Study of Rheological Properties of Biodegradable Polyesters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Biodegradable polyesters are considered as one of the most cost effective and environmentally friendly solutions to waste-disposal problems associated with traditional thermoplastics. The technologies for converting the resins into useful items require knowledge about the rheological properties of these materials. Adequate rheological models are essential for the design and optimization of the process technologies. Rheological properties of two commercial biodegradable polyesters- poly(lactic acid) (PLA) and aliphatic-aromatic co-polyester (AAC) Ecoflex -have been investigated using parallel plate and capillary rheometers. Results from a study on the extrusion instabilities of biodegradable polymers are reported for the first time. The experimental studies found that the biodegradable polyesters exhibit pseudoplastic (shear-thinning) behaviour and the Cox-Merz rule is obeyed. A Cross model was proposed to describe their shear-thinning behaviour. The viscosity of both PLA grades is more temperature sensitive than the viscosity of Ecoflex. It was observed that the extensional viscosity of Ecoflex is larger than that of PLA and that the extensional viscosity of biodegradable polymers is similar to that of LLDPE. The experimental results indicate that biodegradable polymer melts slip at the die wall. It was observed that with increasing shear rate PLA exhibits sharkskin and gross melt fracture while Ecoflex exhibits only gross melt fracture. With regards to flow instabilities PLA behaves like linear polyolefins, however without exhibiting stick-spurt phenomenon. While Ecoflex behaves like branched LDPE, its gross melt fracture starts at higher values of wall shear stress than LDPE. Both biodegradable materials exhibit small extrudate swell: up to 28% for PLA and up to 34% for Ecoflex, which is comparable to that of rigid PVC. It was observed that biodegradable polymers substantially degrade during extrusion processing. It was also found that blending PLA and Ecoflex produced immiscible blends. Melts of these blends exhibited sharkskin and gross melt fracture at higher shear stresses than the neat resins. This effect was attributed both to degradation during blending and to some sort of lubricating effect.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".