Empirical validation of proportional construction parameters: Implications for optimising women’s garment construction and production

Region	Age	N^a	x̅^b	s^c	CV^d (%)	95% CI^e		Range
Region	Age	N^a	x̅^b	s^c	CV^d (%)	h₁	h₂	Min.	Max.
Goransko primorska	–29	236	91.8	7.4	8.1	90.8	92.7	80.0	127.0
	30–39	171	95.9	9.6	10.0	94.5	97.3	75.0	126.5
	40–49	179	100.0	10.1	10.1	98.5	101.5	78.0	132.0
	50–59	157	105.9	11.5	10.9	104.1	107.7	73.0	134.0
	60–69	125	107.5	10.0	9.3	105.7	109.3	80.0	130.0
	70–79	133	108.5	10.4	9.6	106.7	110.3	79.0	131.0
	80–	103	104.5	11.9	11.4	102.2	106.8	68.0	132.0
	Total	1104	100.7	11.7	11.6	100.0	101.4	68.0	134.0
Slavonia	–29	243	89.7	7.6	8.5	88.8	90.7	71.0	122.0
	30–39	121	91.9	7.5	8.2	90.6	93.3	79.0	113.0
	40–9	118	98.2	9.5	9.7	96.5	100.0	81.0	126.0
	50–59	109	100.8	11.4	11.3	98.6	103.0	78.0	134.0
	60–69	113	104.0	10.2	9.8	102.1	105.9	82.0	132.0
	70–79	126	105.2	9.7	9.2	103.4	106.9	81.0	134.0
	80-	110	104.3	10.2	9.8	102.4	106.3	78.0	136.0
	Total	940	97.9	11.2	11.4	97.1	98.6	71.0	136.0
Central Croatia	–29	205	90.3	8.1	9.0	89.2	91.4	68.0	125.0
	30–39	140	95.0	10.1	10.6	93.3	96.7	72.0	128.0
	40–49	140	97.8	11.4	11.7	95.9	99.7	72.0	134.0
	50–59	97	104.7	10.5	10.0	102.6	106.8	86.0	133.2
	60–69	96	107.4	13.0	12.1	104.8	110.1	76.0	137.0
	70–79	110	104.7	9.8	9.4	102.9	106.6	78.0	128.0
	80–	107	101.9	11.8	11.6	99.6	104.1	76.0	129.0
	Total	895	98.8	12.0	12.1	98.0	99.6	68.0	137.0
Dalmatia	–29	253	91.2	6.2	6.8	90.5	92.0	73.5	111.0
	30–39	175	93.5	6.4	6.8	92.6	94.5	80.0	112.0
	40–49	191	98.1	8.0	8.2	96.9	99.2	80.0	125.0
	50–59	147	102.6	9.3	9.1	101.1	104.2	82.5	134.0
	60–69	109	103.8	8.2	7.9	102.2	105.3	80.4	120.0
	70–79	119	103.3	11.5	11.1	101.2	105.4	66.0	142.0
	80–	115	102.5	10.4	10.1	100.6	104.4	80.0	128.0
	Total	1109	98.0	9.7	9.9	97.4	98.6	66.0	142.0
City of Zagreb	–29	168	88.5	6.6	7.5	87.4	89.5	78.0	126.5
	30–39	127	94.0	9.2	9.8	92.4	95.7	77.0	128.0
	40–49	154	98.2	9.4	9.6	96.7	99.7	78.0	129.0
	50–59	110	102.0	10.5	10.3	100.0	104.0	70.5	129.0
	60–69	87	105.1	11.4	10.8	102.7	107.5	83.0	131.0
	70–79	83	104.6	11.1	10.6	102.1	107.0	69.0	131.5
	80–	70	107.2	11.6	10.8	104.4	109.9	79.0	127.0
	Total	799	98.2	11.6	11.8	97.4	99.0	69.0	131.5

[i] ^a, Number of cases; ^b, arithmetic mean; ^c, standard deviation; ^d, coefficient of variation; and ^e, 95% confidence interval.

Table 2

Basic parameters of the scye depth distribution of women (cm) by region and age group.

