Comparison of olefin copolymers as compatibilizers for polypropylene and high‐density polyethylene

Some polyolefin elastomers were compared as compatibilizers for blends of polypropylene (PP) with 30 wt % high‐density polyethylene (HDPE). The compatibilizers included a multiblock ethylene–octene copolymer (OBC), two statistical ethylene–octene copolymers (EO), two propylene–ethylene copolymers (P/E), and a styrenic block copolymer (SBC). Examination of the blend morphology by AFM showed that the compatibilizer was preferentially located at the interface between the PP matrix and the dispersed HDPE particles. The brittle‐to‐ductile (BD) transition was determined from the temperature dependence of the blend toughness, which was taken as the area under the stress–strain curve. All the compatibilized blends had lower BD temperature than PP. However, the blend compatibilized with OBC had the best combination of low BD temperature and high toughness. Examination of the deformed blends by scanning electron microscopy revealed that in the best blends, the compatibilizer provided sufficient interfacial adhesion so that the HDPE domains were able to yield and draw along with the PP matrix. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci, 2009     

Dynamic vulcanization of recycled milk pouches (LDPE–LLDPE) and EPDM blends using dicumyl peroxide

The viability of thermomechanical recycling of post‐consumer milk pouches (blend of low‐density polyethylene (LDPE) and linear low‐density polyethylene (LLDPE)) and its scope for suitable engineering applications were investigated. The effects of blending with ethylene‐propylene‐diene monomer (EPDM) rubber and subsequent curing using dicumyl peroxide (DCP) on the macromolecular structure and properties of recycled polyethylene (PE) blends were studied. The crosslinking efficiency of recycled PE/EPDM blends and possible thermooxidative degradation of recycled polymer upon peroxide curing was assessed using torque and gel content measurements along with infrared spectroscopic analysis. Both the torque and gel content of the blends varied with DCP crosslinking reactions and also were affected by oxidative degradation. In view of the electrical application area of this recycled blend material, the dielectric breakdown strength and volume resistivity were measured. The mechanical performance and thermal stability of recycled PE/EPDM blends improved with progressive crosslinking by DCP but deteriorated somewhat at higher DCP dose. Scanning electron microscopy showed good interface bonding between recycled polymer and dispersed EPDM phase in the cured blends compared to the non‐cured blends. Copyright © 2007 Society of Chemical Industry     

The functions of crystallizable ethylene‐propylene copolymers in the formation of multiple phase morphology of high impact polypropylene

The functions of crystallizable ethylene‐propylene copolymers in the formation of multiple phase morphology of high impact polypropylene (hiPP) were studied by solvent extraction fractionation, transmission electron microscopy (TEM), selected area electron diffraction (SAED), nuclear magnetic resonance (¹³C‐NMR), and selected reblending of different fractions of hiPP. The results indicate that hiPP contains, in addition to polypropylene (PP) and amorphous ethylene‐propylene random copolymer (EPR) as well as a small amount of polyethylene (PE), a series of crystallizable ethylene‐propylene copolymers. The crystallizable ethylene‐propylene copolymers can be further divided into ethylene‐propylene segmented copolymer (PE‐s‐PP) with a short sequence length of PE and PP segments, and ethylene‐propylene block copolymer (PE‐b‐PP) with a long sequence length of PE and PP blocks. PE‐s‐PP and PE‐b‐PP participate differently in the formation of multilayered core‐shell structure of the dispersed phase in hiPP. PE‐s‐PP (like PE) constructs inner core, PE‐b‐PP forms outer shell, while intermediate layer is resulted from EPR. The main reason of the different functions of the crystallizable ethylene‐propylene copolymers is due to their different compatibility with the PP matrix. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci, 2012     

Study on morphology of ternary polymer blends. I. Effects of melt viscosity and interfacial interaction

