3.9 Article

Curing characteristics and mechanical and morphological properties of styrene butadiene rubber/virgin acrylonitrile-butadiene rubber (SBR/vNBR) and styrene butadiene rubber/recycled acrylonitrile-butadiene rubber (SBR/rNBR) blends

Journal

POLYMER-PLASTICS TECHNOLOGY AND ENGINEERING
Volume 47, Issue 10, Pages 1016-1023

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/03602550802355206

Keywords

curing characteristics; mechanical properties; morphological study; NBR; recycled NBR; SBR

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Curing characteristics and mechanical and morphological properties of styrene butadiene rubber/virgin acrylonitrile-butadiene rubber (SBR/vNBR) and styrene butadiene rubber/recycled acrylonitrile-butadiene rubber (SBR/rNBR) were investigated. Results indicated that the curing characteristics, such as scorch time, t(2), and cure time, t(90), of SBR/vNBR and SBR/rNBR blends decreased with increasing vNBR and rNBR content. At similar blend ratios, particularly up to 15 phr, SBR/rNBR blends exhibited higher t(2) and t(90) compared with SBR/vNBR blends. Minimum torque (ML) and maximum torque (MH) of SBR/vNBR blends significantly increased with increasing vNBR content. For SBR/rNBR blends, ML increased with increasing rNBR content, but MH exhibited the opposite trend. Tensile strength, elongation at break (E-b), resilience, and fatigue decreased with increasing virgin and recycled NBR content in both blends. Up to 15 phr, the tensile strength, E-b and fatigue life (Kc) of SBR/rNBR blends were higher than in SBR/vNBR blends. The M100 (stress at 100% elongation), hardness, and cross-linking density of both blends also showed an increasing trend with increasing vNBR and rNBR content. The scanning electron microscopy study indicates that rNBR exhibited a weak rNBR-SBR matrix interaction particularly when more than 15 phr of rNBR was used, thus decreasing the mechanical properties of SBR/rNBR blends.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available