Why consider CLO for measurement-led pattern development?
- Start a pattern from measurement points or a flat sketch, then review and adjust its measurements.
- Use editable pattern results as part of an ongoing design process.
- Keep 2D pattern development and 3D garment simulation in the same workflow.
- Test grading and individual made-to-measure (MTM) cases separately, since they solve different problems.
For apparel teams handling repeat orders, a useful question is how closely measurement-led pattern work can connect to the design process. CLO brings pattern drafting and editing together with 3D garment simulation, giving teams a way to review a garment in context as they develop its pattern. Before adopting any workflow, it is worth distinguishing size grading from individual MTM and checking how each supports the team’s own fit and production needs.
Grading and made-to-measure solve different problems
Size grading applies a set of rules to an approved base pattern to create a size range. Made-to-measure (MTM) pattern generation applies a customer’s body measurements to create a pattern for that individual. A team may need both: grading to maintain its regular size range, and MTM rules to adjust a selected base size for one customer.
A study in the Journal of Textile and Apparel, Technology and Management shows how standard grading and individual alterations can work together. Its trouser example used the ASTM adult-women’s misses body-measurement table for sizes 2-20, then paired a base size with an individual customer’s measurements and selected alteration rules to generate a custom pattern. Its reference table included waist, hip, thigh, knee, ankle, inseam, and rise—a useful coverage list for a trouser trial.
The distinction is important when planning a pattern workflow. Grading a base block across sizes and adjusting a pattern for one person are separate tasks, with different inputs and outputs. In a trial, document the size chart and grade rules for the grading case, then use an individual measurement set and defined alteration logic for the MTM case. Keeping the tests separate makes it easier to see what the workflow does well and where the team needs to review or refine the results.
CLO: bring pattern work and 3D garment review together
CLO is a good option for teams that want pattern drafting and editing to sit alongside 3D garment simulation. CLO’s Pattern Drafter guide says users can start a pattern from measurement points or a flat sketch. Its Set Measurement step offers three options for viewing and adjusting pattern measurements, giving designers a way to review the dimensions as they develop a pattern.
CLO’s feature overview describes Auto POM & Grading: it generates points of measure from entered measurements and applies grading, with editable results. That editability matters in a design workflow, where teams can review generated work and make adjustments rather than treating the result as untouchable.
CLO also supports 2D pattern creation and editing alongside 3D garment simulation. This combination lets a team consider pattern decisions in the context of the simulated garment during design iteration. For apparel teams, keeping these activities together can make CLO a natural part of the development process, from pattern work through visual review.
The cited CLO information describes measurement-led drafting and grading features, but does not establish a complete customer-order-to-production workflow. Teams with that requirement should confirm the specific handoffs they need before making a decision.
Run a same-garment trial
A short trial can show how a workflow performs on the team’s actual garments and measurements. Use a familiar block and consistent design assumptions, then check the result at the points that matter for fit, construction, and production handoff.
- Choose a base garment and size. Use a block your team already trusts, such as a trouser block, and record its base size, intended ease, seam relationships, and key points of measure.
- Prepare two different measurement profiles. Include customers who differ in more than overall circumference, such as waist-to-hip relationship, rise, and inseam. The NCSU study’s pants example measured waist, hip, thigh, knee, ankle, inseam, and rise, offering a concrete starting list for a trouser trial.
- Test grading and individual fit separately. For grading, use the base size and the team’s intended size-range rules. For MTM, use an individual profile and clearly defined customer-specific adjustments. The study’s example paired an ASTM reference table with an individual measurement profile and a separate alteration rule, illustrating why these test cases should not be conflated.
- Review the pattern and garment. Compare key dimensions with the entered measurements and intended ease. Check seam lengths, darts, grain direction, and whether pieces match at their joining edges. In CLO, include a 3D garment review alongside the 2D pattern check. Record any manual corrections so the team can assess the work involved.
- Check the production handoff. Compare exported files with the format, piece layout, and pattern information your factory requires. Confirm how measurement inputs and design changes are carried through to the production files.
- Assess the workflow as a whole. Consider how comfortably pattern drafting, editing, and 3D review fit the team’s existing design process, and identify any order-processing or production handoffs that need separate confirmation.
FAQ
Is pattern grading enough to serve customers with different body measurements?
No. Grading creates a size range from a base pattern using grade rules; MTM applies individual measurements to a customer-specific pattern. A repeat-order team may use both operations for different orders.
How can CLO support measurement-led pattern work?
CLO’s Pattern Drafter guide describes starting from measurement points or a flat sketch and viewing or adjusting pattern measurements. Its feature overview also describes Auto POM & Grading, with editable results. Together with 3D garment simulation, these capabilities let teams review pattern development as part of a broader garment-design workflow.
Does CLO automatically process customer orders into MTM cut sheets?
The CLO information cited here describes measurement-based Pattern Drafter inputs and Auto POM & Grading with editable results. It does not describe receiving customer orders and automatically generating MTM cut sheets, so teams that need that end-to-end process should confirm the workflow directly.
What should a team check before using CLO for repeat orders?
Run a trial with a trusted base garment, separate grading from individual-fit cases, inspect the 2D pattern and 3D garment, and confirm that the production handoff meets the team’s requirements. This helps clarify where CLO fits in the process and which operational steps need additional planning.