4.7 Article

Oxidative degradation products analysis of polymer materials by pyrolysis gas chromatography mass spectrometry

期刊

POLYMER DEGRADATION AND STABILITY
卷 98, 期 12, 页码 2466-2472

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2013.05.018

关键词

Pyrolysis gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (PGC MS); Polymer material; Aging; Degradation product; Additive

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Pyrolysis gas chromatography mass spectroscopy (PGC MS) has been proved to be a powerful method to analyze both the volatile additives and the macromolecular structure of polymer materials. In this paper, flash evaporation technique was used to analyze the volatile degradation products of polymer materials during natural and artificial aging. In high density polyethylene (HOPE) composites, mainly n-alkanes with carbon number from 14 to 29 were detected after natural aging, while no oxidative product was found. Different composites have different n-alkane distributions. In contrast, various oxidative products including ketones, alcohols, esters and unsaturated species could be found in aged polypropylene (PP) nanocomposites. Nanoparticles accelerated the chain scission of PP and increased the formation of oxidative products significantly. During thermal oxidation of nitrile rubber (NBR) seal rubbers, heat/oxidation-induced extra crosslinking predominated and no volatile degradation products was detected. The main change happened in the volatiles is the decrease of additives, especially paraffins, antioxidant RD and hindered phenol. This resulted in the hardening of the rubber and the weakening of the protection from oxidation. Furthermore, the additive distribution along the depth was investigated, showing different migration speeds of different additives. From the additive levels remained in the NBR rubber, it is possible to predict the degradation status. In summary, PGC MS can supply abundant information of polymer degradation and is helpful for mechanism research. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据