Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34685245›Full record

ArticlePolymers2021

Evaluation of Novel Compatibility Strategies for Improving the Performance of Recycled Low-Density Polyethylene Based Biocomposites.

Mahmoud M A Nassar, Ishaq Sider

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Polymers, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Mahmoud M A NassarCollege of Applied Professions, Palestine Polytechnic University, Wadi Alhareya, Hebron P.O. Box 198, Palestine.ORCID 0000-0001-8234-1105
Ishaq SiderDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Palestine Polytechnic University, Wadi Alhareya, Hebron P.O. Box 198, Palestine.
Palestine Polytechnic University · PS

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The interfacial compatibility of the natural filler and synthetic polymer is the key performance characteristic of biocomposites. The fillers are chemically modified, or coupling agents and compatibilisers are used to ensure optimal filler-polymer compatibility. Hence, we have investigated the effect of compatibilisation strategies of olive pits (OP) flour content (10, 20, 30, and 40%wt.) filled with recycled low-density polyethylene (rLDPE) on the chemical, physical, mechanical, and thermal behaviour of the developed biocomposites. In this study, we aim to investigate the filler-polymer compatibility in biocomposites by employing novel strategies for the functionalisation of OP filler and/or rLDPE matrix. Specifically, four cases are considered: untreated OP filled rLDPE (Case 1), treated OP filled rLDPE (Case 2), treated OP filled functionalised rLDPE (Case 3), and treated and functionalised OP filled functionalised rLDPE (Case 4). In general, the evaluation of the performance of biocomposites facilitated the application of OP industrial waste as an eco-friendly reinforcing agent for rLDPE-based biocomposites. Furthermore, surface treatment and compatibilisation improved the properties of the developed biocomposites over untreated filler or uncoupled biocomposites. Besides that, the compatibilisers used aided in reducing water uptake and improving thermal behaviour, which contributed to the stability of the manufactured biocomposites.

Indexed as

biocompositeschemical crosslinkingcompatibilisationinterfacial adhesionolive pitsrecycled polymer

Identifiers

PMID34685245
PMCPMC8539858
OpenAlexW3207955047

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.