used as a tool to
Data lives in our lives and on our
handle or improve what is in focus
desks as isolated elements. Only when we
(Svelby, 1997).
assemble this data into a significant
• An aspect of practically intelligent
configuration do we have information.
behavior that is acquired through
When this information is converted into a
experience and is unrelated to
valid foundation for action, it becomes
general cognitive ability (Wagner,
knowledge. Knowledge is “taken to be an
1985).
attitude towards a proposition which is true

(Dienes & Perner, 1999). Knowledge
Tacit knowledge allows a person to
management is a strategy that turns an
engage in an activity and have little or no
organization’s intellectual assets (both
conscious experience of what it is causing it.
recorded information and the talents of its
Wagner states that it is not simply the
members) into greater productivity, new
amount of experience that matters but also
value, and increased competitiveness
how well one is able to learn from and apply
(Murray, 2002).
knowledge gained through experience

(Wagner, 1985 & 1987).
This recorded information, which is

obvious knowledge found in manuals,
Many industries have begun to
documentation, files, and other accessible
understand and use tacit knowledge to
sources, is known as explicit knowledge
enhance their future performance: law
(bestbooks.com, 2002). Explicit knowledge
enforcement (Kerr, 1995), social work
is information and skills that are easily
(Holland, 1985; Imre, 1985), anthropology
communicated and conveyed to others. It is
(Heath, 1984), survey research methods and
shared, stored, and distributed
sampling (Maynard, Houtkoop-Steenstra,
(hyltonassociates.com, 2002).
Schaeffer, Van Der Zouwen, 2002), systems

engineering (Tatalias & Kelly, 2001),
However, the greater level of
gemology (Collins, 2001), laser-building
knowledge in an organization is tacit-
(Collins, 1992), nuclear weapons
unarticulated knowledge (Saint-Onge, 1996)
(MacKenzie & Spinardi, 1995), biology
and may be the real key to getting things
(Jordan & Lynch, 1992), and vetinerinary
done (Murray, 2002). The definition of tacit
science (Pin., Collins, & Carbone, 1996).
knowledge has been identified in several

ways:
Article Designation: Refereed 6 JTATM
Volume 4, Issue 1,Summer 2004
This research was an effort to use both Database Development
explicit and tacit knowledge to aid in the
development of clothing that should be A convenience sample of women was
better able to meet the needs of the female solicited primarily from the Triangle area of
consumer of today. Capturing and applying North Carolina (Raleigh, Durham, and
tacit knowledge was an important first step Cary). Each subject was informed of the
in what is likely to be a long developmental scanning procedure, possible risks,
process. confidentiality, and contacts in accordance
with the rules of a Human Subject Review
Methodology Board at the university. Demographic
information was also collected for each
The first step in achieving the subject.
objective of this research was to develop a
database of three-dimensional body scan Subjects wore close fitting athletic
data, from a variety of consumer markets, gear to be scanned. Extracted measurements,
which included measurement data, 3D point 3D point cloud data, and reduced body data
cloud data, and demographic data. This were stored and maintained entirely by the
initial step provided an established catalog subject identification number given to each
of subjects for all research pertaining to 3- subject. No potential subject was excluded
dimensional body scanning. on the basis of race, size or shape. Women
ages 18 and older, who had complete
The second step was to develop a demographic data, good 3D body scans, and
“Best Fit” software, using Microsoft Access, complete extracted measurement data were
to compare the 3D measurement data of a used for the sizing system evaluation in this
selected group of subjects to the sizing study.
systems that have been developed in the US
since the 1941 study by O’Brien and Best Fit Evaluation
Sheldon. The final step in this study was to
review the ways in which female shapes are Two tables were created in Microsoft
currently described and to develop a Access, one for storing the sizing standards
description that could be used that would (called Projections) and the other for storing
encompass the 3 dimensional shapes of the subject measurements. Current ASTM
women, rather than only their silhouette. sizing standards, as well as past standards,
were chosen for the evaluation because, with
each revision, groupings of body types were
added and/or taken away. See Table 2 for a
complete listing of all standards used in the
study.

Article Designation: Refereed 7 JTATM
Volume 4, Issue 1,Summer 2004
Table 2. Standards included in the Best Fit  Database

Standard Size Standard Size
ASTM 5585 2-20 CS215-58 8-12
Missy (S,F)
ASTM 5586 (55+) 3-17 CS215-58 30-42
Junior Women’s (R,A)
ASTM 5586 (55+) 3-15 CS215-58 32-40
Junior Petite Women’s (T,A)
ASTM 5586 (55+) 8-18 CS215-58 32-42
Misses Petite Women’s (R,S)
ASTM 5586 (55+) 6-22 CS215-58 28-38
Missy Women’s (R,F)
ASTM 5586 (55+) 10-22 CS215-58 30-36
Misses Tall Women’s (T,F)
ASTM 5586 (55+) 12.5-26.5 CS215-58 10.5-24.5
Half Sizes Half Sizes (S,A)
ASTM 5586 (55+) 34-52 CS215-58 12.5-22.5
Women’s Half Sizes (S,S)
CS215-58 8-22 CS215-58 8.5-20.5
Missy (R,A) Half Sizes (S,F)
CS215-58 10-20 PS42-70 3-17
Missy (T,A) Junior
CS215-58 8-18 PS42-70
Missy (S,A) Junior Petite
CS215-58 10-22 PS42-70
Missy (R,S) Missy Petite
CS215-58 12-18 PS42-70
Missy (T,S) Missy Tall
CS215-58 12-18 PS42-70
Missy (S,S) Women’s
CS215-58 8-16 PS42-70
Missy (R,F) Half Sizes
CS215-58 10-14
Missy (R,T)

