Conjugated Linoleic Acid/Styrene/Butyl Acrylate Bulk and Emulsion Polymerization for Adhesive Applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary The incorporation of conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) into pressure sensitive adhesive (PSA) formulations was evaluated. First, a series of free radical bulk copolymerizations of CLA/styrene (Sty) and CLA/butyl acrylate (BA) were run for reactivity ratio estimation. This was followed by CLA/Sty/BA bulk terpolymerizations. Pseudo‐kinetic models were developed and validated with the copolymerization data and extended and validated for the CLA/Sty/BA terpolymerization case. The pseudo‐kinetic models incorporated the electron trapping effect of oleic acid, a common impurity found in CLA. A series of emulsion terpolymerizations of CLA/Sty/BA were then designed to investigate the influence of terpolymer composition, molecular weight, chain transfer agent concentration, cross‐linker concentration, latex viscosity and particle size on PSA performance (tack, peel strength and shear strength). Empirical PSA performance models were developed and expressed as 3D response surfaces for optimization of the PSA formulation. All experiments were performed at 80°C and monitored with attenuated total reflectance Fourier transform infrared (ATR‐FTIR) spectroscopy both off‐line (bulk experiments) and in‐line (emulsion experiments). Ultimately, the incorporation of 30 wt.% CLA into a practical PSA application suitable for removable adhesives was achieved.
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".