有个客户去年给我发过一张照片。
25 公斤装的编织袋，印着某家原厂的标识，喷码清晰，封口整齐，袋角有一道正常的折痕。他问的是一句很典型的话："这袋是真的吗？"
我看了一会说：从这张照片上，我挑不出任何破绽。
他回了个"哦"，大概是失望。但接下来这句话才是重点——
"照片上没有破绽"这件事，几乎说明不了什么。
我让他把喷码上的批号拍清楚发过来，花了一天时间去核。结果是：那个批号在原厂的编码规则里对不上位置。
原厂的批号通常是带着生产年份和周次信息的，位数和字符位置是一套固定规则。他这袋上的批号看着"很像"，但按规则拆开读，读不通。
后来那批料的处理过程不重要，重要的是这件事的账：
一只印好的编织袋加一台封口机，成本是几块钱。而一吨料的价差是几千块。
造假这件事的投入产出比极好——这正是为什么"看外观"这条路走不通。
一、包装层：能做初筛，不能下结论
包装层要看四个细节：
① 封口工艺。 原厂包装的封口是流水线动作，力度和位置规整一致；手工分装的封口往往不匀、有褶皱，偶尔能看到胶带补丁。
② 印刷与喷码。 看喷码的字体粗细、间距、颜色是否统一。分装货常出现同一批包装上喷码深浅不一致的情况——因为不是同一台机器同一时间打的。
③ 内衬袋。 原厂包装通常有配套内衬；二次包装常常缺这一项，或者用的是通用袋。
④ 批次信息。 包装喷码上的批号，要和送货单、COA 上的批号对得上。三处对不上，就直接停在这里，不要再往下走了。
这一层的作用是"筛"，不是"判"。
有疑点可以深查；看着再完美，也不能就此收货。除了上面四条，整托到货时还有一个很少人看的地方——托盘。
整托原厂来的，托盘唛头、缠绕膜的层数和走向、打包带的间距，都是一套固定动作。散货倒下来再重新装袋打包的，托盘状态很难还原到那个程度——托底新旧不一、膜是后缠的、带上常常能看到二次压紧的痕迹。这不算硬证据，但它决定你要不要继续往下查。
二、文件层：从"看"升级到"查"
文件层的核心不是"有没有这份文件"，而是"这份文件能不能被第三方核实"。
三个动作：
① COA 与批号是否自洽。 质检单上的批号、包装喷码、送货单，三处必须一致。
② 指标是否落在这个牌号的正常区间。 这里有一句反直觉的话：如果 COA 上的数据比该牌号典型值"好得不正常"，反而要警惕。
举个直观的例子：某个牌号的拉伸强度典型值是 80MPa，COA 上写 82、78，这是正常波动；写 95，就要问一句为什么。 因为同一套聚合工艺出来的东西，指标是有分布宽度的，超出分布的"漂亮数据"，要么是改过工艺（那牌号就不该是同一个），要么是被写出来的。
③ 能不能核实。 这一条最关键——向原厂或授权渠道核对批号。
原包不是一个"看起来像"的问题，是一个"能不能核实"的问题。
这一句值得记住。所有绕开"核实"这一步的解释，本质上都是在增加你的成本、降低你的确定性。
采购上的一条判断：包装层最容易仿，指标层最难仿，真正的分水岭在中间那一层——COA 能不能反向核实。愿意配合核实的供应商，本身就是质量信号。 这一条好在成本几乎为零：一个电话、一封邮件就能验。仿包装要花钱，配合核实不用花钱——所以不愿意配合核实的，大概率有原因。
三、物料层：指标才是终审
到了这一层，"像不像原包"已经不重要了。你要判断的是这批料到底是不是它声称的那个东西。
五项检测，各有各的靶子：
① FT-IR 红外光谱 — 确认是不是尼龙、初步区分牌号。它回答的是最基础的问题：这是不是它所声称的那类材料。
这一项的价值在于排错——很多时候问题不是"掺了多少"，而是"根本给错了大类"。 PA 和 PP、PBT 在红外谱图上差别非常明显。
② DSC 差示扫描量热，测熔点 — 这是牌号鉴别最核心的手段。
尼龙的熔点有明确区间：PA6 约 220℃、PA66 约 260℃、PA12 约 178℃。
先看理想情况：如果它的熔点峰值落在 258-262℃，跟 PA66 对得上；如果落在 215 附近，那它大概率是 PA6 而不是 PA66——不管袋子上印的是什么。
更值得注意的是另一种情况：曲线上出现两个峰。
这一步很多人不知道——双峰通常意味着它是混的。 两个不同的熔点，就是两个不同的分子结构在同一袋里。掺混这件事在肉眼、在颜色上都看不出来，但在 DSC 曲线上会直接露出两个肩膀。
③ 灰分（马弗炉灼烧，GB/T 9345.1） — 反算实际无机填料/玻纤含量，用来对付"标称 GF30、实到十几"。
