The functions of crystallizable ethylene‐propylene copolymers in the formation of multiple phase morphology of high impact polypropylene

The functions of crystallizable ethylene‐propylene copolymers in the formation of multiple phase morphology of high impact polypropylene (hiPP) were studied by solvent extraction fractionation, transmission electron microscopy (TEM), selected area electron diffraction (SAED), nuclear magnetic resonance (¹³C‐NMR), and selected reblending of different fractions of hiPP. The results indicate that hiPP contains, in addition to polypropylene (PP) and amorphous ethylene‐propylene random copolymer (EPR) as well as a small amount of polyethylene (PE), a series of crystallizable ethylene‐propylene copolymers. The crystallizable ethylene‐propylene copolymers can be further divided into ethylene‐propylene segmented copolymer (PE‐s‐PP) with a short sequence length of PE and PP segments, and ethylene‐propylene block copolymer (PE‐b‐PP) with a long sequence length of PE and PP blocks. PE‐s‐PP and PE‐b‐PP participate differently in the formation of multilayered core‐shell structure of the dispersed phase in hiPP. PE‐s‐PP (like PE) constructs inner core, PE‐b‐PP forms outer shell, while intermediate layer is resulted from EPR. The main reason of the different functions of the crystallizable ethylene‐propylene copolymers is due to their different compatibility with the PP matrix. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci, 2012     

Multilayered core–shell structure of the dispersed phase in high‐impact polypropylene

The multiphase morphology of high impact polypropylene (hiPP), which is a reactor blend of polypropylene (PP) with ethylene–propylene copolymer, was investigated by transmission electron microscopy, selected area electron diffraction, atomic force microscopy, and field‐emission scanning electron microscopy techniques in conjunction with an analysis of the hiPP composition and chain structure based on solvent fractionation, ¹³C‐NMR, and differential scanning calorimetry measurements. A multilayered core–shell structure of the dispersed phase of hiPP in solution‐cast films and the bulk was observed. The inner core was mainly composed of polyethylene (including its long blocks) together with part of PP, the intermediate layer was ethylene–propylene random copolymer, and the outer shell consisted of ethylene–propylene multiblock copolymers. The formation process and controlling factors of the multilayered core–shell structure are discussed. This kind of multiphase morphology of hiPP caused the material to possess both a high rigidity and high toughness. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci, 2008     

Characterization and properties of polypropylene‐block‐poly(ethylene‐co‐propylene) synthesized by short‐period polymerization

The morphology and mechanical properties of novel block copolymers consisting of isotactic polypropylene (PP) and ethylene–propylene rubber (EPR) synthesized by a short‐period polymerization method were examined using differential scanning calorimetry, atomic force microscopy, dynamic mechanical analysis, and a rheooptical technique. It was found that the novel block copolymers show a single glass transition and EPR segments are trapped into the amorphous region of PP. Furthermore, the rheooptical analysis demonstrates that a drawing process of the EPR‐rich block copolymer induces orientation of the PP lamellae in the EPR matrix. © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 74: 958–964, 1999     

Structural characterization of reactor blends of polypropylene and ethylene‐propylene rubber

Blends of isotactic polypropylene (PP), ethylene‐propylene rubber copolymer (EPR), and ethylene‐propylene crystalline copolymer (EPC) can be produced through in situ polymerization processes directly in the reactor and blends with different structure and composition can be obtained. In this work we studied the structure of five reactor‐made blends of PP, EPR, and EPC produced by a Ziegler‐Natta catalyst system. The composition of EPR was related to the ratio between ethylene and propylene used in the copolymerization step. The ethylene content in the EPR was in the range of 50–70 mol %. The crystallization behavior of PP and EPC in the blends was influenced by the presence of the rubber, and some specific interactions between the components could be established. By preparative temperature rising elution fractionation (P‐TREF) analysis, the isolation and characterization of crystalline EPC fractions were made. © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 92: 2155–2162, 2004     

Influence of copolymerization conditions on the structure and properties of polyethylene/polypropylene/poly(ethylene‐co‐propylene) in‐reactor alloys synthesized in gas‐phase with spherical ziegler‐natta catalyst

