Investigating the use of natural hollow fibers from common milkweed to improve the mechanical and thermal properties of epoxy resin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Milkweed floss was used as a reinforcement to develop lightweight epoxy composites with enhanced thermal insulating properties. Seed fibers from Asclepias Syriaca harvested in Quebec were used for this study. Some fibers were treated with acetone to remove their protective hydrophobic coating. Epoxy resin was blended with 15% w/w of native or acetone‐treated milkweed floss to form prepregs. The prepregs were casted into molds, degassed, and compressed to produce the composites. The composites were passed through a post‐curing phase before characterization. The composites and the epoxy resin alone were characterized to determine their density, porosity, thermal conductivity, thermal degradation, mechanical resistance, and thermo‐mechanical behavior. The composites reinforced with native or acetone‐treated milkweed floss were 7.4% and 10.3% lighter than the epoxy resin, respectively. The specific elastic modulus of the resin increased by 9.6% and 20.1% with the addition of native or acetone‐treated fibers, respectively. The thermal conductivity of the epoxi decreased by 7.8% and 15.6% with the use of native or acetone‐treated milkweed floss, respectively. Due to their low weight and reduced thermal conductivity, the milkweed‐reinforced epoxy composites may find applications in the production of structural and insulating elements for vehicles and buildings.
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 | 0.000 | 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".