Activation of bifunctional coupling agents in fiberglass/polyethylene composites by electron beam
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Electron beam (EB) radiation was investigated as a means to initiate coupling between the fiberglass and plastic phases in fiberglass/polyethylene plastic composites using two bifunctional compounds, 12‐azido‐1‐diazo‐2‐dodecanone (A) and 1‐diazo‐17‐octadecene‐2‐one (B). Chemical studies reveal that EB radiation has the potential to bind both of these compounds to fiberglass. Fiberglass coated with either A or B shows reduced values of percentage recovery upon exposure to EB, indicating a reaction between these compounds and the glass surface. However, even 400 kGy of radiation was not as effective as a heat treatment for 45 min at 150°C. To test the effectiveness of EB radiation to couple these compounds to polyethylene, fiberglass samples were heat‐treated with compounds A and B, followed by extrusion mixing with polyethylene, and exposure of molded tensile and impact samples to EB radiation. Compound B showed the best overall ability to couple with the polyethylene matrix, but a 400‐kGy dose was necessary to bring about substantial coupling. At 400 kGy, samples containing B showed a 23% improvement in tensile properties and a 30% change in Izod impact. © 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 83: 2579–2594, 2002
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) | 0.001 | 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".