A practical first step for a measurement-led style: Use CLO’s Pattern Drafter Auto POM & Grading workflow when entering measurements as you draft. Keep avatar fitting separate from generating and checking grade rules; each answers a different question about the pattern.
- Save the approved measurement chart and grading rules as your pilot baseline.
- Review the base size, adjacent sizes, and size-range endpoints on appropriate avatars.
- Test a factory-format export before approving the handoff.
For a style drafted from body and specification measurements, CLO’s Pattern Drafter Auto POM & Grading offers a direct way to generate points of measure (POMs) and apply grading from measurements entered during drafting. CLO Auto Fitting addresses a separate task: fitting patterns to an avatar’s size. Keeping these operations distinct helps the team choose a focused pilot and assess its results against the right inputs.
1. Identify the grading job before choosing automation
Pattern grading creates a set of garment sizes from a base size. A grade rule describes the change to a point of measure between sizes. In a simple example from Uphance’s explanation of grade rules, an M T-shirt chest measured flat at 20 inches gains half an inch per side from M to L, producing an L chest measurement of 21 inches.
Avatar-size fitting asks a different question: how should a pattern fit a particular digital body? CLO’s Auto Fitting instructions explain that the feature automatically fits patterns to an avatar’s size. It supports CLO avatars and custom avatars with a Fitting Suit applied.
The distinction matters because size rules and body measurements are related inputs, not interchangeable records. In a 2005 study, Nancy Schofield and Karen LaBat examined 40 women’s clothing size charts and compared 38 grade rules with intervals in a sizing standard. Eleven grade rules corresponded to body measurements, while six did not match the related size interval. The study’s historical women’s-chart sample is a reason to preserve your own approved size chart and grade rules as the baseline for a pilot, rather than assuming software-generated increments represent your target customer.
Comparison table Scroll to view every column ↔
| Your starting point | The CLO workflow to assess | Pilot question |
|---|---|---|
| New style, drafted from body and specification measurements | Pattern Drafter Auto POM & Grading | Do the generated POMs and size steps reflect the approved measurement inputs? |
| Existing single-size pattern and a target size chart | Review the pattern and approved grading inputs in CLO | Can the team verify the pattern and grade-rule results against its approved chart? |
| Pattern to be fitted to a particular avatar size | Auto Fitting | Does the pattern fit the intended avatar before you review the style across the size range? |
2. Match the tool to the pattern you have
CLO’s release notes describe Pattern Drafter | Auto POM & Grading as generating POMs and applying grading when measurements are entered during pattern drafting. CLO also describes the results as editable. For a measurement-led new style, that makes CLO a natural workflow to assess: the measurements inform the draft, and the team can review and refine the resulting POMs and grading.
The key is to start with the pattern and records your team actually has. For a new draft, retain the measurements entered in Pattern Drafter and compare the generated POMs and grading with the approved chart. For an existing pattern, first confirm that the pattern, size labels, units, and approved grade-rule record are complete and consistent before evaluating any grading workflow in CLO. This keeps the pilot focused on the quality of the inputs as well as the result.
CLO Auto Fitting is useful when the task is to fit a pattern to a particular avatar size. It does not replace review of the size chart or grade rules: use it to prepare the avatar-size fit check, then assess the intended size range separately.
3. Run a small pilot against a recorded baseline
Start with one representative style and its approved base size, measurement chart, and existing grade-rule record. Save a copy of the pattern and note the source file, software version, units, size labels, and chart used. That creates a clear before-and-after record, whether the pilot begins with a fresh draft or an existing graded pattern.
Begin with the approved base size and one adjacent size to check the first grade transition. The Apparel CAD Pilot Checklist also recommends checking representative sizes at both ends of the range. At each selected size, review the neckline, armhole, waist, hem, key points of measure, and construction details that shape the fit.
Keep the grading record at the point-of-measure level. Grade rules can vary across the same garment: the cited Uphance grade-rule guide notes that sleeves and torsos use different rules, and that adult inseams often do not grade. For a non-linear size range, record the increment at each size step. Uphance’s structured-rule example includes the size scale, base size, POM, base-size measurement, step increments, and an optional tolerance range. That is a practical format for comparing the source rule with the software result.
Then run the selected CLO workflow. For Pattern Drafter, retain the measurements used to create the POMs and grading. Record the resulting changes, including any size or grade-rule additions, and compare them with the approved baseline. This makes it easier to distinguish an input issue, such as an incorrect unit, from a change in the rule or pattern.