The morphology of some ternary blends was investigated. In all of the blends polypropylene, as the major phase, was blended with two different minor phases, ethylene–propylene–diene terpolymer (EPDM) or ethylene–propylene–rubber (EPR) as the first minor phase and high‐density polyethylene (HDPE) or polystyrene (PS) as the second minor phase. All the blends were investigated in a constant composition of 70/15/15 wt %. Theoretical models predict that the dispersed phase of a multiphase polymer blend will either form an encapsulation‐type phase morphology or phases will remain separately dispersed, depending on which morphology has the lower free energy or positive spreading coefficient. Interfacial interaction between phases was found to play a significant role in determining the type of morphology of these blend systems. A core–shell‐type morphology for HDPE encapsulated by rubber was obtained for PP/rubber/PE ternary blends, whereas PP/rubber/PS blends showed a separately dispersed type of morphology. These results were found to be in good agreement with the theoretical predictions. Steady‐state torque for each component was used to study the effect of melt viscosity ratio on the morphology of the blends. It was found that the torque ratios affect only the size of the dispersed phases and have no appreciable influence on the type of morphology. © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 82: 1129–1137, 2001     

Effect of ethylene-propylene copolymer with residual PE crystallinity on mechanical properties and morphology of PP/HDPE blends

Morphology and mechanical properties of polypropylene (PP)/high density polyethylene (HDPE) blends modified by ethylene-propylene copolymers (EPC) with residual PE crystallinity were investigated. The EPC showed different interfacial behavior in PP/HDPE blends of different compositions. A 25/75 blend of PP/HDPE (weight ratio) showed improved tensile strength and elongation at break at low EPC content (5 wt %). For the PP/HDPE = 50/50 blend, the presence of the EPC component tended to make the PP dispresed phase structure transform into a cocontinuous one, probably caused by improved viscosity matching of the two components. Both tensile strength and elongation at break were improved at EPC content of 5 wt %. For PP/HDPE 75/25 blends, the much smaller dispersed HDPE phase and significantly improved elongation at break resulted from compatibilization by EPC copolymers. © 1995 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.     

乙丙嵌段共聚物相对分子质量及链结构对PP/EPR共混体系结构与性能的影响

设计合成了一系列不同相对分子质量和乙烯平均序列长度的乙丙嵌段共聚物（EP），并将其作为聚丙烯（PP）/二元乙丙橡胶（EPR）共混体系的增容剂，考察了EP用量、相对分子质量及乙烯平均序列长度对共混体系性能及分散相形态演变的影响。结果表明，EP增容PP/EPR体系时存在最佳添加量，少量EP的加入可有效提高PP/EPR共混体系的抗冲击性能，并对分散相尺寸及形态起到良好的调控作用；同时，EP的相对分子质量越大对共混体系的冲击性能提高越明显，EP的组成与EPR越接近，对共混体系的增容效果越明显。     

Microhardness of ternary blends of polyolefins with recycled polymer components

Microhardness tests, Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR), and differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) measurements were performed on melt‐pressed films of multicomponent blends based on low‐density polyethylene (LDPE), linear LDPE (LLDPE), high‐density polyethylene (HDPE), and polypropylene (PP), and their recycled homologues. Some of the PE blends also contained ethylene‐propylene‐diene monomer (EPDM) as compatibilizer. In all cases, the variation of microhardness as a function of content of the recycled component follows the additivity law of components. Thus, the range of hardness values of polyolefin blends can be controlled by choice of both components and their relative content in the blend. The hardness of the components increases from LDPE, to LLDPE, to HDPE, to PP and increases from 20 to 84 MPa. For recycled components, the hardness values are reduced by ～15%. According to DSC results, all the blends are immiscible. Results are discussed in terms of the levels of crystallinity reached for the different blends. © 2003 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 89: 2046–2050, 2003     

Mechanical properties and morphology of crosslinked PP/PE blends and PP/PE/propylene–ethylene copolymer blends

