Properties of poly(ethylene terephthalate)/poly(ethylene naphthalate) blends

Blends composed of poly(ethylene terephthalate) (PET) as the majority component and poly(ethylene naphthalate)(PEN) as the minority component were melt-mixed in a single screw extruder at various PET/PEN compound ratios. Tensile and flexural test results reveal a good PET/PEN composition dependence, indicating that the compatibility of the blends is effective in a macrodomain. In thermal tests, single transitions for T_g, T_m and T_c (crystallization temperature), respectively, are observed from DSC as well as single T_g from DMA except for 50/50 blends. These results suggests that the compatibility is sufficient down to the submicron level. Moreover, isothermal DSC tests along with Avrami analysis indicate that PET's crystallization is significantly retarded when blended with PEN. Results in this study demonstrate that PEN is a highly promising additive to improve PET's spinnability at high speeds.     

Finite strain behavior of poly(ethylene terephthalate) (PET) and poly(ethylene terephthalate)-glycol (PETG)

Uniaxial and plane strain compression experiments are conducted on amorphous poly(ethylene terephthalate) (PET) and poly(ethylene terephthalate)-glycol (PETG) over a wide range of temperatures (25-110 °C) and strain rates (.005-1.0 s⁻¹). The stress-strain behavior of each material is presented and the results for the two materials are found to be remarkably similar over the investigated range of rates, temperatures, and strain levels. Below the glass transition temperature (θ_g=80 °C), the materials exhibit a distinct yield stress, followed by strain softening then moderate strain hardening at moderate strain levels and dramatic strain hardening at large strains. Above the glass transition temperature, the stress-strain curves exhibit the classic trends of a rubbery material during loading, albeit with a strong temperature and time dependence. Instead of a distinct yield stress, the curve transitions gradually, or rolls over, to flow. As in the sub-θ_g range, this is followed by moderate strain hardening and stiffening, and subsequent dramatic hardening. The exhibition of dramatic hardening in PETG, a copolymer of PET which does not undergo strain-induced crystallization, indicates that crystallization may not be the source of the dramatic hardening and stiffening in PET and, instead molecular orientation is the primary hardening and stiffening mechanism in both PET and PETG. Indeed, it is only in cases of deformation which result in highly uniaxial network orientation that the stress-strain behavior of PET differs significantly from that of PETG, suggesting the influence of a meso-ordered structure or crystallization in these instances. During unloading, PETG exhibits extensive elastic recovery, whereas PET exhibits relatively little recovery, suggesting that crystallization occurs (or continues to develop) after active loading ceases and unloading has commenced, locking in much of the deformation in PET.     

Crystallization kinetics of poly(ethylene terephthalate)/poly(ethylene 2,6‐naphthalate) blends

The crystallization kinetics of poly(ethylene terephthalate)/poly(ethylene 2,6‐naphthalate) (PET/PEN) blends were investigated by DSC as functions of crystallization temperature, blend composition, and PET and PEN source. Isothermal crystallization kinetics were evaluated in terms of the Avrami equation. The Avrami exponent (n) is different for PET, PEN, and the blends, indicating different crystallization mechanisms occurring in blends than those in pure PET and PEN. Activation energies of crystallization were calculated from the rate constants, using an Arrhenius‐type expression. Regime theory was used to elucidate the crystallization course of PET/PEN blends as well as that of unblended PET and PEN. The transition from regime II to regime III was clearly observed for each blend sample as the crystallization temperature was decreased. © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 81: 23–37, 2001     

Primary structure and physical properties of poly(ethylene terephthalate)/poly(ethylene naphthalate) resin blends

The morphology and properties of blends of poly(ethylene naphthalate) (PEN) and poly(ethylene terephthalate) (PET) that were injection molded under various conditions were studied. Under injection molding conditions that make it possible to secure transparency, blends did not show clear crystallinity at blending ratios of more than 20 mol% in spite of the fact that crystallinity can be observed in the range of PEN content up to 30 mol%. Because both transparency and crystallinity could be secured with a PEN 12 mol% blend, this material was used in injection molding experiments with various injection molding cycles. Whitening occurred with a cycle of 20 sec, and transparency was obtained at 30 sec or more. This was attributed to the fact that transesterification between PET and PEN exceeded 5 mol% and phase solubility (compatibility) between the PET and PEN increased when the injection molding time was 30 sec or longer. However, when the transesterification content exceeded 8 mol%, molecularly oriented crystallization did not occur, even under stretching, and consequently, it was not possible to increase the strength of the material by stretching. PET/PEN blend resins are more easily crystallized by stretch heat‐setting than are PET/PEN copolymer resins. It was understood that this is because residual PET, which has not undergone transesterification, contributes to crystallization. However, because transesterification reduces crystallinity, the heat‐set density of blends did not increase as significantly as that of pure PET, even in high temperature heat‐setting. Gas permeability showed the same tendency as density. Namely, pure PET showed a substantial decrease in oxygen transmission after high temperature heat‐setting, but the decrease in gas permeability in the blend material was small at heat‐set temperatures of 140°C and higher.     

