Polyoxymethylene/ethylene butylacrylate copolymer/ethylene‐methyl acrylate‐glycidyl methacrylate ternary blends

Blends of compatibilized polyoxymethylene (POM)/ethylene butylacrylate copolymer (EBA)/ethylene‐methyl acrylate‐glycidyl methacrylate copolymer (EMA‐GMA) and uncompatibilized POM/EBA were investigated. The notched impact strength of the compatibilized blends was higher than that of their uncompatibilized counterparts. The toughness of the POM blends was improved obviously with relatively low loading of EBA. Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) spectra of EMA‐GMA, pure POM, and POM/EBA/EMA‐GMA blends indicated that epoxy groups of EMA‐GMA reacted with terminal hydroxyl groups of POM molecular chains. The glass‐transition temperature (T_g) values of the POM matrix and the EBA phase were observed shifted to each other in the presence of EMA‐GMA compatibilizer indicating that the compatibilized blends had better compatibility than their uncompatibilized counterparts. With the addition of EBA to POM, both the compatibilized and uncompatibilized blends showed higher onset degradation temperature (T_d) than that of pure POM and the T_d values of the compatibilized blends were higher than those of their uncompatibilized counterparts. The scanning electron microscopy showed better EBA particles distribution state in the compatibilized system than in the uncompatibilized one. The compatibilized blend with an obvious rougher impact fracture surface indicated the ductile fracture mode. POLYM. ENG. SCI., 58:1127–1134, 2018. © 2017 Society of Plastics Engineers     

Effects of olefin‐based compatibilizers on the morphology,thermal and mechanical properties of ABS/polyamide‐6 blends

In this study, commercially available epoxidized and maleated olefinic copolymers, EMA‐GMA (ethylene‐methyl acrylate‐glycidyl methacrylate) and EnBACO‐MAH (ethylene‐n butyl acrylate‐carbon monoxide‐maleic anhydride), were used at 0, 5, and 10% by weight to compatibilize the blend composed of ABS (acrylonitrile‐butadiene‐styrene) terpolymer and PA6 (polyamide 6). Compatibilizing performance of these two olefinic polymers was investigated from blend morphologies, thermal and mechanical properties as a function of blend composition, and compatibilizer loading level. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) studies showed that incorporation of compatibilizer resulted in a fine morphology with reduced dispersed particle diameter at the presence of 5% compatibilizer. The crystallization behavior of PA6 phase in the blends was explored for selected blend compositions by differential scanning calorimetry (DSC). At high compatibilizer level a decrease in the degree of crystallization was observed. In 10% compatibilizer containing blends, formation of γ‐crystals was observed contrary to other compatibilizer compositions. The behavior of the compatibilized blend system in tensile testing showed the negative effect of using excess compatibilizer. Different trends in yield strengths and strain at break values were observed depending on compatibilizer type, loading level, and blend composition. With 5% EnBACO‐MAH, the blend toughness was observed to be the highest at room temperature. © 2007 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 104: 926–935, 2007     

Reactive compatibilization of high‐impact poly(lactic acid)/ethylene copolymer blends catalyzed by N,N‐dimethylstearylamine

The inherent brittleness of poly(lactic acid) (PLA) limits its wide application in many fields. Here, high‐impact PLA/ethylene–methyl acrylate–glycidyl methacrylate random terpolymer (EMA–GMA) blends were prepared with the addition of a small amount of N,N‐dimethylstearylamine (DMSA) catalyst. It was found that the notched impact resistance of various PLA/EMA–GMA blends could be considerably improved by adding DMSA. In particular, the notched Izod impact strength of the blend with 20 wt% EMA–GMA increased from 35.6 to 83.5 kJ m^?2 by adding 0.2 wt% DMSA. Reactive compatibilization between PLA and EMA–GMA with DMSA was studied using Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy. The results indicated that DMSA promoted the reaction between the epoxide group of EMA–GMA and end groups (–OH, –COOH) of PLA. This considerably improved the interfacial adhesion, leading to better wetting of the dispersed phase by the PLA matrix and finer dispersed EMA–GMA particles. Therefore, the significant increase in notched impact strength was attributed to the effective reactive compatibilization promoted by DMSA. © 2013 Society of Chemical Industry     

