Interactions between <scp>PLA</scp>, organo‐montmorillonite and plasticizer: Synergistic effect on the barrier and mechanical properties of <scp>PLA</scp> nanocomposites blown films
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this study, the impact of incorporating a plasticizer on the compatibility between organo‐montmorillonite (OMMt) and polylactic acid (PLA) is investigated, and the resulting barrier and mechanical properties are reported. Four polymers were chosen as plasticizers to prepare the PLA nanocomposite blown films: poly(ethylene glycol), poly(ethylene oxide), polycaprolactone (PCL), and random ethylene‐methyl acrylate‐glycidyl methacrylate terpolymer. Firstly, 5 wt% of each plasticizer and 3 wt% of OMMt (Dellite® D43B) were mixed simultaneously with PLA in a twin‐screw extruder and then introduced into the hopper of a single screw extruder to produce D43B‐PLA/plasticizer nanocomposite films. The compatibilization effect was examined based on microstructure observations and thermodynamic predictions. Crystallinity was evaluated using DSC and XRD measurements. The results obtained for permeability and mechanical testing showed that the improvement of barrier and mechanical properties depends directly on the degree of compatibility between plasticizer, OMMt, and PLA. Indeed, the interfacial properties, XRD diffraction, and TEM images showed that a synergistic effect can result from high interfacial interactions between different compounds.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".