Mechanical properties and multiscale characterization of nanofiber–alumina/epoxy nanocomposites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In contrast to the bulk of published nanocomposite studies, in this study we investigated the mechanical properties of alumina/epoxy nanocomposites manufactured with nanofillers having a fiber or whisker morphology. The article describes how ultrasonic dispersion and in situ polymerization were used to incorporate these 2–4 nm diameter fibers (with aspect ratios of 25–50) into a two‐part epoxy resin (Epon 826/Epicure 9551). The use of untreated and surface‐modified nanoparticles is contrasted, and improvements in both the tensile strength and modulus were observed at low filler loadings. Microstructural characterization of the nanocomposites via multiscale digital image analysis was used to interpret the mechanical properties and was found to be useful for direct comparison with other nanocomposites. In addition, superior performance was demonstrated through comparisons with numerous nanocomposites with nanoparticle reinforcements ranging from carbon nanofibers to spherical alumina particles. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci, 2011
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".