In‐line monitoring of immiscible polymer blends in a rheometer with a fiber‐optics‐assisted fluorescence detection system
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In‐line studies of the initial stages of shear‐induced coalescence in two‐phase polymer blends were carried out with a home‐built device combining a cone and plate rheometer and a fiber‐optic‐assisted fluorescence detection system. A blend of 90 wt % poly(2‐ethylhexyl methacrylate) (PEHMA) and 10 wt % poly(butyl methacrylate) (PBMA) was prepared by the casting of films onto a solid substrate from mixed aqueous latex dispersions of the two polymers. The dispersions were prepared via emulsion polymerization under conditions in which both components were formed as spherical particles with a very narrow size distribution. By using a 14:1 particle ratio of PEHMA to PBMA, we obtained films in which 120‐nm PBMA particles were surrounded by a PEHMA matrix. The blend contained phenanthrene‐labeled PBMA particles and anthracene‐labeled PBMA particles in a ratio of 4:1, whereas the PEHMA matrix polymer was unlabeled. We monitored the anthracene‐to‐phenanthrene fluorescence intensity ratio ( I 470 / I 360 ) as a measure of direct nonradiative energy transfer from phenanthrene to anthracene, whereas the blend was sheared at different shear rates and temperatures. Under no‐shear conditions, the results of in‐line experiments were in good agreement with the results of off‐line measurements of energy transfer by conventional techniques. In blends under shear, the two sets of experiments, in‐line and off‐line, did not agree with each other. The cause of this disagreement was associated with normal forces in the blend under shear that affected the optical path length and the relative intensities of the fluorescence signals of the phenanthrene and anthracene groups in the blend. © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Polym Sci Part B: Polym Phys 39: 2302–2316, 2001
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".