Viscoelastic properties of reactive and non‐reactive blends of ethylene‐methyl acrylate copolymers with styrene‐maleic anhydride copolymer

The effects of compatibilizing reactions on the viscoelastic properties and morphology of ethylene‐methyl acrylate copolymers were studied. Potentially reactive blends of styrene‐maleic anhydride copolymer (SMAH) and a terpolymer of ethylene/methyl acrylate/glycidyl methacrylate (E‐MA‐GMA) were compared with a non‐reactive blend of SMAH and an ethylene/methyl acrylate (E‐MA) copolymer with similar rheological properties. Melt mixing was carried out in a batch mixer and in a co‐rotating twin screw extruder. The morphology of the reactive blends showed smaller domain sizes than the non‐reactive blends, and the viscoelastic properties of the blends were very different. The storage and loss moduli and the complex viscosity of the reactive blends were greater than those of non‐reactive blends. The reactive blends had a higher zero shear viscosity, plateau modulus and mean relaxation time than their non‐reactive counterparts, indicating a higher degree of melt elasticity. The melt elasticity was maximum at 25% functionalized ethylene‐methyl acrylate concentration.     

Effect of compatibilizer in acrylonitrile‐butadiene‐styrene toughened nylon 6 blends: Ductile–brittle transition temperature

The ductile–brittle transition temperatures were determined for compatibilized nylon 6/acrylonitrile‐butadiene‐styrene (PA6/ABS) copolymer blends. The compatibilizers used for those blends were methyl methacrylate‐co‐maleic anhydride (MMA‐MAH) and MMA‐co‐glycidyl methacrylate (MMA‐GMA). The ductile–brittle transition temperatures were found to be lower for blends compatibilized through maleate modified acrylic polymers. At room temperature, the PA6/ABS binary blend was essentially brittle whereas the ternary blends with MMA‐MAH compatibilizer were supertough and showed a ductile–brittle transition temperature at ?10°C. The blends compatibilized with maleated copolymer exhibited impact strengths of up to 800 J/m. However, the blends compatibilized with MMA‐GMA showed poor toughness at room temperature and failed in a brittle manner at subambient temperatures. © 2003 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 90: 2643–2647, 2003     

Compatibilization of polypropylene/ poly(3‐hydroxybutyrate) blends

Blending polypropylene (PP) with biodegradable poly(3‐hydroxybutyrate) (PHB) can be a nice alternative to minimize the disposal problem of PP and the intrinsic brittleness that restricts PHB applications. However, to achieve acceptable engineering properties, the blend needs to be compatibilized because of the immiscibility between PP and PHB. In this work, PP/PHB blends were prepared with different types of copolymers as possible compatibilizers: poly(propylene‐g‐maleic anhydride) (PP–MAH), poly (ethylene‐co‐methyl acrylate) [P(E–MA)], poly(ethylene‐co‐glycidyl methacrylate) [P(E–GMA)], and poly(ethylene‐co‐methyl acrylate‐co‐glycidyl methacrylate) [P(E–MA–GMA)]. The effect of each copolymer on the morphology and mechanical properties of the blends was investigated. The results show that the compatibilizers efficiency decreased in this order: P(E–MA–GMA) > P(E–MA) > P(E–GMA) > PP–MAH; we explained this by taking into consideration the affinity degree of the compatibilizers with the PP matrix, the compatibilizers properties, and their ability to provide physical and/or reactive compatibilization with PHB. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci, 2012     

A New Approach to Supertough Poly(lactic acid): A High Temperature Reactive Blending

A novel approach to PLA toughening is proposed in this study. Poly(lactic acid) (PLA) is toughened using poly(ethylene‐n‐butylene‐acrylate‐co‐glycydyl methacrylate) (EBA‐GMA) as a reactive compatibilizer with the aid of an epoxy‐based chain extender. It is found that the toughening effect of EBA‐GMA in the binary blend investigated is strongly influenced by blending temperature. Blending at high temperatures which are non‐typical for PLA processing (over 250 °C) allows toughness to be increased by an order of magnitude when compared to the toughness of blends prepared at low temperatures (below 200 °C). This effect is attributed to a combination of factors, namely an increasing rate of reactive bonding between PLA and EBA‐GMA at elevated temperatures and enhanced interfacial adhesion between PLA and EBA‐GMA phases. DSC studies show that PLA/EBA‐GMA bonding on the interface acts as an efficient nucleator for PLA. The nucleation ability of the PLA/EBA‐GMA interface strongly depends on blend processing temperature and gradually increases with increasing blending temperature. The PLA/EBA‐GMA interface shows its highest nucleation ability at 250 °C.

