Polyurethane foams from chlorinated and non‐chlorinated metathesis modified canola oil polyols
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The product of 1‐butene metathesis of canola triacylglycerol (CMTAG), with shortened structures, terminal double bonds (50% of the total), and oligomers (40% dimer and trimer, and 10% higher oligomers) was used to synthesize novel polyols and polyurethane foams. A non‐chlorinated (Pol‐1) and a chlorinated polyol (Pol‐2) having OH value (170 and 190 mg KOH/g, respectively) were synthesized from CMTAG by epoxidation followed by hydroxylation, and epoxidation followed by hydrogenation, respectively. Both polyols remained liquid below ambient temperature and demonstrated physical characteristics such as viscosity which allowed for the facile preparation of polyurethane foams. The foam obtained with Pol‐1 was relatively soft (∼0.32 MPa at 10% strain) and very flexible (recovery ∼90%); whereas, the foam obtained with Pol‐2 was semi‐rigid (∼1.1 MPa at 10% strain and recovery of 64%). The higher strength and rigidity of Pol‐2 foam compared to Pol‐1 foam is chiefly attributable to the effect of the bulky chlorines on the crosslink density. Importantly, this work highlights that one can improve and control jointly the mechanical properties and deformation recovery ability of bio‐based foams by combining primary functional groups, oligomers, and high molar volume molecules in the polyols. © 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2018 , 135 , 46616.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 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".