Influence of melt drawing on the morphology of one‐ and two‐step processed LDPE/thermoplastic starch blends
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this study the morphology of LDPE/TPS blends prepared by a one‐step extrusion process is compared to that obtained by reprocessing of the original blends. The influence of composition and melt drawing is examined. A novel methodology based on the form factor of the dispersed particle was used to estimate the equivalent spherical particle size of dispersed thermoplastic starch (TPS). This approach allows for the quantitative comparison of average dispersed phase particles regardless of their shape. Blends prepared in the one‐step extrusion process show increased levels of anisotropy as a consequence of a combination of coalescence and particle deformation during melt drawing. Reprocessed materials demonstrate morphologies that are highly stable to a wide range of hot stretch ratio conditions. The TPS particles of reprocessed blends show no coalescence and a low degree of deformation. This phenomenon is explained by plasticizer evaporation resulting from the second processing step. The TPS is transformed from a highly deformable phase to one resembling a partially cross‐linked material. These data indicate that the one‐step processing of LDPE/TPS blends can be used to generate a wide range of highly elongated morphological structures. A two‐step approach, analogous to typical compounding and shaping operations and involving controlled glycerol removal in the second step can be used to prepare a wide range of highly stable, more isotropic, dispersed particle morphologies. © 2003 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Adv Polym Techn 22: 297–305, 2003; Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI 10.1002/adv.10057
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it