     

Toughening of recycled poly(ethylene terephthalate)/glass fiber blends with ethylene–butyl acrylate–glycidyl methacrylate copolymer and maleic anhydride grafted polyethylene–octene rubber

The aim of this study was to improve the toughness of recycled poly(ethylene terephthalate) (PET)/glass fiber (GF) blends through the addition of ethylene–butyl acrylate–glycidyl methacrylate copolymer (EBAGMA) and maleic anhydride grafted polyethylene–octene (POE‐g‐MAH) individually. The morphology and mechanical properties of the ternary blend were also examined in this study. EBAGMA was more effective in toughening recycled PET/GF blends than POE‐g‐MAH; this resulted from its better compatibility with PET and stronger fiber/matrix bonding, as indicated by scanning electron microscopy images. The PET/GF/EBAGMA ternary blend had improved impact strength and well‐balanced mechanical properties at a loading of 8 wt % EBAGMA. The addition of POE‐g‐MAH weakened the fiber/matrix bonding due to more POE‐g‐MAH coated on the GF, which led to weakened impact strength, tensile strength, and flexural modulus. According to dynamic rheometer testing, the use of both EBAGMA and POE‐g‐MAH remarkably increased the melt storage modulus and dynamic viscosity. Differential scanning calorimetry analysis showed that the addition of EBAGMA lowered the crystallization rate of the PET/GF blend, whereas POE‐g‐MAH increased it. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci, 2008     

Effect of a hybrid compatibilizer on the mechanical properties and interfacial tension of a ternary blend with polypropylene,poly(lactic acid), and a toughening modifier

This study examined the effect of three compatibilizers, namely, a hybrid compatibilizer composed of polypropylene‐maleic anhydride (PP‐g‐MAH) and polyethylene‐glycidyl methacrylate (PE‐g‐GMA), a single compatibilizer composed of PP‐g‐MAH, and a single compatibilizer composed of PE‐g‐GMA, on the mechanical, morphological, and rheological properties of a ternary blend of polypropylene (PP), poly(lactic acid; PLA), and a toughening modifier. The results of tensile strength, flexural strength, and impact strength tests for the ternary blends before and after hydrolysis, revealed that the ternary blend with a hybrid compatibilizer content of 3 phr exhibited better material properties than the blend containing a single compatibilizer. In the weighted relaxation spectra of the ternary blend using the Palierne emulsion model, the ternary blend containing the hybrid compatibilizer, exhibited only one relaxation spectrum peak at ∼ 0.16 s. This result suggests that the ternary blend with the hybrid compatibilizer exhibits uncharacteristic morphological properties, that is, a single‐phase microstructure. The above results suggest that the hybrid mixture is an effective compatibilizer for the ternary blend of PP, PLA, and a toughening modifier. POLYM. COMPOS., 2012. © 2012 Society of Plastics Engineers     

Poly(lactic acid)–layered silicate nanocomposites: The effects of modifier and compatibilizer on the morphology and mechanical properties

Poly(lactic acid) (PLA) based nanocomposites were prepared to investigate the effects of types of nanoclays. Five different organically modified nanoclays (Cloisites^®15A, 25A, and 30B, and Nanofils^®5 and 8) were used. Two rubbery compatibilizers, ethylene‐glycidyl methacrylate (E‐GMA) and ethylene‐butyl acrylate‐maleic anhydride, were used in the nanocomposites as compatibilizer‐impact modifier. The degree of clay dispersion, the chemical compatibility between the polymer matrix and the compatibilizers, and changes in the morphology and mechanical properties of the nanocomposites were investigated. The mechanical properties and the morphological studies showed that the interactions between the different compatibilizers and PLA resulted in different structures and properties; such that the dispersion of clay, droplet size of the compatibilizer, and tensile properties were distinctly dependent on the type of the compatibilizer. Compatibility between C25A, C30B, and E‐GMA resulted in the best level of dispersion, leading to the highest tensile modulus and toughness among the compositions studied. In the mentioned nanocomposites, a network structure was formed owing to the high reactivity of the epoxide group of GMA towards the PLA end groups resulting in high impact toughness. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2015 , 132, 42553.     