A spherical TiCl₄/MgCl₂‐based catalyst was used in the synthesis of polyethylene/polypropylene/poly (ethylene‐co‐propylene) in‐reactor alloys by sequential homopolymerization of ethylene, homopolymerization of propylene, and copolymerization of ethylene and propylene in gas‐phase. Different conditions in the third stage, such as the pressure of ethylene–propylene mixture and the feed ratio of ethylene, were investigated, and their influences on the compositions, structural distribution and properties of the in‐reactor alloys were studied. Increasing the feed ratio of ethylene is favorable for forming random ethylene–propylene copolymer and segmented ethylene–propylene copolymer, however, slightly influences the formation of ethylene‐b‐propylene block copolymer and homopolyethylene. Raising the pressure of ethylene–propylene mixture results in the increment of segmented ethylene–propylene copolymer, ethylene‐b‐propylene block copolymer, and PE fractions, but exerts a slight influence on both the random copolymer and PP fractions. The impact strength of PE/PP/EPR in‐reactor alloys can be markedly improved by increasing the feed ratio of ethylene in the ethylene–propylene mixture or increasing the pressure of ethylene–propylene mixture. However, the flexural modulus decreases as the feed ratio of ethylene in the ethylene–propylene mixture or the pressure of ethylene–propylene mixture increases. © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 102: 2481–2487, 2006     

New synthesis methods for polypropylene‐co‐ethylene‐propylene rubber

In this research, the reinforcement of polypropylene (PP) was studied using a new method that is more practical for synthesizing polypropylene‐block‐poly(ethylene‐propylene) copolymer (PP‐co‐EP), which can be used as a rubber toughening agent. This copolymer (PP‐co‐EP) could be synthesized by varying the feed condition and changing the feed gas in the batch reactor system using Ziegler–Natta catalysts system at a copolymerization temperature of 10°C. The ¹³C‐NMR tested by a 21.61‐ppm resonance peak indicated the incorporation of ethylene to propylene chains that could build up the microstructure of the block copolymer chain. Differential scanning calorimetry (DSC), scanning electron microscopy (SEM), and dynamic mechanical analysis (DMA) results also confirmed these conclusions. Under these conditions, the morphology of copolymer trapped in PP matrix could be observed and the copolymer T_g would decrease when the amount of PP‐co‐EP was increased. DMA study also showed that PP‐co‐EP is good for the polypropylene reinforcement at low temperature. Moreover, the PP‐co‐EP content has an effect on the crystallinity and morphology of polymer blend, i.e., the crystallinity of polymer decreased when the PP‐co‐EP content increased, but tougher mechanical properties at low temperature were observed. © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 103: 3609–3616, 2007     

Structure and properties of impact copolymer polypropylene. II. Phase structure and crystalline morphology

In this work, an impact copolymer polypropylene (ICPP) was separated into 4 fractions, A, B, C, and D. The phase structure, thermal behavior, and crystalline morphology of the ICPP and its 4 fractions were studied thoroughly using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Dynamic mechanical analysis (DMA), differential scanning calorimetry (DSC), and polarized light microscopy (PLM). Results of SEM and DMA show that ethylene–propylene rubber (EPR) and part of the ethylene–propylene segmented copolymer disperse as toughening particles in the ICPP. The size and size distribution of these particles are determined by chain structure of the fractions of ICPP. From fraction A to fraction D, the morphology changes from noncrystalline to semicrystalline gradually, as shown by DSC. DSC results also indicate that thermal behavior of the ICPP agrees greatly with its chain structure. PLM demonstrates that it is difficult for the ICPP to grow perfect spherulites, that is, partially, because the matrix of ICPP, fraction D, has defects in its macromolecular chain. Another cause is that there is a good compatible structure in the ICPP and so the noncrystalline component (including all fractions) hinders the growth of the spherulite. © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 71: 103–113, 1999     

Structure and morphology of polyethylene/polypropylene in‐reactor alloys synthesized by spherical high‐yield Ziegler–Natta catalyst

