Biodegradable Polyamide 6.6 for Textile Application
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study evaluates comparatively some physical and chemical properties of polyamide 6.6 standard and biodegradable. It also evaluates the period of biodegradation of the biodegradable yarn sample and standard sample. The physical properties analyzed were tensile strength, elongation, and tenacity. The chemical properties were related to the behavior of the samples in dyeing and the evaluation of subsequent strength dyeing. The evaluated samples were taken from knitwear produced with polyamide textured filament yarn 80 dtex f 68x1, standard and biodegradable, being purged, bleached, and dyed. The results of the physical tests, although statistically different, have values very near the average, which in practice represent acceptable values within the statistical control process. Both standard and biodegradable samples had the same chemical behavior and there is no difference. Concerning to biodegradation time under laboratory conditions, the carbon dioxide produced by the samples was monitored and measured to determine the percentage of biodegradation according to ASTM D 5511. After 735 days the percentage of biodegradation of the biodegradable yarn was 81.7% and of the normal yarn was 5.2%. This is an expressive gain in ecological terms for synthetic fiber.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".