Effect of combining ethylene/methyl acrylate/glycidyl methacrylate terpolymer and an organoclay on the toughening of poly(lactic acid)

Blends of poly(lactic acid) (PLA) and ethylene/methyl acrylate/glycidyl methacrylate terpolymer (EMA‐GMA) with and without the addition of an organoclay were prepared by melt mixing in a twin screw extruder. Mechanical, morphological, structural, and rheological properties of the systems have been investigated as function of its compositions. The impact strength (IS) of PLA increased with the addition of EMA‐GMA. Furthermore, the addition of 2.5 wt% of organoclay to the PLA/EMA‐GMA blend promoted improvements in the mechanical properties, such as IS, tensile strength, and strain‐at‐break. Further addition of organoclay, 5 wt%, led to a formation of a double percolated network, where the clay particles form bridges across EMA‐GMA droplets and glue them together, however, without coalescence. In addition, morphological and wide‐angle X‐ray scattering analyses evidenced that the clay presents a partially exfoliated structure and that remains inside the EMA‐GMA droplets, probably as a consequence of the approach used to produce the systems. POLYM. ENG. SCI., 54:1922–1930, 2014. © 2013 Society of Plastics Engineers     

Compatibilization and characterization of blends of styrene–maleic anhydride copolymer with modified polyethylenes

Potentially reactive blends of styrene–maleic anhydride (SMAH) with ethylene/methyl acrylate/glycidyl methacrylate (E‐MA‐GMA) and nonreactive blends of SMAH with ethylene/methyl acrylate (E‐MA) were produced in a Brabender batch mixer and in a corotating twin‐screw extruder. The products were characterized in terms of rheology, morphology, and mechanical properties to understand the reaction characteristics between anhydride/epoxy functional groups. Storage modulus, G′, loss modulus, G″ and complex viscosity, η* of the reactive blends were higher than those of nonreactive ones. At 25% E‐MA‐GMA content, maximum in η* was obtained for the reactive blends. The reactive blends showed finer morphology than the nonreactive ones at all concentrations studied. Mechanical characterization showed that reactive SMAH/E‐MA‐GMA blends had higher tensile strength, % strain at break, and tensile modulus than the nonreactive blends for all corresponding modified polyethylene contents. © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 80: 790–797, 2001     

PBT blends with rigid polymer and elastomer inclusions: the effect of component type and reactivity on mechanical behaviour

The present study shows the potential of the poly(butylene terephthalate) (PBT) matrix to form ternary blends with well‐balanced properties, analogous to Polyamide 6 (PA6) systems with a very fine (<100 nm) separately dispersed rigid polymer (poly(styrene‐co‐maleic anhydride)) and elastomer (maleated ethylene‐propylene elastomer). The use in PBT blends of maleated components analogous to those in the PA6 systems was much less effective, due to the presence of larger particles. Enhancement of all properties, including toughness, was found in the case of a blend containing at least one component with epoxide groups, such as rigid styrene‐glycidyl methacrylate copolymer or elastomeric poly[(ethylene)‐co‐(methyl acrylate)‐co‐(glycidyl methacrylate)]. In this case, the reactive compatibilization of the epoxy‐group‐containing component caused refinement of particle size of the other component due to enhanced viscosity. As a result, more advantageous micromechanical behaviour of this ternary in comparison with the binary system occurs. The PBT matrix offers a similar potential to PA6 in synergistic influencing of both well‐dispersed phases. This work supports the universality of rigid polymer‐elastomer combination for the enhancement of the properties of pseudoductile polymers. Copyright © 2004 Society of Chemical Industry     

