Influence of properties and morphology of elastomeric phase on the behavior of ternary reactive blends of polyamide 6/rigid polymer/elastomer

A ternary blend of the PA6 matrix with a finely dispersed rigid polymer and elastomer is a system with well‐balanced mechanical properties. Its micromechanical behavior, especially that of the elastomer phase, apparently differs from corresponding binary mixtures. This study shows the influence of the elastomer type, modulus, and reactivity on the behavior of ternary blends in comparison with analogous binary PA6/elastomer combinations. The presence of rigid reactive poly(styrene‐co‐maleic anhydride) (SMA) enhanced the properties of all the systems studied. For nonreactive elastomers, the dominant effect was refinement of their size due to enhanced viscosity, whereas for functionalized low‐modulus elastomers, the very good balance of properties was due to synergistic influences of both finely dispersed phases. Of interest is the enhanced toughness of ternary blends also for more rigid elastomers having a low toughening efficiency in binary blends. An appropriate addition of rigid SMA together with an elastomer enhances the energy absorption of the matrix, probably without cavitation of very small elastomer particles. Of importance also is the simultaneous strain‐hardening effect of deformed rigid particles. © 2003 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 89: 3647–3651, 2003     

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     

Blends of poly(2,6‐dimethyl‐1,4‐phenylene oxide)/polyamide 6 toughened by maleated polystyrene‐based copolymers: Mechanical properties,morphology, and rheology

Poly(2,6‐dimethyl‐1,4‐phenylene oxide)/polyamide 6 (PPO/PA6 30/70) blends were impact modified by addition of three kinds of maleated polystyrene‐based copolymers, i.e., maleated styrene‐ethylene‐butylene‐styrene copolymer (SEBS‐g‐MA), maleated methyl methacrylate‐butadiene‐styrene copolymer (MBS‐g‐MA), and maleated acrylonitrile‐butadiene‐styrene copolymer (ABS‐g‐MA). The mechanical properties, morphology and rheological behavior of the impact modified PPO/PA6 blends were investigated. The selective location of the maleated copolymers in one phase or at interface accounted for the different toughening effects of the maleated copolymer, which is closely related to their molecular structure and composition. SEBS‐g‐MA was uniformly dispersed in PPO phase and greatly toughened PPO/PA6 blends even at low temperature. MBS‐g‐MA particles were mainly dispersed in the PA6 phase and around the PPO phase, resulting in a significant enhancement of the notched Izod impact strength of PPO/PA6 blends from 45 J/m to 281 J/m at the MBS‐g‐MA content of 20 phr. In comparison, the ABS‐g‐MA was mainly dispersed in PA6 phase without much influencing the original mechanical properties of the PPO/PA6 blend. The different molecule structure and selective location of the maleated copolymers in the blends were reflected by the change of rheological behavior as well. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci, 2010     

Ternary reactive blends of nylon‐6 matrix with dispersed rigid brittle polymer and elastomer

Except by elastomers, the toughness of nylon‐6 (N‐6) can be improved by the addition of rigid poly(styrene‐co‐maleic anhydride) (SMA). In this case, strength and stiffness are also enhanced. Combination of SMA with maleated ethylene‐propylene rubber or styrene‐ethene/butene‐styrene with a total content below 15% gives a ternary blend having a toughness level close to elastomer toughening, whereas the strength and stiffness reached at least the Nylon‐6 values. An explanation is a synergistic combination of both elastomer and rigid polymer toughening mechanisms. An opposite effect on mechanical behavior was found with high contents of both additives. Except for worsened strength and stiffness, in some cases, a higher elastomer content even did not enhance the toughness. This effect can be explained by too fine phase structure found, causing the matrix ligament dimension to be below its minimum critical value. © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 74: 1404–1411, 1999     

Effect of different types of organoclays and compatibilizers on the properties of polystyrene‐based nanocomposites

