Miscibility and crystallization behavior of poly(ether ether ketone ketone)/poly(ether imide) blends

The miscibility and crystallization behavior of poly(ether ether ketone ketone) (PEEKK)/poly(ether imide) (PEI) blends prepared by melt‐mixing were investigated by differential scanning calorimetry. The blends showed a single glass transition temperature, which increased with increasing PEI content, indicating that PEEKK and PEI are completely miscible in the amorphous phase over the studied composition range (weight ratio: 90/10–60/40). The cold crystallization of PEEKK blended with PEI was retarded by the presence of PEI, as is apparent from the increase of the cold crystallization temperature and decrease of the normalized crystallinity for the samples anealed at 300°C with increasing PEI content. Although the depression of the apparent melting temperature of PEEKK blended with PEI was observed, there was no evidence of depression in the equilibrium melting temperature. The analysis of the isothermal crystallization at 313–321°C from the melt of PEEKK/PEI (100/0, 90/10, and 80/20) blends suggested that the retardation of crystallization of PEEKK is caused by the increase of the crystal surface free energy in addition to the decrease of the mobility by blending PEI with a high glass transition temperature. © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 80: 769–775, 2001     

Blends of poly(ethylene terephthalate) and poly(butylene terephthalate)

Commercial grade poly(ethylene terephthalate), (PET, intrinsic viscosity = 0.80 dL/g) and poly(butylene terephthalate), (PBT, intrinsic viscosity = 1.00 dL/g) were melt blended over the entire composition range using a counterrotating twin‐screw extruder. The mechanical, thermal, electrical, and rheological properties of the blends were studied. All of the blends showed higher impact properties than that of PET or PBT. The 50:50 blend composition exhibited the highest impact value. Other mechanical properties also showed similar trends for blends of this composition. The addition of PBT increased the processability of PET. Differential scanning calorimetry data showed the presence of both phases. For all blends, only a single glass‐transition temperature was observed. The melting characteristics of one phase were influenced by the presence of the other. © 2005 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 98: 75–82, 2005     

Microstructure and crystallization of melt‐mixed poly(ethylene terephthalate)/poly(ethylene isophthalate) blends

Physical blends of poly(ethylene terephthalate) (PET) and poly(ethylene isophthalate) (PEI), abbreviated PET/PEI (80/20) blends, and of PET and a random poly(ethylene terephthalate‐co‐isophthalate) copolymer containing 40% ethylene isophthalate (PET₆₀I₄₀), abbreviated PET/PET₆₀I₄₀ (50/50) blends, were melt‐mixed at 270°C for different reactive blending times to give a series of copolymers containing 20 mol % of ethylene isophthalic units with different degrees of randomness. ¹³C‐NMR spectroscopy precisely determined the microstructure of the blends. The thermal and mechanical properties of the blends were evaluated by DSC and tensile assays, and the obtained results were compared with those obtained for PET and a statistically random PETI copolymer with the same composition. The microstructure of the blends gradually changed from a physical blend into a block copolymer, and finally into a random copolymer with the advance of transreaction time. The melting temperature and enthalpy of the blends decreased with the progress of melt‐mixing. Isothermal crystallization studies carried out on molten samples revealed the same trend for the crystallization rate. The effect of reaction time on crystallizability was more pronounced in the case of the PET/PET₆₀I₄₀ (50/50) blends. The Young's modulus of the melt‐mixed blends was comparable to that of PET, whereas the maximum tensile stress decreased with respect to that of PET. All blend samples showed a noticeable brittleness. © 2003 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 90: 3076–3086, 2003     

Rheological behavior of polyester blend and mechanical properties of the polypropylene–polyester blend fibers

