Morphological and Physical Properties of Triblock Copolymers of Methyl Methacrylate and 2‐Ethylhexyl Methacrylate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Summary: Triblock copolymers of methyl methacrylate (MMA) and 2‐ethylhexyl methacrylate (EHMA) [that is, poly(MMA–EHMA–MMA)] were prepared by an emulsion atom‐transfer radical polymerization. The relationships of their structural, morphological, and physical properties were investigated. The latex particles had core‐shell morphologies and the block copolymers experienced phase separation. Small latex particles with a low number of cores could deform and wet silicon‐wafer surfaces, but the deformation of large latex particles was restricted by the internal two‐phase morphology of the particles. Latex casting produced continuous pinhole‐free films, in which hard poly(MMA) (PMMA) cores of different latex particles merged and provided interparticle connections. The morphology of solution‐cast films depended on block composition, solvent type, and film thickness. For all the prepared polymer samples, thick films cast in toluene had poly(EHMA) (PEHMA) materials at air surface, whereas those cast in tetrahydrofuran had a sponge‐like PMMA surface structure. Thin toluene‐cast films from P(MMA–EHMA–MMA) with the block degrees of polymerization ( $\overline {DP}$ ) 200–930–200 showed spherical PMMA domains and those from 380–930–380 yielded a protruded worm‐like PMMA structure. The copolymer materials were coated on a glass surface for peeling tests. The films gave good hot‐melt adhesion properties when the $\overline {DP}$ of the PEHMA block was over 600. The peeling strength depended on the lengths of both PEHMA and PMMA blocks. The P(MMA–EHMA–MMA) sample with $\overline {DP} {\rm s}$ of 310–930–310 yielded the highest peeling strength of 7.4 kgf · inch −1 . The developed material is demonstrated to be a good candidate for a solvent‐free, hot‐melt, pressure‐sensitive adhesives for special‐purpose applications such as medical tapes and labels. magnified image
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".