Choose avatars that represent the product’s intended customer group, using body measurements and proportions relevant to the size range. A research paper on virtual garment fit evaluation for made-to-measure products describes using a test population representing the target group to check sizing and screen fit across individual bodies and postures. The team can apply that approach by writing down the avatar source, size, and body-shape or posture variation for each check.
4. Review the size run in 3D, then sign off
Use avatar fitting to prepare a pattern for the intended body size, then review the size range as a separate fit-validation task. After sewing and draping a pattern on an avatar, CLO’s guide to fitting 3D garments recommends aligning shoulder seams with the avatar’s shoulder line using Attach to Avatar Tape. The guide also points to Transparent Surface, Fit Map, Stress Map, Strain Map, and garment measurements as ways to review fit.
Begin with the base size and confirm that the garment sits as intended at major landmarks. Compare recorded garment measurements with the approved specification. Move to adjacent sizes and check that silhouette and proportions follow the design intent, then review the smallest and largest pilot sizes. For a style involving stretch, walking, sitting, or arm lift, include a motion review.
Use fit maps as diagnostic evidence, not as a decision on their own. If a stress or strain view highlights a concentrated area at the armhole in a larger size, compare it with the pattern piece, the avatar’s body shape, and the size-specific grade rule before revising the pattern. For each issue, record the avatar, fabric settings, view, measurement result, observation, and approved edit. The research paper on virtual fit evaluation describes body distance, elongation, and elasticity views as sources of fitting information; the exact views available depend on the workflow.
A practical pass list for each selected size is:
- Record the avatar source and selected size, then confirm that its measurements and proportions match the target size profile.
- Use fit, stress, or strain views to connect each concern to a garment location and the related point of measure.
- Record the result, revision, reviewer, and approval status.
5. Package a handoff the receiving CAD system can use
The production handoff should connect the approved pattern to its input data and review record. Include the source pattern and version, measurement chart or size specification, base size, size range, grade-rule record, avatar and material information used for 3D review, fit observations, approved revisions, and release status. If your team uses a tech pack or separate grade-rule file, identify the exact approved version alongside the exported pattern.
ASTM’s D6673-04 practice for sewn-products pattern data interchange describes exchanging two-dimensional pattern pieces between CAD systems and exchanging grade-rule tables for apparel. It uses DXF for pattern-piece data and a specially formatted ASCII file for grade-rule tables. The practice covers pattern-piece and style information; marker, spreading, cutter, plotter, and full product-specification information belong in their own factory handoff records.
CLO’s DXF import and export instructions list Standard DXF, AAMA, and ASTM as import formats and list DXF-AAMA, DXF-ASTM, and Standard DXF for export. CLO can include grading information in the DXF or export it separately as a Rule File. Its export dialog selects one size group per file, so include the size group the receiving factory expects. CLO’s import settings also let users set units and choose notch placement on the seam allowance, pattern outline, or both.
Before release, send a test export through the receiving CAD workflow and compare the imported pattern with the approved source. Compare the receiving-CAD import with the approved export in units, size names, graded measurements, notches, sewing and cutting line mapping, and any companion rule file. CLO’s DXF instructions note that CLO and the source pattern CAD system can define sewing and cutting lines differently; the export dialog can swap them before handoff. The documentation also describes DXF seam allowance being read into locked Custom Seam Allowance, which users can unlock for editing. A test export lets the pattern team compare CAD interpretations and correct settings before releasing the approved handoff.
The first rollout should prove one task end to end: use CLO to draft from measurements, carry those inputs through a 3D fit review, and test the receiving-CAD export. Keeping the same approved measurement record in view throughout makes the result easier to review and hand off.
FAQ
Is CLO a good place to start when I am drafting from measurements?
Yes. CLO’s Pattern Drafter Auto POM & Grading is documented for entering measurements during pattern drafting and generating POMs and grading. Keep the measurement chart and generated results with the pilot record.
Does avatar fitting create the same result as a graded size run?
No. CLO Auto Fitting automatically fits patterns to an avatar’s size, while Pattern Drafter Auto POM & Grading generates POMs and applies grading from measurements during drafting. Use avatar fitting to prepare the avatar-size review, then validate the size run separately.
Can a DXF export carry the whole factory handoff?
A DXF can carry pattern pieces and, depending on export settings, grading information; CLO also supports a separate Rule File. ASTM D6673-04 treats grade-rule exchange separately from full product specifications and marker or cutting information, so send those production records through the factory’s agreed channels.
Does a successful 3D fit review replace a physical sample?
Keep a physical sample in the sign-off plan when the team needs to assess fabric hand, surface quality, or production confirmation.