Region	Age	N^a	x̅^b	s^c	CV^d (%)	95% CI^e		Range
Region	Age	N^a	x̅^b	s^c	CV^d (%)	h ₁	h ₂	Min.	Max.
Goransko-primorska	–29	236	18.1	2.3	12.7	17.8	18.4	12.0	25.0
	30–39	171	18.9	2.5	13.0	18.5	19.3	11.5	26.0
	40–49	179	19.8	3.4	17.1	19.3	20.3	12.0	31.5
	50–59	157	19.7	2.8	14.3	19.3	20.2	13.0	30.0
	60–69	125	20.5	2.3	11.5	20.1	20.9	14.0	27.0
	70–79	133	21.2	3.3	15.6	20.6	21.7	13.0	32.0
	80	103	21.9	3.6	16.6	21.2	22.6	14.0	33.0
	Total	1104	19.7	3.1	15.7	19.5	19.9	11.5	33.0
Slavonia	–29	243	17.6	2.1	11.7	17.4	17.9	12.5	26.0
	30–39	121	17.8	2.2	12.5	17.4	18.2	12.0	23.0
	40–49	118	18.2	2.1	11.7	17.9	18.6	14.0	26.0
	50–59	109	19.1	3.1	16.1	18.5	19.6	15.0	28.0
	60–69	113	18.8	2.2	11.7	18.4	19.2	15.0	25.0
	70–79	126	19.5	2.4	12.2	19.1	19.9	14.0	26.0
	80–	110	19.0	2.7	14.3	18.5	19.5	10.0	28.0
	Total	940	18.4	2.5	13.3	18.3	18.6	10.0	28.0
Central Croatia	–29	205	19.2	2.6	13.4	18.8	19.5	12.0	25.6
	30–39	140	19.3	2.7	13.8	18.8	19.7	11.0	26.0
	40–49	140	20.2	2.4	11.9	19.8	20.6	14.5	26.0
	50–59	97	20.0	2.5	12.5	19.5	20.5	14.0	26.0
	60–69	96	22.0	3.1	13.9	21.4	22.7	15.0	32.0
	70–79	110	20.8	2.7	12.8	20.3	21.3	14.0	28.0
	80–	107	20.4	2.8	13.9	19.9	21.0	14.0	28.0
	Total	895	20.1	2.8	13.9	19.9	20.3	11.0	32.0
Dalmatia	–29	253	19.4	3.1	16.1	19.0	19.8	13.2	30.0
	30–39	175	19.5	3.0	15.5	19.1	20.0	15.2	29.0
	40–49	191	19.8	3.2	16.2	19.3	20.2	13.5	30.0
	50–59	147	20.4	3.4	16.5	19.9	21.0	16.0	33.0
	60–69	109	19.7	2.6	13.4	19.2	20.2	15.9	27.0
	70–79	119	20.0	3.0	15.0	19.5	20.6	14.0	29.0
	80–	115	20.0	3.4	16.9	19.3	20.6	12.9	29.0
	Total	1109	19.8	3.1	15.8	19.6	20.0	12.9	33.0
City of Zagreb	–29	168	16.5	2.4	14.4	16.1	16.9	12.0	26.0
	30–39	127	16.7	1.8	11.0	16.4	17.1	11.0	23.3
	40–49	154	17.1	2.4	13.8	16.8	17.5	11.0	26.0
	50–59	110	17.5	2.3	13.2	17.1	17.9	12.0	23.0
	60–69	87	20.0	2.2	11.0	19.6	20.5	14.0	26.0
	70–79	83	19.3	2.6	13.6	18.7	19.9	13.0	24.7
	80–	70	20.6	2.3	11.1	20.1	21.2	11.0	24.0
	Total	799	17.8	2.7	15.1	17.7	18.0	11.0	26.0

[i] ^a, number of cases; ^b, arithmetic mean; ^c, standard deviation; ^d, coefficient of variation; and ^e, 95% confidence interval.

Table 3

Results of the analysis of differences in mean scye depth of women by region and age group (two-way analysis of variance model).

Source of variability		SS^a	df^b	MS^c	F^d	p e
Differences	Region	2716.064	4	679.016	92.442	<0.001
Differences	Age	3328.466	6	554.744	75.524	<0.001
Interaction	Region × Age	1440.642	24	60.027	8.172	<0.001
	Model	7874.729	34	231.610	31.532	<0.001
	Residual	35345.502	4812	7.345
	Total	43220.231	4846	8.919

[i] ^aSum of squares of deviations; ^b, degrees of freedom; ^c, corrected variance; ^d,value of the test statistic; and ^e, probability of the test statistic.

Relationship between empirical, mathematical, and estimated values of women’s scye depth in relation to bust girth (N = 4,847).

Table 4

Basic parameters of the back width distribution of women (cm) by region and age group.