The article deals with method of preparation, rheological properties, phase structure, and morphology of binary blend of poly(ethylene terephthalate) (PET)/poly(butylene terephthalate) (PBT) and ternary blends of polypropylene (PP)/(PET/PBT). The ternary blend of PET/PBT (PES) containing 30 wt % of PP is used as a final polymer additive (FPA) for blending with PP and subsequent spinning. In addition commercial montane (polyester) wax Licowax E (LiE) was used as a compatibilizer for spinning process enhancement. The PP/PES blend fibers containing 8 wt % of polyester as dispersed phase were prepared in a two‐step procedure: preparation of FPA using laboratory twin‐screw extruder and spinning of the PP/PES blend fibers after blending PP and FPA, using a laboratory spinning equipment. DSC analysis was used for investigation of the phase structure of the PES components and selected blends. Finally, the mechanical properties of the blend fibers were analyzed. It has been found that viscosity of the PET/PBT blends is strongly influenced by the presence of the major component. In addition, the major component suppresses crystallinity of the minor component phase up to a concentration of 30 wt %. PBT as major component in dispersed PES phase increases viscosity of the PET/PBT blend melts and increases the tensile strength of the PP/PES blend fibers. The impact of the compatibilizer on the uniformity of phase dispersion of PP/PES blend fibers was demonstrated. © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 102: 4222–4227, 2006     

Syntheses and characterization of poly(butylene terephthalate) copolyesters modified with p‐acetoxybenzoic acid

Poly(butylene terephthalate) (PBT) copolyesters modified with seven compositions of p‐acetoxybenzoic acid (PABA) ranging from 10 to 70 mol % were prepared. The X‐ray diffraction patterns, the polarizing microscopy behaviors, and thermal analysis showed that the modified PBT contained more PABA homopolymer units (PABA–PABA) than PBT–PABA units in the copolyesters. On increasing PABA mole percenage, PBT crystallinity decreased and thermal stability increased. It was found that although the PBT copolyesters did not exhibit a clear liquid crystalline texture like the copolyester of poly(ethylene terephthalate) modified with PABA did, the PBT copolyester containing 70 mol % of PABA exhibited the typical shear thinning behavior of a liquid crystalline polymer. © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 80: 1085–1095, 2001     

Rheological and thermal properties of blends of modified poly(ethylene terephthalate) with p‐acetoxybenzoic acid and poly(butylene terephthalate)

Blending of thermotropic liquid crystalline polyesters (LCPs) with conventional polymers could result in materials that can be used as an alternative for short fiber‐reinforced thermoplastic composites, because of their low melt viscosity as well as their inherent high stiffness and strength, high use temperature, and excellent chemical resistance and low coefficient of expansion. In most of the blends was used LCP of 40 mol % of poly(ethylene terephthalate) (PET) and 60 mol % of p‐acetoxybenzoic acid (PABA). In this work, blends of several copolyesters having various PABA compositions from 10 to 70 mol % and poly(butylene terephthalate) (PBT) were prepared and their rheological and thermal properties were investigated. For convenience, the copolyesters were designated as PETA‐x, where x is the mol % of PABA. It was found that PET‐60 and PET‐70 copolyesters decreased the melt viscosity of PBT in the blends and those PBT/PETA‐60 and PBT/PETA‐70 blends showed different melt viscosity behaviors with the change in shear rate, while blends of PBT and PET‐x having less than 50 mol % of PABA exhibited totally different rheological behaviors. The blends of PBT with PETA‐50, PETA‐60, and PETA‐70 showed the morphology of multiple layers of fibers. © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 74: 1797–1806, 1999     

Mechanical and dielectric breakdown properties of PBT/TPE,PBT/PBT/PET,and PBT/antioxidant blends

To improve the thermal aging flexibility of poly(butylene terephthalate) (PBT), PBT was melt‐blended with three type thermoplastic elastomer [poly ether‐ester type (TPE1), polyester‐ester type (TPE2), and poly(buthylene 2,6‐naphthalate)/poly(tetramethylene glycol) block copolymer type (TPE3)], PBT/poly(ethylene terephthalate), (PET) alloy (Alloy), and phosphate type antioxidant (T1). The content of the three type TPEs and Alloy was fixed at 20 parts per 100 g of PBT. The morphology and thermal behavior of these blends have been investigated with scanning electron microscopy (SEM), differential scanning calorimetry (DSC), and thermogravimetry (TG). In the case of PBT/Alloy‐20 and PBT/TPE3–20 blends show clean fractured surface, whereas for PBT/TPE1–20 and PBT/TPE2–20 blends, the elongated pieces or fiber can be seen abundantly which indicates a good compatibility. TG traces show a significant shift of the weight loss toward higher temperature for PBT/Alloy‐20, whereas PBT/TPE1–20, PBT/TPE2–20 and PBT/TPE3–20 blend decrease in thermal stability than PBT. To investigate the applicability for insulation material, the prepared blend samples were extruded an electric wire and flexibility and electric breakdown voltage (BDV) of wire after thermal aging were studied. For PBT/TPE1–20 and PBT/TPE2–20 blends did not show any cracks after flexibility test at 130°C for 6 h and 225°C for 30 min. In contrast PBT, PBT/Alloy‐20, PBT/TPE3–20, and PBT/T1–1 showed a partial crack in the insulation after flexibility test at 130°C for 6 h although its good flexibility at 225°C for 30 min. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci, 2009     

