## 3 Results and Discussion
### Nanocoated Fabric Pull-Out Properties
#### 3.2.5 Single and Multiple Nanocoated Fabric Pull-Out Energy Results  
Figure 10 depicts the representative energy stages from the pull-out displacement graph of the nano B\({}_{4}\)C-coated p-aramid fabric. Single and multiple pull-out energy results including the crimp extension energy, initial interlacement rupture energy, and stick-slip energy of various nanocoated p-aramid fabric structures computed by using Python language reference version 3.1.2.4 (The Python Software Foundation, Amsterdam, The Netherland) are presented in Figure 11.  
As demonstrated in Figure 10, the pull-out displacement mechanism can be categorized into three distinct energy regions, namely crimp extension energy (stage I), initial interlacement rupture energy (stage II), and stick-slip energy (stage III). Stage I corresponds to the crimp-straightening region (OABO), where the energy required to extract the yarn from the fabric structure is primarily absorbed through the process of crimp removal. This mechanism serves as a critical energy absorption pathway, particularly in areas of warp-wetf intersections, where it generates localized pressure. This pressure is further explained by the following relationship (Equation (3)), leading to enhanced contraction effects on the warp and weft yarns [68; 69]:  
\[T_{w}=T_{f}/\sqrt{c_{f}/c_{w}} \tag{3}\]  
where \(T_{w}\) is the warp tension (N), \(T_{f}\) is the filling tension (N), \(c_{f}\) is the crimp ratio of filling (%) and \(c_{w}\) is the crimp ratio of warp (%). Stage II (Region ACDB) occurs immediately  
Figure 10: Determination of the representative energy stages from the pull-out displacement graph of the nano B\({}_{4}\)C-coated p-aramid fabric. after the peak pull-out force is reached. This phase, referred to as initial interlacement rupture energy, is characterized by the initial disintegration of warp/wet interlacements. Instantaneous energy absorption during this stage has been observed [63]. Stage III (Region CEFD) involves the progressive disintegration of warp and weft intersections at each crossing point. In this phase, yarn surfaces interact predominantly through friction. As the pull-out displacement increases, the associated forces gradually diminish, defining the stick-slip energy region. The cumulative effects of adjacent yarns within the fabric structure amplify the complexity of the phenomena occurring at each intersection. As illustrated in Figure 11, the contribution of crimp extension energy, initial interlacement rupture energy, and stick-slip energy to the total energy absorption in single-yarm pull-out tests was determined as follows: for the KPO, the respective contributions were 6.61%, 3.94%, and 89.40%. In the case of the BPO, these values were 6.26%, 3.10%, and 90.64%, respectively. For the MPO, the contributions were recorded as 8.67%, 5.47%, and 85.86%, while for the GPO, they were identified as 8.21%, 3.36%, and 88.43%, respectively. In the context of two-yarm pull-out tests of all nanocoated soft fabric structures, the contribution of crimp energy to the total energy absorption was observed to range between 6.05% and 11.57%, while the contribution of initial interlacement rupture energy was within the range of 4.42% to 5.43%. Stick-slip energy exhibited a dominant contribution, ranging from 83.00% to 89.16%. Conversely, for three-yarm pull-out tests, crimp energy contributed between 7.59% and 26.36% to the total energy absorption, whereas the initial interlacement rupture energy contribution ranged from 0.97% to 4.79%. Stick-slip energy contributions were found to vary between 72.34% and 91.01%. As exhibited in Figure 11, the single-yarm total pull-out energy of the BPO exhibited a notable increase of 76.37% compared to the MPO and was 6.32 times and 4.52 times higher  
Figure 11: Single and multiple (two yarns and three yarns) pull-out energy results of nanocoated p-aramid fabric structures. (**a**) Single-yarm pull-out energy. (**b**) Two-end pull-out energy. (**c**) Three-end pull-out energy. than the GPO and KPO structures, respectively.