操作不难：坩埚称重，称 5 克左右样品，600℃ 灼烧 2 小时，冷却后再称重，剩下的残渣比例约等于无机物含量。
PA66-GF30 烧完应该剩 30% 左右（助剂会有少量残留，略有偏差属正常）。如果剩 22%，那就是差不多少加了 8 个点——差的这 8 个点，正好落在上一节说的"收缩率漂 0.2mm"那个范围里。
④ 相对黏数（乌氏粘度计，GB/T 1632.1） — 反映聚合度，这是识别回料最硬的一项。
原因是这样的：尼龙每过一次高温加工，分子链都会断一截。链短了，在溶液里的流动阻力就小，黏数就低。
这是一个不可逆的过程——所以同一种料，回收次数越多，黏数越低。 掺了回料的料，黏数一定比同等牌号的原生料低，而且这个低，是加什么都补不回来的。
⑤ 含水率（卡尔·费休法） — 偏高不一定是假料，但它意味着两件事：干燥环节要多投入，加工时水解风险更高。
一笔账：五项全部走一遍，费用大致是几百到一千出头。 跟一吨料的价差、跟一批件翻车的代价相比，这是一个很小的数。
四、不用送检也能做的四项车间自检
很多时候你不方便送第三方，或者想先有个大概。这四项不需要专业仪器，但必须记住它们的定位：只能预警，不能定性。
① 沉浮法。 PA 的密度大于 1，入水下沉；PP、PE 小于 1，会浮起来。
拿一次性杯子装水，丢几粒进去就能看：有明显上浮的，说明里面混了聚烯烃。 这一项抓的是"给错大类"，不是抓掺多少。
② 简易灼烧。 没有马弗炉也能粗看：坩埚或直接在不锈钢片上烧，看残渣状态。
残渣发白、成絮状或短纤状，那是玻纤；结黑硬块、有焦糊味的，碳化严重，热历史大概率不好。
③ 熔体拉丝。 加热到熔融状态，用金属棒挑起来拉：
PA 能拉出较长、有韧性的丝
PP 的丝短、容易断
含回料的熔体，颜色发暗、表面有颗粒感
④ 气味。 PA6 加热有它自己的特征气味；出现明显杂味、焦味的，多半受过不止一次热历史。 这条最不严谨，但它几乎不花钱。
这四项做完，你得到的是一个判断：要不要送检。 它们解决不了"够不够格"，但能替你挡掉大部分显而易见的错。
到货当天花十分钟走一遍，动作顺序建议这样排：
| 顺序 | 动作 | 大约耗时 | 主要能查出的东西 |
|---|
| 1 | 三处批号对照（喷码·送货单·COA） | 2 分钟 | 文件不自洽、来路不明 |
| 2 | 拍照存档（外袋·喷码·托底） | 1 分钟 | 事后追溯的凭据 |
| 3 | 留样 1-2kg 并贴标 | 2 分钟 | 三个月后还能测 |
| 4 | 沉浮 + 简易灼烧 | 5 分钟 | 错大类、玻纤含量明显偏低 |
| 5 | 拉丝 + 气味 | 3 分钟 | 热历史异常、明显掺混 |
前三步几乎不花钱，但决定了后两步有没有意义。很多厂把顺序搞反了——先纠结要不要送检，却在最开始那三分钟省了事。
这里有个容易被忽略的顺序问题：先留样，再讨论要不要送检。
因为检测是要挑出有代表性的样品做破坏性/半破坏性测试的，一次全烧完就没有余量了。留够标样，你才能在发现问题之后有第二轮、第三轮确认的机会——也才能在跟供应商对话时，拿出的是同一个批号的同一份东西。
五、为什么"特别便宜的原包"值得多想一步
这一段不是指控任何人，只是讲一个基本的逻辑。
正牌原包料的价格主要由树脂成本、供需和汇率决定，它的波动是有区间的。 如果一个报价长期、稳定地明显低于这个区间，那差额一定来自某处：
基材等级（不是那个牌号）
批次性质（副牌或混批）
文件缺失（没有原厂 COA）
服务缩水（无技术支持、不支持小批量、交期不稳定）
这四种都不一定是坑，但必须被说清楚。 说不清楚的差额，就是你要承担的风险。
六、一个被低估的软判据：对方愿不愿意配合核实
前面讲的都是技术动作。还有一个更简单、见效更快的判断维度——你提出核实要求时，对方的反应。
可以试三句话：
1. "批号能给我一下吗，我想核一核。" —— 正常的供应商会直接给；如果开始解释"这个批号不好查"，值得多想一层。
2. "能不能把这批的 COA 给我？" —— 正常当天或次日就能给；如果总是"下次补"，那这批料的身份本身就是不确定的。
3. "我打算送第三方测一下黏数和灰分。" —— 正常供应商会支持，甚至会告诉你哪家机构快；如果开始劝阻，那个理由本身值得记下来。
这里还有个时间上的讲究：核实要在付款之前做，不要在出事之后做。
