ArticlePolymers2021
Melt- vs. Non-Melt Blending of Complexly Processable Ultra-High Molecular Weight Polyethylene/Cellulose Nanofiber Bionanocomposite.
Article in Polymers, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Article
- Sintering and Processing-Dependent Mechanical Behavior of UHMWPE and Its Nanocomposites in the Presence of Microfine UHMWPE.ACS omega · 2026Article
- Using Thermomechanical Properties to Reassess Particles' Dispersion in Nanostructured Polymers: Size vs. Content.Polymers · 2023Review
- Unveiling the Potential of Rice Straw Nanofiber-Reinforced HDPE for Biomedical Applications: Investigating Mechanical and Tribological Characteristics.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2023Article
- Performance Evaluation of Cellulose Nanofiber with Residual Hemicellulose as a Nanofiller in Polypropylene-Based Nanocomposite.Polymers · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
The major hurdle in melt-processing of ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE) nanocomposite lies on the high melt viscosity of the UHMWPE, which may contribute to poor dispersion and distribution of the nanofiller. In this study, UHMWPE/cellulose nanofiber (UHMWPE/CNF) bionanocomposites were prepared by two different blending methods: (i) melt blending at 150 °C in a triple screw kneading extruder, and (ii) non-melt blending by ethanol mixing at room temperature. Results showed that melt-processing of UHMWPE without CNF (MB-UHMWPE/0) exhibited an increment in yield strength and Young's modulus by 15% and 25%, respectively, compared to the Neat-UHMWPE. Tensile strength was however reduced by almost half. Ethanol mixed sample without CNF (EM-UHMWPE/0) on the other hand showed slight decrement in all mechanical properties tested. At 0.5% CNF inclusion, the mechanical properties of melt-blended bionanocomposites (MB-UHMWPE/0.5) were improved as compared to Neat-UHMWPE. It was also found that the yield strength, elongation at break, Young's modulus, toughness and crystallinity of MB-UHMWPE/0.5 were higher by 28%, 61%, 47%, 45% and 11%, respectively, as compared to the ethanol mixing sample (EM-UHMWPE/0.5). Despite the reduction in tensile strength of MB-UHMWPE/0.5, the value i.e., 28.4 ± 1.0 MPa surpassed the minimum requirement of standard specification for fabricated UHMWPE in surgical implant application. Overall, melt-blending processing is more suitable for the preparation of UHMWPE/CNF bionanocomposites as exhibited by their characteristics presented herein. A better mechanical interlocking between UHMWPE and CNF at high temperature mixing with kneading was evident through FE-SEM observation, explains the higher mechanical properties of MB-UHMWPE/0.5 as compared to EM-UHMWPE/0.5.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.