Study of Physical and Mechanical Properties of Hardened Hybrid Poplar Wood = Étude des propriétés physiques et mécaniques du bois des peupliers hybrides durcis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hybrid poplar has been planted widely in North America for its fast-growing, easy hybridization properties. However, due to its inherent characteristics of low density and high \nmoisture content, hybrid poplar is not well-suited for products requiring high strength, surface hardness, or for use in Joad bearing applications. It is considered an important fibre resource for pulp and paper. This study explores the potential of this species through the use of \npolymer impregnation for wood hardening. \nWood samples, from eight hybrid poplar clones, aspen, silver maple, white ash, red oak and northern white cedar, were impregnated with methyl methacrylate (MMA) and polymerized in situ using the heat-catalyst method. Hybrid poplar clones were investigated for the effect of wood hardening on swelling percent in three principle directions, volumetry swelling properties, water uptake, water repellent efficiency and anti-swelling efficiency after soaking, hardness, compression strength, static flexion and abrasion resistance. Monomer impregnation rate and polymer retention rate of the six wood species, and changes in their pore characteristics before and after hardening determined using mercury intrusion porosimetry (MIP) were also studied to evaluate the effects of wood species and density. \nPMMA occupied mainly pores with diameter d > 0.1 J.Ull in the wood samples. Porosity appears to be the main determinant of impregnation rate and polymer retention, especially for porosity with pore diameter > 0.1 Jlm. Polymer retention was found in the range of 142- 180% for the studied clones, and the densities of the hardened poplar wood samples were 2.2 to 2.6 times higher than control. The presence of polymer significantly decreased volumetry swelling and water uptake by several times. Mechanical test results showed varying increases in static bending, compression strength, hardness for hardened poplar woods. However, the risk of increased brittleness was observed as well. Treated wood also exhibited superior \nabrasion resistance compared to control samples.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".