MOISTURE AND FLEXURAL BEHAVIOUR OF HEMP MAT FOAM STRUCTURAL INSULATED PANEL SPECIMENS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The use of structural insulated panels (SIPs) for wall and roof assemblies in residential and commercial buildings is a well-known construction technique. SIPs typically use a combination of either expanded polystyrene foam (EPS) or polyurethane foam (PUR) as the core material. The covering or skin is predominantly oriented strand board (OSB). The OSB is either bonded to the foam with adhesive in the case of EPS, while polyurethane is used to provide adhesion with PUR SIPs. This paper presents the results of research that investigated the use of industrial hemp mat used as a skin for soy-based polyurethane foam panels. A series of tests were conducted to investigate moisture resistance and flexural behaviour on hemp mat foam panels. Moisture absorption behaviour was evaluated on three specimen types: uncoated, earth plaster and tung oil treated hemp mat. The absorption coefficient A w was determined for all specimens. The tung oil treated specimens exhibited a water absorption coefficient that was 5.3% of that for untreated hemp mat panel specimens. Flexural tests were conducted on dry specimens with earth-plastered hemp mat, tung oil coated hemp mat, OSB and, untreated hemp mat skins. Tung oil provided resistance to tension failure and increased capacity to withstand considerable deformation without tensile failure in flexural specimens. Compared with pure foam specimens, untreated hemp mat improved flexural performance by 16.3%.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".