A series of spherical polyethylene/polypropylene (PE/PP) in‐reactor alloys were synthesized with spherical high‐yield Ziegler–Natta catalyst by sequential multistage polymerization in slurry. The morphology of PE/PP alloy granule was evaluated by optical microscopy, scanning electron microscopy, and transmission electron microscopy. The results show PE/PP in‐reactor alloy with excellent morphology, high porosity, and narrow distribution of the particle size. The PE/PP in‐reactor alloys show excellent mechanical properties with good balance between toughness and rigidity. It was fractionated into five fractions by temperature‐gradient extraction fractionation, and every fractionation was analyzed by FTIR, ¹³C‐NMR, DSC, and WAXD. The PE/PP in‐reactor alloy was found to contain mainly five portions: PP, PE, segmented copolymer with PP and PE segment of different length, ethylene‐b‐propylene copolymer, and an ethylene–propylene random copolymer. The characteristic chain structure leads to good compatibility between the fractions of the alloy that shows a multiphase structure. © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 103: 2075–2085, 2007     

Study on morphology of high impact polypropylene prepared by in situ blending

High impact polypropylene (HIPP) was prepared by in situ blending of isotactic polypropylene and ethylene–propylene rubber (EPR) with spherical Ziegler–Natta catalyst. Morphology and pore characteristics of such HIPP were investigated by scanning electron microscope, atomic force microscopy, and mercury intrusion. Amorphous phase was removed from polypropylene matrix and characterized by ¹³C NMR spectrum. It was found that the EPR prepared in this manner contained variable composition polymer chains with a distribution of ethylene and propylene sequence lengths. Final products of HIPP were free flowing, spherical granules. There were small pores in HIPP, which seemed not to be filled up, and could be determined by mercury intrusion even when the content of rubber was up to 24 wt %. Homopolypropylene with pore diameter between 100 and 10,000 nm was suitable for EPR to fill in during ethylene–propylene copolymerization. The block copolymer fractions act as a compatilizer between matrix and EPR. © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 101: 1386–1390, 2006     

Probing into the pristine basic morphology of high impact polypropylene particles

In this paper, the pristine basic morphology of high impact polypropylene (hiPP) particles prepared with an industrial MgCl₂/TiCl₄ Ziegler–Natta catalyst undergoing sequentially occurred propylene (P) homopolymerization and ethylene (E)/propylene copolymerization has been probed mainly using transmission electron microscopy (TEM) techniques including plain TEM and the advanced transmission electron microtomography (TEMT). It is revealed that the basic structure units comprising a whole hiPP particle are the submicron PP (polypropylene) globule and nano-sized EP (ethylene-co-propylene) droplet. EP rubber (EPR) domain is formed by the agglomeration of EP droplets. Continually formed EP droplets turn to fill, from inside out, the micro- and macro-pores inside the preformed PP skeleton, affording different-sized EPR domains. Taking the two basic structure units into account, new quaternary structure model describing the manifold structures of hiPP particles has been proposed. From these findings, it is suggested that, to gain hiPP polymers with excellent stiffness/toughness-balanced properties, it is crucial to control the first-staged propylene homopolymerization alongside a rational design of the catalyst architecture to accomplish desired EPR dispersion morphologies that dictate hiPP properties.     

Study of crystallization and melting behavior of polypropylene‐block‐polyethylenes copolymers fractionated from polypropylene and polyethylene mixtures

A series of ethylene–propylene block copolymer fractions of differing compositions, while still retaining broad molecular weight distributions, were obtained by fractionation of polypropylene (PP) and polyethylene (PE) copolymers prepared by sequential polymerization of ethylene and propylene. The crystallization and melting behavior of the polypropylene‐block‐polyethylene fractions were studied. It was observed that the major component could suppress crystallization of the minor component, leading to a decrease in crystallinity and melting temperature. Non‐isothermal crystallization showed that crystallization of the ethylene block was less influenced by composition and cooling rate than the propylene block. At fast cooling rates, the ethylene block could crystallize prior to the propylene block. Isothermal crystallization kinetics experiments were also conducted. We found that the block copolymers with minor ethylene components had smaller Avrami exponents (n ≈ 1.0), hence indicating a reduced growth dimension of the PE crystals by the pre‐existing PP crystals. On the other hand, the ethylene block exhibited much larger Avrami exponents in those block copolymers with major ethylene contents. Copyright © 2004 Society of Chemical Industry     

Chain structure and mechanical properties of polyethylene/polypropylene/poly(ethylene‐co‐propylene)in‐reactor alloys synthesized with a spherical Ziegler–Natta catalyst by gas‐phase polymerization

