Elastomers from Renewable Metathesized Palm Oil Polyols
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Polyurethane (PU) elastomers were prepared from 1-butene metathesized palm oil (PMTAG) polyols in order to study the effect of their molecular structure on the properties of polyurethanes. The chemical structure, thermal degradation, thermal properties, and tensile strength of the PUs were determined using Fourier transform infrared (FTIR), thermogravimetric analysis (TGA), differential scanning calorimetry (DSC), dynamic mechanical analysis (DMA), and texture analysis, respectively. Depending on the cross-linking density, which increases with increasing hydroxyl values of the polyols, the polyurethanes produced behave as rigid plastic or elastomeric rubbers. The highest hydroxyl polyol (OH value: 184 mg KOH/g) produced polyurethanes displaying a tensile strength of ∼18 MPa and displayed characteristics of a rigid plastic. On the other hand, the polyurethane prepared from the low hydroxyl polyol (OH value: 83 mg KOH/g) displayed more elastomeric characteristics with a lower tensile strength of ∼4.2 MPa and ∼120% elongation at break. All of the PUs prepared in this study display high thermal stability ( T on of degradation of ∼280 °C), comparable to commercial PUs. The thermal transition behavior of the PUs from DSC and DMA indicates that the glass transition temperature of the PUs increased with an increase in OH value of the polyols. Polyurethanes prepared from metathesized palm oil polyols display superior performance when compared with more expensive bio based PUs derived from canola and soybean oils and represent potential for replacing current commercially available petrochemically derived polyols.
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".