Slip of styrene–butadiene rubbers: The effects of pressure and viscous heating
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During the processing of elastomeric compounds under high flow rates, significant pressure drops (106–108 Pa) are encountered. Under such conditions, the viscosity of these compounds is significantly affected by pressure and viscous heating. Moreover, strong flow rates may cause these systems to slip at the wall, violating the classical no-slip boundary condition of fluid mechanics. To determine the slip velocity by the well-known Mooney method, the effects of pressure and viscous heating should be considered. In this work, an experimental methodology is developed to determine the slip velocity of styrene–butadiene compounds in capillary flow corrected for the effects of pressure and viscous heating. First, the temperature increase due to viscous heating is measured during the extrusion process and accounted for in correcting the experimental data to infer the slip velocity. Consequently, the corrected experimental data for the effects of pressure and viscous heating are used to calculate the slip velocity from the deviation of the linear viscoelastic behavior (deviation from the Cox–Merz rule). The Mooney method is also used to confirm the calculated slip velocity of the elastomeric compounds.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".