MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281607041 · doi:10.1002/app.52666

Hydrothermal aging of <scp>fire‐protective</scp> fabrics

2022· article· en· W4281607041 on OpenAlexafffund
Md. Saiful Hoque, Ankit Saha, Hyun‐Joong Chung, Patricia I. Dolez

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Polymer Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicFlame retardant materials and properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsHydrothermal circulationMaterials scienceComposite materialMoistureAramidUltimate tensile strengthFiberFire performanceFire protectionChemical engineeringFire resistance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Fire‐protective fabrics made from high‐performance fibers are available to provide protection from various hazardous conditions such as extreme heat and flame. However, these fabrics are often exposed to other deteriorating conditions, including moisture. It is a concern for user's safety as some high‐performance fibers are sensitive to hydrolysis. This study exposed eight fire‐protective fabrics corresponding to typical blends used in firefighter protective suit outer shells to accelerated hydrothermal aging. They were immersed in water at different temperatures between 60 and 95°C for up to 1200 h. After exposure to hydrothermal aging, some fabrics exhibited a significant loss in tensile strength without any morphological changes. Based on results from energy‐dispersive X‐ray spectroscopy and pH measurements of the aging water, the larger loss in strength experienced by the para‐aramid/PBI fiber‐based fabrics can be related to the high amount of sulfur measured in the PBI fibers, contributing to an acceleration of the para‐aramid fiber's hydrolysis in acidic conditions. Hydrothermal aging also appears to affect the water‐repellent finish of some fabrics. The study provides an insight into the effect of a generally ignored hazard, that is, moisture, on the long‐term performance of fire‐protective fabrics.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.484

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations13
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied Polymer ScienceSame topicFlame retardant materials and propertiesFrench-language works237,207