Reactive mixing of PET and PET/PP blends with glycidyl methacrylate–modified styrene‐b‐(ethylene‐co‐olefin) block copolymers

Styrene‐b‐(ethylene‐co‐butylene)‐b‐styrene (SEBS) and styrene‐b‐(ethylene‐co‐propylene) (SEP, SEPSEP) block copolymers with different styrene contents and different numbers of blocks in the copolymer chain were functionalized by melt radical grafting with glycidyl methacrylate (GMA) and employed as compatibilizers for PET‐based blends. Binary blends of PET with both functionalized (SEBS‐g‐GMA, SEP‐g‐GMA, SEPSEP‐g‐GMA) and neat (SEBS, SEP, SEPSEP) copolymers (75 : 25 w/w) and ternary blends of PET and PP (75 : 25 w/w) with various amounts (2.5–10 phr) of both modified and unmodified copolymers were prepared in an internal mixer, and their properties were evaluated by SEM, DSC, melt viscosimetry, and tensile and impact tests. The roles of the chemical structure, grafting degree, and concentration of the various copolymers on blend compatibilization was investigated. The blends with the grafted copolymers showed a neat improvement of phase dispersion and interfacial adhesion compared to the blends with nonfunctionalized copolymers. The addition of grafted copolymers resulted in a marked increase in melt viscosity, which was accounted for by the occurrence of chemical reactions between the epoxide groups of GMA and the carboxyl/hydroxyl end groups of PET during melt mixing. Blends with SEPSEP‐g‐GMA and SEBS‐g‐GMA, at concentrations of 5–10 phr, showed a higher compatibilizing effect with enhanced elongation at break and impact resistance. The effectiveness of GMA‐functionalized SEBS was then compared to that of maleic anhydride–grafted SEBS. © 2005 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 98: 2201–2211, 2005     

Super‐Tough and Highly‐Ductile Poly(l‐lactic acid)/Thermoplastic Polyurethane/Epoxide‐Containing Ethylene Copolymer Blends Prepared by Reactive Blending

Ethylene‐methyl acrylate‐glycidyl methacrylate copolymer (E‐MA‐GMA) is employed to improve the impact toughness of poly(l ‐lactic acid) (PLLA)/thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU) blends by reactive melt‐blending. The reaction and miscibility between the components are confirmed by Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy, dynamic mechanical analysis, and differential scanning calorimetry. A super‐tough PLLA/TPU/E‐MA‐GMA multiphase blend (75/10/15) exhibits a significantly improved impact strength of 77.77 kJ m^?2, which is more than 17 times higher than that of PLLA/TPU (90/10) blend. A co‐continuous‐like TPU phase structure involving E‐MA‐GMA phase at the etched cryo‐fractured surface and the high‐orientated matrix deformation at the impact‐fractured surface are observed by scanning electron microscopy. The high‐orientated matrix deformation induced by the co‐continuous TPU phase structure is responsible for the super toughness of PLLA/TPU/E‐MA‐GMA blends.     

Rheological behavior and morphological and interfacial properties of PLA/TPE blends

Rheological and interfacial tension data were employed to predict the morphology and thermal and mechanical properties of noncompatibilized and compatibilized poly(lactic acid) (PLA)/thermoplastic elastomer (TPE) blends. PLA was melt blended with thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU) and ethylene elastomer (EE) and compatibilized by ethylene–butyl acrylate–glycidyl methacrylate (EBG) in an internal mixer chamber. Both TPU and EE TPEs have higher viscosities than PLA, and the interfacial properties evaluated have revealed better adhesion between domains of PLA–TPU. The efficiency of the compatibilizer agent EBG depended on the TPE type inferred by modifications in the scanning electron microscopy images of PLA/TPE blends and by the Izod impact strength (improved by 23%). The EBG was more effective in the PLA/TPU blend. The TPEs and EBG did not affect the PLA thermal stability, and no thermal event was observed in the usual PLA extrusion and injection temperature range. © 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2019 , 136, 47962.     

