MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Degradation Kinetics and Mechanical Studies of Intumescent Coated Cotton Fabric

2015· article· en· W1941807940 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Satish Kumar, Sohan Lal, Sanjiv Arora

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Research Updates in Polymer Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicFlame retardant materials and properties
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntumescentMaterials scienceCharAmmonium polyphosphateThermogravimetryComposite materialUltimate tensile strengthFire retardantCelluloseChemical engineeringPyrolysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the present study, cotton fabric were prepared via coating with intumescent formulations of ammonium polyphosphate (APP), guanidine nitrate, penta erythritol (PER) and metal salts at different loading levels via ‘Pad-dry cure’ method. Thermal degradation behavior of prepared cotton derivatives was investigated by thermogravimetry (TG) and differential thermal analysis (DTA) from ambient temperature to 700 oC. Dynamic TG analysis was used to study the thermal degradation behavior of samples at four different heating rates of 2, 5, 10 and 20 oC min-1 in air atmosphere. The treated cotton fabric decomposes at lower temperatures and produces higher amount of char yields. The degradation activation energy was calculated using Friedman, modified Coats-Redfern and Ozawa-Flynn-Wall (O-F-W) iso-conversional model free methods. Tensile properties of coated fabric were found to be reduced with increase in loading of intumescent formulation but there was an abrupt increase in sample coated with intumescent and silica. With the insertion of iron (Fe) metal ion along with intumescent reduces the fabric strength due to formation of metal complexes with cotton cellulose which decreases the crosslinking. The maximum flame ratardancy of CF 12APP-Si among all cotton derivatives is suggested as the flame retardancy directly proportional to char yield (22 % at 650 oC) that is highest and inversely proportional to MMLR value (8.3 % min-1), that is least among all samples. Based on thermal and kinetic studies, the optimum concentration of flame retardant is worked out.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.629

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.151
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.254 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Research Updates in Polymer ScienceSame topicFlame retardant materials and propertiesFrench-language works237,207