Modeling the delamination process during shear premixing of nanoclay/thermoset polymer nanocomposites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract As shear premixing is an important process for the dispersion of nanoclays in polymeric resins, this article studies the effect of temperature, duration, speed of premixing, and also the interlamellar spacing of clay platelets on the dispersion of organoclay in epoxy by using a high speed premixing technique which can generate high shear. The quality of dispersion and intercalation/exfoliation of organoclay in epoxy after premixing (before adding hardener) was analyzed by means of X‐ray diffraction (XRD) and rheological measurement. The dispersion and intercalation/exfoliation of organoclay in the epoxy nanocomposites (ENCs) after curing were characterized by TEM. The results illustrate that the intercalation/exfoliation of organoclay in epoxy at the premixing step is very much depending on the premixing parameters. This article also presents a model which takes into account the parameters such as the interlamellar spacing of clay platelets, the viscosity of the epoxy‐clay mixtures, and the velocity of the mixer to explain their effect on the dispersion of clay in epoxy resin. The study focuses on the flow of epoxy clay in the high shear mixer to describe a model for predicting the processing conditions necessary for achieving delamination of the clay layers. Experimental results on the dispersion of clay are also provided to validate the model. The model provides a guide for the premixing parameters necessary to separate the clay layers. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci, 2011
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".