Before the 1770s, textile production was a
cottage industry using
flax and
wool. Weaving was a family activity. The children and women would
card the fibre – break up and clean the disorganised fluff into long bundles. The women would then spin these rough
rovings into
yarn wound onto a
spindle. The male weaver would use a frame
loom to weave this into cloth. This was then
tentered in the sun to bleach it. The invention by
John Kay of the
flying shuttle made the loom twice as productive, causing the demand for cotton yarn to vastly exceed what traditional spinners could supply. There were two types of spinning wheel: the
simple wheel, which uses an
intermittent process, and the more refined Saxony wheel, which drives a differential
spindle and flyer with a heck (an apparatus that guides the thread to the reels) in a
continuous process. These two wheels became the starting point of technological development. Businessmen such as
Richard Arkwright employed inventors to find solutions that would increase the amount of yarn spun, then took out the relevant patents. The
spinning jenny allowed a group of eight spindles to be operated together. It mirrored the simple wheel; the rovings were clamped, and a frame moved forward stretching and thinning the roving. A wheel was rapidly turned as the frame was pushed back, and the spindles rotated, twisting the rovings into yarn and collecting it on the spindles. The spinning jenny was effective and could be operated by hand, but it produced weaker thread that could be used only for the weft part of the cloth. (Because the side-to-side
weft does not have to be stretched on a loom in the way that the
warp is, it can generally be less strong.) The throstle and the later
water frame pulled the rovings through a set of attenuating rollers. Spinning at differing speeds, these pulled the thread continuously while other parts twisted it as it wound onto the heavy spindles. This produced thread suitable for warp, but the multiple rollers required much more energy input and demanded that the device be driven by a water wheel. The early water frame, however, had only a single spindle. Combining ideas from these two system inspired the spinning mule. The increased supply of muslin inspired developments in loom design such as
Edmund Cartwright's
power loom. Some spinners and
handloom weavers opposed the perceived threat to their livelihood: there were frame-breaking riots and, in 1811–13, the
Luddite riots. The preparatory and associated tasks allowed many
children to be employed until this was regulated. Development over the next century and a half led to an automatic mule and to finer and stronger yarn. The
ring frame, originating in
New England in the 1820s, was little used in Lancashire until the 1890s. It required more energy and could not produce the finest counts.
The first mule Samuel Crompton invented the spinning mule in 1779, so called because it is a hybrid of Arkwright's
water frame and
James Hargreaves's
spinning jenny in the same way that a
mule is the product of crossbreeding a
female horse with a
male donkey. The spinning mule has a fixed frame with a creel of cylindrical
bobbins to hold the roving, connected through the headstock to a parallel carriage with the spindles. On the outward motion, the rovings are paid out through attenuating rollers and twisted. On the return, the roving is clamped and the spindles are reversed to take up the newly spun thread. Crompton built his mule from wood. Although he used Hargreaves' ideas of spinning multiple threads and of attenuating the roving with rollers, it was he who put the spindles on the carriage and fixed a creel of roving bobbins on the frame. Both the rollers and the outward motion of the carriage remove irregularities from the rove before it is wound on the spindle. When Arkwright's patents expired, the mule was developed by several manufacturers. Crompton's first mule had 48 spindles and could produce of 60s thread a day. This demanded a spindle speed of 1,700 rpm, and a power input of . The mule produced strong, thin
yarn, suitable for any kind of
textile, warp or weft. It was first used to spin cotton, then other fibres. Samuel Crompton could not afford to
patent his invention. He sold the rights to
David Dale and returned to weaving. Dale patented the mule and profited from it.