这两者的难度不是一个量级。付款前你说"批号给我核一下"，这是一句正常的业务对话；出了事之后再说同一句，它就变成了一句质问——从那一刻起，对方想的就不是配合你，而是怎么自保。
愿意被核实的供应商，本身就是一种质量信号。 因为核实对他是低成本、对你却是高价值——他没有理由拒绝。
反过来也成立：凡是绕开核实的解释，都是在把不确定性转移给你。
七、留样：比任何检测都先到的一步
最后补一个几乎不花钱、但绝大多数厂都没做对的动作。
在前面所有方法之前，有一件事应该先做到位：每批料到货就留样。
具体怎么做：
留多少：每批留 1-2 公斤，装在密封袋里
标什么：牌号、批号、供应商、到货日期、对应的订单号
留多久：至少留到这批料做的件全部交付之后再延半年
这里有个小细节：标签写在纸条上放进自封袋，不要只靠袋身记号笔。 记号笔在搬运摩擦和车间潮气里很容易花掉；而一张写着牌号、批号、供应商、到货日期和对应订单号的纸条，半年后打开还能认出来。
放哪：干燥、避光、常温，别堆在车间角落
为什么要强调这一条？
因为前面讲的五项检测有个共同前提：你手上得有东西可以测。 事情往往不是当天发生的——它会在三个月后、批次换了两轮之后、客户端出了状况之后才浮出水面。到那个时候再回头找，袋子早就扔了，剩下的只有一张发票和一个回忆。
一句话总结这一步的定位：
检测决定你能不能查得出来，留样决定你有没有得查。
结语
回到最开始那个问题：怎么辨别真假原包。
包装层几分钟能做完，但最不可靠；文件层的"核实"一步就能筛掉大部分问题；物料层的五项指标才是终审。
而在这一切之前，还有一步叫留样——它不决定你能不能查出来，它决定你有没有机会查。
一句总结：
包装是给眼睛看的，指标是给设备看的。眼睛能骗，设备不好骗。
如果你手上有一批料拿不准，把这三样发过来：牌号、包装喷码/批号照片、能测到的任意一项指标（首选熔指或黏数）——我们帮你判断该往哪个方向查。
总有人问：副牌料到底能不能用。
我们的回答一直没变——能用的地方很多，不能用的地方一处都不能碰。它和回料是两回事：一个是指标偏了，一个是分子链断了。
A customer sent me a photo last year.
A 25-kilogram woven bag, printed with the logo of a certain original factory, with clear spray markings, neatly sealed, and a normal crease at the corner of the bag. He asked a very typical question: 'Is this bag genuine?'
I looked for a while and said: From this photo, I can't find any flaws.
He replied with an 'oh,' probably disappointed. But the next sentence is the key—
The fact that 'there are no flaws in the photo' hardly proves anything.
I asked him to take a clear picture of the batch number on the spray code and send it over. It took a whole day to verify. The result was: that batch number didn’t match the position according to the original factory’s coding rules.
The original factory batch number usually includes information about the production year and week, and the number of digits and character positions follow a fixed set of rules. The batch number on his bag looks "very similar," but when read according to the rules, it doesn't make sense.
