Effects of maleated syndiotactic polystyrene on the morphology,mechanical properties,and crystallization behavior of syndiotactic polystyrene/polyamide 6 blends

The compatibilization of syndiotactic polystyrene (sPS)/polyamide 6 (PA‐6) blends with maleic anhydride grafted syndiotactic polystyrene (sPS‐g‐MA) as a reactive compatibilizer was investigated. The sPS/PA‐6 blends were in situ compatibilized by a reaction between the maleic anhydride (MA) of sPS‐g‐MA and the amine end group of PA‐6. The occurrence of the chemical reaction was substantiated by the disappearance of a characteristic MA peak from the Fourier transform infrared spectrum. Morphology observations showed that the size of the dispersed PA‐6 domains was significantly reduced and that the interfacial adhesion was much improved by the addition of sPS‐g‐MA. As a result of reactive compatibilization, the impact strengths of the sPS/PA‐6 blends increased with an increase in the sPS‐g‐MA content. The crystallization behaviors of the blends were affected by the compatibilization effect of sPS‐g‐MA. A single melting peak of sPS in the noncompatibilized blend was gradually split into two peaks as the amount of the compatibilizer increased. A single crystallization peak of PA‐6 in the noncompatibilized blend became two peaks with the addition of 3 wt % sPS‐g‐MA. The new peak was a result of the fractionation crystallization. As the amount of sPS‐g‐MA increased, the intensity of the new peak increased, and the original peak nearly disappeared. Finally, the crystallization peak of PA‐6 disappeared with 20 wt % sPS‐g‐MA in the blend. © 2003 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 89: 2502–2506, 2003     

Preparation of the HIPS/MA graft copolymer and its compatibilization in HIPS/PA1010 blends

The graft copolymer of high‐impact polystyrene (HIPS) grafted with maleic anhydride (MA) (HIPS‐g‐MA) was prepared with melt mixing in the presence of a free‐radical initiator. The grafting reaction was confirmed by infrared analyses, and the amount of MA grafted on HIPS was evaluated by a titration method. 1–5% of MA can be grafted on HIPS. HIPS‐g‐MA is miscible with HIPS. Its anhydride group can react with polyamide 1010 (PA1010) during melt mixing of the two components. The compatibility of HIPS‐g‐MA in the HIPS/PA1010 blends was evident. Evidence of reactions in the blends was confirmed in the morphology and mechanical behavior of the blends. A significant reduction in domain size was observed because of the compatibilization of HIPS‐g‐MA in the blends of HIPS and PA1010. The tensile mechanical properties of the prepared blends were investigated, and the fracture surfaces of the blends were examined by means of the scanning electron microscope. The improved adhesion in a 15% HIPS/75% PA1010 blend with 10% HIPS‐g‐MA copolymer was detected. The morphology of fibrillar ligaments formed by PA1010 connecting HIPS particles was observed. © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 71: 2017–2025, 1999     

Blends of recycled polycarbonate and acrylonitrile–butadiene–styrene: comparing the effect of reactive compatibilizers on mechanical and morphological properties

Blends of recycled polycarbonate (PC) and acrylonitrile–butadiene–styrene (ABS) were prepared and some mechanical and morphological properties were investigated. To compatibilize these blends, ABS‐g‐(maleic anhydride) (ABS‐g‐MA) and (ethylene–vinyl acetate)‐g‐(maleic anhydride) (EVA‐g‐MA) with similar degree of grafting of 1.5% were used. To compare the effect of the type of compatibilizer on mechanical properties, blends were prepared using 3, 5 and 10 phr of each compatibilizer. A co‐rotating twin‐screw extruder was used for blending. The results showed that ABS‐g‐MA had no significant effect on the tensile strength of the blends while EVA‐g‐MA decreased the tensile strength, the maximum decrease being about 9.6% when using 10 phr of this compatibilizer. The results of notched Charpy impact strength tests showed that EVA‐g‐MA increased the impact strength of blends more than ABS‐g‐MA. The maximum value of this increase occurred when using 5 phr of each compatibilizer, it being about 54% for ABS‐g‐MA and 165% for EVA‐g‐MA. Scanning electron microscopy micrographs showed that the particle size of the dispersed phase was decreased in the continuous phase of PC by using the compatibilizers. Moreover, a blend without compatibilizer showed brittle behaviour while the blends containing compatibilizer showed ductile behaviour in fracture. © 2013 Society of Chemical Industry     

Nonisothermal crystallization and melting behavior of β‐nucleated isotactic polypropylene and polyamide 66 blends

