MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2106850050 · doi:10.1002/app.38306

Effect of fiber surface treatment of poultry feather fibers on the properties of their polymer matrix composites

2012· article· en· W2106850050 on OpenAlexaff
Masud S. Huda, Walter Schmidt, Manjusri Misra, Lawrence T. Drzal

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Polymer Science · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNatural Fiber Reinforced Composites
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceComposite materialComposite numberFiberThermogravimetric analysisPolypropyleneAdhesionPolymerPlastics extrusionChemical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study develops the enabling technology needed to transform the fibers of poultry feather (FPF), a waste product left over after processing poultry in the food processing industry, as reinforcement filler material for manufacturing composite materials. We successfully fabricated composite materials from biopolymers (polylactide, PLA) and FPF that were produced by the extruder system. FPF‐reinforced polypropylene (PP) composites were also compounded and molded and compared to PLA/FPF composite. The composites were evaluated via thermal and mechanical analysis. To enhance the adhesion between the polymer matrix and the FPF, the FPF have been treated with sodium hydroxide, 10% maleinized polybutadiene rubber, and a silane‐coupling agent. X‐ray photoelectron spectroscopy was used to analyze the influence of modifications on the properties of fibers and found that the coupling agent was localized at the surface of the fibers. Thermal behavior of pretreated fibers was also studied by thermogravimetric analysis. All treatments clearly enhanced thermal performance of fibers. This enhancement of fiber properties, along with an improvement in fiber/matrix adhesion, led to improvement in the mechanical properties of the composite materials. It was found that the surface‐treated fiber‐reinforced materials offered superior mechanical properties compared to untreated fiber‐reinforced composite materials. Moreover, morphological studies by the scanning electron microscopy demonstrated that better adhesion between the fiber and the matrix was achieved especially for the surface‐treated fiber‐reinforced composite materials. © 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 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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.508

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.249
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations24
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied Polymer ScienceSame topicNatural Fiber Reinforced CompositesFrench-language works237,207