Region	Age	Na	x̅^b	s^c	CV^d (%)	95% CI^e		Range
Region	Age	Na	x̅^b	s^c	CV^d (%)	h₁	h₂	Min.	Max.
Goransko-primorska	–29	236	34.8	3.5	10.1	34.4	35.3	26.0	48.0
	30–39	171	36.7	3.7	10.1	36.1	37.2	29.0	47.0
	40–49	179	37.7	4.1	10.9	37.1	38.3	27.0	49.0
	50–59	157	38.9	4.0	10.3	38.3	39.5	28.5	49.0
	60–69	125	39.5	3.7	9.3	38.9	40.2	30.0	50.0
	70–79	133	39.4	4.6	11.6	38.6	40.2	26.0	48.0
	80–	103	37.8	5.3	14.1	36.8	38.8	24.0	48.0
	Total	1104	37.5	4.4	11.7	37.3	37.8	24.0	50.0
Slavonia	–29	243	34.6	3.3	9.6	34.1	35.0	24.2	50.0
	30–39	121	35.2	3.2	9.2	34.6	35.7	27.0	49.0
	40–49	118	36.4	3.2	8.9	35.8	37.0	29.0	45.0
	50–59	109	37.8	3.6	9.4	37.1	38.5	29.5	47.0
	60–69	113	37.9	3.2	8.3	37.3	38.5	31.0	48.0
	70–79	126	38.0	3.2	8.5	37.5	38.6	27.0	49.0
	80–	110	37.8	3.7	9.8	37.1	38.5	27.0	48.0
	Total	940	36.5	3.6	10.0	36.3	36.7	24.2	50.0
Central Croatia	–29	205	34.3	3.9	11.3	33.8	34.8	26.0	46.0
	30–39	140	36.1	4.3	11.9	35.4	36.8	24.0	47.0
	40–49	140	36.4	4.4	12.0	35.6	37.1	28.0	51.0
	50–59	97	37.7	4.2	11.2	36.8	38.5	30.0	48.0
	60–69	96	37.3	4.8	12.9	36.3	38.3	29.0	50.0
	70–79	110	37.7	4.5	12.0	36.8	38.5	28.0	50.0
	80–	107	37.2	4.5	12.1	36.3	38.0	27.0	50.0
	Total	895	36.4	4.5	12.3	36.1	36.6	24.0	51.0
Dalmatia	–29	253	34.2	3.5	10.2	33.8	34.6	24.5	44.0
	30–39	175	35.4	3.4	9.7	34.9	36.0	25.0	44.0
	40–49	191	36.5	3.7	10.2	36.0	37.0	26.0	48.0
	50–59	147	37.3	4.0	10.6	36.7	38.0	27.0	49.0
	60–69	109	37.9	3.4	8.9	37.2	38.5	26.5	47.0
	70–79	119	37.2	4.2	11.2	36.4	38.0	27.5	47.0
	80–	115	36.8	3.9	10.6	36.1	37.5	28.0	47.0
	Total	1109	36.2	3.9	10.8	35.9	36.4	24.5	49.0
City of Zagreb	–29	168	33.5	3.6	10.7	33.0	34.1	26.0	44.0
	30–39	127	35.9	3.6	10.0	35.3	36.6	27.0	47.0
	40–49	154	36.2	3.5	9.7	35.6	36.8	27.0	44.0
	50–59	110	37.6	3.4	9.1	36.9	38.2	29.0	45.5
	60–69	87	40.6	3.6	9.0	39.8	41.3	32.0	51.0
	70–79	83	39.7	4.7	11.9	38.6	40.7	28.0	51.0
	80–	70	41.1	4.3	10.4	40.1	42.2	29.0	48.0
	Total	799	37.0	4.5	12.2	36.7	37.4	26.0	51.0

[i] ^a, Number of cases; ^b, arithmetic mean; ^c, standard deviation; ^d, coefficient of variation; and ^e 95% confidence interval.

Table 5

Results of the analysis of differences in mean back width of women by region and age group (two-way ANOVA model).

Source of variability		SS^a	df^b	MS^c	F^d	p ^e
Differences	Region	1535.944	4	383.986	25.903	<0.001
Differences	Age	12223.705	6	2037.284	137.429	<0.001
Interaction	Region × Age	1856.509	24	77.355	5.218	<0.001
	Model	14864.257	34	437.184	29.491	<0.001
	Residual	71334.208	4812	14.824
	Total	86198.465	4846	17.788

[i] ^a, Sum of squares of deviations; ^b, degrees of freedom; ^c, corrected variance; ^d, value of the test statistic; and ^e, probability of the test statistic.

Relationship between empirical, mathematical, and estimated values of women’s back width in relation to bust girth (N = 4,847).

Table 6

Comparison of existing and proposed proportional construction formulas.

Construction parameter	Existing proportional formula	Proposed proportional formula
Scye depth	Bust girth/10 + 10.5 cm	Bust girth/12 + 11 cm
Back width	Bust girth/8 + 5.5 cm	Bust girth/8 + 7 cm

References

Authors

Metrics

Articles in this issue

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/ftee-2026-0009 | Journal eISSN: 2300-7354 | Journal ISSN: 1230-3666

Journal RSS Feed

Language: English

Page range: 101 - 109

Submitted on: Mar 23, 2026

Accepted on: Sep 9, 2026

Published on: Oct 22, 2026

Published by: Łukasiewicz Research Network-Łódź Institute of Technology

In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services

Publication frequency: Volume open

Keywords:

Anthropometry,

Construction parameters,

Garment construction,

Garment fit,

Linear regression

Related subjects:

Business and economics,

Business management,

Business informatics,

Process management,

Industrial chemistry,

Cellulose, paper and textiles,

Polymer science and technology,

Materials sciences,

Biomaterials and natural materials

© 2026 Ksenija Doležal, Renata Hrženjak, Blaženka Brlobašić Šajatović, published by Łukasiewicz Research Network-Łódź Institute of Technology
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.

Volume 34 (2026): Issue 1 (February 2026)

Empirical validation of proportional construction parameters: Implications for optimising women’s garment construction and production

Figure 1

Table 1

Table 2

Table 3

Figure 2

Table 4

Table 5

Figure 3

Table 6

Paradigm

My account