Step 1: Define the "drawing" process. Drawing is a post-spinning process where newly formed synthetic filaments are stretched to several times their original length.
Step 2: Understand what happens at a molecular level during drawing. In the as-spun state, the long polymer chains in the fiber are randomly coiled and arranged. The drawing process pulls these chains, causing them to uncoil and align themselves parallel to the fiber axis. This alignment is called "molecular orientation."
Step 3: Analyze the consequences of molecular orientation. When the molecules are oriented, they can pack more closely together and exert stronger intermolecular forces on each other. This leads to a significant increase in the fiber's strength (tenacity) and stiffness (modulus), which are the primary goals of drawing. While crystallinity (A) may also increase as a result of the better packing (a phenomenon called stress-induced crystallization), the fundamental objective and direct change is the improvement in molecular orientation. Density (C) will increase slightly and thickness (D) will decrease, but these are consequences, not the primary objective.
Conclusion: The main objective of drawing is to align the polymer chains along the fiber axis, i.e., to improve molecular orientation, which in turn increases strength.
The primary functions of Spin finish are \(\underline{\hspace{2cm}}\).
A. Lubrication of fiber surface
B. Drawing of filaments
C. Antistatic action
D. Cohesion of filaments
Match the LIST-I (Spectroscopy) with LIST-II (Application)
LIST-I | LIST-II |
---|---|
A. Visible light spectroscopy | III. Identification on the basis of color |
B. Fluorescence spectroscopy | IV. Identification on the basis of fluorophore present |
C. FTIR spectroscopy | I. Identification on the basis of absorption in infrared region |
D. Mass Spectroscopy | II. Identification on the basis of m/z ion |
Match the LIST-I with LIST-II
LIST-I | LIST-II |
---|---|
A. Forensic Psychiatry | III. Behavioural pattern of criminal |
B. Forensic Engineering | IV. Origin of metallic fracture |
C. Forensic Odontology | I. Bite marks analysis |
D. Computer Forensics | II. Information derived from digital devices |
Match the LIST-I with LIST-II
LIST-I | LIST-II |
---|---|
A. Calvin Goddard | II. Forensic Ballistics |
B. Karl Landsteiner | III. Blood Grouping |
C. Albert Osborn | IV. Document examination |
D. Mathieu Orfila | I. Forensic Toxicology |
Match the LIST-I (Evidence, etc.) with LIST-II (Example, Construction etc.)
LIST-I | LIST-II |
---|---|
A. Biological evidence | IV. Blood |
B. Latent print evidence | III. Fingerprints |
C. Trace evidence | II. Soil |
D. Digital evidence | I. Cell phone records |
Match the LIST-I with LIST-II
LIST-I | LIST-II |
---|---|
A. Ridges | III. The raised portion of the friction skin of the fingers |
B. Type Lines | I. Two most inner ridges which start parallel, diverge and surround or tend to surround the pattern area |
C. Delta | IV. The ridge characteristics nearest to the point of divergence of type lines |
D. Enclosure | II. A single ridge bifurcates and reunites to enclose some space |