Polystyrene/organoclay nanocomposites were prepared by melt intercalation in the presence of elastomeric impact modifiers. Three different types of organically modified montmorillonites; Cloisite® 30B, 15A, and 25A, were used as reinforcement, whereas poly [styrene‐b‐(ethylene‐co‐butylene)‐b‐styrene] (SEBS‐g‐MA) and poly(ethylene‐b‐butyl acrylate‐b‐glycidyl methacrylate) (E‐BA‐GMA) elastomeric materials were introduced to act as impact modifier. Owing to its single aliphatic tail on its modifier and absence of hydroxyl groups, Cloisite® 25A displayed the best dispersion in the polystyrene matrix, and mostly delaminated silicate layers were obtained in the presence of SEBS‐g‐MA. This was attributed to the higher viscosity of SEBS‐g‐MA compared with both E‐BA‐GMA and poly(styrene‐co‐vinyloxazolin) (PS). In addition, the compatibility between SEBS‐g‐MA and PS was found to be better in comparison to the compatibility between E‐BA‐GMA and PS owing to the soluble part of SEBS‐g‐MA in PS. The clay particles were observed to be located mostly in the dispersed phase leading to larger elastomeric domains compared with binary PS/elastomer blends. The enlargement of the elastomeric domains resulted in higher impact strength values in the presence of organoclay. Good dispersion of Cloisite® 25A in PS/SEBS‐g‐MA blends enhanced the tensile properties of this nanocomposite produced. It was observed that the change in the strength and stiffness of the ternary nanocomposites mostly depend on the type of the elastomeric material. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 2013     

Synergetic toughness and morphology of poly(propylene)/nylon 11/maleated ethylene‐propylene diene copolymer blends

Polypropylene (PP)/nylon 11/maleated ethylene‐propylene‐diene rubber (EPDM‐g‐MAH) ternary polymer blends were prepared via melt blending in a corotating twin‐screw extruder. The effect of nylon 11 and EPDM‐g‐MAH on the phase morphology and mechanical properties was investigated. Scanning electron microscopy observation revealed that there was apparent phase separation for PP/EPDM‐g‐MAH binary blends at the level of 10 wt % maleated elastomer. For the PP/nylon 11/EPDM‐g‐MAH ternary blends, the dispersed phase morphology of the maleated elastomer was hardly affected by the addition of nylon 11, whereas the reduced dispersed phase domains of nylon 11 were observed with the increasing maleated elastomer loading. Furthermore, a core‐shell structure, in which nylon 11 as a rigid core was surrounded by a soft EPDM‐g‐MAH shell, was formed in the case of 10 wt % nylon 11 and higher EPDM‐g‐MAH concentration. In general, the results of mechanical property measurement showed that the ternary blends exhibited inferior tensile strength in comparison with the PP matrix, but superior toughness. Especially low‐temperature impact strength was obtained. The toughening mechanism was discussed with reference to the phase morphology. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci, 2008     

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     

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     

Compatibilization and elastomer toughening of polyamide‐6 (PA6)/poly(phenylene ether) (PPE) blends

In the elastomer‐modified (polyamide‐6/poly(phenylene ether) (PA6/PPE) = 50/50 blends, poly(styrene‐co‐maleic anhydride) (SMA) was demonstrated to be an efficient reactive compatibilizer. The G1651 elastomer was shown to be an effective impact modifier to result in superior toughness and heat‐deflection temperature (HDT) than is the 1901X elastomer for the SMA‐compatibilized blends because G1651 particles exclusively reside within the dispersed PPE phase but 1901X particles tend to distribute in the PA6 matrix and/or along the interface. The apparent average diameter of the dispersed PPE phase is insignificantly dependent on the elastomer content in the G1651‐modified blend, whereas it increases with increase of the elastomer content in the 1901X‐modified blend. Moreover, there exists a critical elastomer content, 15 phr, for the ductile–brittle transition of the G1651‐modified SMA‐modified PA6/PPE blends. © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 74: 23–32, 1999     

Morphology and properties of PBT/nylon 6/EVA‐g‐MAH ternary blends prepared by reactive extrusion

Morphology and properties of poly(butylene terephthalate) (PBT)/nylon 6 (PA6)/EVA‐g‐MAH ternary blends were investigated. The blends were prepared in a corotating, intermeshing, twin‐screw extruder. The incorporation of maleic anhyride (MAH) grafted onto ethylene‐vinyl acetate copolymer (EVA) (EVA‐g‐MAH) in the PBT/PA6 binary blends decreased the tensile and flexural strength but increased the impact strength, while the mechanical properties of the PBT/PA6 blends were decreased with increasing PA6 content regardless of the presence or absence of the EVA‐g‐MAH. The morphology studies of the ternary blends showed gross phase separation. The rheological properties of the ternary blends suggested that excessively high reactivity between amine end groups of PA6 and MAH grafted onto EVA makes the compatibility between PBT and PA6 worse, although EVA‐g‐MAH was expected to work as a compatibilizer for PBT/PA6 blends. The degree of reactivity between functional groups in PBT, PA6, and EVA‐g‐MAH was also examined by investigating the effect of blending sequence on the properties of the ternary blends.     