Novel miscible poly(ethylene sebacate)/poly(4-vinyl phenol) blends: Miscibility, melting behavior and crystallization study

High molecular weight samples of the novel biodegradable polyester poly(ethylene sebacate) (PESeb) were synthesized. Miscible poly(ethylene sebacate)/poly(4-vinyl phenol) semicrystalline/amorphous blends were prepared by applying the solvent casting method. Miscibility was proved by the single composition dependent glass transition temperature over the entire composition range observed in DSC traces of the quenched blend samples and also by the melting point depression. The Flory-Huggins interaction parameter was found to be x₁₂ = −1.3. Also, FTIR spectra supported the hypothesis of intermolecular interactions due to hydrogen bonding. The crystallization of PESeb in blends was studied. As expected, isothermal crystallization rates decreased in the blends with increasing the PVPh content. The Lauritzen-Hoffman analysis was tested. The values of nucleation constant K_g did not show any substantial variation. The non-isothermal crystallization of the blends was also tested. It was found that the crystallization is retarded in the case of blends, compared to the neat PESeb.     

Glass‐transition and melting behavior of poly(ethylene terephthalate)/poly(ethylene 2,6‐naphthalate) blends

The glass‐transition temperatures and melting behaviors of poly(ethylene terephthalate)/poly(ethylene 2,6‐naphthalate) (PET/PEN) blends were studied. Two blend systems were used for this work, with PET and PEN of different grades. It was found that T_g increases almost linearly with blend composition. Both the Gibbs–DiMarzio equation and the Fox equation fit experimental data very well, indicating copolymer‐like behavior of the blend systems. Multiple melting peaks were observed for all blend samples as well as for PET and PEN. The equilibrium melting point was obtained using the Hoffman–Weeks method. The melting points of PET and PEN were depressed as a result of the formation of miscible blends and copolymers. The Flory–Huggins theory was used to study the melting‐point depression for the blend system, and the Nishi–Wang equation was used to calculate the interaction parameter (χ₁₂). The calculated χ₁₂ is a small negative number, indicating the formation of thermodynamically stable, miscible blends. © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 81: 11–22, 2001     

Transesterification reaction kinetics of poly(ethylene terephthalate/poly(ethylene 2,6‐naphthalate) blends

The transesterification reaction of poly(ethylene terephthalate)/poly(ethylene 2,6‐naphthalate) blends during melt‐mixing was studied as a function of blending temperature, blending time, blend composition, processing equipment, and different grades of poly(ethylene terephthalate) and poly(ethylene 2,6‐naphthalate). Results show that the major factors controlling the reaction are the temperature and time of blending. Efficiency of mixing also plays an important role in transesterification. The reaction kinetics can be modeled using a second‐order direct ester–ester interchange reaction. The rate constant (k) was found to have a minimum value at an intermediate PEN content and the activation energy of the rate constant was calculated to be 140 kJ/mol. © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 80: 2422–2436, 2001     

Transesterification reactions in triphenyl phosphite additivated‐poly(ethylene terephthalate)/poly(ethylene naphthalate) blends

The occurrence of transesterification reactions in poly(ethylene terephthalate) (PET)/poly(ethylene naphthalate) (PEN) blends prepared in presence of triphenyl phosphite (TPP) was investigated. When PEN was processed with TPP, which is a known chain extender for PET, chain extension reactions also took place. Torqueprocessing time curves obtained during preparation of 75/25 PET/PEN blends containing TPP, showed a build‐up profile followed by a fast decrease that was interpreted as chain extension between blend components and degradation due to phosphite residues formation, respectively. Although transesterification inhibition was expected, this type of reaction was not suppressed by TPP.     