Improvements Crompton's machine was largely built of wood, using bands and pulleys for the driving motions. After his machine was public, he had little to do with its development. Henry Stones, a mechanic from
Horwich, constructed a mule using toothed gearing and, importantly, metal rollers. and Hargreaves used parallel scrolling to achieve smoother acceleration and deceleration. In 1790, William Kelly of
Glasgow used a new method to assist the draw stroke. He was in conversation with John Kennedy about the possibility of a self-acting mule. Kennedy, a partner in McConnell & Kennedy machine makers in
Ancoats, was concerned with building ever larger mules. McConnell & Kennedy ventured into spinning when they were left with two unpaid-for mules; their firm prospered and eventually merged into the
Fine Spinners & Doublers Association. In 1793, John Kennedy addressed the problem of fine counts. With these counts, the spindles on the return traverse needed to rotate faster than on the outward traverse. He attached gears and a clutch to implement this motion. William Eaton, in 1818, improved the winding of the thread by using two faller wires and performing a backing off at the end of the outward traverse. All these mules had been worked by the strength of the operatives. The next improvement was a fully automatic mule.
Roberts' self-acting mule self-acting spinning mule: 1835 diagram showing the gearing in the headstock
Richard Roberts took out his first patent in 1825 and a second in 1830. The task he had set himself was to design a self-actor, a self-acting or automatic spinning mule. Roberts is also known for the
Roberts Loom, which was widely adopted because of its reliability. The mule in 1820 still needed manual assistance to spin a consistent thread; a self-acting mule would need: • A reversing mechanism that would unwind a spiral of yarn on the top of each spindle, before commencing the winding of a new stretch • A faller wire that would ensure the yarn was wound into a predefined form such as a cop • An appliance to vary the speed of revolution of the spindle, in accordance with the diameter of thread on that spindle A counter faller under the thread was made to rise to take in the slack caused by backing off. This could be used with the top faller wire to guide the yarn to the correct place on the cop. These were controlled by levers and cams and an inclined plane called the shaper. The spindle speed was controlled by a drum and weighted ropes, as the headstock moved the ropes twisted the drum, which using a tooth wheel turned the spindles. None of this would have been possible using the technology of Crompton's time, fifty years earlier. File:Selfactor MKL Bd. 15 1890 (128660571).jpg|A cross section 1890 File:Selfaktor ausgefahren.jpg|The outward traverse File:Selfaktor eingefahren.jpg|The inward traverse File:Textile-Spinning room.jpg|Notice the faller wire gear File:Vonwiller 001.jpg|Selfactor in Vonwiller & Co.,
Senftenberg,
Austria-Hungary (today Žamberk, Czech Republic) With the invention of the self actor, the hand-operated mule was increasingly referred to as a mule-jenny.
Oldham counts Oldham counts refers to the medium thickness cotton that was used for general purpose cloth. Roberts did not profit from his self-acting spinning mule, but on the expiry of the patent other firms took forward the development, and the mule was adapted for the counts it spun. Initially Roberts' self-actor was used for coarse counts (Oldham Counts), but the mule-jenny continued to be used for the very finest counts (Bolton counts) until the 1890s and beyond.
Woollen mules Spinning wool is a different process as the variable lengths of the individual fibres means that they are unsuitable for attenuation by roller drafting. For this reason, woolen fibres are carded using condenser cards which rub the carded fibres together rather than drafting them. They are then spun on mule-type machines which have no roller drafting, but create the draft by the spindles receding from the delivery rollers whilst that latter, having paid out a short length of roving, are held stationary. Such mules are often complex involving multiple spindles speeds, receding motions, etc. to ensure optimum treatment of the yarn.
Condenser spinning Condenser spinning was developed to enable the short fibres produced as waste from the combing of fine cottons, to be spun into a soft, coarse yarns suitable for sheeting, blankets etc. Only approximately 2% of the mule spindles in Lancashire were condenser spindles, but many more condenser mules survive today as these were the last spindles regularly at work., and the mules are similar.
Helmshore Mills was a cotton waste mule spinning mill.
Current usage Mules are still in use for spinning woolen and alpaca, and being produced across the world. In Italy for example by
Bigagli and
Cormatex. ==Operation of a mule==