Effect of poly [styrene‐b‐(ethylene‐co‐butylene)‐b‐styrene] (SEBS) and maleic anhydride‐grafted SEBS triblock copolymers in immiscible blends of (polyamide‐6)/polycarbonate: Morphology‐mechanical properties relationships

The effects of using maleated poly[styrene‐b‐(ethylene‐co‐butylene)‐b‐styrene] triblock copolymer (SEBS‐g‐MAH) and unmodified SEBS (unSEBS) on the phase morphology and mechanical properties of immiscible polymer blends of polyamide‐6 (PA‐6) and polycarbonate (PC) are investigated. Different binary, ternary, and quaternary blends were prepared by using a Brabender® co‐rotating twin‐screw extruder. The weight ratio of unSEBS to SEBS‐g‐MAH was changed to probe the phase morphology and mechanical properties. The results revealed that the mechanical properties of (PA‐6)/PC/(unSEBS/SEBS‐g‐MAH) blends were considerably governed by the unSEBS to SEBS‐g‐MAH weight ratio. Morphological investigation based on the spreading coefficient concept confirmed the results of scanning electron microscopy, indicating encapsulation of unSEBS domains around the PC core‐forming component in the presence of reactive SEBS‐g‐MAH precursor. Moreover, larger unSEBS‐PC composite droplets appeared throughout PA‐6 matrix upon increasing the ratio of unSEBS to SEBS‐g‐MAH, until reaching a maximum value. In the case of the (PA‐6)/PC blend compatibilized with a 50/50 combination of unSEBS and SEBS‐g‐MAH, the highest mechanical properties, i.e., tensile strength, impact resistance, and strain at break, were achieved owing to compatibilizing effect of virgin and maleated SEBS constituents. J. VINYL ADDIT. TECHNOL., 21:245–252, 2015. © 2014 Society of Plastics Engineers     

Synthesis and application of MDPE‐g‐GMA as reactive compatibilizer in blends of MDPE/PET and MDPE/PA6

In the present study, glycidyl methacrylate (GMA) grafted medium density polyethylene (MDPE‐g‐GMA) was synthesized in the molten state and applied as a reactive compatibilizer in MDPE/polyamid6 (PA6) and in MDPE/poly(ethylene terephtalate) (PET) blends. Graft copolymerization of GMA onto MDPE was performed in presence and absence of styrene, with different concentrations of dicumyl peroxide (DCP) as a radical initiator. In the presence of styrene, the MDPE‐g‐GMA with 6% GMA was obtained by addition of only 0.1 phr of DCP. Furthermore, the maximum grafting was reached when 0.6 and 0.7 phr concentration of DCP for styrene containing and styrene free samples were used, respectively. Torque‐time measurement showed faster grafting reaction rate in the presence of styrene. Four MDPE‐g‐GMA samples were selected as compatibilizers in the blends. Furthermore, the effects of melt flow index and grafting content of compatibilizers on mechanical properties and morphology of the blends were investigated through tensile tests and SEM analysis. Tensile test results indicated that the presence of compatibilizers in the blends led to 250 and 133% increase in elongation at break for PA6 and PET blends, respectively. Moreover, the best tensile results for blends were obtained using MDPE‐g‐GMA with high flow ability. The average particle size of the dispersed phase decreased by 350% for PA6 and 300% for PET blends compared with nonreactive blends. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci, 2012     

Tough polyamide 6/core–shell blends prepared via in situ anionic polymerization of ε‐caprolactam by reactive extrusion

In this study, the molten ε‐caprolactam (CL) solution of maleated styrene‐ethylene/butylene‐styrene block copolymer (SEBS‐g‐MA) and polystyrene (PS) containing catalyst and activator were introduced into a twin screw extruder, and polyamide 6 (PA6)/SEBS/PS blends were successfully prepared via anionic polymerization of CL by reactive extrusion. The mechanical properties measurements indicated that both the elongation at break and notched Izod impact strength of PA6/SEBS/PS (85/10/5) blends were improved distinctly with slight loss of tensile and flexural strength as compared to that of pure PA6. The images of transmission electron microscopy showed that a core–shell structure with PS core and poly (ethene‐co‐1‐butene) (PEB) shell was formed within the PA6 matrix. Fourier transform infrared was used to investigate the formation mechanisms of the core–shell structure. POLYM. ENG. SCI., 53:2705–2710, 2013. © 2013 Society of Plastics Engineers     

Valorization of poly(butylene terephthalate) wastes by blending with virgin polypropylene: Effect of the composition and the compatibilization