Transesterification in poly(ethylene terephthalate) and poly(ethylene naphthalate 2,6-dicarboxylate) blends: model compounds study

Kinetics of transesterification reaction in poly(ethylene terephthalate)-poly(ethylene naphthalate 2,6-dicarboxylate), PET-PEN, blends resulting from melt processing was simulated using model compounds of ethylene dibenzoate (BEB) and ethylene dinaphthoate (NEN). The exchange reaction between BEB and NEN was followed by ¹H NMR spectroscopy using signals from the aliphatic protons of ethylene glycol moieties at 4.66 and 4.78 ppm, respectively. The first-order kinetics was established under pseudo-first-order conditions for both reactants. Thus, the overall transesterification reaction was second order reversible. The reversibility was confirmed experimentally by heating a mixed sequence of 1-benzoate 2-naphthoate ethylene (BEN) under similar conditions. Both forward reaction of the equimolar amounts of the reagents and reverse reaction came to equilibrium at the same molar ratio of the reactants and reaction products of roughly 0.25:0.50:0.25 for BEB, BEN, and NEN, respectively. The rate equation for the transesterification reaction in the model system was modified using half-concentration of BEN, which is the only effective in the intermolecular exchange. Direct ester-ester exchange was deduced as a prevailing mechanism for the transesterification reaction under the conditions studied, and the values of equilibrium and rate constants, as well as other basic thermodynamic and kinetic parameters were determined. The use of Zn(OAc)₂ as a catalyst resulted in a significant decrease in the activation enthalpy of transesterification, which might be due to the partial switch of the reaction mechanism from primarily pseudo-homolytic to more heterolytic where Zn^II acts as a Lewis base which binds to the ester carbonyl oxygen.     

Miscibility and crystallization kinetics of poly(trimethylene terephthalate)/amorphous poly(ethylene terephthalate) blends

The miscibility and crystallization kinetics of the blends of poly(trimethylene terephthalate) (PTT) and amorphous poly(ethylene terephthalate) (aPET) have been investigated by differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) and polarized optical microscopy (POM). It was found that PTT/aPET blends were miscible in the melt. Thus, the single glass transition temperature (T_g) of the blends within the whole composition range and the retardation of crystallization kinetics of PTT in blends suggested that PTT and aPET were totally miscible. The nucleation density of PTT spherulites, the spherulitic growth, and overall crystallization rates were depressed upon blending with aPET. The depression in nucleation density of PTT spherulites could be attributed to the equilibrium melting point depression, while the depression in the spherulitic growth and overall crystallization rates could be mainly attributed to the reduction of PTT chain mobility and dilution of PTT upon mixing with aPET. The underlying nucleation mechanism and growth geometry of PTT crystals were not affected by blending, from the results of Avrami analysis. POLYM. ENG. SCI., 47:2005–2011, 2007. © 2007 Society of Plastics Engineers     

Isothermal‐crystallization kinetics and melting behavior of crystalline/crystalline blends of poly(trimethylene terephthalate) and poly(ethylene 2,6‐naphthalate)

The isothermal crystallization and crystal morphology of poly(trimethylene terephthalate) (PTT)/poly (ethylene 2,6‐naphthalate) (PEN) blends were investigated with differential scanning calorimetry and polarized optical microscopy. The commonly used Avrami equation was used to fit the primary stage of isothermal crystallization. The Avrami exponents were evaluated to be in the range of 3.0–3.3 for isothermal crystallization. The subsequent melting endotherms of the blends after isothermal crystallization showed multiple melting peaks. The crystallization activation energies of the blends with 20 or 40% PTT was ?48.3 and ?60.9 kJ/mol, respectively, as calculated by the Arrhenius formula for the isothermal‐crystallization processes. The Hoffman–Lauritzen theory was also employed to fit the process of isothermal crystallization, and the kinetic parameters of the blends with 20 or 40% PTT were determined to be 1.5 × 10⁵ and 1.8 × 10⁵ K², respectively. The spherulite morphology of the six binary blends formed at 190°C showed different sizes and perfect Maltese crosses when the PTT or PEN component was varied, suggesting that the greater the PTT content was, the larger or more perfect the crystallites were that formed in the binary blends. © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 103: 3316–3325, 2007     

Melting and crystallization behavior of poly(ethylene terephthalate) and poly(m‐xylylene adipamide) blends