Later, the processing of that batch of materials wasn’t important; what was important was the accounting for this matter:
A printed woven bag plus a sealing machine costs a few yuan. But the price difference per ton of material is a few thousand yuan.
The input-output ratio of faking is extremely good—that is exactly why the 'judging by appearance' route doesn't work.
1. Packaging layer: Can perform initial screening, but cannot draw conclusions
The packaging layer should consider four details:
① Sealing process. The seals on original factory packaging are done by an assembly line, with consistent force and positioning; manually repackaged seals are often uneven, wrinkled, and occasionally have tape patches.
② Printing and coding. Check whether the font thickness, spacing, and color of the codes are consistent. For repackaged goods, it is common to find inconsistencies in the depth of the coding on the same batch of packaging because they were not printed by the same machine at the same time.
③ Inner liner bag. Original factory packaging usually comes with a matching inner liner; secondary packaging often lacks this item, or uses a generic bag.
④ Batch information. The batch number on the packaging spray code must match the batch number on the delivery note and COA. If the three do not match, stop right there and do not proceed any further.
The function of this layer is 'screening', not 'judging'.
Any doubts can be investigated further; no matter how perfect it looks, you cannot accept it just like that. Besides the four points above, there is another rarely checked area when the whole pallet is delivered — the pallet itself.
Full pallets come from the original factory, and the pallet markings, the number and direction of layers of stretch film, and the spacing of the strapping are all a set of fixed actions. If loose cargo is dumped and then repackaged into bags, it is very difficult to restore the pallet to that level—the bottom layer may be of mixed new and old materials, the film is applied afterward, and the straps often show signs of being re-tightened. This is not hard evidence, but it determines whether you should continue investigating.
2. Document Layer: Upgrade from 'Viewing' to 'Inspecting'
The core of the document layer is not 'whether this document exists,' but 'whether this document can be verified by a third party.'
Three actions:
① Whether the COA and batch number are consistent. The batch number, packaging spray code, and delivery note on the quality inspection sheet must all match.
② Whether the indicators fall within the normal range for this grade. Here is a counterintuitive statement: if the data on the COA are 'abnormally better' than the typical values for this grade, one should actually be cautious.
Here's a straightforward example: the typical tensile strength of a certain grade is 80 MPa. It's normal to see 82 or 78 on the COA; but if it says 95, you need to ask why. That's because products from the same polymerization process have a range of values. Data that exceeds this distribution, the 'beautiful numbers,' either come from a modified process (in which case it shouldn't be the same grade) or they were fabricated.
③ Can it be verified? This point is the most crucial — check the batch number with the original manufacturer or authorized channels.
The original package is not a 'looks like' problem; it's a 'can it be verified' problem.
This sentence is worth remembering. All explanations that bypass the 'verification' step are essentially increasing your costs and reducing your certainty.
A judgment in procurement: the packaging layer is the easiest to counterfeit, the indicator layer is the hardest to counterfeit, and the real dividing line lies in the middle layer—whether the COA can be verified in reverse. Suppliers willing to cooperate with verification are themselves a signal of quality. This is advantageous because the cost is almost zero: a phone call or an email can verify it. Counterfeiting packaging costs money, but cooperating with verification does not—so suppliers unwilling to cooperate with verification likely have a reason.
3. Material Layer: Metrics Are the Final Review
At this level, whether it 'looks like the original package' is no longer important. What you need to determine is whether this batch of material is actually what it claims to be.
Five tests, each with its own target:
① FT-IR Infrared Spectroscopy — To confirm whether it is nylon and to preliminarily distinguish the grade. It answers the most basic question: Is this the type of material it claims to be?
The value of this item lies in troubleshooting — many times the problem is not 'how much was mixed,' but 'the entirely wrong category was given.' PA and PP, PBT have very obvious differences in infrared spectra.
② DSC Differential Scanning Calorimetry, measuring melting point — this is the most essential method for grade identification.
Nylon has a clear melting point range: PA6 about 220°C, PA66 about 260°C, PA12 about 178°C.
First, let's look at the ideal situation: if its melting point peak falls between 258-262°C, it matches PA66; if it is around 215°C, then it is most likely PA6 rather than PA66—regardless of what is printed on the bag.
What is even more noteworthy is another situation: the curve shows two peaks.
