MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285092853 · doi:10.1515/ipp-2021-4214

Calendering of thermoplastics: models and computations

2022· article· en· W4285092853 on OpenAlex
Evan Mitsoulis, Nickolas D. Polychronopoulos, Savvas G. Hatzikiriakos

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Polymer Processing · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicRheology and Fluid Dynamics Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCalenderingMaterials scienceLubricationViscoplasticityComposite materialShear thinningFinite element methodDissipationRheologyConstitutive equationMechanicsThermodynamicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract John Vlachopoulos (JV) started his polymer processing career with the process of calendering. In two landmark papers with Kiparissides, C. and Vlachopoulos, J. (1976). Finite element analysis of calendering. Polym. Eng. Sci. 16: 712–719; Kiparissides, C. and Vlachopoulos, J. (1978). A study of viscous dissipation in the calendering of power-law fluids. Polym. Eng. Sci. 18: 210–214 he introduced the Finite Element Method (FEM) to solve the governing equations of mass, momentum, and energy based on the Lubrication Approximation Theory (LAT). This early work was followed by the introduction of wall slip (with Vlachopoulos, J. and Hrymak, A.N. (1980). Calendering poly(vinyl chloride): theory and experiments. Polym. Eng. Sci. 20: 725–731). The first 2-D simulations for calendering PVC were carried out with Mitsoulis, E., Vlachopoulos, J., and Mirza, F.A. (1985). Calendering analysis without the lubrication approximation. Polym. Eng. Sci. 25: 6–18. In the intervening 35 years, other works have emerged, however our understanding has not been drastically improved since JV’s early works. Results have also been obtained for pseudoplastic and viscoplastic fluids using the general Herschel-Bulkley constitutive model. The emphasis was on finding possible differences with LAT regarding the attachment and detachment points of the calendered sheet (hence the domain length), and the extent and shape of yielded/unyielded regions. The results showed that while the former is well predicted by LAT, the latter is grossly overpredicted. More results have been obtained for 3-D simulations, showing intricate patterns in the melt bank. Also, the transient problem has been solved using the ALE-FEM formulation for moving free-boundary problems. The results are compared with the previous simulations for the steady-state and show a good agreement. The transient simulations capture the movement of the upstream and downstream free surfaces, and also provide the attachment and detachment points, which are unknown a priori . Finding these still remains the prevailing challenge in the modeling of the calendering process.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.822
Threshold uncertainty score0.236

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.230 · 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