Impact toughness, viscoelastic behavior, and morphology of polypropylene–jute–viscose hybrid composites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT In this investigation, we studied the impact toughness and viscoelastic behavior of polypropylene (PP)–jute composites. In this study, we used viscose fiber as an impact modifier and maleated PP as a compatibilizer. The toughness of the composites was studied with conventional Charpy and instrumental falling‐weight impact tests. The composites’ viscoelastic properties were studied with dynamic mechanical analysis. The results show that the incorporation of viscose fibers improved the impact strength and toughness to 134 and 65% compared to those of the PP–jute composites. The tan δ peak amplitude also increased with the addition of the impact modifier and indicated a greater degree of molecular mobility. The thermal stability of the composites was evaluated with thermogravimetric analysis. The addition of 2 wt % maleated polypropylene (MAPP) to the impact‐modified composite improved the impact strength and toughness to 144 and 93%, respectively. The fiber–matrix morphology of the fracture surface and the Fourier transform infrared spectra were also studied to ascertain the existence of the type of interfacial bonds. Microstructural analysis showed the retention of viscose fibers in the composites compared to the more separated jute fibers. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2016 , 133 , 42981.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".