ArticlePolymers2024
Nanocellulose Grades with Different Morphologies and Surface Modification as Additives for Waterborne Epoxy Coatings.
Article in Polymers, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cellulose Nanocrystals as Nucleating Agents in Lignin-Based Rigid Polyurethane Foams.ACS omega · 2026Article
- Research on the Performance of Modified Nanocrystalline Cellulose Reinforced Waterborne Epoxy Coatings.ACS omega · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
While adding different micro- and nanocellulose types into epoxy coating formulations with waterborne phenalkamine crosslinker, effects on processing conditions and coating performance were systematically investigated. The variations in viscosity, thermal and thermomechanical properties, mechanical behavior, abrasive wear, water contact angles, and coating morphologies were evaluated. The selected additives include microcrystalline cellulose (MCC) at 1 to 10 wt.% and cellulose nanocrystals (CNC), cellulose nanofibers (CNF), cellulose microfibers (CMF), and hydrophobically modified cellulose microfibers (mCMF) at 0.1 to 1.5 wt.%. The viscosity profiles are determined by the inherent additive characteristics with strong shear thinning effects for epoxy/CNF, while the epoxy/mCMF provides lower viscosity and better matrix compatibility owing to the lubrication of encapsulated wax. The crosslinking of epoxy/CNF is favored and postponed for epoxy/(CNC, CMF, mCMF), as the stronger interactions between epoxy and CNF are confirmed by an increase in the glass transition temperature and reduction in the dampening factor. The mechanical properties indicate the highest hardness and impact strength for epoxy/CNF resulting in the lowest abrasion wear rates, but ductility enhances and wear rates mostly reduce for epoxy/mCMF together with hydrophobic protection. In addition, the mechanical reinforcement owing to the specific organization of a nanocellulose network at percolation threshold concentrations of 0.75 wt.% is confirmed by microscopic analysis: the latter results in a 2.6 °C (CNF) or 1.6 °C (CNC) increase in the glass transition temperature, 50% (CNF) or 20% (CNC) increase in the E modulus, 37% (CNF) or 32% (CNC) increase in hardness, and 58% (CNF) or 33% (CNC) lower abrasive wear compared to neat epoxy, while higher concentrations up to 1.5 wt.% mCMF can be added. This research significantly demonstrates that nanocellulose is directly compatible with a waterborne phenalkamine crosslinker and actively contributes to the crosslinking of waterborne epoxy coatings, changing the intrinsic glass transition temperatures and hardness properties, to which mechanical coating performance directly relates.
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.