Caracterización mecánica y morfológica de termoplásticos reciclados espumados reforzados con sub productos de madera
Bibliographic record
Abstract
El objetivo del presente estudio fue observar la morfología y caracterizar las propiedades mecánicas de materiales compuestos de madera y plásticos reciclados espumados. Se mezcló polietileno de alta densidad reciclado con fibra de madera de Pinus radiata D.Don (pino radiata) de 60 mesh. Las concentraciones de fibra fueron de 15 y 25% en peso, el polímero se espumó con un agente químico ACA (azodicarbonamida) y se utilizó anhídrido maleico MAPE (Epolene E-20) como agente de acoplamiento. Los compuestos se obtuvieron usando un proceso de extrusión en un equipo doble tornillo. Los resultados demostraron que el agente acoplamiento tuvo un efecto positivo sobre la adherencia del polímero reciclado y la fibra de madera. La densidad de los compuestos disminuyó con el agente espumante y las propiedades mecánicas de dureza, impacto, módulo de elasticidad en flexión y tracción fueron superiores para los compuestos no espumados. Se concluyó que al aumentar la concentración de fibra aumentaron las propiedades mecánicas de los compuestos a excepción de la tenacidad que al incorporar el agente espumante disminuyó ligeramente. AbstractThe objective of the present study was to observe the morphology and characterize the mechanical properties of wood plastic composite foams. Recycled high density polyethylene was mixed with Pinus radiata D. Don (radiata pine) wood fiber of 60 mesh. The fiber concentrations were 15 and 25% by weight. The compounds were foamed with a chemical agent ACA (azodicabonamide) and MAPE (Epolene E-20) was used as a coupling agent. The composites were obtained by twin– screw extrusion. The results showed that the coupling agent had a positive effect on the adhesion of the recycled polymer and wood fiber. The density of the compounds decreased with blowing agent and the mechanical properties of hardness, impact, modulus of elasticity in bending and tension were higher for unfoamed composites. It was concluded that increasing the concentration of fiber increases the mechanical properties with the exception of impact resistance of the compounds that by incorporating the blowing agent decreased slightly.
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) | 0.002 | 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".