MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A dual resin application system for improved bamboo-wood bonding

2024· article· en· W4402164189 on OpenAlexafffund
Jialin Zhang, Kate Semple, Mei‐Ling Chen, Chunping Dai

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Adhesion and Adhesives · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBamboo properties and applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of British ColumbiaChina Postdoctoral Science FoundationNanjing Forestry University
KeywordsBambooMaterials scienceAdhesiveComposite materialEngineered woodPolymer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work, a dual resin application system using commercial phenol formaldehyde (PF) resins with different molecular weight (MW) was investigated to improve bonding performance of bamboo and wood composite laminates. Water droplet contact angle was deemed to be unreliable for assessing resin wettability on bamboo due to its unique tissue structure compared with wood. Microscopic observation of the resin penetration showed high MW PF largely remained in the glueline and only entered the lumens of cut or damaged bamboo cells near the bondline. Low MW PF appeared in cell corners of bamboo parenchyma but not lumens. Applying low MW PF to the bamboo and high MW PF to the wood surface separately significantly improved bond shear strength with reduced difference between dry and wet conditions. The dry and wet bond strengths using the new method were enhanced by 36.5 % and 97.4 %, respectively, compared to high MW PF alone. The results suggest that low MW PF can permeate bamboo cell walls and fortify them against swelling and stress on the bamboo-resin interface in wet conditions. Further modifications are required to produce a stronger adhesive than the bamboo tissue to improve wet shear fiber failure rates and develop a viable structural bond qualification test for bamboo and bamboo-wood composites.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.782
Threshold uncertainty score0.186

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.241 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Adhesion and AdhesivesSame topicBamboo properties and applicationsFrench-language works237,207