Bibliographic record
Abstract
Because of the banning of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) that used in the traditional PUIR foams by the 1987 Montreal Protocol, we have targeted our research on new CFC-free PUIR formulations. In this study, we have focused on chemical blowing techniques for PUIR foams that were based on CO2 -forming reactions of isocyanate chemistries. Our goal is to prepare a 100% CO2-blown PUIR foams with density of 2~3 lb/ft3 possessing fine-cell sizes of less than 150 μm and stable dimension stability that still have the mechanical properties of traditional heat resistant PUIR foams.\n In my optimization efforts, I have screened systematically various combinations of blowing/trimerization catalysts and in conjunctions with other additives for introducing heat stable functional groups. It was found that a combination of PC-41 (trimerization catalyst) and dimethyl phospholene oxide (DMPO) has been the most efficient for foam blowing process. In the meantime, these blowing combinations also have to be complimented by the addition of epoxy resin (Epon 188) in range of 20% to 25% in the formulation in achieving suitable exotherm for further crosslinking reactions.\n In the 100% CO2 blown foam prepared by this study, successful introductions of isocyanurate, carbodiimide, oxazolidone and amide-imide functional groups into the foam polymer have been achieved by a one-shot process. In the meantime, the modified foams have been found to have higher heat resistant properties. They were dimensional stable and exhibiting foaming profiles suitable for adaptation to the current PUIR manufacturing facility.
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) | 0.002 | 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".