4.7 Article

Conductive Plastics from Al Platelets in a PBT-PET Polyester Blend Having Co-Continuous Morphology

Journal

POLYMERS
Volume 14, Issue 6, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/polym14061092

Keywords

reinforced polymer composite; metal-plastics; PET; PBT blend; mechanical properties; conductive plastics

Funding

  1. SABIC Polymer Research Center (SPRC), Department of Chemical Engineering, King Saud University

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Conductive plastics, created by adding conductive fillers to polymer matrices, are more effective when used in binary polymer blends with a co-continuous morphology. Embedding aluminium nano platelets, a relatively low-cost conductive filler, in a 60/40 PBT/PET polymer blend resulted in a reduction of resistivity to the level of an electrostatic charge dissipation material. The dimensional stability of the conductive articles remained above the T-g of PET due to the crystallization of the 60/40 PBT/PET blend during injection molding.
Conductive plastics are made by placing conductive fillers in polymer matrices. It is known that a conductive filler in a binary polymer blend with a co-continuous morphology is more effective than in a single polymer, because it aids the formation of a 'segregated conductive network'. We embedded a relatively low-cost conductive filler, aluminium nano platelets, in a 60/40 PBT/PET polymer blend. While 25 vol.% of the Al nanoplatelets when placed in a single polymer (PET) gave a material with the resistivity of an insulator (10(14) omega cm), the same Al nano platelets in the 60/40 PBT/PET blend reduced the resistivity to 7.2 x 10(7) omega cm, which is in the category of an electrostatic charge dissipation material. While PET tends to give amorphous articles, the 60/40 PBT/PET blends crystallised in the time scale of the injection moulding and hence the conductive articles had dimensional stability above the T-g of PET.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available