Effects of Reaction Parameters on the Glycidyl Etherification of Bark Extractives during Bioepoxy Resin Synthesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study outlines the influence of a series of reaction conditions on the yield and reactivity of the glycidyl etherification reaction of the bark extractive-based bioepoxy monomer (E-epoxy). To maximize the yield and epoxy content, the glycidylation reaction was examined with various substrates, solvents, catalysts, time periods, reaction temperatures, and sodium hydroxide/hydroxyl (NaOH/OHV) ratios. Spray-dried bark extractives were used as substrates due to their higher hydroxyl group content and lower molecular weight compared to the oven-dried bark extractives. A dioxane/water combination was selected from among four solvents based on the yield and epoxy equivalent weights of the final product, and tetrabutylammonium hydroxide was chosen as a ring-opening catalyst due to its effect of suppressing hydrolysis. Furthermore, a response surface methodology was applied to find the optimal reaction time, reaction temperature, and NaOH/OHV ratio of the E-epoxy monomer. The maximum extent of conversion with minimum epoxy equivalent weight was achieved after 4.5 h with an NaOH/OHV ratio of 3.4 at 80 °C. This work identifies the effects of reaction parameters on the yield and reactivity of E-epoxy and sheds new light on the glycidylation reaction between epichlorohydrin and renewable biomass.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".