Polyaniline as a dual flame retardant and electrostatic dissipative additive in polyethylene nanocomposites
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Polyolefins, such as polyethylene (PE), are highly flammable and electrically insulative, limiting their applicability. The study explored the flame‐retardancy and electrical conductivity of PE/polyaniline (PE/PANI) nanocomposites containing undoped PANI, PANI doped, and co‐doped with various acids and PANI modified with a double layered hydroxide or ammonium polyphosphate (APP). The nanocomposites were synthesized through in situ chemical oxidative polymerization of aniline and compression molding. Flame retardancy was evaluated using UL 94 tests and cone calorimetry. All nanocomposites, except the de‐doped PANI nanocomposite, attained a UL 94 V2 rating. Cone calorimeter results showed that PANI doped with H 3 PO 4 reduced the peak heat release rate by 20% compared to neat PE, whereas co‐doping PANI with H 3 PO 4 and phytic acid reduced it by 31%. The nanocomposites exhibited volume resistivity for suitable for electrotactic dissipation applications but showed marginally reduced mechanical properties. This study demonstrates the potential to develop electrostatic dissipative and flame‐retardant PE nanocomposites incorporating PANI. Highlights PE/PANI nanocomposites were synthesized. PANI doped with H 3 PO 4 reduced the peak HRR by 20%. Co‐doping PANI with H 3 PO 4 and phytic acid further reduced peak HRR. Nanocomposites attained a UL 94 V2 rating. PE/PANI nanocomposites were electrostatic dissipative.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it