ArticleMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Mechanical Performance of Wool-Reinforced Epoxy Composites: Tensile, Flexural, Compressive, and Impact Analysis.
Article in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. 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.
- Experimental Evaluation of Sheep Wool Fibres as Sustainable Reinforcement in Eco-Friendly Cement Mortars.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study situates washed sheep-wool fibres as a sustainable reinforcement candidate for epoxy matrices and evaluates their mechanical response under tensile, flexural, compressive, and Charpy impact loading. The objective of this work is to assess whether short, washed sheep-wool fibres can function as a sustainable reinforcement for epoxy matrices, and to identify optimal fibre length-content windows that improve mechanical behaviour for engineering applications. Moulded-machined specimens were produced with fibre lengths of 3, 6, and 10 mm and contents of 1.0-5.0 wt.%, depending on the test; neat epoxy served as the reference. In tension, selected formulations-particularly 10 mm/1.5 wt.%-showed simultaneous increases in ultimate stress and modulus relative to the neat resin, corresponding to gains of about 10% in ultimate tensile stress and 50% in tensile modulus, at the expense of ductility. In flexure, the modulus decreases by roughly 15-35% compared with the matrix, whereas configurations with 3-6 mm at 2.5-5 wt.% raise the fracture stress by about 35-45% and improve post-peak resistance. In compression, reinforcement markedly elevates yield stress, with increases of up to about 160% at 3 mm/2 wt.%, while the ultimate strain decreases moderately. In Charpy impact, all reinforced materials underperform the resin, with absorbed energy reduced by roughly 75-93% depending on fibre length and content, with 3 mm/1 wt.% being the least affected. A two-factor analysis of variance (ANOVA) indicates that fibre length primarily governs tensile and compressive behaviour, while fibre content dominates flexural and impact responses. Overall, the findings support wool fibres as a viable reinforcement when length and content are optimized, pointing to their use in non-structural to semi-structural industrial components such as interior panels, housings, casings, protective covers, and other parts where moderate tensile/compressive performance is sufficient and material sustainability is prioritised.
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.