Effect of citric acid content and extractives treatment on the manufacturing process and properties of citric acid-bonded Salacca frond particleboard
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study focused on the effect of an extractive treatment and the application of citric acid on the properties of particleboard made from Salacca frond. In general, extractives have a negative effect on the bondability of synthetic resin. However, the effect of extractives on the bonding mechanism of citric acid as the biobased adhesive is unclear. Unextracted and extracted Salacca frond were used as the raw materials. A hot water extractive treatment was conducted by boiling the particles for 2 h. The boards were manufactured under the following conditions: citric acid content of 0%; 10%; 20% weight percent (wt%), pressing temperature of 180 °C, and pressing time of 10 min. The target density was set at 0.8 g cm-3. The results showed that the addition of citric acid resulted in an increase in the physical and mechanical properties of the particleboard. Interestingly, when a 20% citric acid content was applied, there were no siginificant differences in the physical or mechanical properties of the particleboards made from unextracted and extracted particles. Based on these results, it was concluded that when citric acid is used as adhesive, the hot-water extractive treatment of Salacca frond is not needed.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".