Many people don't know this step—the double peak usually means it is a mixture. Two different melting points indicate two different molecular structures in the same bag. Mixing cannot be seen with the naked eye or in color, but it will show two shoulders directly on the DSC curve.
③ Ash content (muffle furnace incineration, GB/T 9345.1) — used to back-calculate the actual inorganic filler/glass fiber content, to deal with the 'nominal GF30, actually only around ten'.
The operation is not difficult: Weigh the crucible, weigh about 5 grams of the sample, ignite at 600℃ for 2 hours, cool and weigh again, the remaining residue proportion is approximately equal to the inorganic content.
After burning PA66-GF30, there should be about 30% remaining (there will be a small amount of residue from the additives, a slight deviation is normal). If 22% remains, it means roughly 8 percentage points were missing — these 8 missing points exactly fall within the range mentioned in the previous section about the 'shrinkage fluctuation of 0.2mm'.
④ Relative viscosity (Ubbelohde viscometer, GB/T 1632.1) — reflects the degree of polymerization, this is the most important indicator for identifying the hardness of recycled material.
The reason is this: Every time nylon undergoes high-temperature processing, the molecular chains break. When the chains are shorter, the flow resistance in the solution is lower, and the viscosity is lower.
This is an irreversible process—so for the same material, the more times it is recycled, the lower its viscosity. Material mixed with recycled content will definitely have lower viscosity than the virgin material of the same grade, and this reduction cannot be compensated for by adding anything.
⑤ Moisture content (Karl Fischer method) — A slightly high reading does not necessarily indicate counterfeit material, but it implies two things: more investment is needed in the drying process, and the risk of hydrolysis during processing is higher.
A rough calculation: going through all five items, the cost is roughly between a few hundred to just over a thousand. Compared to the price difference for a ton of material or the cost of a batch of parts going wrong, this is a very small amount.
4. Four workshop self-inspections that can be done without sending for testing
Many times it is inconvenient for you to send it to a third party, or you want to have a rough idea first. These four items do not require professional instruments, but you must remember their purpose: they can only provide a warning, not a definitive assessment.
① Floatation method. The density of PA is greater than 1, so it sinks in water; PP and PE are less than 1, so they will float.
Take a disposable cup and fill it with water, then drop in a few grains to see: if there is an obvious floating, it indicates that polyethylene has been mixed in. This item catches the 'wrong major category,' not how much is mixed.
② Simple roasting. You can roughly observe it without a muffle furnace: burn it in a crucible or directly on a stainless steel sheet, and see the state of the residue.
If the residue is whitish and forms a fluffy or short-fiber texture, it is fiberglass; if it forms black hard lumps with a burnt smell, it is severely carbonized and the thermal history is most likely poor.
③ Melt drawing. Heat to a molten state, lift it with a metal rod and pull:
PA can draw out longer, more resilient threads
The PP fiber is short and easy to break
Melt containing regrind, dark in color, with a grainy surface
④ Smell. PA6 has its own characteristic odor when heated; if there is a noticeable off-smell or burnt smell, it has most likely undergone multiple heating processes. This criterion is the least rigorous, but it hardly costs anything.
After completing these four tasks, what you get is a judgment: whether to send it for inspection. They can't determine if it 'meets the standard,' but they can block most obvious mistakes for you.
On the day of arrival, spend ten minutes going through it once, and the suggested order of actions is as follows:
| Order | Action | Approximately takes time | Mainly things that can be found |
|---|
| One | Comparison of Three Batch Numbers (Inkjet Code · Delivery Note · COA) | 2 minutes | The document is inconsistent and of unknown origin |
| Two | Photo archiving (outer bag · spray code · backing) | 1 minute | Retroactive evidence |
| Three | Keep a sample of 1-2 kg and attach a label | 2 minutes | Can still be tested three months later |
| Four | Ups and Downs Simple Scorching | 5 minutes | Wrong major category, fiberglass content is significantly low |
| Five | Brushed wire smell | 3 minutes | Abnormal thermal history, obvious mixing |
The first three steps cost almost nothing, but they determine whether the last two steps are meaningful. Many factories get the order wrong—first they worry about whether to send for inspection, but they take the easy way out in the first three minutes.
There is an easily overlooked order issue here: take a sample first, then discuss whether it should be sent for testing.
