High-Shear-Rate Behavior of Radial Hydrogenated Styrene−Isoprene and Block Ethylene−Propylene Copolymer Solutions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Using a capillary viscometry technique, the high-shear-rate behavior of two polymer additives (an ethylene−propylene block copolymer and a radial hydrogenated styrene−isoprene copolymer) in a hydrocarbon-based oil solution has been investigated. At mass concentrations of up to 2.0% for the styrene−isoprene copolymer and 1.5% for the ethylene−propylene additive, the viscosity was measured over a range of shear rates from 10 4 to 10 6 s -1 . To correct for the effects of viscous heating and pressure changes, a numerical correction procedure is used which reduces the experimental results to viscosity data at a common reference temperature and pressure for comparison. Over the range of shear rates examined, the styrene−isoprene solutions exhibited typical shear-thinning behavior, becoming more dramatic at higher polymer concentrations. In addition to shear thinning at the higher shear rates, a shear-thickening region was observed in the more concentrated ethylene−propylene solutions. As the polymer concentration increased, the degree of shear thickening was shown to be more severe and the critical region was observed at lower shear rates.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".