Structure and mechanical properties of poly(sulfone of bisphenol A)/poly(butylene terephthalate) blends

Blends of poly(sulfone of bisphenol A) (PSU) with poly(butylene terephthalate) (PBT) were obtained by direct injection moulding across the composition range. The two components of the blends reacted slightly in the melt state, producing linear copolymers. The slight changes observed in the two glass transition temperatures indicate that the copolymers were present in the two amorphous phases of the blends. The observed reactions and the high viscosity of the matrix of the PSU‐rich compositions led to a very fine morphology which could not be attained in the PBT‐rich compositions due to the low viscosity of the matrix and the direct injection moulding procedure used. This procedure is fast and economically advantageous, but leads to poor mixing. The different morphologies influenced neither the modulus nor the yield stress, which tended to follow the rule of mixtures. However, the low fracture properties of the PBT‐rich compositions contrasted with the ductility behaviour, and even the impact strength of the PSU‐rich blends, which also tended to be proportional to the blend composition. Copyright © 2004 Society of Chemical Industry     

Influence of the degree of grafting on the morphology and mechanical properties of blends of poly(butylene terephthalate) and glycidyl methacrylate grafted poly(ethylene‐co‐propylene) (EPR)

Poly(ethylene‐co‐propylene) (EPR) was functionalized to varying degrees with glycidyl methacrylate (GMA) by melt grafting processes. The EPR‐graft‐GMA elastomers were used to toughen poly(butylene terephthalate) (PBT). Results showed that the grafting degree strongly influenced the morphology and mechanical properties of PBT/EPR‐graft‐GMA blends. Compatibilization reactions between the carboxyl and/or hydroxyl of PBT and epoxy groups of EPR‐graft‐GMA induced smaller dispersed phase sizes and uniform dispersed phase distributions. However, higher degrees of grafting (>1.3) and dispersed phase contents (>10 wt%) led to higher viscosities and severe crosslinking reactions in PBT/EPR‐graft‐GMA blends, resulting in larger dispersed domains of PBT blends. Consistent with the change in morphology, the impact strength of the PBT blends increased with the increase in EPR‐graft‐GMA degrees of grafting for the same dispersion phase content when the degree of grafting was below 1.8. However, PBT/EPR‐graft‐GMA1.8 displayed much lower impact strength in the ductile region than a comparable PBT/EPR‐graft‐GMA1.3 blend (1.3 indicates degree of grafting). Morphology and mechanical results showed that EPR‐graft‐GMA 1.3 was more suitable in improving the toughness of PBT. SEM results showed that the shear yielding properties of the PBT matrix and cavitation of rubber particles were major toughening mechanisms. Copyright © 2006 Society of Chemical Industry     

Crystallization and melting behavior of poly(ether ether ketone)/poly(aryl ether sulfone) blends