A highly novel nano‐CaCO₃ supported β‐nucleating agent was employed to prepare β‐nucleated isotactic polypropylene (iPP) blend with polyamide (PA) 66, β‐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 β‐nucleated iPP and its blends were investigated by differential scanning calorimeter and wide angle X‐ray diffraction. Experimental results indicated that the crystallization temperature (T) of PP shifts to high temperature in the non‐nucleated PP/PA66 blends because of the α‐nucleating effect of PA66. T of PP and the β‐crystal content (K_β) in β‐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 β‐nucleated iPP/PA66 blends increased the β‐crystal content; however, EVA‐g‐MA is not benefit for the formation of β‐crystal in the compatibilized β‐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 was evaluated by Mo's method. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci, 2011     

Effect of compatibilization on the properties of HIPS/PA1010 blends

Blends consisting of high‐impact polystyrene (HIPS) as the matrix and polyamide 1010 (PA1010) as the dispersed phase were prepared by mixing. The grafting copolymers of HIPS and maleic anhydride (MA), the compatibilizer precursors of the blends, were synthesized. The contents of the MA in the grafting copolymers are 4.7 wt % and 1.6 wt %, and were assigned as HAM and LMA, respectively. Different blend morphologies were observed by scanning electron microscopy (SEM); the domain size of the PA1010 dispersed phase in the HIPS matrix of compatibilized blends decreased comparing with that of uncompatibilized blends. For the blend with 25 wt % HIPS‐g‐MA component, the T_c of PA1010 shifts towards lower temperature, from 178 to 83°C. It is found that HIPS‐g‐MA used as the third component has profound effect on the mechanical properties of the resulting blends. This behavior has been attributed to the chemical reaction taking place in situ during the mixing between the two components of PA1010 and HIPS‐g‐MA. © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 76: 799–806, 2000     

Crystallization behavior of PP/PP‐g‐MAH/GFR PA66 blends: Establishment of their continuous‐cooling‐transformation of relative crystallinity diagrams

Polypropylene/polypropylene‐grafted‐maleic anhydride/glass fiber reinforced polyamide 66 (PP/PP‐g‐MAH/GFR PA 66) blends‐composites with and without the addition of polypropylene‐grafted‐maleic anhydride (PP‐g‐MAH) were prepared in a twin screw extruder. The effect of the compatibilizer on the thermal properties and crystallization behavior was determined using differential scanning calorimetry analysis. The hold time was set to be equal to 5 min at 290°C. These conditions are necessary to eliminate the thermomechanical history in the molten state. The crystallization under nonisothermal conditions and the plot of Continuous‐Cooling‐Transformation of relative crystallinity diagrams of both PP and PA 66 components proves that PP is significantly affected by the presence of PP‐g‐MAH. From the results it is found that an abrupt change is observed at 2.5 wt % of PP‐g‐MAH as a compatibilizer and then levels off. In these blends, concurrent crystallization behavior was not observed for GFR PA66. © 2007 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 104: 1620–1626, 2007     

Compatibilizer in waste tire powder and low‐density polyethylene blends and the blends modified asphalt

With the increasing ratio of waste tire powder (WTP) to low‐density polyethylene (LDPE), the hardness and tensile strength of the WTP/LDPE blends decreased while the elongation at break increased. Five kinds of compatibilizers, such as maleic anhydride‐grafted polyethylene (PE‐g‐MA), maleic anhydride‐grafted ethylene‐octene copolymer (POE‐g‐MA), maleic anhydride‐grafted linear LDPE, maleic anhydride‐grafted ethylene vinyl‐acetate copolymer, and maleic anhydride‐grafted styrene‐ethylene‐butylene‐styrene, were incorporated to prepare WTP/LDPE blends, respectively. PE‐g‐MA and POE‐g‐MA reinforced the tensile stress and toughness of the blends. The toughness value of POE‐g‐MA incorporating blends was the highest, reached to 2032.3 MJ/m³, while that of the control was only 1402.9 MJ/m³. Therefore, POE‐g‐MA was selected as asphalt modifier. The toughness value reached to the highest level when the content of POE‐g‐MA was about 8%. Besides that the softening point of the modified asphalt would be higher than 60°C, whereas the content of WTP/LDPE blend was more than 5%, and the blends were mixed by stirring under the shearing speed of 3000 rpm for 20 min. Especially, when the blend content was 8.5%, the softening point arrived at 82°C, contributing to asphalt strength and elastic properties in a wide range of temperature. In addition, the swelling property of POE‐g‐MA/WTP/LDPE blend was better than that of the other compalibitizers, which indicated that POE‐g‐MA /WTP/LDPE blend was much compatible with asphalt. Also, the excellent compatibility would result in the good mechanical and processing properties of the modified asphalt. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci, 2011     

