Manufacture and Properties of Ultra-Low Density Panel from Wood Fibre
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conventional wood-based fibreboard has a density of 500-1000 kg/m. In this study, Fibre used in this study was a mixture (6:3:1 dry weight) of mechanical pine (Pinus massoniana) pulp, kraft pulp(spruce-pine-fir from Canada), and fibre for medium density fibreboard (Pinus massoniana : mixture of hardwoods = 3:7). The fibre mixture was dissociated in the dissociator at 15% consistency, then refined in the refiner at 10% consistency until the pulp reached a beating degree of 32 SR. Approximately 6.8, 3.4, 2.3 and 1.7 percent (solid weight / dry fibre weight) of polyacrylamide resin, polyurethane, water repellent (alkyl ketene dimers), and surface active agent (sodium dodecylbenzene sulfonate), respectively, were added in different manufacture stages. Ultra-low density panel with a bulk density of 56.3 kg/m was made. The results showed that the panel had an internal bond strength of 0.15 MPa, modulus of rupture of 0.70 MPa, modulus of elasticity of 8.91 MPa, and compression strength of 0.17 MPa (at 10% compression). The ULDF had smooth surfaces with fibres randomly scattered over the surface, featuring porous structure (Fig. 1a)). Fibres seemed covered with resin and bond together at inter-crossing nodes. Unlike the conventional MDF in which fibres are distributeduniformly across the thickness, fibres in the ULDF tended to form cross-linked layers across the thickness (Fig. 1b)). Density profile analysis indicated that the density across thickness of the ULDF was relatively uniform except a higher density variation in the outer layers. Shown in Fig. 3 is a typical density profile of the ULDF of 20 mm thickness. Thickness swelling after 24 hours water immersion was 0.57%. Thermalconductivity of 0.035 W/mK, and sound absorption coefficient of 0.67. Uniformly distributed resin on the fibre surface acts as bonding agent to form strong integral connections between fibres. The manufactured product can be used as buffer material for packaging and insulating material for building. Fig. 2. Microscopic images showing: a) the surface (Motic DMB5 digital microscope) and b) cross section along thickness (XGL 2I stereo microscope) of ultra low density fibreboard. a) b)
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".