Materials 2025 , 18 , 228
6of 17
Table3. Rearrangement of the 29 tested tissue products based on the TSA method.
TSA Rank
Rearrangement of the Tissue Products
TSA Rank
Product ID
Product ID
21 25 16 22 19 8
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
T01 T02 T03 T04 T05 T06 T07 T08 T09 T10 T11 T12 T13 T14 T15 T16 T17 T18 T19 T20 T21 T22 T23 T24 T25 T26 T27 T28 T29
T22 T14 T15 T09 T08 T12 T07 T04 T23 T16 T20 T21 T18 T19 T13 T03 T27 T26 T06 T24 T01 T05 T28 T11 T02 T25 T17 T10 T29
7 5 4
28 24
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29
6
15
2 3
Rougher
↓
10 27 13 14 11 12 20 26 18 17 23 29 1 9
Softer
With this step complete, it becomes easier, from this point forward, to process and interpret the results, because an initial analysis and organization of the products has been carried out, based on their softness characteristics, not being randomly organized anymore. With that said, let us now compare the TSA results with the results obtained through the other three methods (SUB, KES, and OPT), after converting their corresponding measured values from a minimum of 1 to a maximum of 29. Table 4 shows the obtained ranks for each of the assessment methods, having as a reference the TSA method, presented in an ascending order in Table 4 (see column 2). To facilitate the interpretation of the results, the positions (ranks) of the 29 tested tissue products obtained for the four different methods were also represented graphically, in Figure 3. The black bars shown on the graph represent the results using the Tissue Softness Analyzer (TSA), the red bars represent the results obtained in the Subjective Evaluation (SUB), the orange bars represent the results obtained through the Kawabata Evaluation System (KES), and, finally, the yellow bars represent the results that were obtained through the implemented Optical System (OPT).
Made with FlippingBook interactive PDF creator