Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Montreal Protocol regulates the uses of ozone depletion substances (ODSs). In the developed countries, the phaseout of high ozone depletion potential (ODP) CFCs in rigid foam applications was made possible with the introduction of lower ODP HCFCs. HCFC-141b was chosen as an excellent replacement for CFC-11 in many rigid foam applications. HCFC-141b blown rigid foams offer excellent thermal insulation, fire resistance and dimensional stability. According to the Montreal Protocol, HCFC-141b will eventually be phased out. Lower ODP HCFCs (i.e., HCFC-142b and HCFC-22), zero ODP HFCs and hydrocarbons are considered to be alternatives. Unfortunately, neither HFCs nor pentanes can match performance and cost of HCFCs. An HFC and pentane(s) coblowing system can potentially offer some advantages over purely pentane blown foams including lower foam density (therefore lower cost), better thermal insulation and better fire performance than purely pentane(s) blown foams. The coblown foam has lower cost than HFC blown foams. In this study, we choose HFC-134a, a commercially available blowing agent, as a coblowing agent with pentane(s). We make polyisocyanurate (PIR) foams with HFC-134a as a coblowing agent with n-C5, i-C5, i-C5/c-C5, and the levels of HFC-134a are 10 and 20 mole%. We determine thermal conductivity (or k-factor) of foams from −8 to 40 °C. The results show that the effects of HFC-134a on the low temperature k-factors are different, depending on the pentane isomers. Furthermore, we screen a series of surfactants to determine their effects on the k-factors.
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) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".