ArticlePolymers2024
Machining Eco-Friendly Jute Fiber-Reinforced Epoxy Composites Using Specially Produced Cryo-Treated and Untreated Cutting Tools.
Article in Polymers, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In recent years, consumers have become increasingly interested in natural, biodegradable and eco-friendly composites. Eco-friendly composites manufactured using natural reinforcing filling materials stand out with properties such as cost effectiveness and easy accessibility. For these reasons, in this research, a composite workpiece was specially manufactured using eco-friendly jute fibers. Two cost-effective cutting tools were specially produced to ensure high-quality machining of this composite workpiece. One of these specially manufactured cutting tools was subjected to DC&T (deep cryogenic treatment and tempering) processes to improve its performance. At the end of the research, when the lowest and highest Fd (delamination factor) values obtained with DC&T-T1 and T1 cutting tools were compared, it was observed that 5.49% and 6.23% better results were obtained with the DC&T-T1 cutting tool, respectively. From the analysis of the S/N (signal-to-noise) ratios obtained using Fd values, it was found that the most appropriate machining parameters for the composite workpiece used in this investigation were the DC&T-T1 cutting tool, a 2000 rev/min spindle speed and a 100 mm/min feed rate. Through ANOVAs (analyses of variance), it was discovered that the most significant parameter having an impact on the Fd values was the spindle speed, with a rate of 53.01%. Considering the lowest and highest Ra (average surface roughness) values obtained using DC&T-T1 and T1 cutting tools, it was seen that 19.42% and 16.91% better results were obtained using the DC&T-T1 cutting tool, respectively. In the S/N ratio analysis results obtained using Ra values, it was revealed that the most appropriate machining parameters for the composite workpiece used in this investigation were the DC&T-T1 cutting tool, a 2000 rev/min spindle speed and a 100 mm/min feed rate. In the ANOVAs, it was revealed that the most significant parameter having an effect on the Ra values was the feed rate at 37.86%.
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.