Modification of Wheat Straws through Steam Explosion and its Effect on Panel Properties
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Particleboards bonded with urea formaldehyde (UF) and a combination of UF and methylene diphenyl diisocyanate (MDI) resins were manufactured using wheat straws modified through different steam explosion treatments. The effect of steam explosion treatment, resin system, and mixing ratios of wood and straw materials on the panel properties was investigated. Generally, with steam explosion treatment of straw fibers, panel properties in bending and internal bond (IB) strength increased, thickness swelling (TS) and water absorption (WA) decreased. The bending properties for the panels made from the straws pretreated with 12 h water-soaking were significantly improved at the UF/MDI content level of 5%/1%. The IB strength dramatically increased, while TS and WA decreased with the use of dual resins. With increased weight ratio of wheat straw to wood particles, the bending properties, IB strength, TS and WA deteriorated. Pure wheat straw boards had the lowest properties. Wood particles in substitution for part of straw materials helped improve the panel properties. The results demonstrated that steam explosion modification and/or its combination with UF/MDI dual resin system can be a feasible approach to improve the bonding strength for wheat straw based particleboards.
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".