Evaluation of Mechanical Properties of Hybrid Composites Reinforced with Marijuana and Luffa Fibers in an Epoxy Matrix, pp. 134-144
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Natural fibers (NF) derived from the stem of Marijuana (Cannabis sativa) plant and the Luffa sponge cylindrica plant are progressively being utilized in polymer composites with fiber reinforcement, gradually replacing synthetic fibers (SF).The combination of these two distinct NFs would enhance the efficiency of composites utilized in secondary structural applications.This research aims to examine the impact of the arrangement of Marijuana and Luffa fibers on mechanical behaviors of an epoxy matrix.To accomplish this, the fabrication of composite laminates involved using hand layup technique.These laminates were made up of four layers of fabric arranged in specific sequences.The different composites were created as follows: Composite A (Marijuana/Luffa/Luffa/Marijuana), Composite B (Luffa / Marijuana / Marijuana / Luffa), Composite C (Marijuana /Luffa/ Marijuana /Luffa), Composite D (Marijuana/Marijuana/Luffa/Luffa), and Composite E (Luffa/Marijuana/Luffa/Marijuana).The impact of these arrangements of layers on the behaviours of Natural Fibre Hybrid Composites (NFHC) was assessed by a sequence of uniform tests, such as Flexural, Impact, Interlaminar Shear Strength, and fracture toughness (FT) tests, in accordance with the standards established by ASTM.The experimental outputs demonstrated that A composite displayed exceptional mechanical capabilities due to its incorporation of a Luffa fibers at the core as well as Marijuana fabric on its external surface.Therefore, A exhibited an impressive tensile strength (TS) 46.74 MPa, maximum flexural strength (FS) 107.89MPa, and an exceptionally maximum ILSS of 3.54MPa.Furthermore, A exhibited a notable fracture toughness of approximately 78.95 MPa m1/2, as well as an exceptional impact strength (IS) 91.24 J/m2.In addition, SEM images verified that the existence of robust bonding among matrix and fibers in Composite A resulted in an overall enhancement of mechanical performance by 82% related to Composites B, C, D, and E.
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".