A study on weld line morphology and mechanical strength of injection molded polystyrene/poly(methyl methacrylate) blends
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this work, the mechanical strength and weld line morphology of injection molded polystyrene/poly(methyl methacrylate) (PS/PMMA) blends were investigated by scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and mechanical property test. The experimental results show that the tensile strength of PS/PMMA blends get greatly decreased due to the presence of the weld line. Although the tensile strength without the weld line of PS/PMMA (70/30) is much higher than that of the PS/PMMA (30/70) blend, their tensile strength with weld line shows reversed change. The viscosity ratio of dispersed phase over matrix is a very important parameter for control of weld‐line morphology of the immiscible polymer blend. In PS/PMMA (70/30) blend, the PMMA dispersed domains at the core of the weld line are spherically shaped, which is the same as bulk. While in the PS/PMMA (30/70) blend, the viscosity of the dispersed PS phase is lower than that of the PMMA matrix, the PS phase is absent at the weld line, and PS particles are highly oriented parallel to the weld line, which is a stress concentrator. This is why weld line strength of PS/PMMA (30/70) is lower than that of PS/PMMA (70/30) blend. © 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 84: 1856–1865, 2002; DOI 10.1002/app.10450
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".