MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2265235695 · doi:10.4271/2006-01-0507

Cell Nucleation and Growth Study of PP Foaming with CO<sub>2</sub> in a Batch-Simulation System

2006· article· en· W2265235695 on OpenAlexafffund
Qianyu Guo, Samantha Chang, J. Wang, Chul B. Park

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicPolymer Foaming and Composites
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsNucleationMaterials scienceComputer scienceChemical engineeringThermodynamicsPhysicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<div class="htmlview paragraph">TPO is being used to make automotive parts for its number of advantages: i) low temperature flexibility and ductility, ii) excellent impact/stiffness/flow balance, iii) excellent weatherability, and iv) free-flowing pellet form for easy processing, storage, and handling. However, by foaming TPO, due to its higher rigidity-to-weigh ratio, it would offer additional advantages over the solid counterparts in terms of reduced weight, reduced material cost, and decreased fuel usage without compromising their performance. Since a major component in TPO is polypropylene (PP), understanding PP foaming behaviours is an important step towards understanding TPO foaming. For foam materials, cell density and cell size are two significant parameters that affect their material properties. In this research, we observed the cell nucleation and initial growth behaviours of PP foams blown with CO<sub>2</sub> under various experimental conditions in a batch foaming simulation system. We found that the nucleating agent content, initial temperature, pressure (i.e., gas content), and pressure drop rate during foaming have a significant effect on cell density and cell growth. Based on the experimental results, optimum foaming conditions and effective processing strategies for PP-CO<sub>2</sub> system are suggested.</div>

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.963
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.209 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper seriesSame topicPolymer Foaming and CompositesFrench-language works237,207