The crystallization and melting behaviors as well as the crystalline morphologies of Poly(ethylene terephthalate)/Poly(m‐xylylene adipamide) (PET/MXD6) blends have been examined and characterized with the aid of differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) and wide angle x‐ray diffraction (WAXD). The isothermal and nonisothermal crystallization behaviors of the blends were studied as functions of the contents of MXD6, catalyst concentrations, and the effects of the interchange reactions between PET and MXD6. Wide angle x‐ray scattering has been used to examine the crystalline morphologies of the PET/MXD6 blends, to characterize their crystalline and amorphous phases, and to determine crystallite sizes in the blends. Results indicate that the catalyst has both catalyzing and nucleation effects on the PET/MXD6 blends, with the extents of each effect dependent upon the content of catalyst. In addition the crystalline morphology was found to be dominated by the MXD6 content as well as the crystallization temperature. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci, 2010     

Improving the transparency of stretched poly(ethylene terephthalate)/polyamide blends

Compatibilized blends of poly(ethylene terephthalate (PET) with an aromatic polyamide such as poly(m‐xylylene adipamide) (MXD6) have good transparency (T) because the constituent refractive indices (RIs) match closely. However, haziness is observed when the blends are stretched. This study demonstrated that stretching imparted a greater RI anisotropy to PET than to the aromatic polyamide. The resulting RI mismatch was responsible for the loss in T. Analysis of the strain‐dependent birefringence revealed that different molecular deformation models described the intrinsic birefringence of the PET and aromatic polyamides. Hydrogen bonding of the polyamide may have been responsible for the difference. On the basis of these results, three approaches for improving T of stretched PET blends were attempted. Blends with a lower molecular weight MXD6 exhibited slightly higher T after stretching; however, they did not compare with stretched PET. Increasing the amount of compatibilizer reduced the particle size; however, the dimension of even the smallest particles exceeded the quarter wavelength after biaxial stretching transformed the spherical particles into platelets. Copolyamides based on MXD6 that incorporated isophthalate were designed to increase the RI of the polyamide and thereby reduce the RI mismatch with stretched PET. Unexpectedly, the poor T of stretched copolyamide blends was attributed to the high glass‐transition temperature of the copolyamide, which hampered the molecular orientation. © 2005 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 99: 225–235, 2006     

Miscibility and melting behavior of poly(ethylene terephthalate)/poly(trimethylene terephthalate) blends

The miscibility and melting behavior of binary crystalline blends of poly(ethylene terephthalate) (PET)/poly(trimethylene terephthalate) (PTT) have been investigated with differential scanning calorimetry and scanning electron microscope. The blends exhibit a single composition‐dependent glass transition temperature (T_g) and the measured T_g fit well with the predicted T_g value by the Fox equation and Gordon‐Taylor equation. In addition to that, a single composition‐dependent cold crystallization temperature (T_cc) value can be observed and it decreases nearly linearly with the low T_g component, PTT, which can also be taken as a valid supportive evidence for miscibility. The SEM graphs showed complete homogeneity in the fractured surfaces of the quenched PET/PTT blends, which provided morphology evidence of a total miscibility of PET/PTT blend in amorphous state at all compositions. The polymer–polymer interaction parameter, χ₁₂, calculated from equilibrium melting temperature depression of the PET component was ?0.1634, revealing miscibility of PET/PTT blends in the melting state. The melting crystallization temperature (T_mc) of the blends decreased with an increase of the minor component and the 50/50 sample showed the lowest T_mc value, which is also related to its miscible nature in the melting state. © 2007 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci, 2008     

Nonisothermal crystallization kinetics of poly(ethylene terephthalate) and poly(methyl methacrylate) blends

The nonisothermal crystallization kinetics of poly(ethylene terephthalate) (PET) and poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA) blends were studied. Four compositions of the blends [PET 25/PMMA 75, PET 50/PMMA 50, PET 75/PMMA 25, and PET 90/PMMA 10 (w/w)] were melt‐blended for 1 h in a batch reactor at 275°C. Crystallization peaks of virgin PET and the four blends were obtained at cooling rates of 1°C, 2.5°C, 5°C, 10°C, 20°C, and 30°C/min, using a differential scanning calorimeter (DSC). A modified Avrami equation was used to analyze the nonisothermal data obtained. The Avrami parameters n, which denotes the nature of the crystal growth, and Z_t, which represents the rate of crystallization, were evaluated for the four blends. The crystallization half‐life (t_½) and maximum crystallization (t_max) times also were evaluated. The four blends and virgin polymers were characterized using a thermogravimetric analyzer (TGA), a wide‐angle X‐ray diffraction unit (WAXD), and a scanning electron microscope (SEM). © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 101: 3565–3571, 2006     

High-impact poly(ethylene terephthalate) blends

Rubbers of different kind were tested as toughening agents of poly(ethylene terephthalate) (PET), noting significant morphological and mechanical differences. In particular, good results were obtained by using an ethylene–ethyl acrylate–glycidyl methacrylate copolymer. The resulting blend evidenced good particle distribution, and the latter was related to chemical interactions between the rubber epoxy groups and PET terminal groups, including the effect of low molecular weight and polymeric amine catalysts, and to extrusion conditions. © 1995 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.     