Two polyethylene/polypropylene/poly(ethylene‐co‐propylene) in‐reactor alloy samples with a good polymer particle morphology were synthesized by sequential multistage gas‐phase polymerization with a spherical Ziegler–Natta catalyst. The alloys showed excellent mechanical properties, including both toughness and stiffness. With temperature‐gradient extraction fractionation, both alloys were fractionated into five fractions. The chain structures of the fractions were studied with Fourier transform infrared, ¹³C‐NMR, and thermal analysis. The alloys were mainly composed of polyethylene, polyethylene‐b‐polypropylene block copolymer, and polypropylene. There also were minor amounts of an ethylene–propylene segmented copolymer with very low crystallinity and an ethylene–propylene random copolymer. The block copolymer fraction accounted for more than 44 wt % of the alloys. The coexistence of these components with different structures was apparently the key factor resulting in the excellent toughness–stiffness balance of the materials. © 2005 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 97: 640–647, 2005     

Preparation and characterization of high MFR polypropylene and polypropylene/poly(ethylene‐co‐propylene) in‐reactor alloys

In this work, high melt flow rate (MFR) polypropylene (HF‐PP) and polypropylene/poly(ethylene‐co‐propylene) in‐reactor alloys (HF‐PP/EPR) with MFR ≈ 30 g/10 min were synthesized by spherical MgCl₂‐supported Ziegler–Natta catalyst with cyclohexylmethyldimethoxysilane (CHMDMS) or dicyclopentyldimethoxysilane (DCPDMS) as external donor (De). The effects of De on polymerization activity, chain structure, mechanical properties, and phase morphology of HF‐PP and HF‐PP/EPR were studied. Adding CHMDMS caused more sensitive change of the polymers MFR with H₂ than DCPDMS, and produced PP/EPR alloys containing more random ethylene‐propylene copolymer (r‐EP) and segmented ethylene‐propylene copolymer (s‐EP). CHMDMS also caused formation of s‐EP with higher level of blockiness than DCPDMS. HF‐PP/EPR alloy prepared in the presence of DCPDMS exhibited higher flexural properties but lower impact strength than that prepared with CHMDMS. Toughening efficiency of the rubber phase was nearly the same in the alloys prepared using CHMDMS or DCPDMS as De, but stiffness of the alloy can be improved by using DCPDMS. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2016 , 133, 42984.     

Comparison of olefin copolymers as compatibilizers for polypropylene and high‐density polyethylene

Some polyolefin elastomers were compared as compatibilizers for blends of polypropylene (PP) with 30 wt % high‐density polyethylene (HDPE). The compatibilizers included a multiblock ethylene–octene copolymer (OBC), two statistical ethylene–octene copolymers (EO), two propylene–ethylene copolymers (P/E), and a styrenic block copolymer (SBC). Examination of the blend morphology by AFM showed that the compatibilizer was preferentially located at the interface between the PP matrix and the dispersed HDPE particles. The brittle‐to‐ductile (BD) transition was determined from the temperature dependence of the blend toughness, which was taken as the area under the stress–strain curve. All the compatibilized blends had lower BD temperature than PP. However, the blend compatibilized with OBC had the best combination of low BD temperature and high toughness. Examination of the deformed blends by scanning electron microscopy revealed that in the best blends, the compatibilizer provided sufficient interfacial adhesion so that the HDPE domains were able to yield and draw along with the PP matrix. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci, 2009     

Isotactic polypropylene/ethylene‐co‐propylene blends: Influence of the copolymer microstructure on rheology,morphology, and properties of injection‐molded samples

