Morphological Study on Room‐Temperature‐Cured PMMA‐Grafted Natural Rubber‐Toughened Epoxy/Layered Silicate Nanocomposite
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A morphological study was conducted on ternary systems containing epoxy, PMMA‐grafted natural rubber, and organic chemically modified montmorillonite (Cloisite 30B). Optical microscopy, transmission electron microscopy (TEM), scanning electron microscopy (SEM), energy dispersive X‐ray (EDX), and wide‐angle X‐ray diffraction (WAXD) analysis were used. The following four materials were prepared at room temperature: cured unmodified epoxy, cured toughened epoxy, cured unmodified epoxy/Cloisite 30B nanocomposites, and cured toughened epoxy/Cloisite 30B nanocomposites. Mixing process was performed by mechanical stirring. Poly(etheramine) was used as the curing agent. The detailed TEM images revealed co‐continuous and dispersed spherical rubber in the epoxy‐rubber blend, suggesting a new proposed mechanism of phase separation. High‐magnification TEM analysis showed good interactions between rubber and Cloisite 30B in the ternary system. Also, it was found that rubber particles could enhance the separation of silicates layers. Both XRD and TEM analyses confirmed that the intercalation of Cloisite 30B was achieved. No distinct exfoliated silicates were observed by TEM. Aggregates of layered silicates (tactoids) were observed by SEM and EDX, in addition to TEM at low magnification. EDX analysis confirmed the presence of organic and inorganic elements in the binary and ternary epoxy systems containing Cloisite 30B.
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".