1995
DOI: 10.1007/bf01441904
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effects of shear flow and viscosity difference on phase separation

Abstract: We discuss some salient features recently Ibund in phase-separating fluids under shear. They are highly elongated, bicontinuous domain structures Istring phase}, hysteresis in the droplet distribution in the off-critical case. existence of the spinodal due to suppression of droplet formation in shear, and critical rheology. We also examine the condition of bicontinuity and the eflective viscosity when the two phases have different viscosities.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
8
0

Year Published

1998
1998
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 22 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
1
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This observation is contrary to what was observed in the case of the quiescent blend, in which the domain size of the dispersed phase increases with increasing temperature. This phenomenon was also observed in binary fluid mixtures under shear (27) in which a larger droplet volume fraction was obtained when the quench depth decreased. The above effect becomes more evident when the sheared samples are compared to quiescent samples at the same temperature.…”
Section: Quiescent Conditionssupporting
confidence: 59%
“…This observation is contrary to what was observed in the case of the quiescent blend, in which the domain size of the dispersed phase increases with increasing temperature. This phenomenon was also observed in binary fluid mixtures under shear (27) in which a larger droplet volume fraction was obtained when the quench depth decreased. The above effect becomes more evident when the sheared samples are compared to quiescent samples at the same temperature.…”
Section: Quiescent Conditionssupporting
confidence: 59%
“…The change and enlargement of the phase structure observed in 70/30 PC/PMMA might be attributed to the evolution of the liquid–liquid phase separation by stretching at 160 °C, which was above the T g s of both component polymers. Since PC/PMMA blends are partially miscible and are suggested to exhibit an LCST type phase diagram [48,49], the evolution of the liquid–liquid phase of separation might be caused by shifting the LCST phase diagram to a lower temperature by stretching [60] and the orientation-induced phase separation [46,47,61].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The durometer D hardness increased from 80 to 83 by blending 5% of PMMA [45]. The segregation of PMMA might be attributed to the orientation-induced phase separation resulting from variations in viscosity, due to composition fluctuations [46,47]. A PC/PMMA blend is partially miscible and is suggested to exhibit a lower critical solution temperature (LCST) type phase diagram, in which liquid–liquid phase separation occurs at a temperature above the LCST [48,49].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It allows them to make a broad range of structures for a given composition. [4][5][6][7] In addition, the structure formation could be followed by measuring the effect of the shear rate on the rheological properties, such as viscosity and normal forces. 8,9 These studies indicated that the structure formation is a result of interactions present in the dispersion in relation to the shear stress applied.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%