Composite droplets with core/shell morphologies prepared from HDPE/PS/PMMA ternary blends by twin‐screw extrusion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Ternary blends of PS and PMMA in a PE matrix were prepared by twin‐screw extrusion to investigate the core/shell encapsulation phenomenon in the composite droplet. The PS was found to encapsulate the PMMA to form composite droplets within the PE matrix as expected from the spreading coefficient theory. The effects of dispersed phase concentration, viscosity ratio, feeding sequence and twin‐screw operating conditions were investigated. The blend morphology was observed by scanning electron microscopy after selective extraction of either PS or PMMA, and average core and composite droplet diameters were determined by image analysis. Although it is known that the structure of composite droplet blends can be substantially altered through control of the volume fraction of the components in the dispersed phase, this study demonstrates that blends with a 1:1 composite droplet volume fraction are relatively stable to large variations in the minor phase viscosities and processing conditions. Twin‐screw extrusion thus provides a highly robust technique for the melt processing of blends possessing composite droplet morphologies. Polym. Eng. Sci. 44:749–759, 2004. © 2004 Society of Plastics Engineers.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".