1961
DOI: 10.1002/pol.1961.1205015410
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An empirical concept of flow for polyisobutene systems

Abstract: Viscosities were measured on 11 polyisobutenes with molecular weight of 224 to 71,000. Measurements were made on cetane and tetralin solutions containing 11.2–100 wt.‐% polymer. Tests were made at 80–135°C. and a t shear rates to 8 × lo6 sec.‐l. Low shear capillary and two types of rotational viscometers were used. The data confirm that polyisobutene systems show an abrupt transition in log viscosity—log molecular weight correlations. This transition occurs near 15,000 for MV where M is Viscosity‐average molec… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

2
3
0

Year Published

1963
1963
1999
1999

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 24 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 37 publications
(3 reference statements)
2
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Th e p olym er concen trations r epor ted correspond to volum e p ercen t values of 2, 4, and 16 at 25 D C. Sin ce each sample served for measuremen ts at the two temper atures, it was n ecessary to correct for the density ch ange at t he higher te mp er ature in ord er to accurately calculate M e at 75 D C. These results clearly indicate th e existence of the t ransition p oint to at least t wo volume percen t concentration and the inverse first power dependence of th e mol ecular weight for t r ansition (M b) on concen tration. This latter point is at variance with t h e interpretation given to data ob tained from st udies [32][33][34] The constancy of the molecular weight-concentration product found for th e polyisoprene solutions is in complete accord wit h t h e results obtained from investigations [36][37][38][39][40][41][42] of the rheological behavior of p olystyr ene and polyisobutylen e in bulk and concentrated solutions. A similar conclusion is r each ed from the combin ed r esults of Buech e [10,12] and Bletso [43] for solutions of poly(meth yl m eth acrylate) .…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 57%
“…Th e p olym er concen trations r epor ted correspond to volum e p ercen t values of 2, 4, and 16 at 25 D C. Sin ce each sample served for measuremen ts at the two temper atures, it was n ecessary to correct for the density ch ange at t he higher te mp er ature in ord er to accurately calculate M e at 75 D C. These results clearly indicate th e existence of the t ransition p oint to at least t wo volume percen t concentration and the inverse first power dependence of th e mol ecular weight for t r ansition (M b) on concen tration. This latter point is at variance with t h e interpretation given to data ob tained from st udies [32][33][34] The constancy of the molecular weight-concentration product found for th e polyisoprene solutions is in complete accord wit h t h e results obtained from investigations [36][37][38][39][40][41][42] of the rheological behavior of p olystyr ene and polyisobutylen e in bulk and concentrated solutions. A similar conclusion is r each ed from the combin ed r esults of Buech e [10,12] and Bletso [43] for solutions of poly(meth yl m eth acrylate) .…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 57%
“…This dependence manifests itself by two crossing lines. This is in agreement with the theoretical prediction of Bueche for the solutions (21) and the data of Porter and Jonson (22). At the range of higher molecular weights the lines are parallel and are described by the Fox-Loshack equation.…”
supporting
confidence: 86%
“…Fox and Allen 2 proposed a relationship between M c and 〈 R 〉 0 /M which, in the terminology used here, can be expressed as follows: where 〈 R 〉 0 is the mean-square unperturbed radius of gyration and the quantity 6 X c N a is proposed to be universal with X c = 45.7 ± 9.2. Accordingly, the data for the various species in Table should give a straight line through the origin when plotted as N c = M c / m b vs p . This relationship, shown in Figure , exhibits a rather poor fit to the data and yields a correlation coefficient R of only 0.853.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%