Blends of recycled poly(butylene terephthalate) (PBT) parts obtained from scrapped cars, and virgin polypropylene (PP), were prepared in a twin‐screw extruder at different compositions. Selected compositions were also prepared with the presence of ethylene‐co‐glycidyl methacrylate copolymer (E‐GMA) and ethylene/methyl acrylate/glycidyl methacrylate terpolymer (E‐MA‐GMA) compatibilizers. The effect of the composition and the type of compatibilizer, as well as the mixing conditions, on the morphology phase, thermal, viscoelastic behavior, and mechanical properties of the blends has been investigated. Blends PP/PBT of various composition exhibit a coarse morphology and a poor adherence between both phases, resulting in the decrease of ductility, whereas at weak deformation, PBT reinforced the tensile properties of PP. Addition of E‐GMA and E‐MA‐GMA to the PP/PBT blend exhibited a significant change in morphology and improved ductility because of interfacial reactions between PBT end chains and epoxy groups of GMA that generate EG‐g‐PBT copolymer. Moreover, thermal and viscoelastic study indicated that the miscibility of PP and PBT has been improved further and the reactions were identified. The E‐MA‐GMA results in the best improvement of ductility. POLYM. ENG. SCI., 2008. © 2008 Society of Plastics Engineers     

Super‐ductile PBT alloy with excellent heat resistance

A super‐ductile PBT alloy with excellent heat resistance was successfully fabricated by reactive blending of poly(butylene terephthalate) (PBT) with poly(ethylene‐co‐glycidyl methacrylate) together with linear low density polyethylene (LLDPE) and hydrogenated styrene‐butadiene‐styrene block copolymer (SEBS). It possesses a unique tensile stress–strain curve with no yielding point and large elongation at break, moreover, the alloy did not show serious deterioration of the mechanical properties by high temperature annealing at 150°C for 96 h. The structure‐properties relationship is discussed on the basis of transmission electron microscopy, differential scanning calorimetry, dynamic mechanical analysis, and wide‐angle X‐ray diffraction analysis. The outstanding ductile nature seems to come from the negative pressure effect of LLDPE (or LLDPE/SEBS) particles that dilates the PBT ligament matrix to enhance the local segment motions. POLYM. ENG. SCI., 2008. © 2008 Society of Plastics Engineers.     

Acrylonitrile–butadiene–styrene toughened nylon 6: The influences of compatibilizer on morphology and impact properties

Polymer alloys have been used as an alternative to obtain polymeric materials with unique physical properties. Generally, the polymer mixture is incompatible, which makes it necessary to use a compatibilizer to improve the interfacial adhesion. Nylon 6 (PA6) is an attractive polymer to use in engineering applications, but it has processing instability and relatively low notched impact strength. In this study, the acrylonitrile–butadiene–styrene (ABS) triblock copolymer was used as an impact modifier for PA6. Poly(methyl methacrylate‐co‐maleic anyhydride) (MMA‐MA) and poly(methyl methacrylate‐co‐glycidyl methacrylate) (MMA‐GMA) were used as compatibilizers for this blend. The morphology and impact strength of the blends were evaluated as a function of blend composition and the presence of compatibilizers. The blends compatibilized with maleated copolymer exhibited an impact strength up to 800 J/m and a morphology with ABS domains more efi8ciently dispersed. Moderate amounts of MA functionality in the compatibilizer (～5%) and small amounts of compatibilizer in the blend (～5%) appear sufficient to improve the impact properties and ABS dispersion. © 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 87: 842–847, 2003     

Blends of polyamide 6 and epichlorohydrin elastomers. I. Graft copolymerization in the melt blending

With the purpose of improving the mechanical properties of the polyamides, the possibility of combining polyamides with elastomers has been used. The low compatibility of the resulting blends leads to deficient mechanical properties, and therefore, it is necessary to add the compatibilizer to the mixture or to produce the compatibilizer during the melting mixture. Usually, at least one of the components must contain a reactive functional groups. In the present work, blends of polyamide 6 (PA 6) and epichlorohydrin elastomers, polyepichlorohydrin (PEPI), and the equimolar copolymer poly(epichlorohydrin‐co‐ethylene oxide), ECO, with different compositions were prepared by mechanical mixture using a Banbury‐type mixer. The blends were characterized by rheological measurements, the Molau test, elemental analysis, Infrared Spectroscopy by Diffuse Reflectance, Transmission Electron Microscopy, and X‐ray Diffractometry. The blends of PA 6 with PEPI and ECO are heterogeneous, showing a morphology of elastomer particles dispersed in the polyamide matrix. The results of rheological measurements and the Molau test indicate a graft copolymerization in the interface between the polyamide and the elastomer, PA 6‐g‐elastomer, whose concentration decreases with the elastomer content. It was found that the grafting of PEPI and PA 6 changed the diffraction pattern of PA 6. © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 72: 1827–1833, 1999     

