Preparation and Characterization of Polymer TiO<sub>2</sub> Nanocomposites via <em>In-situ</em> Polymerization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Polymer nanocomposites are already a part of many important of worldwide businesses: automotive (molded part in cars), electronics and electrical engineering, household products, packaging industry, aircraft interiors, appliance components, security equipments. Among many nanocomposite precursors, TiO2 nanopowder is increasingly being investigated due to its special properties. The objective of this work is to synthesize and characterize polymer-TiO2 hybrid nanocomposites. When dispersed at the nanoscale level TiO2 could act as visually transparent UV filters and high-thermomechanical-performance materials. The synthesis strategy involved two steps. Firstly, aggregated TiO2, as received, was modified by 3-trimethoxysilyl propylmethacrylate aimed at altering its surface characteristics. The effect of modifier concentration on changing the physicochemical properties of TiO2 surface was evaluated. Size distribution of unmodified and modified TiO2 nanopowders was measured using a particle size analyzer. The qualitative and quantitative grafting of vinyl groups on TiO2 surface was investigated with Fourier transform-infrared (FTIR) and proton nuclear magnetic resonance (1H-NMR) spectroscopy. Secondly, styrene monomer was then added to carry out copolymerization with vinyl groups on the modified TiO2 by free radical initiator 2,2-azobis isobutyronitrile (AIBN) in bulk medium. FTIR spectra confirmed the formation of nanocomposites with polystyrene chains chemically linked to the surface of TiO2 nanopowders. Thermogravimetric analysis (TGA) and differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) indicated that the resulting nanocomposites displayed higher thermal stability and maintained similar glass transition temperatures (Tg) compared with pure PS. Ultraviolet ?visible spectroscopy (UV-Vis) investigated that these nanocomposites have improved optical properties potentially acting as visually transparent UV filters. Such incremented properties were attributed to the nancoscale dispersion (20-50nm size) of TiO2 into polystyrene matrix, which morphology was observed by scanning electron microscopy (SEM).
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".