MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999267575 · doi:10.1002/pen.20432

Rheology of wood plastics melt, part 3: Nonlinear nature of the flow

2005· article· en· W1999267575 on OpenAlexfundno aff
T. Q. Li, Michael P. Wolcott

Bibliographic record

VenuePolymer Engineering and Science · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicRheology and Fluid Dynamics Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsExtensional viscosityRheometerRheologyMaterials scienceViscoelasticityComposite materialShear (geology)Shear stressHigh-density polyethyleneShear flowNonlinear systemShear rateStress relaxationMechanicsCreepPolyethyleneShear viscosityPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The nonlinear rheology of HDPE/maple melt in both shear and extensional flow was studied using a rotational parallel plate rheometer and the hyperbolic die technique, respectively. Nonlinear features were found in oscillatory shear tests at strain levels far below the values for neat polymer melt. The shear stress relaxation tests revealed the time–strain factorizability, and the damping function was found to follow the sigmoidal‐type relation. The nonlinear nature of the shear flow was further observed as the shear stress growth function from step rate tests as compared to the prediction based on linear viscoelasticity. Extensional stress growth functions of the filled HDPE was build through the viscosity data based on hyperbolic dies with different Hencky strain. The comparison with prediction based on linear viscoelasticity and the Trouton's law further indicated significant damping owing to the particulate suspension nature of the wood plastics melts. POLYM. ENG. SCI., 46:114–121, 2006. © 2005 Society of Plastics Engineers

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations35
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolymer Engineering and ScienceSame topicRheology and Fluid Dynamics StudiesFrench-language works237,207