Mechanical, barrier, and interfacial properties of biodegradable composite films made of methylcellulose and poly(caprolactone)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Methylcellulose (MC) films were prepared by casting from its 1% aqueous solution containing 0.5% vegetable oil, 0.25% glycerol, and 0.025% Tween®80. Poly(caprolactone) (PCL) films were prepared by compression molding from its granules. Biodegradable composite films were fabricated using MC film as reinforcing agent and PCL as the matrix material by compression molding. One layer of MC film was reinforced with two layers of PCL films. The MC content in the composites was varied from 10 to 50% by weight. Mechanical, barrier, and degradation properties of PCL, MC, and composite films were evaluated. The values of puncture strength (PS), puncture deformation (PD), viscoelasticity (Y) coefficient, and water vapor permeability (WVP) of the composites (50% MC content) were found to be 124.3 N/mm, 3.2 mm, 31%, and 2.6 g·mm/m2·day·kPa, respectively. Oxygen transmission rate (OTR) of PCL, MC, and composites (50% MC) were found to be 175, 25, 22 cc/m2/d, respectively, which indicated that composite films showed significantly lower OTR than PCL films. Degradation tests of the composite films (50% MC) were performed for 6 weeks in aqueous medium (at 25°C), and it was found that composites lost its mass slowly with time. After 6 weeks, mass and PS of the composites were decreased to 13.4 and 12%, respectively. Composite interface was studied by scanning electron microscopy (SEM). The MC film had good adhesion with PCL matrix during compression molding and suggested strong interface of the composite system. SEM image after 6 weeks of degradation showed some openings in the interface and revealed slow degradation of the MC films. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci, 2012
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".