Dynamics and criteria for bubble instabilities in a single layer film blowing extrusion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this paper, the performance of a new in‐line scanning camera system for the study of various bubble instabilities in film blowing extrusion is critically evaluated. Three commercial film‐grade polyethylenes, LmPE, LLDPE and LDPE, were used to generate the bubble instabilities. Reliable and objective criteria for differentiating various bubble instabilities such as draw resonance, helicoidal instability, and frost line height instability are proposed by using the new device. Detailed dynamics of each bubble instability was carefully investigated as a function of time in a broad range of the take‐up ratio (TUR), blow‐up ratio (BUR) and frost line height (FLH). In addition, effects of melt temperature and mass flow rates on dynamics of the bubble instabilities are discussed. It was found that the new system could capture the main characteristics of all bubble instabilities quantitatively. It was also found that magnitude and periodicity of radius variation during draw resonance of LmPE decreased as TUR increased at constant FLH and BUR. This implies that the origin of draw resonance in film blowing seems to be different from that observed in fiber spinning. In the case of helicoidal instability, eccentricity, which defines the deviation of the bubble center from the die center, decreased as TUR increased. However, the bubble could not be stabilized as expected. A graphical quantification approach to determine the stable zone in the bubble stability map is also discussed.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".