Simultaneous polypropylene functionalization and nanoclay dispersion in PP/Clay nanocomposites using ultrasound
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Polypropylene nanocomposite materials were prepared with 5 and 10 wt % cloisite C20A clay, jointly with 0.6 and 1.2 wt % of maleic anhydride (MA) for the simultaneous polymer functionalization and clay dispersion in a twin screw extruder assisted with ultrasonic irradiation, using different sonication intensities (231, 347, and 462 W, which correspond to 30%, 45%, and 60% of the maximum instrument intensity, “770 W”) all in a single‐step operation. The MA polymer functionalization was followed by FTIR spectroscopy and determined by titration. The increase in modulus of the obtained PP/Clay nanocomposites was attributed to the greater dispersion level, presumably achieved becuase of the joint application of the PP–Clay compatibilization with MA and the sonication during processing in a twin screw extruder. The greater level of clay dispersion was verified by the displacement of the XRD diffraction peak to lower angles, indicating an intercalated‐exfoliated structure that was corroborated by STEM. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2014, 131, 40631.
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) | 0.001 | 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".