MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2069163274 · doi:10.1002/app.29333

Cure characteristics and mechanical properties of hydrogenated natural rubber/natural rubber blends

2008· article· en· W2069163274 on OpenAlexaff
Napida Hinchiranan, W. Lertweerasirikun, W. Poonsawad, Garry L. Rempel, Pattarapan Prasassarakich

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Polymer Science · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicPolymer Nanocomposites and Properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVulcanizationNatural rubberUltimate tensile strengthMaterials sciencePeroxideElongationComposite materialSulfurPolymer chemistryChemistryOrganic chemistryMetallurgy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The cure characteristics and mechanical properties of blends consisting of hydrogenated natural rubber (HNR) and natural rubber (NR) blends were investigated. The HNR/NR blends at 50/50 wt ratio were vulcanized using various cure systems: peroxide vulcanization, conventional vulcanization with peroxide, and efficient vulcanization with peroxide. The HNR/NR vulcanizates cured by the combination of peroxide and sulfur donor (tetramethylthiuram disulfide, TMTD) in the efficient vulcanization with peroxide exhibited the best mechanical properties. It was also found that the hydrogenation level of HNR did not affect the tensile strength of the vulcanizates. The tensile strength of the blends decreased with increasing HNR content because of the higher incompatibility to cause the noncoherency behavior between NR and HNR. However, the HNR/NR vulcanizate at 50/50 wt ratio showed the maximum ultimate elongation corresponding to a co‐continuous morphology as attested to by scanning electron micrographs. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci, 2009

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.654

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.196 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied Polymer ScienceSame topicPolymer Nanocomposites and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207