Finite element model of thermal stress effects onstress distributions in rubber modified glassy polymers. Part 1 – Single particle model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A single particle finite element model has been used to analyse the effects of thermal stresses on the stress distributions near the interface between the rubber particle and the matrix in rubber modified polymers. The thermal stresses are due to the mismatch of thermal contraction between the rubber particle and the matrix during cooling. The study is to determine whether the thermal stresses are significant enough to affect the distribution of normal stress and von Mises stress at the particle/matrix interface. Results from the single particle model show that a temperature decrease of 60 K, i.e. from 100 to 40°C, can generate a circumferential compressive stress at the particle/matrix interface, which is of the same magnitude as the tensile stress required to cause failure in most of the glassy polymers. Although the effect on the circumferential normal stress is significant, its effect on the von Mises stress is very small. The results also show that when the cavitation occurs in the rubber particle, the thermal stress effect is drastically reduced. This study provides encouraging evidence for the importance of thermal stresses in determining the stress distributions in rubber modified polymers and suggests that thermal stresses should be considered in the deformation analysis of these materials.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.002 |
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".