## 3 Results and Discussion
### Shrinkage Results and Analysis  
The dimensional changes in the knitted samples were evaluated by measuring their length and width before and after the first washing. The process was identical for all samples: machine washing at 40 \({}^{\circ}\)C using liquid detergent and a standard wash-rinse-spin cycle, followed by air-drying under controlled ambient conditions (22 \({}^{\circ}\)C, 60% humidity). The length measurements before and after washing are shown in Figure 14, and the width measurements are presented in Figure 15. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Knit Macrostructure** & **Sample 1** & **Sample 2** & **Sample 3** & **Sample 4** & **Sample 5** \\ \hline Production time, min & 3 & 9 & 3 & 10 & 5 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 7: Production time. Figure 13: The knitted samples: (**a**) Sample 1; (**b**) Sample 2; (**c**) Sample 4; (**d**) Sample 3; (**e**) Sample 5. To support a more comprehensive interpretation of the results, a correlation analysis was performed between pre- and post-wash dimensions. The findings are illustrated in Figure 16, where blue dots represent length and red squares represent width. The black dashed line (y = x) serves as a reference indicating no dimensional change. Points below the line indicate shrinkage, while those above suggest expansion. Figure 16: Correlation between the size of the samples before and after first washing: length (blue dots) and width (red squares). Figure 14: Length of the samples before and after washing. Figure 15: Length of the samples before and after washing. The actual shrinkage percentages for both length and width were calculated using Equation (1) and visualised in Table 8 and Figure 17.  
To better capture the combined dimensional changes in both directions, the shrinkage of each sample was also calculated in terms of area (Equation (2)). This approach offers a more comprehensive measure of overall deformation, especially in cases where shrinkage occurs in one direction and expansion in the other. The results, presented in Table 8, show the total percentage of area lost or gained after washing for each structure. The results highlight significant differences in post-wash characteristics among the samples. Sample 1 (\(\text{Sh}_{\text{av}}=30.69\%\)) exhibits the most severe reduction in total fabric area. The high-density Aran and Cable modules introduce substantial internal tension and compact loop structures, which contract heavily when exposed to washing. Such a dramatic loss of area suggests that the structure is not suited for applications where size consistency is critical unless pre-treatment or compensation is applied. It also reflects how dense, textured designs amplify the effects of yarn swelling and loop pullback. Sample 2 is the most dimensionally stable sample in the group, with its area shrinkage of \(\text{Sh}_{\text{av}}=30.69\%\). The near-zero change in area is remarkable given the relative complexity of the symmetrical Cable-Aran layout. It indicates a well-balanced stitch geometry, allowing for even distribution of tension and controlled deformation. Sample 2 could be considered a reference model for structure types that require size retention--e.g., shaped garments, panels, or knit-to-measure applications. Sample 3 has a negative area shrinkage (\(\text{Sh}_{\text{av}}=-13.64\%\)), which means area expansion after washing. This sample is the least stable. The negative shrinkage reflects a net gain in fabric area--a clear sign of relaxation and expansion. The openwork Pointelle design, while visually delicate and breathable, lacks the structural tension needed to resist dimensional spreading after washing. This behaviour compromises fit and consistency and may require stabilising strategies such as tighter gauge or additional reinforcing rows. The area shrinkage of Sample 4 is \(\text{Sh}_{\text{av}}=0.01\%\). Although the overall area remains virtually unchanged, this is a mathematically neutral result masking physical asymmetry.