Effects of electron beam irradiation on poly(ethylene 2,6‐naphthalate)/poly(ethylene terephthalate) blends

The effect of electron beam (EB) irradiation on the properties and compatibility of poly(ethylene 2,6‐naphthalate) (PEN)/poly(ethylene terephthalate) (PET) blends was investigated. Upon EB irradiation, PEN/PET blends underwent transesterification reactions, resulting in the formation of more random copolymers from the original binary pair. The degree of transesterification increased with dose rate, and all of the irradiated blends exhibited a single glass transition temperature. This indicated that transesterification reactions promoted by EB irradiation led to the formation of a single phase. Transesterification reactions promoted by EB irradiation led to more random copolymers, and the reduced regularity in the irradiated blends decreased the melting temperature. A higher degree of randomness and lower number‐average sequence lengths for the blend systems indicated that a more random chain structure was formed in the blends. The rheological measurements demonstrated that the irradiated PEN/PET blends were miscible. EB irradiation could promote transesterification reaction, thus enhancing the compatibility of PEN/PET blends.     

Fracture behaviour of polyethylene naphthalate (PEN)

Fracture toughness of a semi-crystalline polyethylene naphthalate (PEN) film of thicknesses 0.050, 0.075 and 0.125 mm was measured as a function of temperature and loading rate using both double edge notched tension (DENT) and single edge notched tension (SENT) specimens. The specific essential work of fracture (EWF) and the multi-specimen J-integral methods were used to evaluate fracture toughness. The variation of the specific total work of fracture (w_f) with ligament length (L) was linear for ligament lengths between 5 and 15 mm. Within this range, w_f versus L was independent of thickness at all temperatures but was dependent on both temperature and loading rate. The specific EWF (w_e) was found to be independent of thickness and loading rate but showed three regions of varying temperature dependence. Between 23 and 80°C (region I) w_e was essentially independent of temperature but increased with temperature between 80 and 120°C (region II) and decreased with temperature thereafter (region III). At glass transition temperature (i.e. 120°C), w_e reached a maximum value of 75 kJ/m². The specific non-EWF (βw_p) increased with both loading rate and temperature. The greatest change in βw_p value with respect to temperature was obtained in region II.The plot of J-integral versus crack extension (Δa) was independent of thickness but was dependent upon temperature. w_e was found to be equivalent to both J_0.2 and J₀.     

Liquid induced crystallization of poly(ethylene naphthalate) oligomers

Amorphous poly(ethylene naphthalate) (PEN) oligomer has been crystallized at room temperature by treating in liquids having solubility parameter, δ, in the range of 15-29 (J cm⁻³)^1/2. It has been observed that the liquids having δ in the range of 18.5-25 are able to crystallize PEN oligomer efficiently. A direct correlation has been observed between δ and crystallite size calculated from WAXS technique.     

Crystallization of poly(butylene terephthalate)/poly(ethylene octene) blends: Isothermal crystallization

Poly(ethylene‐octene) (POE), maleic anhydride grafted poly(ethylene‐octene) (mPOE), and a mixture of POE and mPOE were added to poly(butylene terephthalate) (PBT) to prepare PBT/POE, PBT/mPOE, and PBT/mPOE/POE blends by a twin‐screw extruder. Observation by scanning electron microscopy revealed improved compatibility between PBT and POE in the presence of maleic anhydride groups. The melting behavior and isothermal crystallization kinetics of the blends were studied by wide‐angle X‐ray diffraction and differential scanning calorimeter; the kinetics data was delineated by kinetic models. The addition of POE or mPOE did not affect the melting behavior of PBT in samples quenched in water after blending in an extrude. Subsequent DSC scans of isothermally crystallized PBT and PBT blends exhibited two melting endotherms (T_mI and T_mII). T_mI was the fusion of the crystals grown by normal primary crystallization and T_mII was the melting peak of the most perfect crystals after reorganization. The dispersed second phase hindered the crystallization; on the other hand, the well dispersed phases with smaller size enhanced crystallization because of higher nucleation density. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci, 2008