Effects of molecular weight and grafted maleic anhydride of functionalized polylactic acid used in reactive compatibilized binary and ternary blends of polylactic acid and thermoplastic cassava starch

Polylactic acid (PLA) was reactively functionalized with maleic anhydride (MA) and 2,5‐bis(tert‐butylperoxy)?2,5‐dimethylhexane (Luperox 101 or L101) using a twin screw extruder (TSE). The effects of functionality (grafted MA level) and/or number average molecular weight of functionalized PLA (PLA‐g‐MA) as the reactive polymer pairs (binary blends) and reactive compatibilizer (ternary blends) were investigated. Due to the dominant side reaction during melt free radical grafting, polymer degradation or chain scission, PLA‐g‐MA having a higher grafted MA had lower molecular weights and intrinsic viscosity as well as broader molecular weight distribution values. The thermal, physical, mechanical, and morphological properties of binary blends produced by using the TSE and injection molding at a ratio of 70 wt % PLA‐g‐MA and 30 wt % thermoplastic cassava starch (TPCS) were analyzed. The reactive blends having grafted MA more than 0.4 wt % had poor tensile strength and elongation at break. Similar trends in morphology and tensile properties were observed in the reactive ternary blends. The use of PLA‐g‐MA strongly impacted the elongation at break but not the modulus or tensile strength. An increase of PLA‐g‐MA's number average molecular weight ( or M_n) improved the tensile properties of the blends. The reactive ternary blend having 0.1 wt % grafted MA on PLA and PLA‐g‐MA basis and PLA‐g‐MA's M_n of 45 kDa offered the highest elongation at break. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2015 , 132, 42230.     

Effects of different compatibilizers on the rheological,thermomechanical, and morphological properties of HDPE/LLDPE blend‐based nanocomposites

The influence of two different compatibilizers and their combination (maleic anhydride grafted high density polyethylene, HDPE‐g‐MA; maleic anhydride grafted linear low density polyethylene, LLDPE‐g‐MA; and 50/50 wt % mixture of these compatibilizers) on the rheological, thermomechanical, and morphological properties of HDPE/LLDPE/organoclay blend‐based nanocomposites was evaluated. Nanocomposites were obtained by melt‐intercalation in a torque rheometer in two steps. Masterbatches (compatibilizer/nanoclay 2:1) were obtained and subsequently diluted in the HDPE/LLDPE matrix producing nanocomposites with 2.5 wt % of nanoclay. Wide angle X‐ray diffraction (WAXD), steady‐state rheological properties, and transmission electron microscopy (TEM) were used to determine the influence of different compatibilizer systems on intercalation and/or exfoliation process which occurs preferentially in the amorphous phase, and thermomechanical properties. The LLDPE‐g‐MA with a high melt index (and consequently low viscosity and crystallinity) was an effective compatibilizer for this system. Furthermore, the compatibilized nanocomposites with LLDPE‐g‐MA or mixture of HDPE‐g‐MA and LLDPE‐g‐MA exhibited better nanoclay's dispersion and distribution with stronger interactions between the matrix and the nanoclay. These results indicated that the addition of maleic anhydride grafted polyethylene facilitates both, the exfoliation and/or intercalation of the clays and its adhesion to HDPE/LLDPE blend. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 130: 1726–1735, 2013     

Morphology and mechanical properties of polyamide 12 blends with styrene/ethylene–butylene/styrene rubbers with and without maleation

Blends of polyamide 12 (PA12) with styrene/ethylene–butylene/styrene (SEBS) and maleic anhydride grafted SEBS (SEBS‐g‐MA) were prepared by twin‐screw extrusion and injection molding. The morphology, mechanical properties, and dynamic mechanical properties of the blends were studied. The morphology of the blends was evaluated from the etched surfaces of cryogenically fractured specimens with scanning electron microscopy. The morphological parameters showed that the PA12/SEBS‐g‐MA blends (PM series) exhibited a finer and more uniform rubber dispersion than the PA12/SEBS blends (PS series) because of the interfacial chemical reactions. SEBS functionalization via maleic anhydride grafting strongly affected the morphological parameters, such as the domain size, interfacial area per unit of volume, and critical interparticle distance, but the distribution of the rubber domains in the blends was less affected. Tensile and impact studies showed that the PS blends had worse mechanical properties than the PM blends. The tensile strength and elongation at break of the PM blends were considerably greater than those of the PS blends. The fracture toughness and energy values determined for notched Charpy specimens in high‐speed impact tests were markedly higher for the PM blends than for the PS blends. A similar observation was obtained from instrumented falling weight impact studies. Dynamic mechanical analysis confirmed the incompatibility of the blend components because the glass‐transition temperatures of PA12 and the rubber phase (SEBS and SEBS‐g‐MA) were not affected. © 2005 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl polym Sci 95: 1376–1387, 2005     

