A flame retarded chitosan binder for insulating miscanthus/recycled textile fibers reinforced biocomposites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The main objective of this study is devoted to the development of new insulating and ignifuged miscanthus fibers (Mf)/recycled textile fibers (RTf) reinforced biocomposites (BCs) using chitosan as polysaccharide‐based binder and aluminum trihydroxide (ATH) fillers while focusing on the fire behavior. To achieve this goal, a preliminary study was carried out on flame retarded chitosan‐based films with various ATH‐filler ratios (20, 33, 50, and 60 wt %). ATG and pyrolysis‐combustion flow calorimeter analysis showed significant improvement of chitosan thermal behavior with the addition of 33 wt % and above of ATH. Mechanical properties of films were, however, degraded. Thereafter, different ratios of miscanthus/RTf reinforced BCs (fibers content up to 89.5–90 wt %) were elaborated through thermocompression process using neat chitosan and chitosan/ATH (67/33 wt %) as a binder. Mechanical, thermal, and fire behavior were evaluated. Higher mechanical properties were found for hybrid materials containing the association of both RTf and Mf in comparison to those containing only RTf or Mf. Fireproof BCs (E rating: according to the NF EN ISO 11925‐2), with thermal conductivity values between 0.07 and 0.09 W m−1 K−1 and density range between 270 and 299 kg m−3 were successfully elaborated. The results of this study show a promising use of the chitosan/ATH system as flame retardant for biobased insulating building materials. © 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2019, 136, 47306.
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".