Power series for normal stress differences of polymeric liquids in large-amplitude oscillatory shear flow
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Exact solutions for normal stress differences in polymeric liquids subjected to large-amplitude oscillatory shear flow (LAOS) contain many Bessel functions, each appearing in infinite sums. For the simplest relevant model of a polymeric liquid, the corotational Maxwell fluid, Bessel functions appear 38 times in the exact solution. By relevant, we mean that higher harmonics are predicted in LAOS. By contrast, approximate analytical solutions for normal stress differences in LAOS often take the form of the first few terms of a power series in the shear rate amplitude, and without any Bessel functions at all. Perhaps the best example of this, from continuum theory, is the Goddard integral expansion (GIE) that is arrived at laboriously. There is thus practical interest in extending the GIE to an arbitrary number of terms. However, each term in the GIE requires much more work than its predecessor. For the corotational Maxwell fluid, for instance, the GIE for the normal stress differences has yet to be taken beyond the fifth power of the shear rate amplitude. In this paper, we begin with the exact solution for normal stress difference responses in corotational Maxwell fluids, then perform an expansion by symbolic computation to confirm up to the fifth power, and then to continue the GIE. In this paper, for example, we continue the GIE to the 41st power of the shear rate amplitude. We use Ewoldt grids to show that our main result is highly accurate. We also show that, except in its zero-frequency limit, the radius of convergence of the GIE is infinite. We derive the pattern for the common denominators of the GIE coefficients and also for every numerator for the zeroth harmonic coefficients. We also find that the numerators of the other harmonics appear to be patternless.
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".