MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2034145382 · doi:10.3139/217.2267

Utilizing Processing Parameters for Evaluating Polymer Viscosity during Plastication in Injection Molding

2009· article· en· W2034145382 on OpenAlexaff
Rickey Dubay, D. Zhang, J. M. Hernandez

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Polymer Processing · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInjection Molding Process and Properties
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceViscosityMolding (decorative)PolymerInjection molding machinePressure dropComposite materialWork (physics)RheologyMelt flow indexTemperature dependence of liquid viscosityMechanical engineeringMechanicsRelative viscosityEngineeringCopolymer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper investigates the viscosity behavior of melt polymer during the plastication stage in an injection molding machine (IMM). The objective of this paper is to develop theoretical viscosity-based models for evaluating and predicting the bulk viscosity of the melt polymer near the tip of the screw during the plastication stage. The uniqueness of these models is that they include the effects of material properties and machine processing parameters, such as screw rotational speed, hydraulic back pressure, barrel pressure drop, melt pressure and melt temperature. Several open loop tests were conducted on an industrial IMM in order to quantify process parameter effects on the plastication cycle. The derived model was used to predict bulk viscosity using the open loop tests data. The viscosity-based models in this work will be used for developing future optimal controllers for controlling the polymer viscosity during the plastication stage of the injection molding cycle.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.268 · 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

Citations3
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Polymer ProcessingSame topicInjection Molding Process and PropertiesFrench-language works237,207