Meltrheological behavior, phase morphology, and impact properties of isotactic‐polypropylene (iPP)‐based blends containing ethylene–propylene copolymer (EPR) synthesized by means of a titanium‐based catalyst with very high stereospecific activity (EPR_Ti) were compared to those of iPP/EPR blends containing EPR copolymers synthesized by using a traditional vanadium‐based catalyst (EPR_V). The samples of EPR copolymers were synthesized ad hoc. They were characterized by comparable propylene content, average molecular masses, and molecular mass distribution in order to assess the effects of distribution of composition and sequence lengths of the structural units on the structure–properties correlations established in the melt and in the solid state while studying different iPP/EPR pairs.^1–5 Differential scanning calorimetry, (DSC), wide‐angle X‐ray spectroscopy (WAXS), small‐angle X‐ray (SAXS), and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) investigations showed that the EPR_Ti chain is characterized by the presence of long ethylenic sequences with constitutional and configurational regularity required for crystallization of the polyethylene (PE) phase occurring, whereas a microstructure typical of a random ethylene–propylene copolymer was exhibited by the EPR_V copolymer. The different intra‐ and intermolecular homogeneity shown by such EPR phases was found to affect their melt rheological behavior at the temperatures of 200 and 250°C; all the EPR_Ti dynamic–viscoelastic properties resulting were lower than that shown by the EPR_V copolymer. As far as the melt rheological behavior of the iPP/EPR_V and iPP/EPR_Ti blends was concerned, both the iPP/EPR pairs are to be classified as “negative deviation blends” with G′ and G" values higher than that shown by the plain components. The extent of the observed deviation in the viscosity values and of the increase in the amounts of stored and dissipated energy shown by such iPP/EPR pairs was found to be dependent on copolymer microstructure, being larger for the melts containing the EPR_Ti copolymer. The application of the Cross–Bueche equation also confirmed that, in absence of shear, the melt phase viscosity ratio is the main factor in determining the viscosity of iPP/EPR blends and their viscoelastic parameters. The general correlation established between EPR dispersion degree (range of particle size and number‐average particle size), as determined in injection‐molded samples, and melt phase viscosity ratio (μ) was ratified; the type of dependence of EPR size upon μ value was in qualitative agreement with the prediction of the Taylor–Tomotika theory. Contrary to expectation,^1–5 for test temperature close to iPP T_g, EPR_V particles ranging in size between 0.75 and 1.25 μm resulted and were more effective than EPR_Ti particles, ranging in size between 0.25 and 0.75 μm, in promoting multiple craze formation. Also taking into account the SAXS results, revealed that the molecular superstructure (i.e., crystalline lamellar thickness and amorphous interlayer) of the iPP matrix is unaffected by both the presence of EPR_Ti and EPR_V phase. The above finding was related to the ethylenic crystallinity degree shown by the EPR_Ti copolymer. In particular, such a degree of crystallinity was supposed to deteriorate toughening by decreasing the tie molecules density in the EPR_Ti domains, notwithstanding the beneficial effect of the ethylenic lamellar buildup. For test temperature close to room temperature, the ductile behavior exhibited by the iPP/EPR_Ti blends was accounted for by a predominant shear yielding fracture mechanism probably promoted by a high concentration of interlamellar tie molecules among iPP crystallites in agreement with DSC results. Nonisothermal crystallization experiments showed, in fact, that the crystallization peak of the iPP phase from iPP/EPR_Ti melt is shifted to higher temperatures noticeably, thus indicating a material characterized by a comparatively higher number of spherulites per unit value grown at lower apparent undercooling values. Accordingly, WAXS analysis revealed comparatively higher iPP crystal growth in the directions perpendicular to the crystallographic planes (110) and (040) of the iPP. © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 72: 701–719, 1999     

Structure and properties of impact copolymer polypropylene. I. Chain structure

In this work, impact copolymer polypropylene (ICPP) was fractionated into 4 fractions. ICPP and the 4 fractions were studied using Fourier transform infrared and ¹³C nuclear magnetic resonance analysis. The results demonstrate that fraction A is ethylene–propylene rubber, fraction B is ethylene–propylene (EP) segmented copolymer, fraction C is ethylene–propylene block copolymer, and fraction D is polypropylene with a few ethylene monomers in the chain. The differences in properties between different impact copolymer polypropylenes should be due to their fractions' differences in composition and chain sequence structure. © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 71: 93–101, 1999     

Fractionation and characterization of an ethylene–propylene copolymer produced with a MgCl2/SiO2/TiCl4/diester‐type ziegler–natta catalyst

