Chemical Binder-Free and Oven-Dried Lignocellulose/Clay Composite Foams: Flame Resistance, Thermal Insulation, and Recyclability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Global efforts to reduce carbon emissions and improve thermal comfort demand sustainable and safe-to-use insulative materials. This study advances a new type of chemical binder-free lignocellulose/clay composite foam as a sustainable alternative to the currently used synthetic and glass/mineral counterparts. Pressurized disk milling unraveled submicron “hairy” fibrillation on the surface of refiner mechanical pulp (RMP). Such fibrillated fibers were then subjected to a foam laying process, with kaolinite being incorporated as an efficient and cost-effective fire retardant. Upon oven drying, the foams display suitable structural and mechanical robustness. Through mild fibrillation treatment of the RMP, a clay retention of up to 2-fold by weight was achieved without compromising the properties of the foam, removing the need for the addition of chemical binders. The foam density, mechanical and thermal properties, and flame resistance were systematically investigated with respect to the relative fiber loading as well as surfactant and clay addition. A low thermal conductivity (43.7 ± 0.7 mW/(m·K)) and high flame resistance (limiting oxygen index of ∼43%) were demonstrated for hybrid foams of apparent density of 136 ± 1 kg/m 3 that also displayed good compressive strength (Young’s modulus of 0.805 ± 0.158 MPa and compressive stress of 0.126 ± 0.008 MPa at 25% strain). Remarkably, owing to the absence of chemical binding, facile recyclability was demonstrated over three cycles, with no significant reduction in performance. Overall, this work proposes a readily scalable technology toward safe-to-use, recyclable lignocellulose/clay composite foams for building insulation.
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) | 0.000 | 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 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".