What the data for this category looks like
Chemical fiber-related data primarily comes from batch quality inspection reports from upstream petroleum and petrochemical enterprises, customs import and export clearance documents, monthly operating data from industry associations, and procurement ledgers from downstream weaving enterprises. Data update cycles vary significantly by source. Batch quality inspection reports are updated in real time with production batches. Monthly industry data is updated at the end of each month. Customs data is synchronized weekly. Single documents are mostly structured tables or PDFs with fixed fields. Core fields include product name, specification model, monofilament diameter, breaking strength, elongation at break, and moisture content. Corresponding units are none, none, μm, cN/dtex, %, and % respectively.
Constraints Imposed on Workflow Orchestration
The multi-source, heterogeneous, and professionally unit-labeled data characteristics of the chemical fiber category impose multiple constraints on workflow orchestration.
- Support execution triggered by production batch to adapt to task submission rhythms at different production nodes.
- Include built-in multi-format parsing nodes that extract fields from three common document types: structured tables, PDF quality inspection reports, and text ledgers.
- Configure dedicated numerical verification rules to check formats of professional units such as cN/dtex and μm, and filter invalid data.
- Enable batch task scheduling to handle monthly batch-synchronized industry data and downstream procurement ledgers.
Configuration Settings
| Configuration Item | Recommended Value | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
workflow_input_schema | {"file": {"type": "file"}, "kb_id": {"type": "string"}} | Must support passing two core parameters: file and knowledge base ID, to adapt to both API call and manual trigger scenarios |
PARSE_FILE_TIMEOUT_SECONDS | 1200 seconds | Chemical fiber multi-page quality inspection reports contain multiple sets of test data. Full parsing requires a long duration, to avoid task interruption due to mid-execution timeout |
UPLOAD_FILE_MAX_SIZE | 200 MB | Single merged chemical fiber batch quality inspection report files have large volume. The upload limit must be relaxed to cover all scenarios |
SIMILARITY_THRESHOLD | 0.75–0.85 | Chemical fiber professional terms have high recognition accuracy. This range can accurately match test data from different batches of the same category and filter irrelevant information |
RECALL_TOP_N | Top 6 entries | The number of core chemical fiber test fields is fixed. Too many recalled entries will introduce redundant information and reduce due diligence report generation efficiency |
BATCH_PARSE_CONCURRENCY | 10–15 per minute | When synchronizing industry data in monthly batches, balance parsing efficiency and server load to avoid resource overload |
The parameter values provided on this page are common starting points for configuration. Actual values are affected by material form, data volume, and business rules. Each scenario requires specific analysis. It is recommended to test on your own samples before finalizing settings.
Three Common Misconfigurations
- Symptom: A
413 Request Entity Too Largeerror is returned when calling the workflow API to upload a file. Cause: TheUPLOAD_FILE_MAX_SIZEconfiguration was not adjusted to the threshold suitable for chemical fiber reports. The default threshold cannot accommodate large-volume quality inspection reports. - Symptom: Professional parameters such as chemical fiber monofilament diameter and breaking strength cannot be extracted after workflow execution, and the parsed result fields are empty. Cause: No structured parsing rules for the chemical fiber industry were configured. General-purpose parsing nodes cannot recognize professional fields and unit formats.
- Symptom: After passing the knowledge base ID, the workflow prompts missing or unauthorized parameters. Cause: The
kb_idfield was not declared in the workflow input schema, or the knowledge base ID was not passed as a request body parameter during API calls, violating parameter transfer rules.
How to Verify Correct Configuration
- Call the test API, upload a standardized chemical fiber quality inspection report, and check whether the parsed results cover the preset core business fields.
- Manually pass a test knowledge base ID in the workflow debugging interface to verify that the workflow can normally call the bound knowledge base to complete context association.
- Submit a single batch of tasks, and check whether the workflow execution efficiency and resource usage meet the preset configuration requirements.
- View the workflow execution logs to confirm that there are no abnormal error messages in the file upload, parsing, and knowledge base call links.
Question material comes from public community discussions. Configuration values are common starting points and should be measured against your own samples. Verified on 2026-09-14.