Excellent Adhesion of Carbon Fibers to Polyurethane Matrix and Substantial Improvement of the Mechanical Properties of Polyurethane
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, polyurethane-carbon fiber composites were prepared with excellent interface with perfect adhesion of carbon fibers with the polyurethane matrix. The polyurethane was thermoplastic polyurethane and the carbon fiber was polyacrylonitrile based with 7 micron meter thickness. The composites were prepared with solvent casting technique. The composite materials were characterized with tensile testing, dynamic mechanical analysis, scanning electron microscope, and thermogravimetric analysis. The excellent adhesion of the carbon fibers in the polyurethane matrix was observed with scanning electron microscopy investigations. This adhesion creates huge improvements in the mechanical properties of the polyurethane. 300 % improvement in tensile strength was achieved with very low percentages of the carbon fiber such as 3 wt %. The hydrophilicity of the polyurethane matrix was confirmed with water contact angle measurements that led to better interaction. Key Words: Polyurethane, carbon fiber, mechanical properties, interphase..
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".