The crystallization and melting behavior of poly(ether ether ketone) (PEEK) in blends with poly(aryl ether sulfone) (PES) prepared by melt mixing are investigated by differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) and wide‐angle X‐ray scattering (WAXS). The presence of PES is found to have a notable influence on the crystallization behavior of PEEK, especially when present in low concentrations in the PEEK/PES blends. The PEEK crystallization kinetics is retarded in the presence of PES from the melt and in the rubbery state. An analysis of the melt crystallization exotherm shows a slower rate of nucleation and a wider crystallite size distribution of PEEK in the presence of PES, except at low concentrations of PES, where, because of higher miscibility and the tendency of PES to form ordered structures under suitable conditions, a significantly opposite result is observed. The cold crystallization temperature of the blends at low PES concentration is higher then that of pure PEEK, whereas at a higher PES concentration little change is observed. In addition, the decrease in heat of cold crystallization and melting, which is more prevalent in PEEK‐rich compositions than in pure PEEK, shows the reduction in the degree of crystallinity because of the dilution effect of PES. Isothermal cold crystallization studies show that the cold crystallization from the amorphous glass occurs in two stages, corresponding to the mobilization of the PEEK‐rich and PES‐rich phases. The slower rate of crystallization of the PEEK‐rich phase, even in compositions where a pure PEEK phase is observed, indicates that the presence of the immobile PES‐rich phase has a constraining influence on the crystallization of the PEEK‐rich phase, possibly because of the distribution of individual PEEK chains across the two phases. The various crystallization parameters obtained from WAXS analysis show that the basic crystal structure of PEEK remains unaffected in the blend. Further, the slight melting point depression of PEEK at low concentrations of PES, apart from several other morphological reasons, may be due to some specific interactions between the component homopolymers. © 2003 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 90: 2906–2918, 2003     

Morphology monitoring of PE/PBT blends by reactive processing

Polyethylene (PE)/poly(butylene terephthalate) (PBT) blends were in situ compatibilized during a processing operation by the addition of a partially hydroxylated ethylene vinyl acetate copolymer (EVAh). This copolymer, obtained from ethylene vinyl acetate (EVA), was as compatible with PE as EVA was before modification. In the presence of EVAh, the dispersion of PBT in the PE matrix was finer, and the interfacial adhesion was improved. These results are relevant for the compatibilization of PE/PBT blends. Moreover, such blends present good toluene barrier properties. © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 82: 3568–3577, 2001     

Crystallization kinetics of poly(1,4‐butylene‐co‐ethylene terephthalate)

The crystallization kinetics of poly(butylene terephthalate) (PBT), poly(ethylene terephthalate) (PET), and their copolymers poly(1,4‐butylene‐co‐ethylene terephthalate) (PBET) containing 70/30, 65/35 and 60/40 molar ratios of 1,4‐butanediol/ethylene glycol were investigated using differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) at crystallization temperatures (T_c) which were 35–90 °C below equilibrium melting temperature . Although these copolymers contain both monomers in high proportion, DSC data revealed for copolymer crystallization behaviour. The reason for such copolymers being able to crystallize could be due to the similar chemical structures of 1,4‐butanediol and ethylene glycol. DSC results for isothermal crystallization revealed that random copolymers had a lower degree of crystallinity and lower crystallite growth rate than those of homopolymers. DSC heating scans, after completion of isothermal crystallization, showed triple melting endotherms for all these polyesters, similar to those of other polymers as reported in the literature. The crystallization isotherms followed the Avrami equation with an exponent n of 2–2.5 for PET and 2.5–3.0 for PBT and PBETs. Analyses of the Lauritzen–Hoffman equation for DSC isothermal crystallization data revealed that PBT and PET had higher growth rate constant G_o, and nucleation constant K_g than those of PBET copolymers. © 2001 Society of Chemical Industry     

Ternary blend nanofibres of poly(lactic acid), polycaprolactone and cellulose acetate butyrate for skin tissue scaffolds: influence of blend ratio and polycaprolactone molecular mass on miscibility,morphology, crystallinity and thermal properties