Blending is an effective method for improving polymer properties. However, the problem of phase separation often occurs due to incompatibility of homopolymers, which deteriorates the physical properties of polyblends. In this study, isotactic polypropylene was blended with low-density polyethylene. Crosslinking agent and copolymers of propylene and ethylene (either random copolymer or block copolymer) were added to improve the interfacial adhesion of PP/LDPE blends. The tensile strength, heat deflection temperature, and impact strength of these modified PP/PE blends were investigated. The microstructures of polyblends have been studied to interpret the mechanical behavior through dynamic viscoelasticity, wide-angle X-ray diffraction, differential scanning calorimetry, picnometry, and scanning electron microscopy. The properties of crosslinked PP/PE blends were determined by the content of crosslinking agent and processing method. For the material blended by roll, a 2% concentration of peroxide corresponded to a maximum tensile strength and minimum impact strength. However, the mechanical strength of those products blended by extrusion monotonously decreased with increasing peroxide content because of serious degradation. The interfacial adhesion of PP/PE blends could be enhanced by adding random or block copolymer of propylene and ethylene, and the impact strength as well as ductility were greatly improved. Experimental data showed that the impact strength of PP/LDPE/random copolymer ternary blend could reach as high as 33.3 kg · cm/cm; however, its rigidity and tensile strength were inferior to those of PP/LDPE/block copolymer blend.     

Evaluation of olefinic block copolymer blends with amorphous polyolefins—effect of different unsaturated and saturated hydrocarbon tackifier resins on blend miscibility

Blends of ethylene–octene based olefinic block copolymer (OBC) with two amorphous polyolefin (APO) polymers [atactic propylene homopolymer (PP) and ethylene–propylene copolymer (PE–PP)] were evaluated at three different ratios. Dynamic mechanical analysis (DMA) and transmission electron microscopy (TEM) evaluations were performed to determine the blend miscibility characteristics. Viscoelastic properties of both OBC blends with PP polymer, and OBC blends with PE–PP copolymer showed incompatibility. Analysis revealed that both blends formed two phase morphologies. The effect of three unsaturated aliphatic hydrocarbon resins with varying aromatic content and two saturated hydrocarbon resins with different chemistries were evaluated as compatibilizing agent for OBC/PP and OBC/PE–PP blends. A 1 : 1 polymer blend ratio of OBC/PP and OBC/PE–PP was selected to better understand the influence of resin addition at three different levels 20, 30, and 40 wt %. The fully aliphatic unsaturated resin seems to improve the miscibility of the OBC/PP blends at higher resin addition levels, but reduced the miscibility as the aromatic content of the resin increases. However, OBC/PE–PP blends showed improved miscibility with increasing aromatic content. A ternary phase morphology was particularly observed for both OBC/PP and OBC/PE–PP blends with highly aromatic (14%) unsaturated hydrocarbon resin, in which OBC formed the continuous phase, and PP, PE–PP, and unsaturated hydrocarbon resins formed the dispersed phase. Interestingly, we did not observe much difference in miscibility characteristics between the two saturated resin chemistries in both blend systems (OBC/PP and OBC/PE–PP). The Harkins spreading coefficient concept was used to better understand the ternary blend dispersed phase morphology. Spreading coefficients indicate that the free hydrocarbon resins (both unsaturated and saturated) were encapsulated by the amorphous PP or amorphous PE–PP polymer in the dispersed phase for the respective blend compositions. Overall OBC–PP and OBC/PE–PP blends showed better miscibility characteristics with both saturated aliphatic hydrocarbon resins, irrespective of the difference in resin chemistries. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 130: 2624–2644, 2013     

Study on morphology of ternary polymer blends. II. Effect of composition

The composition effect on morphology of polypropylene/ethylene–propylene–diene terpolymer/polyethylene (PP/EPDM/PE) and polypropylene/ethylene–propylene–diene terpolymer/polystyrene (PP/EPDM/PS) ternary blends has been investigated. In all of the blends, polypropylene as the major phase was blended with two minor phases, that is, EPDM and PE or PS. From morphological studies using the SEM technique a core–shell morphology for PP/EPDM/PE and separated dispersed morphology for PP/EPDM/PS were observed. These results were found to be in agreement with the theoretical predictions. The composition of components affected only the size of dispersed phases and had no appreciable effect on the type of morphology. The size of each dispersed phase, whether it forms core or shell or disperses separately in matrix, can be related directly to its composition in the blend. © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 82: 1138–1146, 2001     

An investigation on recycled PET/PP and recycled PET/PP‐EP compatibilized blends: Rheological,morphological, and mechanical properties

