The Use of Low-pressure Plasma on Enhancing the Attachment of Al<sub>2</sub>O<sub>3</sub> Nanoparticles to Wood–Plastic Composites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wood–plastic composites (WPC) are widely used for many purposes due to their interesting properties, but they have poor surface adhesion due to the chemical inertness of the matrix. Thus, in this work, the effect of plasma treatment on the WPC was investigated regarding its influence in the aluminum oxide (Al2O3) nanoparticles attachment to the surface. WPC were prepared in a polypropylene (PP) matrix, plasma-treated at 100 W for 600 s, and then covered with Al2O3 nanoparticles dispersion. The WPC/Al2O3 surfaces have been investigated by means of morphology, surface roughness, chemical structure, wettability, and nanohardness. Plasma treatment improved the attachment of Al2O3 onto WPC, which was confirmed by the higher presence of aluminum and oxygen-containing functional groups and the reduction of the intensity of peaks of methylene (CH2) and methyl (CH3) groups on the WPC surface. The higher surface reactivity of plasma-treated WPC resulted in a better distribution of the nanoparticles over the entire surface. In addition, plasma treatment avoided the formation of coffee-ring phenomenon but it was able to create cone-like structures on the WPC, increasing the surface roughness due to the etching effect and the attachment of Al2O3 nanoparticles. Plasma treatment followed by Al2O3 nanoparticles attachment increased the wettability, hardness, and elastic modulus of WPC at nanometric scale.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".