Influence of the component reactivity on the properties of ternary reactive blends Nylon 6/rigid brittle polymer/elastomer

The ternary reactive blend of Nylon 6 matrix with dispersed poly(styrene‐co‐maleic anhydride) and maleated SEBS or EPR represents a toughened system with enhanced strength and, at least, the retained stiffness of the matrix. In the present work, the influence of changed reactivity of dispersed phases, including the application of one or both nonreactive components, on the phase structure and related mechanical behavior is studied. Lowering of the reactivity of the elastomer caused a decrease of blend properties, whereas suitable dilution of SMA by PS brought better properties in comparison with a fully reactive system. With the nonreactive N6/PS/SEBS blend, the formation of blended bicontinuous inclusions causes worsening of toughness. This documents the importance of separate dispersion of both phases for good mechanical behavior in the system studied, which is shown to be assured by application of at least one reactive component. © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 78: 1597–1603, 2000     

Microstructural characteristics of glass bead‐ and wollastonite‐filled isotactic‐polypropylene composites modified with thermoplastic elastomers

Microstructural characteristics of isotactic‐polypropylene/glass bead (iPP/GB) and iPP/wollastonite (iPP/W) composites modified with thermoplastic elastomers, poly(styrene‐b‐ethylene‐co‐butylene‐b‐styrene) copolymer (SEBS) and corresponding block copolymer grafted with maleic anhydride (SEBS‐g‐MA), were investigated. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM), differential scanning calorimetry (DSC), and dynamic mechanical analyses (DMA) showed that the iPP/SEBS and iPP/SEBS‐g‐MA blends were partially compatible two‐phase systems. Well‐dispersed spherical GB and acicular W particles without evidence of interfacial adhesion were observed in the iPP/GB and iPP/W binary composites respectively. Contrary to the blends, melt flow rates of the iPP/GB and PP/W composites decreased more with SEBS‐g‐MA than with SEBS because of enhanced interfacial adhesion with SEBS‐g‐MA elastomer. The SEM analyses showed that the ternary composites containing SEBS exhibited separate dispersion of the rigid filler and elastomer particles (i.e., separate microstructure). However, SEBS‐g‐MA elastomer not only encapsulated the spherical GB and acicular W particles completely with strong interfacial adhesion (i.e., core‐shell microstructure) but also dispersed separately throughout iPP matrix. In accordance with the SEM observations, the DSC and DMA revealed quantitatively that the rigid filler and SEBS particles in iPP matrix acted individually, whereas the rigid filler particles in the ternary composites containing SEBS‐g‐MA acted like elastomer particles because of the thick elastomer interlayer around the filler particles. The Fourier transform infrared analyses revealed an esterification reaction inducing the strong interfacial adhesion between the SEBS‐g‐MA phase and the filler particles. POLYM. COMPOS., 31:1265–1284, 2010. © 2009 Society of Plastics Engineers     

Influences of ethylene–butylacrylate–glycidyl methacrylate on morphology and mechanical properties of poly(butylene terephthalate)/polyolefin elastomer blends

Elastomer ethylene–butylacrylate–glycidyl methacrylate (PTW) containing epoxy groups were chosen as toughening modifier for poly(butylene terephthalate) (PBT)/polyolefin elastomer (POE) blend. The morphology, thermal, and mechanical properties of the PBT/POE/PTW blend were studied. The infrared spectra of the blends proved that small parts of epoxy groups of PTW reacted with carboxylic acid or hydroxyl groups in PBT during melt blending, resulting in a grafted structure which tended to increase the viscosity and interfere with the crystallization process of the blend. The morphology observed by scanning electron microscopy revealed the dispersed POE particles were well distributed and the interaction between POE and PBT increased in the PBT/POE/PTW blends. Mechanical properties showed the addition of PTW could lead to a remarkable increase about 10‐times in impact strength with a small reduction in tensile strength of PBT/POE blends. Differential scanning calorimetry results showed with increasing PTW, the crystallization temperature (T_c) and crystallinity (X_c) decreased while the melting point (T_m) slightly increased. Dynamic mechanical thermal analysis spectra indicated that the presence of PTW could improve the compatibility of PBT/POE blends. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2014 , 131, 40660.