Study on interfacial properties of unidirectional flax/vinyl ester composites: Resin manipulation on vinyl ester system
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Flax fibers are widely used as reinforcements in bio‐based polymer matrix composites. This study investigated the hydrophilic nature and surface purity of flax fiber that affects fiber/matrix adhesion in combination with hydrophobic structural polymers via matrix modification and the utilization of fiber treatment, specifically in a flax/vinyl ester (VE) composite. A new method to manipulate the vinyl ester system with acrylic resin (AR) was developed to produce flax reinforced. On the other hand, different types of chemical and physical treatments were applied on the flax fiber. FTIR was applied to evaluate the effects of surface treatments. Dynamic mechanical analysis (DMA) was used to analyze the unmodified and modified VE resin system. The surface of untreated and treated flax fibers and their composites were analyzed by scanning electronic microscopy (SEM). Sodium ethoxide‐treated flax/VE with 1% (wt) AR caused the best mechanical performance among all the flax/VE composites evaluated. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 2013
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".