Improvement of Poly(lactic acid)-Poly(hydroxy butyrate) Blend Properties for Use in Food Packaging: Processing, Structure Relationships
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Poly(lactic acid)-poly(hydroxybutyrate) (PLA-PHB)-based nanocomposite films were prepared with bio-based additives (CNCs and ChNCs) and oligomer lactic acid (OLA) compatibilizer using extrusion and then blown to films at pilot scale. The aim was to identify suitable material formulations and nanocomposite production processes for film production at a larger scale targeting food packaging applications. The film-blowing process for both the PLA-PHB blend and CNC-nanocomposite was unstable and led to non-homogeneous films with wrinkles and creases, while the blowing of the ChNC-nanocomposite was stable and resulted in a smooth and homogeneous film. The optical microscopy of the blown nanocomposite films indicated well-dispersed chitin nanocrystals while the cellulose crystals were agglomerated to micrometer-size particles. The addition of the ChNCs also resulted in the improved mechanical performance of the PLA-PHB blend due to well-dispersed crystals in the nanoscale as well as the interaction between biopolymers and the chitin nanocrystals. The strength increased from 27 MPa to 37 MPa compared to the PLA-PHB blend and showed almost 36 times higher elongation at break resulting in 10 times tougher material. Finally, the nanocomposite film with ChNCs showed improved oxygen barrier performance as well as faster degradation, indicating its potential exploitation for packaging applications.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".