Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41865110›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2026

Recycling paper waste into structural cellulose composites with enhanced mechanical and thermal performance.

Marcin Szczepanski, Ahmed Manguri

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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.

Marcin SzczepanskiFaculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Gdansk University of Technology, 80-223, Gdansk, Poland. marcin.szczepanski@pg.edu.pl.
Ahmed ManguriCivil Engineering Department, College of Engineering, University of Raparin, Rania, Kurdistan Region, Iraq.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recycling post-consumer cellulose waste for use in construction materials has largely been limited to board-type composite materials. While the wood-panel market is dominated by OSB and MDF, there is limited research concerning structural boards produced directly from recycled paper waste through simple processing methods. This work examines the potential to produce rigid polyurethane-cellulose composite boards using ground waste newspapers as a filler material without a catalyst. Composite boards containing 10-50 wt.% cellulose were manufactured by hot pressing and evaluated for tensile and compressive strengths, Charpy impact testing, thermogravimetric analysis, dynamic mechanical analysis, and water vapour permeability. The modulus of elasticity increased nearly three times from 10% cellulose content to 50% cellulose content due to the increased cellulose content. The maximum compressive strength was achieved at 30% cellulose content. Impact strength was not significantly impacted by filler content, resulting in consistent values for all compositions. Thermogravimetric analysis indicated that, with increasing cellulose fraction, thermal stability improved (e.g., the peak decomposition temperature (PDT) increased). Dynamic mechanical analysis results confirmed that, for boards with high cellulose content, stiffness and energy dissipation increased with each incremental increase in cellulose content. The results of the study indicate that paper recycling waste can be processed into a mechanically stable material, Polyurethane-Cellulose Boards, for use in many non-load-bearing applications within the construction sector. Using these boards represents a viable and scalable means of converting cellulose waste into a usable product in the construction industry.

Indexed as

CelluloseCompositeMechanical propertiesRecycling paperThermogravimetric

Identifiers

PMID41865110
PMCPMC13144366

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.