Effects of mechanical fibrillation time by disk grinding on the properties of cellulose nanofibrils
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cellulose nanofibrils (CNF) were successfully produced from a bleach kraft eucalyptus pulp by a supermasscolloider. Effects of grinding time on structure and properties of CNF and the corresponding CNF films were investigated. Grinding time was important to increase the optical transparency of CNF suspensions. The degree of polymerization (DP) and crystallinity index (CrI) of CNF decreased linearly with the increase in CNF suspension transparency. This suggests optical transparency of a CNF suspension can be used to characterize the degree of fibrillation. Specific tensile strength and Young’s modulus of the CNF films made of CNF suspension with only 0.5 h grinding were increased approximately 30% and 200%, respectively, compared with conventional handsheets prepared by valley beating to 300 Canadian Standard Freeness (CSF). Energy input was only 1.38 kWh/kg for 0.5 h grinding. Grinding beyond 0.5 h produced negligible improvement in specific tensile and specific modulus. Opacity of CNF films decreased rapidly during the first 1.5 h of fibrillation and then plateaued.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".