MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2038961225 · doi:10.1021/ma0482664

High Contrast Imaging of Interphases in Ternary Polymer Blends Using Focused Ion Beam Preparation and Atomic Force Microscopy

2005· article· en· W2038961225 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMacromolecules · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIon-surface interactions and analysis
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique MontréalRegroupement Québécois sur les Matériaux de Pointe
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials scienceComposite materialPolymerHigh-density polyethyleneIon beamPolystyreneTernary operationPolyethyleneFocused ion beamInterphasePhase (matter)Chemical engineeringBeam (structure)IonOpticsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we demonstrate the applicability of focused ion beam (FIB) preparation followed by tapping mode atomic force microscopy (TMAFM) to analyze model interphase thicknesses in high density polyethylene/polystyrene/poly(methyl methacrylate) (HDPE/PS/PMMA) ternary polymer blends prepared by melt mixing. Previous work has shown that, in a polyethylene matrix, this blend exhibits a dispersed phase composed of a well-segregated PMMA core and a PS shell. Control of the PS/PMMA composition ratio allows for the control of shell thickness and hence this blend provides an excellent model system to analyze interphase thicknesses. A focused ion beam preparation was applied to the melt blended samples to prepare very smooth surfaces without mechanical deformation (i.e., no plowing or interfacial debonding), while TMAFM was used to obtain high-resolution images of the composite droplets in order to measure the mean diameter of the droplets and PS shell thickness. It is shown that the three polymer components have different ion beam etching rates, which results in a topological contrast between the phases of the blends when viewed by tapping mode atomic force microscopy. In this case, PMMA has the highest etching rate, while PS has the lowest and HDPE is intermediate. This high level of contrast between the phases allows for a clear identification of the PS interphase. Even the fine features of particles in the process of coalescing can be clearly identified. To ensure that this procedure was not altering the blend phase sizes in any way, average composite droplet diameters obtained with FIB preparation and TMAFM measurements were compared with the classic technique of cryomicrotome preparation and SEM measurements. The dispersed phase size data from the two procedures compare well. The FIB/TMAFM approach allows for the estimation of the PS interphase thicknesses from 100 to 200 nm depending on the PS/PMMA composition ratio. The approach presented here avoids the pitfalls associated with microtomy such as microvoiding, deformation of the materials and debonding at the interphase. It also eliminates the need for extraction of polymers with selective solvents and staining techniques used to provide contrast. This technique provides significant advantages for the analysis of multicomponent polymer blends or blends with complex morphologies. It also provides a first step toward a new approach for analyzing interphase thickness in polymer blends.

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.

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 score0.191
Threshold uncertainty score0.497

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.239 · 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