Cellulose and lignin as carbon black replacement in natural rubber
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Lignocellulosic fillers have gained attention as biofillers due to their low cost, availability, and eco‐friendly nature. Various lignocellulosic fillers from different sources having different chemical compositions have been used in natural rubber (NR) without sufficient comparison. So the objective of this study is to investigate the effect of two well defined industrial fillers (lignin and cellulose) along with black spruce cellulosic pulps obtained from an organosolv process on the properties of NR. To this end, a range (0/100–100/0) of lignin/cellulose (L/C) ratios is prepared. The biobased materials are chemically extracted from black spruce sawdust to partially replace carbon black (CB) in NR composites. The results show that higher L/C ratios provide higher tensile strength and elongation break, while lower ratios produce higher tensile modulus and hardness. These results indicate that a balance between different mechanical properties can be achieved by controlling the L/C ratio. A discussion on the total replacement of CB by lignin or cellulose is also presented to produce a more biobased compound.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".