Mechanical characterization of epoxy composites reinforced with a blend of Hibiscus rosa and snake grass fibers enhanced with neem gum powder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mechanical and physical characteristics were studied of epoxy composites reinforced with different blends of the Hibiscus (H) rosa plant fiber and snake (S) grass fiber, with and without the addition of neem gum powder. The incorporation of the snake grass fiber significantly enhanced the mechanical properties, with the biocomposite 20S10H exhibiting the highest tensile strength (56 MPa), flexural strength (87 MPa), hardness (86 SD), and impact strength (6.98 J), due to the synergistic effect of snake grass fiber and neem gum as a binder. The interlaminar shear strength also showed an improvement, reaching a maximum of 6.52 MPa for the biocomposite 20S10H, reflecting enhanced interfacial bonding and reduced void content. Water absorption (40%) decreased with the increased proportion of snake grass fiber and the inclusion of neem gum, with the lowest absorption recorded for the biocomposite 30S30H, indicating reduced moisture uptake. In contrast, biocomposites with a higher proportion of Hibiscus rosa fiber exhibited higher water absorption. The scanning electron microscopy (SEM) study of the fracture surfaces demonstrated enhanced fiber-matrix adhesion and decreased porosity in biocomposites with neem gum, validating the neem gum’s contribution to better interfacial bonding and overall biocomposite efficacy.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".