Extraction and characterization of Alfa fibers and their use to produce Alfa/wool woven fabrics for composite reinforcement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Because of their appealing properties, such as biodegradability, high basic stiffness, low density, and low cost, natural fibers have begun to be used in a variety of applications. In comparison to synthetics, they are also reusable. The aim of this work is to develop new woven materials made of wool and Alfa fibers (Stipa-tenacissima). The extraction of Alfa fibers was achieved via alkaline treatment. The chemical composition, mechanical and physical properties of the extracted fibers were determined. Wovens were produced using the weaving of taffetas technique. This study presents a chemical, physical, morphological and mechanical characterization of Alfa/wool yarns and fabrics. The results show that the fabric made of fibers treated with 2 mol concentration of NaOH presents the greatest morphological structure and a higher degree of crystallinity due to the reorganization of the molecular chains that results in a better orientation of the fibers compared to other concentrations. On the other hand, the results of the tensile test show that the Young’s modulus of the Alfa/Alfa woven fabric is 8 ± 1.157 MPa in the weft direction, compared to the Alfa/wool woven fabric which has 6.06 ± 0.196 MPa and wool/wool woven fabric with 14.10 ± 1.369 MPa.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".