Because the testing is meant to select representative samples for destructive/semi-destructive tests, if you burn them all at once, there will be no leftovers. You need to keep enough standard samples so that when a problem is discovered, you have the chance for a second or third round of verification — and also so that when talking to the supplier, you can present the exact same batch number and the same item.
5. Why 'extra cheap original packages' are worth a second thought
This paragraph is not accusing anyone; it is just explaining a basic logic.
The price of genuine original packaged materials is mainly determined by the cost of resin, supply and demand, and exchange rates, and its fluctuations are within a certain range. If a quote is consistently and stably significantly below this range, the difference must come from somewhere:
Base material grade (not that grade code)
Batch nature (sub-brand or mixed batch)
File missing (no original factory COA)
Service reduction (no technical support, no support for small batches, unstable delivery times)
These four types are not necessarily pitfalls, but they must be clearly explained. Any difference that is not clearly explained is the risk you have to bear.
6. An underestimated soft criterion: whether the other party is willing to cooperate with verification
What was discussed earlier were all technical actions. There is another, simpler, and faster way to judge — the other party's reaction when you request verification.
You can try three sentences:
1. "Can you give me the batch number? I want to check it." — A normal supplier will give it directly; if they start explaining "this batch number is hard to check," it's worth thinking twice.
2. 'Can you give me the COA for this batch?' — Normally it can be provided the same day or the next day; if it is always 'given next time,' then the identity of this batch of material itself is uncertain.
3. "I plan to have a third party test the stickiness and ash content." — A normal supplier would support this, and might even tell you which organization is fast; if they start to dissuade you, the reason itself is worth noting.
There is also a timing consideration here: verification should be done before payment, not after something goes wrong.
The difficulty of these two situations is not on the same level. Before the payment, when you said 'Check the batch number for me,' it was a normal business conversation; after something went wrong, saying the same sentence again becomes a question — from that moment on, the other party is no longer thinking about cooperating with you, but about how to protect themselves.
Suppliers who are willing to be verified are, in themselves, a signal of quality. Because verification is low-cost for them but high-value for you—they have no reason to refuse.
The reverse also holds: any explanation that bypasses verification is shifting uncertainty onto you.
7. Sample Retention: The Step That Comes Before Any Testing
Finally, add an action that costs almost nothing, but that most factories get wrong.
Before all the methods mentioned earlier, one thing should be done first: keep a sample from each batch of materials upon arrival.
Specifically, how to do it:
How much to keep: Keep 1-2 kilograms per batch, and store in a sealed bag
Label what: brand, batch number, supplier, arrival date, corresponding order number
How long to keep: At least keep it until this batch of materials has been fully delivered, then extend for another six months
Here's a small detail: write the label on a piece of paper and put it into a resealable bag, rather than relying solely on a marker on the bag itself. Markers can easily smudge from handling friction and humidity in the workshop; but a piece of paper with the grade, batch number, supplier, arrival date, and corresponding order number can still be recognized when opened six months later.
Where to place: dry, away from light, at room temperature, do not stack in the corners of the workshop
Why emphasize this point?
Because the five tests mentioned earlier have a common premise: you need to have something on hand to test. Things often don’t happen on the same day—they may only surface three months later, after two batches have changed, or after the client encounters a problem. By the time you go back to look, the bag has long been thrown away, leaving only an invoice and a memory.
A one-sentence summary of the positioning of this step:
Testing determines whether you can find it, while keeping a sample determines whether you have something to test.
Conclusion
Returning to the very first question: how to distinguish between genuine and fake original packaging.
The packaging layer can be completed in a few minutes, but it is the least reliable; the 'verification' step in the document layer can filter out most problems; the five indicators in the material layer are the final review.
And before all of this, there is a step called sample retention—it doesn't determine whether you can detect it, it determines whether you have the chance to detect it.
In summary:
Packaging is for the eyes, while specifications are for the equipment. The eyes can be fooled, but the equipment is not easily deceived.
If you have a batch of material and are unsure, send these three things over: the grade, a photo of the packaging spray code/batch number, and any measurable specification (preferably melt index or viscosity)—we'll help you determine which direction to investigate.
There are always people asking: can secondary grade materials actually be used?
Our answer has always been the same—there are many places where it can be used, and there is not a single place where it can't be touched. It's different from recycled material: one has shifted specifications, the other has broken molecular chains.
