Mechanical recycling of <scp>PLA</scp>: Effect of weathering, extrusion cycles, and chain extender
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This work evaluated the reprocessing of PLA with a high melt flow index (MFI). PLA samples were prepared by extrusion using a chain extender (Joncryl ADR‐4368) and subjected to two additional extrusion cycles with or without exposure to accelerated weathering. The results showed drastic affectations of PLA properties by weathering. The MFI increased from 65 to 137 g/10 min by reprocessing, while reprocessed and weathered samples reached a MFI of 417 g/10 min after three extrusion cycles. The addition of Joncryl prevented PLA degradation (MFI of 170 g/10 min after three extrusion cycles, even when weathering was performed). Additionally, the tensile strengths of weathered samples were substantially decreased (67%) compared to only reprocessed samples (14%). In this sense, PLA mechanical recycling is a good alternative if it is not exposed to harsh weathering conditions, in which case a chain extender is needed to get reasonable properties. Otherwise, reprocessing accelerated the composting of PLA, and the chain extender addition did not limit it.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".