An ethylene–propylene copolymer synthesized with a Ziegler–Natta catalyst was fractionated by a combination of dissolution/precipitation and temperature‐gradient extraction fractionation. The fractions were characterized with ¹³C‐NMR, differential scanning calorimetry, and wide‐angle X‐ray diffraction. The fractionation was carried out mainly with respect to the content of ethylene, but the crystallizable propylene sequences could also exert an influence on the fractionation. The copolymer contained a series of components with wide variations in the compositions. With an increase in the ethylene content, the structure of the fractions became blockier and blockier, and the fraction extracted at 111°C had the blockiest structure. A further increase in the ethylene content led to a decrease in the length and number of the propylene sequences. Differential scanning calorimetry results showed that the composition distribution in single fractions was not homogeneous, and multiple melting peaks were observed. Wide‐angle X‐ray diffraction results revealed both polyethylene and polypropylene crystals in most of the fractions. Short propylene sequences could be included in the polyethylene crystals, and short ethylene sequences could also be incorporated into the polypropylene crystals. The incorporation of propylene sequences into polyethylene crystals strongly depended on the sequence distribution and crystallization conditions. © 2007 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci, 2008     

Facile synthesis of ethylene–propylene fully alternating copolymer and comparison with random copolymer of similar composition

A precisely sequenced ethylene–propylene (EP) fully alternating copolymer was synthesized via trans‐1,4‐polymerization of isoprene catalyzed by Ziegler–Natta catalyst followed by hydrogenation. This EP copolymer was used as model polymer for studying structure–property relationship. An ethylene–propylene random copolymer (ethylene–propylene rubber [EPR]) with similar ethylene content was also prepared for comparison, and the effect of comonomer sequence distribution on properties was investigated. The copolymer chain structures were monitored by ¹H and ¹³C NMR and Fourier translation infrared. Differential scanning calorimetry, thermogravimetric analysis, dynamic mechanical analysis, and tensile tests were employed to determine the thermal and mechanical properties. The fully alternating copolymer EP gives a more precise glass transition comparing than EPR. Further understanding on thermal properties and aggregation behavior of ethylene–propylene copolymers is made possible by this comparative study. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2018 , 135, 45816.     

Mass transfer resistance in the production of high impact polypropylene

Mass transfer resistance in the production of high impact polypropylene (hiPP) produced by a two-stage slurry/gas polymerization was investigated by field-emission scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and transmission electron microscopy (TEM) techniques. It is found that the formation of ethylene-propylene copolymer (EPR) phases in polypropylene (iPP) particle produced in the first stage slurry polymerization exhibits a developing process from exterior to interior. During the early stage of ethylene-propylene copolymerization, with lower content of copolymerized ethylene (7.4 mol%), the EPR phases occur only in the external layer of the particle, while at the later stage of the copolymerization with higher content of copolymerized ethylene (26.7 mol%), the elastomer phases distribute uniformly in the whole particle. This phenomenon is due to an effect of mass transfer resistance. The origin of mass transfer resistance is loosely agglomerate inclusions of low tacticity polypropylene within the semi-filled micropores inside the iPP particle. It is the inclusions inside the micropores that resist the diffusion of ethylene/propylene comonomers into the particle.     

Polypropylene/polyethylene blends as models for high‐impact propylene–ethylene copolymers,part 1: Interaction between rheology and morphology

In this work, composition effects on interfacial tension and morphology of binary polyolefin blends were studied using rheology and electron microscopy. The amount of dispersed phase (5–30 wt %) and its type [ethylene–octene copolymer, linear low‐density polyethylene (LLDPE), and high‐density polyethylene] was varied, and the influence of different matrix materials was also studied by using a polypropylene homopolymer and a ethylene–propylene (EP) random copolymer. The particle size distribution of the blends was determined using micrographs from transmission electron microscopy (TEM). A clear matrix effect on the flow behavior could be found from the viscosity curves of the blends. Analyzing the viscosity of the blends applying the logarithmic mixing rule indicated a partial miscibility of the EP random copolymer with low amounts of the LLDPE in the melt. Micrographs from TEM also showed a clear difference in morphology if the base polymer is changed, with PE lamellae growing out of the inclusions or being present directly embedded in the matrix. To verify these findings, the interfacial tension was determined. The applicability of Palierne's emulsion model was found to be limited for such complex systems, whereas Gramespacher–Meissner analysis led to interfacial tensions comparable with those already reported in the literature. The improved compatibility when changing the matrix polymer from the homopolymer to the random copolymer allows the development of multiphase materials with finer phase structure, which will also result in improved mechanical and optical performance. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 2013