Evaluation of mechanical, optical, and antibacterial properties of metal‐oxide dispersed <scp>HDPE</scp> nanocomposites processed by rotational molding
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract To investigate the impact of zinc oxide/titanium dioxide nanoparticles on the characteristics of high‐density polyethylene, researchers used the rotational molding technique to produce polymeric nanocomposites. The nanocomposites' morphological, mechanical, optical, as well as biological characteristics, were studied using a range of characterizations. SEM analysis revealed a uniform morphology of ZnO and TiO2 nanoparticles in the polymer matrix, with 80–120 nanometers middle particle dimensions. The existence of ZnO with hexagonal wurtzite form as well as TiO2 with rutile phase was verified by XRD and XRF. Corresponded to the pure polymer, the HDPE‐ZnO/TiO2 nanocomposites' flexural modulus and tensile strength increased, but elongation at break reduced, according to mechanical characterization. UV–visible spectroscopy revealed that the HDPE‐ ZnO/TiO2 nanocomposites showed UV light absorption at wavelengths ranging from 250 to 390 nm. According to antibacterial tests and contact angle measurements, adding metal oxide NPs to HDPE improved hydrophilicity and antibacterial activity.
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".