Search

The present work on the mechanical properties of ≤10 wt% fly ash additions in 2.5 wt% increments to recycled high-density polyethylene (RHDPE) synthesizes experimental data from three similar published reports. The present work shows, as a function of increasing fly ash addition level, maxima at the initial fly ash addition level of 2.5 wt% for the tensile elastic modulus (+25%) and tensile strength (+10%); a slight general increase in the yield stress (+6%); and significant general decreases in the yield strain (−61%), elongation at break (−92%), and Charpy impact strength (−55%). Combining these data with data for higher-level additions of fly ash (≤40 wt%/23 vol%) and cenospheres (≤39 vol%) to HDPE or RHDPE provides the basis for design parameters and a generalized model for the interpretation of failure of composites of hard brittle spherical dispersant additions in ductile polymeric matrices. The relevant load-extension plots are characterized by three behavioral regions: ductile deformation (dispersion strengthening and stress concentration), crazing (debonding and cavitation), and brittle failure (fibril failure). The locations of these regions and their transitions are a function of five dependent variables: dispersant volume, dispersant particle size, intrinsic flaw size ( viz., dispersant size), generated flaw size ( viz., void size), and interfacial bond strength and associated load transfer. POLYM. ENG. SCI., 56:1096-1108, 2016. © 2016 Society of Plastics Engineers [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This research derives a numerical taxonomy that classifies manufacturers with similar combinations of supply chain (SC) capabilities into three SC Strategy Groups. This research also explores the relationship between the SC Strategy Groups and contextual factors, competitive priorities and firm performance. There are significant differences among the SC Strategy Groups for the location of the firm, the level of uncertainty, the competitiveness of the market and firm performance. Surprisingly, there is no relationship between the SC Strategy Groups and a firm's competitive priorities, indicating that firms are often not linking their SC strategy to their competitive strategy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]