Microstructure and Mechanical Properties of Welded Thermoplastics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Thermoplastics have been used increasingly for automobile components for both interior and under-the-hood applications. The plastic parts are made through various molding process such as compression molding, injection molding and blow molding. For parts with large or complicated geometry, small portions of the part may have to be molded first, then joined together using a welding process. The welded regions usually exhibit inhomogeneous and inferior mechanical performance compared to the bulk regions due to the differences in thermal history. The microstructures and mechanical properties of welded thermoplastics have been examined using hot-plate welded polyethylene. The specimens are prepared at various thermal conditions to simulate the real welding process. The thermal properties in welds are monitored using DSC (Differential Scanning Calorimetry) and the crystallinities are calculated. The microstructures in welds are examined using optical microscope and TEM (transmission electron micrograph) and smaller lamellar size is observed. The mechanical properties of the weld are examined using tensile test and special-constructed microindentation test. Both tests show that the mechanical properties in the welds are inferior to that in the bulks but they can be improved by proper heat treatments such as annealing.
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) | 0.002 | 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".