Effect of core‐shell morphology evolution on the rheology,crystallization, and mechanical properties of PA6/EPDM‐g‐MA/HDPE ternary blend

In this article, polyamide 6 (PA6), maleic anhydride grafted ethylene‐propylene‐diene monomer (EPDM‐g‐MA), high‐density polyethylene (HDPE) were simultaneously added into an internal mixer to melt‐mixing for different periods. The relationship between morphology and rheological behaviors, crystallization, mechanical properties of PA6/EPDM‐g‐MA/HDPE blends were studied. The phase morphology observation revealed that PA6/EPDM‐g‐MA/HDPE (70/15/15 wt %) blend is constituted from PA6 matrix in which is dispersed core‐shell droplets of HDPE core encapsulated by EPDM‐g‐MA phase and indicated that the mixing time played a crucial role on the evolution of the core‐shell morphology. Rheological measurement manifested that the complex viscosity and storage modulus of ternary blends were notable higher than the pure polymer blends and binary blends which ascribed different phase morphology. Moreover, the maximum notched impact strength of PA6/EPDM‐g‐MA/HDPE blend was 80.7 KJ/m² and this value was 10–11 times higher than that of pure PA6. Particularly, differential scanning calorimetry results indicated that the bulk crystallization temperature of HDPE (114.6°C) was partly weakened and a new crystallization peak appeared at a lower temperature of around 102.2°C as a result of co‐crystal of HDPE and EPDM‐g‐MA. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 2013     

Morphology and properties of nylon 6 and high density polyethylene blends in presence of nanoclay and PE‐g‐MA

In this study, we report the synergistic effect of nanoclay and maleic anhydride grafted polyethylene (PE‐g‐MA) on the morphology and properties of (80/20 w/w) nylon 6/high density polyethylene (HDPE) blend. Polymer blend nanocomposites containing nanoclay with and without compatibilizer (PE‐g‐MA) were prepared by melt mixing, and their morphologies and structures were examined with scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and wide angle X‐ray diffractometer (WAXD) study. The size of phase‐separated domains decreased considerably with increasing content of nanoclay and PE‐g‐MA. WAXD study and transmission electron microscopy (TEM) revealed the presence of exfoliated clay platelets in nylon 6 matrix, as well as, at the interface of the (80/20 w/w) nylon 6/HDPE blend–clay nanocomposites. Addition of PE‐g‐MA in the blend–clay nanocomposites enhanced the exfoliation of clays in nylon 6 matrix and especially at the interface. Thus, exfoliated clay platelets in nylon 6 matrix effectively restricted the coalescence of dispersed HDPE domains while PE‐g‐MA improved the adhesion between the phases at the interface. The use of compatibilizer and nanoclay in polymer blends may lead to a high performance material which combines the advantages of compatibilized polymer blends and the merits of polymer nanocomposites. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci, 2012     

Property enhancement in polypropylene ternary blend nanocomposites via a novel poly(ethylene oxide)‐grafted polystyrene‐block‐poly(ethylene/butylene)‐block‐polystyrene toughener–compatibilizer system