The effectiveness of P(E‐co‐MA‐co‐GMA) as a compatibilizer for recycled PET/PP and recycled PET/PP‐EP (polypropylene (ethylene‐propylene) heterophase copolymer) blends was investigated by means of morphological (scanning electron microscopy), rheological (small amplitude oscillatory shear), mechanical (tensile, flexural and impact tests), and thermal (differential scanning calorimetry) properties. Compatibilizer concentration ranged from 1 to 5 wt % with respect to the whole blend. All blends were obtained in a 90/10 composition using a twin screw extruder. Compatibilization effects for PETr/PP‐EP were more pronounced due to ethylene segments present in both PP‐EP and P(E‐co‐EA‐co‐GMA). PETr/PP‐EP has shown greater dispersed phase size reduction, a more solid‐like complex viscosity behavior and larger storage modulus at low frequencies in relation to PETr/PP blend. For both investigated blends, mechanical properties indicated an improvement in both elongation at break and impact strength with increasing compatibilizer content. PETr/PP‐EP blends showed improved performance for the same level of compatibilizer content. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2015 , 132, 41892.     

Rheological,thermal, and morphological properties of blends based on poly(propylene), ethylene propylene rubber,and ethylene-1-octene copolymer that could result from end of life vehicles: Effect of maleic anhydride grafted poly(propylene)

The objective of this work is to study the properties of blends that could result from the recycling of end-of-life vehicles (ELV). While ethylene propylene rubber (EPR) and ethylene propylene diene monomer (EPDM) have been used extensively as elastomeric additives in poly(propylene) (PP), they can be substituted by ethylene-1-octene copolymer (EOC). As a consequence, the matter resulting from the sorting of ELV might be more complex and made of PP, EPR, and EOC. The effect of incorporating EOC [that is a polyethylene elastomer (PEE)] and maleic anhydride grafted polypropylene (PP-g-MAH) on the rheological, thermal, and morphological properties of PP/EPR blends has been investigated. Blends of various compositions (with and without compatibilizer) were prepared using a corotating twin-screw extruder. The results were compared to the ones presented by a commercial (PP/EPR) blend. The EPR phase is dispersed in the form of spherical particles in (PP/EPR). The EOC phase is dispersed in the form of aggregated particles. Dynamic viscoelastic and differential scanning calorimetry properties of (PP/EPR)/EOC blends shows the incompatibility of the components even in presence of PP-g-MAH copolymer. POLYM. ENG. SCI., 47:1009–1015, 2007. © 2007 Society of Plastics Engineers     

Tensile elongation of high‐fluid polypropylene/ethylene–propylene rubber blends: Dependence on molecular weight of the components and propylene content of the rubber

We studied tensile behavior of low‐molecular‐weight (MW) polypropylene (PP)/ethylene–propylene rubber (EPR; 70/30) blends from the viewpoint of the MWs of PP and EPR and the compatibility between PP and EPR. The value of the melt flow rate of PP varied from 30 to 700 g/10 min at 230°C. We studied the compatibility between PP and EPR by varying the propylene content in EPR (27 and 68 wt %). At the initial elongation stage, crazes were observed in all blends. When blends included EPR with 27 wt % propylene, the elongation at break of the low‐MW PP improved little. The blends with EPR and 68 wt % propylene content were elongated further beyond their yielding points. The elongation to rupture was increased with increasing MW of EPR. Molecular orientation of the low‐MW PP was manifested by IR dichroism measurements and X‐ray diffraction patterns. The blends of low‐MW PP and EPR could be elongated by the partial dissolution of EPR of high‐MW in the PP amorphous phase. © 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 83: 46–56, 2002     

Crystallization,melting behavior,and morphology of BPP/HDPE blend

The crystallization, melting behavior, and morphology of a low ethylene content block propylene–ethylene copolymer (BPP) and a high-density polyethylene (HDPE) blend were studied. It was found that the existence of ethylene–propylene rubber (EPR) in BPP has more influence on the crystallization of HDPE than on that of PP. This leads to the decreasing of the melting temperature of the HDPE component in the blends. It is suggested that the EPR component in BPP shifted to the HDPE component during the blending process. The crystallinity of the HDPE phase in the blends decreased with increasing BPP content. The morphology of these blends was studied by polarized light microscopy (PLM) and SEM. For a BPP-rich blend, it was observed that the HDPE phase formed particles dispersed in the PP matrix. The amorphous EPR chains may penetrate into HDPE particles to form a transition layer. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 69: 2469–2475, 1998     

