In Situ Punch–Shear Testing of Polymers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conventional material aging and testing protocols involve exposing coupon samples to saturation in application fluid(s) at temperature and pressure conditions typically encountered during service, followed by mechanical testing at ambient conditions. This practice can generate misleading results for materials for which fluid ingress is rapidly reversible, most notably at elevated temperatures. A recently developed in situ punch-shear device has been successfully used to establish experimental correlations between the tensile properties (ASTM D638) and shear properties (ASTM D732) of Polyethylene of Raised Temperature (PERT) under dry conditions. It also enabled measurement of shear properties of select polymers while immersed (saturated) in fluids at elevated pressure and temperature. The present work extends the treatment to a suite of commercially available thermoplastic polymers spanning the commodity, engineering, and high-performance polymer grades with varying degrees of hygroscopicity. The objectives of this contribution are three-fold, namely: (i) assess the effect of sample preparation method on measured mechanical properties, (ii) compare the experimentally established correlations between shear and tensile tests for the different class of polymer grades before fluid exposure, and (iii) gauge reversibility of the measured tensile and shear properties after aging in deionized water to saturation at 95 °C. Results indicate that (i) the test coupon preparation method affects the tensile to shear correlation and must be standardized to enable systematic comparison of in situ properties, (ii) individual correlations segregate by polymer family, and (iii) conventional tensile testing after a saturation-dehydration cycle yields optimistic mechanical properties.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".