Rheological properties of poly(lactic acid) based nanocomposites: Effects of different organoclay modifiers and compatibilizers

Poly(lactic acid) (PLA) nanocomposites containing five types of organically modified, layered silicates and two elastomeric compatibilizers, namely ethylene‐glycidyl methacrylate (E‐GMA) and ethylene‐butyl acrylate‐maleic anhydride (E‐BA‐MAH), were prepared using a twin screw extruder. The morphologies of the nanocomposites were determined by X‐ray diffraction (XRD) and transmission electron microscopy (TEM), and the rheological properties of the melts were measured using small‐amplitude oscillatory shear. XRD revealed that the addition of E‐GMA to the binary nanocomposites resulted in higher compatibility between the organoclay nanoplatelets and the polymer matrix. TEM showed that all of the nanocomposites contained mixed dispersed structures, involving tactoids of various sizes, as well as intercalated and exfoliated organoclay layers. Rheological properties were found to be affected by the differences in the compatibility between the organoclays and the polymer matrix, and by the addition of the compatibilizer. Organoclay types that resulted in high level of dispersion exhibited higher values of complex viscosity compared to that of neat PLA. The addition of E‐GMA introduced a solid‐like rheological behavior at low frequencies. All of the nanocomposites had similar rheological behavior at high frequencies. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2016 , 133, 42915.     

Immobilization of Candida lipolytica lipase on macroporous beaded terpolymers with epoxy groups

A series of macroporous beaded terpolymers with epoxy groups were synthesized by suspension polymerization with glycidyl methacrylate (GMA), ethylene glycol dimethacrylate (EGDMA), and the third monomers including styrene, methyl methacrylate, n‐butyl acrylate (BA), butyl methacrylate (BMA), and 2‐hydroxyethyl methacrylate for immobilization of Candida lipolytica lipase. The effect of various third monomers on loading and activity recovery of immobilized lipase were studied. Terpolymers with BA as the third monomer were found to give the biggest loading of lipase, and the activity recovery of lipase immobilized on poly(GMA‐EGDMA‐BA) terpolymers reached 79.0%. As the content of BA (%) increasing, the loading of lipase enhanced, but the activity recovery reached 88.5% for the initial stage and decreased to 46.9% at last. The poly(GMA‐EGDMA‐BA‐10) showed an optimal result in lipase immobilization. Lipase immobilized on poly(GMA‐EGDMA‐BA‐10) carriers had broader pH and higher temperature stability. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 2013     

Rubber‐toughened PLA blends with low thermal expansion

In this study, poly (lactic acid) (PLA) blended with various rubber components, i.e., poly (ethylene‐glycidyl methacrylate) (EGMA), maleic anhydride grafted poly(styrene‐ethylene/butylene‐styrene) triblock elastomer (m‐SEBS), and poly(ethylene‐co‐octene) (EOR), was investigated. It was observed that EGMA is highly compatible due to its reaction with PLA. m‐SEBS is less compatible with PLA and EOR is incompatible with PLA. Electron microscopy (SEM and TEM) revealed that a fine co‐continuous microlayer structure is formed in the injection‐molded PLA/EGMA blends. This leads to polymer blends with high toughness and very low linear thermal expansion both in the flow direction and in the transverse direction. The microlayer thickness of rubber in PLA blends was found to play key roles in reducing the linear thermal expansion and achieving high toughness of the blends. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 2013     

Synthesis and photopolymerization of acrylic acrylate copolymers

Acrylate‐functionalized copolymers were synthesized by the modification of poly(butyl acrylate‐co‐glycidyl methacrylate) (BA/GMA) and poly(butyl acrylate‐co‐methyl methacrylate‐co‐glycidyl methacrylate). ¹³C‐NMR analyses showed that no glycidyl methacrylate block longer than three monomer units was formed in the BA/GMA copolymer if the glycidyl methacrylate concentration was kept below 20 mol %. We chemically modified the copolymers by reacting the epoxy group with acrylic acid to yield polymers with various glass‐transition temperatures and functionalities. We studied the crosslinking reactions of these copolymers by differential scanning calorimetry to point out the effect of chain functionality on double‐bond reactivity. Films formed from acrylic acrylate copolymer precursors were finally cured under ultraviolet radiation. Network heterogeneities such as pendant chains and highly crosslinked microgel‐like regions greatly influenced the network structure and, therefore, its viscoelastic properties. © 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 86: 753–763, 2002