Ternary blends of poly(lactic acid) (PLA), polycaprolactone (PCL) and cellulose acetate butyrate (CAB) were fabricated into the form of electrospun nanofibres targeted for skin tissue scaffolds. The effects of blend ratio and molecular mass of PCL (PCL1 and PCL2) on morphology, miscibility, crystallinity, thermal properties, surface hydrophilicity and cell culture of the nanofibres were investigated. Blends with high PLA loading (80/10/10 PLA/PCL/CAB) gave fibres with a smooth surface, owing to the enhanced miscibility between the polymer chains from the presence of CAB, which acts as compatibilizer. In contrast, blends with high PCL loading were immiscible, which led to beads during the electrospinning process. The increased molecular mass of PCL2 produced smoother fibres than low‐molecular‐mass PCL1. The XRD patterns of blends of PLA/PCL1/CAB and PLA/PCL2/CAB were similar to one another, in which the high‐crystallinity peaks of PCL seen for 20/70/10 blends were very small for 50/40/10 blends and much less prevalent for 80/10/10 blends. Better fibre formation (80/10/10 > 50/40/10 > 20/70/10) with less crystallinity occurs in well‐formed fibres. Selected blends of PLA/PCL/CAB promoted growth of NIH/3T3 fibroblast cells, demonstrating that our novel biocompatible ternary blend nanofibrous scaffolds have potential in skin tissue repair applications. In addition, this work helps in the design and understanding of the factors that control the properties of nanofibrous PLA/PCL/CAB scaffolds. © 2017 Society of Chemical Industry     

Thermal,crystalline, and tribological properties of PEEK/PEI/PES plastics alloys

PEEK/PEI/PES plastics alloys in weight ratios of 70/30/0, 70/25/5, 65/30/5, 60/30/10, 60/35/5, and the three kinds of single high performance engineering plastics 100/0/0, 0/100/0, 0/0/100 were prepared by twin‐screw extrusion molding. A single glass‐transition temperature (T_g) of each alloy in the former five kinds of the plastics alloys could be measured by DSC and always rose to higher one than that of the pure PEEK by about 20°C. The crystalline degrees of these alloys could also ascended to more than 35.81% higher than that of the pure PEEK, especially for the alloy of the ratio 60/30/10 reached the maximum crystalline degree 37.76%. Adding PEI or PEI and PES, the crystalline temperatures of the PEEK alloys were decreased. The wear resistances of the alloys under dry sliding condition were considerably improved compared with pure PEI or PES, and the specific wear rate of the pure PEI or PES were four to six times as large as that of the alloys. However, the specific wear rates of the alloys were six to eight times larger than that of the pure PEEK, and the friction coefficients of the alloys were higher than that of the pure PEEK for 0.2–0.3. The polymeric transferred film on the steel ring surface against the alloys could be found, but no film on that against pure PES or PEI was found. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 2013     

Effect of the compatibilization of linear low‐density polyethylene‐g‐acrylic acid on the morphology and mechanical properties of poly(butylene terephthalate)/linear low‐density polyethylene blends

A poly(butylene terephthalate) (PBT)/linear low‐density polyethylene (LLDPE) alloy was prepared with a reactive extrusion method. For improved compatibility of the blending system, LLDPE grafted with acrylic acid (LLDPE‐g‐AA) by radiation was adopted in place of plain LLDPE. The toughness and extensibility of the PBT/LLDPE‐g‐AA blends, as characterized by the impact strengths and elongations at break, were much improved in comparison with the toughness and extensibility of the PBT/LLDPE blends at the same compositions. However, there was not much difference in their tensile (or flexural) strengths and moduli. Scanning electron microscopy photographs showed that the domains of PBT/LLDPE‐g‐AA were much smaller and their dispersions were more homogeneous than the domains and dispersions of the PBT/LLDPE blends. Compared with the related values of the PBT/LLDPE blends, the contents and melting temperatures of the usual spherulites of PBT in PBT/LLDPE‐g‐AA decreased. © 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 84: 1059–1066, 2002; DOI 10.1002/app.10399     

Processability,Structure and Mechanical Properties of Poly(ether imide)/Amorphous Copolyester Blends

Blends of PEI with an amorphous copolyester (PCTG) were obtained by melt‐mixing followed by injection molding. The processability of PEI increased several times upon addition of just 10% PCTG, thus expanding the applications of PEI. All the blends showed a single T_g and most of them were transparent. However, they were biphasic as suggested by the widening of the T_g's and proved by SEM. A fine dispersed particle size and good adhesion level were also observed by SEM. The values of the modulus of elasticity and the yield stress appeared close the additivity rule, and were attributed to the combined effects of the density increase and orientation decrease in the blends. These morphological changes had a slightly negative influence on ductility which was nevertheless high.

