Effects of pH on lap-shear strength for aspen veneer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study is one part of a whole project called "Impact of Extreme pH of Structural Adhesives on Bond Durability."The objective of this study was to evaluate effects of pH on woodadhesive bond strength and chemical change in aspen (Populus tremuloides Michx) wood caused by extreme pH exposures.Aspen veneer lap-shear samples were tested for maximum stress (N/mm 2 ) and wood failure (%) after exposure to soaking in different buffered solutions (pH ¼ 2.0, 2.5, 3.0; water, 10.0, 11.0, 11.5, 12.0, and 12.5) for 1, 4, and 7 mo.One set of samples stored in laboratory conditions was also tested as a control at each test time.Results indicated that bond strength and wood failure decreased after 4-and 7-mo exposures to acidic conditions but did not change significantly under alkaline exposures.However, the buffered acidic solutions (pH ¼ 2.0 and 3.0) did not cause a measurable chemical change in aspen wood, whereas losses in hemicellulose and lignin were found after aspen wood specimens had been exposed to pH 11.0 buffered solutions.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".