ArticleScientific reports2026
Effect of magnesium oxide on mechanical behavior of jute fiber reinforced epoxy bio nanocomposite.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This work investigates how magnesium oxide (MgO) nanoparticles affect the mechanical performance of jute fiber-reinforced epoxy bio-nanocomposites. Three composite variations were generated using hand lay-up (HLU): one without MgO, one with 2% MgO, and another with 4%. The laminate surface was uniformly subjected to a controlled load of 30 kg using a flat steel plate and mechanical weights to ensure homogeneous bonding. All samples were cured accordingly. Tensile and flexural tests as well as Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR) and Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) were used together to evaluate structural and chemical properties. Tensile test results revealed that the MgO-free composite exhibited higher tensile strength and stiffness, whereas the 2% MgO composite showed higher strain at failure, indicating improved ductility and toughness. This highlights a clear trade-off between strength and ductility depending on MgO content. Though all samples showed similar flexural strength, which is 39 MPa, flexural analysis revealed that the MgO-free composite had the greatest flexural modulus, which is 320.542 MPa, while the 2% MgO composite showed the lowest, which is 264.123 MPa. FTIR verified interactions between MgO and the epoxy matrix on a chemical level. Peaks at 3286 cm⁻¹, 1712 cm⁻¹, and 1264 cm⁻¹ in the MgO-free composite matched hydroxyl, carbonyl, and ester groups. These slightly changed peaks in the 2% MgO composite point to improved bonding. Reduced dispersion efficiency and further peaks at 350 cm⁻¹ were shown by the 4% MgO sample. These results were validated by SEM pictures displaying homogeneous MgO distribution at 2% and notable aggregation at 4%. Using without MgO was the best choice because it increased tensile strength and chemical bonding while keeping the structure strong, making it a good option for eco-friendly industrial applications.
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.