Compatibilization mechanism induced by organoclay in PMMA/PS blends
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this work, the effect of adding organoclay (Cloisite 20A) to a poly(methyl metacrylate) (PMMA)/polystyrene (PS) blend was evaluated in order to understand the compatibilization mechanism taking place. The blend morphology was quantified using micrographs obtained by scanning electron microscopy and observed by transmission electron microscopy. The state of dispersion of the clay was studied using small angle X-ray scattering and wide angle X-ray scattering and by applying the Carreau-Yasuda with a yield stress model to small amplitude oscillatory shear (SAOS) data. Morphological analyses revealed that the clay was intercalated, that its addition resulted in a decrease in the size of the dispersed phase and that it was preferentially located at the interface, except in the case of saturated interfaces, in which case the remaining clay was dispersed in PMMA. By applying the simplified Palierne model to SAOS experiments, the interfacial tension between the polymers forming the blend was inferred and shown to decrease upon addition of clay. The relaxation spectra inferred from the SAOS data, using the Honerkamp and Weese method, revealed four relaxation times: Relaxation of PMMA and PS chains, relaxation of the droplet shape, as well as an additional relaxation phenomenon attributed to the Marangoni stress. Although Marangoni stresses have already been studied in the case of blends compatibilized by block copolymers, this is the first time that it has been evidenced in the case of a clay as compatibilizer.
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) | 0.001 | 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".