Influence of Epoxy/Nanosilica on Mechanical Performance of Hemp/Kevlar Fiber Reinforced Hybrid Composite with an Ultrasonic Frequency
Post-publication record
Source: Retraction Watch, joined by DOI. OpenAlex records retraction as is_retracted, a boolean over a state space with at least four values, so it cannot express an expression of concern, a correction or a reinstatement; it reports them as false, which reads as “fine”.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ultrasonic vibration was employed in blending the nanosilica into epoxy resin to manufacture hemp/kevlar/nanosilica-based epoxy composites, with an ultrasonic occurrence of 20 kHz and a 900 W capacity of power. An ultrasonic probe was utilized to ensure the consistent dispersion of the nanoparticles in the epoxy. The mechanical characteristics of hemp/kevlar fiber reinforced with epoxy/nanosilica in a mat form have been studied. Hand layup procedures were used to create these composites, including varying weight % of nanosilica and variable fiber stacking sequencing. The different weight % are 3, 6, and 9, and the stacking sequences are B, C, and D. The effectiveness of ultrasonic irradiation on mechanical characteristics was investigated and related. The inclusion of 6 wt.% of SiO 2 to the B type resulted in a 25% rise in tension and a 37% in bending. The addition of 6 wt.% silica to the C-type hybridization nanocomposite results in a 34% rise in tension and a 38% rise in bending. Extreme tension behavior is attained at 6 wt.% SiO 2 with epoxy with the B type piling order, and extreme bending behavior is obtained at 6 wt.% SiO 2 with the C type piling order. A B-type model composite with a 6-wt.% SiO 2 addition performed better in hygroscopic than A, C, and D type model composites. An SEM is utilized to observe the microstructure of shattered materials.
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".