Toughening and compatibilization of polypropylene/polyamide‐6 blends with a maleated–grafted ethylene‐co‐vinyl acetate

In this article, maleated–grafted ethylene‐co‐vinyl acetate (EVA‐g‐MA) was used as the interfacial modifier for polypropylene/polyamide‐6 (PP/PA6) blends, and effects of its concentration on the mechanical properties and the morphology of blends were investigated. It was found that the addition of EVA‐g‐MA improved the compatibility between PP and PA6 and resulted in a finer dispersion of dispersed PA6 phase. In comparison with uncompatibilized PP/PA6 blend, a significant reduction in the size of dispersed PA6 domain was observed. Toluene‐etched micrographs confirmed the formation of interfacial copolymers. Mechanical measurement revealed that the addition of EVA‐g‐MA markedly improved the impact toughness of PP/PA6 blend. Fractograph micrographs revealed that matrix shear yielding began to occur when EVA‐g‐MA concentration was increased upto 18 wt %. © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 99:3300–3307, 2006     

Effect of diblock copolymers on morphology and mechanical properties for syndiotactic polystyrene/ethylene‐propylene copolymer blends

Interfacial agents are often used to compatibilize immiscible polymer blends. They are known to reduce the interfacial tension, homogenize the morphology, and improve adhesion between phases. In this study, two diblock copolymers of styrene/ethylene‐propylene (SEP), which have different molecular weights, were used to compatibilize a blend of syndiotactic polystyrene (sPS) 75% and ethylene‐propylene rubber (EPR) 25% so as to extend the applications of sPS as incoming thermoplastics. The morphological analysis and emulsification curve, which relates the average size of the dispersion particles to the concentration of diblock copolymers added, was used to investigate the efficiency of the interfacial agents on the blend morphology. A notched izod impact test and a tensile test were also performed to determine the compatibilization effect of different molecular weight copolymers on the mechanical properties of the blends and to establish links between morphology and mechanical properties. Results suggest that the lower molecular weight diblock copolymer showed an effective emulsifying capacity for sPS/ERP immiscible blend in morphology and mechanical properties. © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 91:3618–3626, 2004     

Morphology prediction and the effect of core‐shell structure on the rheological behavior of PP/EPDM/HDPE ternary blends

In this work, the morphologies of polypropylene (PP)/ethylene‐propylene‐diene (EPDM) rubber/high density polyethylene (HDPE) 70/20/10 blends were studied and compared with the predictions of the spreading coefficient and minimum free energy models. The interfacial tension of PP/HDPE, PP/EPDM, and HDPE/EPDM blends were obtained by fitting the experimental dynamic storage modulus data to Palierne's theory. The prediction results showed core‐shell morphology (core of HDPE and shell of EPDM) in PP matrix. The PP/EPDM/HDPE blends were respectively prepared by direct extrusion and lateral injection method. Core‐shell morphology (core of HDPE and shell of EPDM) could be obtained with direct extrusion corresponding to the predicted morphology. The morphology of PP/EPDM/HDPE blends could be effectively controlled by lateral injection method. For PP/EPDM/HDPE blend prepared by lateral injection method, HDPE and EPDM phase were dispersed independently in PP matrix. It was found that the different morphology of PP/EPDM/HDPE blends prepared by two methods showed different rheological behavior. When the core‐shell morphology (core of HDPE and shell of EPDM) appeared, the EPDM shell could confine the deformation of HDPE core significantly, so the interfacial energy contribution of dispersed phase on the storage modulus of blends would be weaken in the low frequency region. POLYM. ENG. SCI., 2011. © 2011 Society of Plastics Engineers     

