Finally, the semiconducting behavior
of the films, experienced by previous optical studies, was confirmed through electrical S3I-201 measurements, which also indicate the dependence of the resistivity with the atomic composition of the films. (C) 2010 American Institute of Physics. [doi: 10.1063/1.3520661]“
“A highly novel nano-CaCO(3) supported beta-nucleating agent was employed to prepare beta-nucleated isotactic polypropylene (iPP) blend with polyamide (PA) 66, beta-nucleated iPP/PA66 blend, as well as its compatibilized version with maleic anhydride grafted PP (PP-g-MA), maleic anhydride grafted polyethylene-octene (POE-g-MA), and polyethylene-vinyl acetate (EVA-g-MA), respectively. Nonisothermal crystallization behavior and melting characteristics of beta-nucleated iPP and its VS-6063 chemical structure blends were investigated by differential scanning calorimeter and wide angle X-ray diffraction. Experimental results indicated that the crystallization temperature (T(c)(p)) of PP shifts to high temperature in the non-nucleated PP/PA66 blends because of the alpha-nucleating effect of PA66. T(c)(p) of PP and the beta-crystal
content (K(beta)) in beta-nucleated iPP/PA66 blends not only depended on the PA66 content, but also on the compatibilizer type. Addition of PP-g-MA and POE-g-MA into beta-nucleated iPP/PA66 blends increased the beta-crystal content; however, EVA-g-MA is not benefit for the formation of beta-crystal in the compatibilized beta-nucleated iPP/PA66 blend. It can be relative to the different interfacial interactions between PP and compatibilizers. The nonisothermal crystallization kinetics of PP in the blends Tariquidar research buy was evaluated by Mo’s method. (C) 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 119: 3566-3573, 2011″
“Several studies compared blood pressure (BP) at home (HBP) with ambulatory BP (ABP), but using different devices, which contribute to differences in measured BP. A novel dual-mode device allowing ABP and HBP monitoring (Microlife WatchBPO3) was validated according to the European Society of Hypertension International Protocol and used to compare the two methods. In the validation study, 33 subjects were assessed
with simultaneous BP measurements taken by 2 observers (connected mercury sphygmomanometers) 4 times, sequentially with 3 measurements taken using the tested device. Absolute observer-device BP differences were classified within 5/10/15mmHg zones. Measurements with <= 5 mm Hg difference were calculated per participant. In the validation study, the device produced 70/89/96 measurements within 5/10/15mmHg, respectively, for systolic BP and 67/95/99 for diastolic BP. Twenty-eight subjects had at least two of their systolic BP differences <= 5 mm Hg and one subject had no difference <= 5 mm Hg, whereas for diastolic BP, it was 22 and 1 subjects, respectively. Mean device-observers BP difference was -0.3 +/- 5.6/-2.4 +/- 4.8 mm Hg (systolic/diastolic).