Parameters regulating interfacial and mechanical properties of short glass fiber reinforced polypropylene
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The performance of thermoplastic composites is known to depend on the intrinsic properties of the two composite components, the quality of the fiber–matrix interface, and the crystalline properties of their matrix. The objective of this work is to characterize the effect of the addition of modified polypropylene (PP) and silane coupling agent on the mechanical and interfacial properties of short fiber reinforced PP composites. Differential scanning calorimetry (DSC), single fiber composite fragmentation tests (SFC), and mechanical testing are used to understand the different parameters regulating the interfacial properties of composites. No influence of the modified PP on the level of crystallinity is observed. Some differences in the size of the spherulites are observed for acrylic acid grafted PP (PP-g-AA). Those samples also show lower mechanical properties in spite of good interfacial interactions. Maleic anhydride grafted PP (PP-g-MAh) leads to better mechanical performances than PP-g-AA. A high MAh content PP-g-MAh grade with low viscosity is the best polymeric additive used in the present work. © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 78: 2047–2060, 2000
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".