There were 21 subject measurements Difference and Weighted Tolerance
compared with those found in the various Difference.
standards. These measurements were
selected from the many available from body Percentage Difference
scan data, because they were common
among all of the standards and met the The Percent Difference formula
measurement definitions within the calculated the closest size based on the
standards. A ‘Form’ designed in the Access percentage difference between the subject’s
software compared 21 of each subject’s measurement and the standard measure that
measurements with the same measures for was determined to provide the “Best Fit”.
each of the size standards. It then calculated For every 5% difference between the
and displayed the best fitting standard that standard and the subject’s measurement, the
was closest to the subject’s body size. The ‘Difference’ was calculated as one. The
comparison was completed in three different number of measures that were 5% or more
ways – Percentage Difference, Tolerance different from the Best Fit standard is
displayed as ‘Distance’. A positive number
Article Designation: Refereed 8 JTATM
Volume 4, Issue 1,Summer 2004
indicated that the scan data was larger than was within three times the tolerance level, it
the Best Fit standard. A negative number became two or else, the value of Difference
indicated that the Best Fit standard was was three. The ‘Difference’ values of all the
larger than the scan data. The standard that 21 measurements were added up to get the
had the lowest ‘Distance’ value was final “Distance”. As before, the standard
determined to be the standard that would size having the lowest ‘Distance’ value was
provide the “Best Fit” for the subject. determined to be the standard size that
would provide the “Best Fit” for the
Tolerance Difference individual.

For the Tolerance Difference formula, “Best Fit” Results
each measurement was given a tolerance
limit. If the difference between the subject’s Percentage Difference Results
measurement and the standard measurement
fell within this value, the difference was Using the Percentage Difference
counted as zero. If the measurement fell method, the standard that provided the ‘Best
outside the tolerance value, the difference Fit’ for the largest number of subjects (over
was counted as one. The tolerances were 44%) was the CS215-58 database.
taken from the Apparel Design and Regardless, more than 93% of the subjects’
Production Handbook (Fashiondex, 1998), measurements were greater than 5% larger
which includes a list of tolerances than the standard that gave them the best fit.
customarily used by the apparel
manufacturing industry. This was proposed Tolerance Level Results
as a logical way to evaluate fit, since
production of clothing generally is allowed When using the Tolerance Difference
to fall within the specified tolerance, so too method, the standard that provided the ‘Best
might bodies. The standard corresponding Fit’ for the largest number of subjects (over
to the least value of ‘Distance’ was taken as 35%) was the 55+ASTM 5586-95 standard.
the closest standard size to provide the “Best The average number of measurements that
Fit” for the individual. were out of tolerance within this “Best Fit”
standard was 10 out of the 21 measurements.
Weighted Tolerance That is, for every subject, at least 48% of the
measurements were not within the tolerance
A Weighted Tolerance formula was limits for their “Best Fit” standard size.
developed to calculate the degree to which a
measurement was out of tolerance with the Among the 254 subjects in the
standard. This formula was proposed to database, the number of people whose
allow researchers the opportunity to “value” measurement fell out of tolerance for each
the degree to which a standard might depart measurement category was determined. The
from providing good fit. The value of results are shown in the Figure 1. Among
‘Difference’ was increased from zero to 254 subjects, 253 people fell out of tolerance
three based on the tolerance level. For from their standard in the bust measurement.
example, if the difference between the Likewise, more than 100 subjects fell out of
subject’s measurement and the standard tolerance in all of the twenty-one
measurement was within tolerance, the value measurements. Overall, at least 74% of the
of Difference was zero; if it was within subjects fell out of tolerance from their
twice the tolerance value, it was one, if it standard size in their body measurements.

Article Designation: Refereed 9 JTATM
Volume 4, Issue 1,Summer 2004
Number of Subjects out of Tolerance from the Standard

1
of Subjects 230000 Bust-172 Waist-186 HighHip-220 Hip-171 NeckBase-153 UpperArm-182 ThighMax-150 Total Crotch-204 Cervical Height-157 Waist Height-201 Hip Height-240 Crotch Height-220 Front Waist Length-184 Back Waist Length-183 Rise-212 Across Shoulder-168 Shoulder Length-189 Cross Back Width-187 Cross Chest Width-177 Arm Length-226 Bust Pt to Bust Pt-20
r
e
b 100
m
u
N
0
Measurements

Figure 1. Tolerance difference for each measurement.

Weighted Tolerance

100%

80%

e
g 60%
a
cent Three
Per 40% Two

One

20% Zero

0%

Measurements

Figure 2. Weighted tolerance differences for each measurement.
Article Designation: Refereed 10 JTATM
Volume 4, Issue 1,Summer 2004