Two‐step preparation of phosphorus‐containing organoclay and its effect on fire‐resistant and mechanical properties of the flame‐retardant polyethylene composite
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this study, a nanohybrid based on montmorillonite (oMMT2) was prepared through a two‐step method using Arquad MCB‐80 and 9,10‐dihydro‐9‐oxa‐10‐phosphaphenanthrene‐10‐oxide (DOPO) as intercalation agents. The nanohybrid exhibited a basal spacing of 31.5 Å, which contained approximately 12.3% of Arquad MCB‐80 and 31.6% of DOPO. Various amount of oMMT2 nanohybrid was incorporated into a flame‐retardant polyethylene system containing aluminum trihydroxide and red phosphorus with a constant total additive content of 20 wt%. The dispersibility of oMMT2 in the composite matrix was evaluated by energy dispersive x‐ray mapping and x‐ray diffraction analyses. At a content of 3 wt% in the nanocomposite, oMMT2 showed a highly exfoliated state, while at a 5% content, a partially exfoliated and intercalated state was observed. A synergistic flame‐retardant effect between the nanohybrid and the mixture of aluminum trihydroxide and red phosphorus was found. The nanocomposite loading 3 wt% oMMT2 demonstrated the best flame retardancy, achieving a V‐0 rating of the vertical burning test with a limiting oxygen index of 27.6%. Moreover, the addition of the low oMMT2 contents (≤3 wt%) improved the mechanical properties of the flame‐retardant composite.
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) | 0.001 | 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".