4.7 Article

Effect of different mechanical recycling processes on the hydrolytic degradation of poly(L-lactic acid)

Journal

POLYMER DEGRADATION AND STABILITY
Volume 133, Issue -, Pages 339-348

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2016.09.018

Keywords

Poly(lactic acid); Mechanical recycling; Water absorption; Hydrolytic degradation

Funding

  1. MINECO-Spain [MAT201347972-C2-2-P]
  2. Ecoembes
  3. [UPM RP 160543006]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The growing production of poly(lactic acid) (PLA) has increased the interest for the mechanical recycling of this polymer. The main objective of this work is to study the effect of different mechanical recycling processes on the hydrolytic degradation of PLA. A commercial grade of PLA was subjected to two different recycling processes, one of them comprising an accelerated thermal and photochemical aging and a second melt compounding and compression molding step, and other including a demanding washing step after the accelerated aging process. The accelerated aging and, especially, the washing step had a significant effect on degradation during recycling. Samples of virgin and recycled plastic immersed in a phosphate buffered solution at 37 or 58 degrees C were removed at selected times and then characterized by gravimetric analysis, IR and UV spectroscopy, thermal analysis, x-ray diffraction and microhardness and viscosity measurements. The water absorption process, at both temperatures, can be modeled using a Fickian model only when the immersion times were short. The different recycling processes caused an increase of the diffusion coefficient of PLA at 37 degrees C, while at 58 degrees C the differences were smaller. DSC results pointed out that mechanical recycling promotes a slight crystallization of PLA at 37 degrees C that explains the increasing of the hardness during the hydrolysis. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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