Mechanical performance and moisture absorption of various natural fiber reinforced thermoplastic composites
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Natural fibers are seeing increased use in composite applications due to their reduced cost, low density, and environmental benefits (more sustainable and lower carbon footprint). Although many natural fiber systems have been examined over the last decade, there have been relatively few studies which have compared a variety of fiber types and processing methods directly in the same experimental set. In this study, natural fiber composites made from low density polyethylene (LDPE) and a variety of Canadian based fiber feedstocks were examined including hemp bast, flax bast, chemically pulped wood, wood chips, wheat straw, and mechanically pulped triticale. The effect of fiber type, fiber fraction and maleic anhydride polyethylene (MAPE) coupling agent on the mechanical properties and long‐term moisture absorption behavior was quantified. In general, addition of natural fiber to LDPE results in an increase in modulus (stiffness) with a corresponding loss of material elongation and impact toughness. Of the fiber types tested, composites made from chemically pulped wood had the best mechanical properties and the least moisture absorption. However, the use of MAPE coupling agent was found to significantly increase the mechanical performance and reduce moisture absorption for all other natural fiber types. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 130: 969‐980, 2013
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it