4.5 Article

Reinforcement of the Gas Barrier Properties of Polyethylene and Polyamide Through the Nanocomposite Approach: Key Factors and Limitations

Publisher

EDP SCIENCES S A
DOI: 10.2516/ogst/2013145

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this study, polyamide 6 (PA6) and polyethylene (PE) nanocomposites were prepared from melt blending and a detailed characterization of the nanocomposite morphology and gas barrier properties was performed. The choice of the organoclay was adapted to each polymer matrix. Exfoliated morphology and improved gas transport properties were obtained by melt mixing the polar PA6 matrix and the organoclay, whereas a micro-composite with poor barrier properties was formed from the binary PE/organomodified clay mixture. Different modified polyethylenes were examined as compatibilizers for the polyethylene/organoclay system. The effect of compatibilizer molar mass, polarity and content was investigated on the clay dispersion and on the gas barrier properties. The optimal compatibilizer to clay weight ratio was found to be equal to 4 whatever the compatibilizer. However, a high degree of clay delamination was obtained with the high molar mass compatibilizer whereas highly swollen clay aggregates resulted from the incorporation of the low molar mass interfacial agents. Contrary to the PA based system, the barrier properties of PE nanocomposites were not directly related to the clay dispersion state but resulted also from the matrix/clay interfacial interactions. Oxidized wax was identified as a very promising interfacial agent and a step by step study was performed to optimize the gas transport properties of the systems based on PE, oxidized wax and organoclay. In particular, an interesting combination of oxidized wax and high molar mass maleic anhydride grafted polyethylene allowing dividing the gas permeability by a factor 2 in comparison with neat PE was proposed.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available