Evaluation of physical, rheological, and structural properties of vulcanized EVA/SBS modified bitumen
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT In this study, the performance and modification mechanism of EVA (ethylene‐vinyl‐acetate) modified (EM), EVA/SBS (Styrene‐Butadiene‐Styrene) modified (ESM), and EVA/SBS/sulfur modified (ESSM) bitumens were evaluated. The physical, rheological, morphological, and structural properties were determined before and after aging, and compared with those of base bitumen. These properties were evaluation using conventional physical methods, Fourier transform infrared spectrometer, optical microscopy, dynamic shear rheometer, and bending beam rheometer, respectively. The results showed that sulfur was useful in bitumen, EVA, and SBS modification by forming a vulcanized crosslinking polymer network. The vulcanization improved most of the physical properties of ESM bitumen, especially high‐ and low‐temperature performance, and toughness and tenacity (previously not evaluated in the literature). Meanwhile, vulcanization improved the compatibility between polymers and bitumen and increased the aging resistance of ESM bitumen. Vulcanization reactions took place without new functional groups being presented in the infrared spectrum. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2017, 134, 44850.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".