Effects of wheat straw fiber content and characteristics, and coupling agent concentration on the mechanical properties of wheat straw fiber‐polypropylene composites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Wheat straw fiber‐polypropylene (PP) composites were prepared to investigate the effects of wheat straw fiber content (10, 20, 30, 40, and 50 wt %), fiber size (9, 28, and 35 mesh), and maleic anhydride grafted polypropylene (MAPP) concentration (1, 2, 5, and 10 wt %) on the static and dynamic mechanical properties of the wheat straw fiber‐PP composites in this study. The tensile modulus and strength of the composites increased linearly with increasing wheat straw fiber content up to 40%, whereas the elongation at break decreased dramatically to 3.78%. Compared with the composites made of the longer wheat straw fiber, the composites made of the fines (>35 mesh) had a slightly higher tensile strength of 31.2 MPa and tensile elongation of 5.39% at break. With increasing MAPP concentration, the composites showed an increase in tensile strength, and the highest tensile strength of 34.0 MPa occurred when the MAPP concentration reached 10 wt %. As wheat straw fiber content increased from 0 to 40%, the flexural modulus of the composites increased gradually from 1335 to 3437 MPa. The MAPP concentration and wheat straw fiber size distribution had no appreciable effect on the static flexural modulus of the composites. The storage flexural modulus of the composites increased with increasing wheat straw fiber content. The scanning electron microscopy (SEM) observation on the fracture surface of the composites indicated that a high wheat straw fiber content (>30 wt %) resulted in fiber agglomeration and a reduction in interfacial bonding strength. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci, 2009
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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".