Adhesion of propylene–ethylene copolymers to high‐density polyethylene

The adhesion of some propylene–ethylene (P/E) copolymers to polypropylene (PP) and high density polyethylene (HDPE) was studied in order to compare them with other olefin copolymers as compatibilizers for PP/HDPE blends. A one‐dimensional model of the compatibilized blends was fabricated by layer‐multiplying coextrusion. The microlayered tapes consisted of many alternating layers of PP and HDPE with a thin tie‐layer inserted at each interface. The thickness of the tie‐layer varied from 0.1 to 15 μm, which included thicknesses comparable to those of the interfacial layer in a compatibilized blend. In the T‐peel test, the P/E copolymers delaminated at the HDPE interface. An elastomeric P/E with higher ethylene content exhibited substantially higher delamination toughness than a more thermoplastic P/E with lower ethylene content. Inspection of the crack‐tip damage zone revealed that a change from deformation of the entire tie‐layer to formation of a localized yielded zone was responsible. By treating the damage zone as an Irwin plastic zone, it was demonstrated that a critical stress controlled the delamination toughness. The temperature dependence of the delamination toughness was also measured. POLYM. ENG. SCI., 2010. © 2009 Society of Plastics Engineers     

Compatibilizers for recycling of the plastic mixture wastes. II. The effect of a compatibilizer for binary blends on the properties of ternary blends

In this article, we discuss the effect of a compatibilizer for binary blends on the properties of ternary blends composed of high‐density polyethylene (HDPE), polypropylene (PP), or polystyrene (PS) and poly(vinyl chloride) (PVC) virgin polymers with a simulated waste plastics fraction. Chlorinated polyethylene (CPE), ethylene–propylene rubber (EPR), and their 1/1 (w/w) mixture were tested as compatibilizers for the HDPE/PP/PVC ternary blend. CPE, styrene‐ethylene‐propylene block copolymer (SEP), or their 1/1 (w/w) mixture were tested as compatibilizers for the HDPE/PS/PVC ternary blend. The composition of the ternary blends were fixed at 8/1/1 by weight ratio. The amount of the compatibilizer was 3 phr. Rheological, mechanical, and thermal properties were measured. For the 8/1/1 HDPE/PP/PVC ternary blends, the tensile strength was slightly decreased, but the impact strength was significantly increased by adding EPR, CPE, or their mixture. EPR exhibited the most significant impact modification effect for the ternary blends. In a similar way, for 8/1/1 HDPE/PS/PVC ternary blends, on adding SEP, CPE, or their mixture, the tensile strength was slightly decreased, but the impact strength was noticeably increased. It was found that the SEP worked much better as an impact modifier for the ternary blends than CPE or the SEP/CPE mixture did. © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 76: 1048–1053, 2000     

Mechanical properties and morphology of polyethylene–polypropylene blends with controlled thermal history

The effect of time–temperature treatment on the mechanical properties and morphology of polyethylene–polypropylene (PE–PP) blends was studied to establish a relationship among the thermal treatment, morphology, and mechanical properties. The experimental techniques used were polarized optical microscopy with hot‐stage, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), differential scanning calorimetry (DSC), and tensile testing. A PP homopolymer was used to blend with various PEs, including high‐density polyethylene (HDPE), low‐density polyethylene (LDPE), linear low‐density polyethylene (LLDPE), and very low density polyethylene (VLDPE). All the blends were made at a ratio of PE:PP = 80:20. Thermal treatment was carried out at temperatures between the crystallization temperatures of PP and PEs to allow PP to crystallize first from the blends. A very diffuse PP spherulite morphology in the PE matrix was formed in partially miscible blends of LLDPE–PP even though PP was present at only 20% by mass. Droplet‐matrix structures were developed in other blends with PP as dispersed domains in a continuous PE matrix. The SEM images displayed a fibrillar structure of PP spherulite in the LLDPE–PP blends and large droplets of PP in the HDPE–PP blend. The DSC results showed that the crystallinity of PP was increased in thermally treated samples. This special time–temperature treatment improved tensile properties for all PE–PP blends by improving the adhesion between PP and PE and increasing the overall crystallinity. In particular, in the LLDPE–PP blends, tensile properties were improved enormously because of a greater increase in the interfacial adhesion induced by the diffuse spherulite and fibrillar structure. © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 76: 1151–1164, 2000