Synthesis and characterization of a novel toughener–compatibilizer for polypropylene (PP)–montmorillonite (MMT) nanocomposites were conducted to provide enhanced mechanical and thermal properties. Poly(ethylene oxide) (PEO) blocks were synthetically grafted onto maleic anhydride‐grafted polystyrene‐block‐poly(ethylene/butylene)‐block‐polystyrene (SEBS‐g‐MA). Special attention was paid to emphasize the effect of PEO‐grafted SEBS (SEBS‐g‐PEO) against SEBS‐g‐MA on morphology, static/dynamic mechanical properties and surface hydrophilicity of the resultant blends and nanocomposites. It was found that the silicate layers of neat MMT are well separated by PEO chains chemically bonded to nonpolar SEBS polymer without needing any organophilic modification of the clay as confirmed by X‐ray diffraction and transmission electron microscopy analyses. From scanning electron microscopy analyses, elastomeric domains interacting with MMT layers via PEO sites were found to be distributed in the PP matrix with higher number and smaller sizes than the corresponding blend. As a benefit of PEO grafting, SEBS‐g‐PEO‐containing nanocomposite exhibited not only higher toughness/impact strength but also increased creep recovery, as compared to corresponding SEBS‐g‐MA‐containing nanocomposite and neat PP. The damping parameter of the same nanocomposite was also found to be high in a broad range of temperatures as another advantage of the SEBS‐g‐PEO toughener–compatibilizer. The water contact angles of the blends and nanocomposites were found to be lower than that of neat hydrophobic PP which is desirable for finishing processes such as dyeing and coating. © 2018 Society of Chemical Industry     

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     

Reactive extrusion of polycaprolactone compounds containing wood flour and lignin

Biodegradable polycaprolactone (PCL) was melt‐compounded in a Werner & Pfleiderer twin‐screw extruder (ZSK25) together with wood flour (WF) and lignin with maleic anhydride‐grafted polycaprolactone (PCL‐g‐MA) used as a compatibilizer. The grafting of maleic anhydride onto PCL was achieved with reactive extrusion in the presence of 2,5‐dimethyl‐2,5‐di‐(t‐butylperoxy)hexane as an initiator. The graft copolymers were analyzed with size exclusion chromatography and titration. As a function of the initiator and maleic anhydride addition, the grafted maleic anhydride content varied from 1.4 to 3.1 wt %. Compounds compatibilized with PCL‐g‐MA exhibited improved mechanical properties: a compatibilized PCL compound containing 40 wt % WF gave a Young's modulus of 2300 MPa with respect to 400 MPa for neat PCL and a 100% increase in yield stress. The content of WF, lignin, and PCL‐g‐MA was varied systematically to examine stress–strain and impact behavior. Low contents of grafted maleic anhydride and PCL‐g‐MA were required to improve both mechanical properties and interfacial adhesion. Biodegradation was investigated. Lignin addition was found to retard biodegradation. © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 81: 1972–1984, 2001     

Toughening and compatibilization of polyphenylene sulfide/nylon 66 blends with SEBS and maleic anhydride grafted SEBS triblock copolymers

In this study, styrene‐b‐ethylene/butylene‐b‐styrene triblock copolymer (SEBS) and maleic anhydride grafted SEBS (SEBS‐g‐MA) were used as compatibilizers for the blends of polyphenylene sulfide/nylon 66 (PPS/PA66). The mechanical properties, including impact and tensile properties and morphology of the blends, were investigated by mechanical properties measurements and scanning electron microscopy. Impact measurements indicated that the impact strength of the blends increases slowly with elastomer (SEBS and SEBS‐g‐MA) content upto 20 wt %; thereafter, it increases sharply with increasing elastomer content. The impact energy of the elastomer‐compatibilized PPS/PA66 blends exceeded that of pure nylon 66, implying that the nylon 66 can be further toughened by the incorporation of brittle PPS minor phase in the presence of SEBS or SEBS‐g‐MA. The compatibilization efficiency of SEBS‐g‐MA for nylon‐rich PPS/PA66 was found to be higher than SEBS due to the in situ forming SEBS interphase between PPS and nylon 66. The correlation between the impact property and morphology of the SEBS‐g‐MA compatibilized PPS/PA66 blends is discussed. The excellent impact strength of the nylon‐rich blends resulted from shield yielding of the matrix. © 2007 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci, 2007     

Effect of maleic anhydride grafted polybutadiene on the compatibility of polyamide 66/acrylonitrile‐butadiene‐styrene copolymer blend

The addition of maleic anhydride grafted polybutadiene (PB‐g‐MAH) can greatly improve the compatibility of polyamide 66 (PA66)/acrylonitrile‐butadiene‐styrene copolymer (ABS) blends. Unlike the commonly used compatibilizers in polyamide/ABS blends, PB‐g‐MAH is compatible with the ABS particles' core phase polybutadiene (PB), rather than the shell styrene‐acrylonitrile (SAN). The compatibility and interaction of the components in the blends were characterized by Fourier transform‐infrared spectra (FTIR), Molau tests, melt flow index (MFI), dynamic mechanical analyses (DMA), and scanning electron microscopic (SEM) observations. The results show that PB‐g‐MAH can react with the amino end groups in PA66 while entangle with the PB phase in ABS. In this way, the compatibilizer anchors at the interface of PA66/ABS blend. The morphology study of the fracture sections before and after tensile test reveals that the ABS particles were dispersed uniformly in the PA66 matrix and the interfacial adhesion between PA66 and ABS was increased significantly. The mechanical properties of the blends thus were enhanced with the improving of the compatibility. POLYM. ENG. SCI., 2012. © 2011 Society of Plastics Engineers     