     

The vibration welding of poly(butylene terephthalate) and a polycarbonate/poly(butylene terephthalate) blend to each other and to other resins and blends

Vibration welding is used to assess the weldability of poly(butylene terephthalate) (PBT) and a polycarbonate/poly(butylene terephthalate) blend (PC/PBT) to each other and to other resins and blends: PBT to PC/PBT, PBT to modified poly(phenylene oxide) (M-PPO), PBT to polyetherimide (PEI) and PEI to a 65 wt% mineral-filled polyester blend (65-PF-PEB), PBT to a poly(phenylene oxide)/polyamide blend (PPO/PA), PC/PBT to M-PPO, and PC/PBT to PPO/PA. Based on the tensile strength of the weaker of the two materials in each pair, the following relative weld strengths have been demonstrated: PBT to PC/PBT,98%; PBT to PEI, 95%; 65-PF-PEB to PEI, 92%; and PC/PBT to M-PPO, 73%. PBT neither welds to M-PPO nor to PPO/PA, and PC/PBT does not weld to PPO/PA.     

Solvent effects on the miscibility of poly(methyl methacrylate)/poly(bisphenol a carbonate) blends

Blends of atactic or syndiotactic poly(methyl methacrylate) (designated as aPMMA or sPMMA) and poly(bisphenol A carbonate) (PC) were prepared from solution casting. Tetrahydrofuran (THF) and chloroform were used as solvent. Experimental results indicated that the as‐cast blends from THF were quite different from the chloroform‐cast ones. After film preparation, THF‐cast blends did not show any visible phase separation. However, chloroform‐cast blends formed a phase‐separated structure. The as‐cast PC from either solvent was not completely amorphous, and had a melting point at 239–242°C, indicating a certain degree of crystallinity. In contrast, the quenched samples of aPMMA/PC blends prepared from the two solvents behaved virtually the same. They both showed aPMMA dissolves better in PC, but PC solubility in aPMMA is very little. Using sPMMA instead of aPMMA to blend with PC, different results were obtained. The quenched sPMMA/PC blends cast from THF showed only one T_g. However, immiscibility (i.e., two T_gs) was found in the same blend system when cast from chloroform. THF was believed to cause the observation of single T_g due to the following kinetic reason. sPMMA and PC were still trapped together even after THF removal in a homogeneous, but nonequilibrium state below the glass transition. Therefore, the quenched sPMMA/PC blends were not truly thermodynamically miscible. From the results of aPMMA or sPMMA with PC, increasing syndiotacticity seemed to improve the miscibility between PMMA and PC. © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 80: 2842–2850, 2001     

Properties of uncompatibilized and compatibilized poly(butylene terephthalate)–LLDPE blends

In this work, blends of poly(butylene terephthalate) (PBT) and linear low‐density polyethylene (LLDPE) were prepared. LLDPE was used as an impact modifier. Since the system was found to be incompatible, compatibilization was sought for by the addition of the following two types of functionalized polyethylene: ethylene vinylacetate copolymer (EVA) and maleic anhydride‐grafted EVA copolymer (EVA‐g‐MAH). The effects of the compatibilizers on the rheological and mechanical properties of the blends have been also quantitatively investigated. The impact strength of the PBT–LLDPE binary blends slightly increased at a lower concentration of LLDPE but increased remarkably above a concentration of 60 wt % of LLDPE. The morphology of the blends showed that the LLDPE particles had dispersed in the PBT matrix below 40 wt % of LLDPE, while, at 60 wt % of LLDPE, a co‐continuous morphology was obtained, which could explain the increase of the impact strength of the blend. Generally, the mechanical strength was decreased by adding LLDPE to PBT. Addition of EVA or EVA‐g‐MAH as a compatibilizer to PBT–LLDPE (70/30) blend considerably improved the impact strength of the blend without significantly sacrificing the tensile and the flexural strength. More improvement in those mechanical properties was observed in the case of the EVA‐g‐MAH system than for the EVA system. A larger viscosity increase was also observed in the case of the EVA‐g‐MAH than EVA. This may be due to interaction of the EVA‐g‐MAH with PBT. © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 72: 989–997, 1999