MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1978661805 · doi:10.1063/1.3480991

Magnetic microrheometer for <i>in situ</i> characterization of coating viscosity

2010· article· en· W1978661805 on OpenAlexaff
Jin‐Oh Song, Robert Henry, Ryan Jacobs, Lorraine F. Francis

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Scientific Instruments · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCharacterization and Applications of Magnetic Nanoparticles
Canadian institutionsNexen (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceIn situCharacterization (materials science)CoatingViscosityComposite materialNanotechnologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A magnetic microrheometer has been designed to characterize the local viscosity of liquid-applied coatings in situ during solidification. The apparatus includes NdFeB magnets mounted on computer-controlled micropositioners for the manipulation of ∼1 μm diameter superparamagnetic particles in the coating. Magnetic field gradients at 20-70 T/m are generated by changing magnet size and the gap distance between the magnets. A specimen stage located between two magnets is outfitted with a heater and channels to control process conditions (temperature and air flow), and a digital optical microscope lens above the stage is used to monitor the probe particle position. Validation studies with glycerol and polyimide precursor solution showed that microrheometry results match traditional bulk rheometry within an error of 5%. The viscosities of polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) solution and polyimide precursor solution coatings were measured at different shear rates (0.01-5 s(-1)) by adjusting the magnetic field gradient. The effect of proximity to the substrate on the particle motion was characterized and compared with theoretical predictions. The magnetic microrheometer was used to characterize the time-viscosity profile of PVA coatings during drying at several temperatures. The viscosity range measured by the apparatus was 0.1-20 Pa s during drying of coatings at temperatures between room temperature and 80 °C.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score0.309

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.223 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of Scientific InstrumentsSame topicCharacterization and Applications of Magnetic NanoparticlesFrench-language works237,207