Mechanical and thermal properties of polypropylene/montmorillonite nanocomposites using stearic acid as both an interface and a clay surface modifier
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effects of stearic acid treatment on the crystallization, morphology, thermal, and mechanical properties of polypropylene (PP)/montmorillonite (Mm) nanocomposites were investigated. Stearic acid was used as a new surface modifier for Mm, and also small amounts of this acid were used as a new interface modifier. Nanocomposites containing 1.5, 2.5, 5, and 10% in weight of the unmodified and modified Mm were prepared by melt blending. The tensile and impact properties of nanocomposites were evaluated. Wide‐angle X‐ray diffraction was used to study both the generated PP β crystals and the dispersion state of the nanocomposites. Differential scanning calorimeter was used to detect the melting and crystallization behavior of the samples. The toughness of some nanocomposites was higher than the pure PP. β phase of PP was observed with the addition of Mm. Stearic acid favored the dispersion of the nanocomposites when used as interface modifier. Nanocomposites with better dispersion exhibited crystallization temperatures similar to pure PP. POLYM. COMPOS., 35:1–9, 2014. © 2013 Society of Plastics Engineers
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".