MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2071413883 · doi:10.1177/0021955x03039247

Effect of Talc Content on the Volume Expansion Ratio of Extruded PP Foams

2003· article· en· W2071413883 on OpenAlexaff
Hani E. Naguib, Chul B. Park, Patrick Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cellular Plastics · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicPolymer Foaming and Composites
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTalcExpansion ratioMaterials sciencePolypropyleneComposite materialThermal expansionVolume (thermodynamics)ExtrusionVolume expansionThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper elucidates the effects of cell density on the volume expansion behavior of polypropylene (PP) foams blown with butane in extrusion. The cell density was controlled by varying the talc content, and foam expansion was observed at a fixed blowing agent content while varying the melt and die temperatures. As observed in our previous studies, the curve of the final expansion ratio of PP foam versus temperature showed a typical mountain shape for each talc content, confirming that the two governing expansion mechanisms were gas loss and stiffening of melt. As the talc content increased, the expansion curve skewed towards the lower temperature, which showed that the expanded foams with a high talc content were more susceptible to gas loss at elevated temperatures. This indicates that the processing temperature should be decreased to have a large expansion ratio from the extruded PP foams at a high talc content. In other words, the optimum temperature to maximize expansion decreased at a higher talc content. It is believed that the shift of the expansion curves was caused by the promoted expansion rate of extruded foams with a greater talc content because of the reduced diffusion distance of gas molecules to the nearest stabilized nucleus. On the other hand, the increased cell density at a high talc content increased the number of cell layers in the cross section of the extruded foam, and thereby the gas loss was localized to the cells on the surface which acted favorable for the final expansion ratio to a certain degree.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations85
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cellular PlasticsSame topicPolymer Foaming and CompositesFrench-language works237,207