Comparative study of different maleic anhydride grafted compatibilizer precursors towards LDPE/PA6 blends: Morphology and mechanical properties

The study deals with the effectiveness of maleic anhydride grafted styrene-b-ethylene-co-propylene copolymer (SEPMA) as compatibilizer precursor (CP) for blends of low density polyethylene (LDPE) with polyamide-6 (PA). The CP was produced by grafting MA onto SEP in the melt. The specific interactions between the CP and the blends components have been investigated through characterizations of the binary LDPE/CP and PA/CP blends. The compatibilizing efficiency of the MA-grafted SEP, as revealed by the thermal properties and the morphology of the compatibilized blends, has been shown to be excellent. The morphology, as well as the mechanical properties of the compatibilized with SEPMA 75/25 w/w and 25/75 w/w LDPE/PA6 blends have been compared with those of the blends compatibilized with maleic anhydride functionalized HDPE sample (1-HDPE-g-MA) and with a commercial maleic anhydride grafted styrene-b-(ethylene-co-1-butene)-b-styrene copolymer (SEBSMA1). The results show that the strong compatibilizing efficiency of SEPMA is comparable with that of SEBSMA1, while 1-HDPE-g-MA exhibits a slightly lower activity, particularly for the blends, in which PA is the matrix phase.     

Mechanical characterization of toughened polyamide‐6 blends with metallocene copolymers

The effectiveness as impact modifier of two in situ maleated metallocene copolymers, a metallocene polyethylene, (mPE1) and a metallocene ethylene‐propylene (mEPDM) and three commercial maleated copolymers (mPE2‐g‐MA, EPDM‐g‐MA, and mEPR‐g‐MA) were studied in binary and ternary blends carried out in an intermeshing corotating twin‐screw extruder with polyamide‐6 (PA) as matrix (80 wt %). Also, the effects of the grafting degree, viscosity ratio, and crystallinity of the dispersed phases on the morphological and mechanical properties of the blends were investigated. A significant improvement of the compatibility of these grafted copolymers with PA6 was shown by FTIR spectroscopy, capillary rheometry, and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) in all reactive blends. The tensile strength values of the mEPR‐g‐MA/PA2 binary blend showed the highest strain hardening. The results obtained in this work indicated that the effectiveness of the grafted copolymers as impact modifier depends on the morphology of the blends and a combination of tensile properties of the blend components such as Young's modulus, Poisson ratio, and break stress. © 2007 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci, 2008     

Reactive Compatibilizer Precursors for LDPE/PA6 Blends, 4

Summary: The effectiveness of some thermoplastic elastomers grafted with maleic anhydride (MA) or with glycidyl methacrylate (GMA) as compatibilizer precursors (CPs) for blends of low density polyethylene (LDPE) with polyamide‐6 (PA) has been studied. The CPs were produced by grafting different amounts of MA or GMA onto a styrene‐block‐(ethylene‐co‐1‐butene)‐block‐styrene copolymer (SEBS) (KRATON G 1652), either in the melt or in solution. A commercially available SEBS‐g‐MA copolymer with 1.7 wt.‐% MA (KRATON FG 1901X) was also used. The effect of the MA concentration and of other characteristics of the SEBS‐g‐MA CPs was also studied. The specific interactions between the CPs and the blends components were investigated through characterizations of the binary LDPE/CP and PA/CP blends, in the whole composition range. It was demonstrated that the SEBS‐g‐GMA copolymers display poor compatibilizing effectiveness due to cross‐linking resulting from reactions of the epoxy rings of these CPs with both the amine and the carboxyl end groups of PA. On the contrary, the compatibilizing efficiency of the MA‐grafted elastomers, as revealed by the thermal properties and the morphology of the compatibilized blends, was shown to be excellent. The results of this study confirm that the anhydride functional groups possess considerably higher efficiency, for the reactive compatibilization of LDPE/PA blends, than those of the ethylene‐acrylic acid and ethylene‐glycidyl methacrylate copolymers investigated in previous works.

SEM micrograph of the 75/25 LD08/PA blend (with 2 phr SEBSMA1).