Preparation of electrospun polyurethane/hydrophobic silica gel nanofibrous membranes for waterproof and breathable application
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The polyurethane (PU)/hydrophobic silica gel (HSG) fibrous membranes with the hydrophobic and breathable surface was fabricated via electrospinning. By employing the HSG incorporation, mechanical properties, thermal stability, and waterproofness of the composite membranes could be improved. The porous structure of the membranes would be regulated by tuning the temperatures of thermal treatment. When HSG content increased to 3 wt%, the PU/HSG composite membranes possessed remarkable tensile strength of 6.3 MPa and high water contact angle (WCA) of 134°. Furthermore, the maximum WCA (142° ± 1°), good hydrostatic pressure (5.45 kPa), large water vapor transmission rate (8.05 kg/m 2 /day), and high air permeability (9.25 L/m 2 /s) of the composite membranes could be achieved by heat treatment at 120°C. The resultant membranes performed significantly better when compared to the pure PU membranes under the same conditions, such as the higher tensile strength (100%), better waterproofness (200%), and stronger breathablity (25%). POLYM. ENG. SCI., 58:1381–1390, 2018. © 2017 Society of Plastics Engineers
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) | 0.000 | 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 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".