4.6 Article

Contribution of compatibilizer backbone to degradation and retained functionality of multiple extruded polypropylene/poly(ethylene terephthalate) blends

期刊

JOURNAL OF APPLIED POLYMER SCIENCE
卷 138, 期 12, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/app.50044

关键词

compatibilization; blends; degradation; morphology; recycling

资金

  1. Bijzonder Onderzoeksfonds [BOF.STA.2017.0019.01]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study evaluates the thermal and morphological stabilization of three compatibilizers during the mechanical recycling of polymer blends. The results show that although the degradation of the blends is low during multiple processing, the core stability depends on the initial stability of all components. The thermal stability of the matrix-based grafted compatibilized blend is the most favorable across the five extrusions.
This study assesses thermal and morphological stabilization of three compatibilizers during mechanical recycling of polymer blends. Polypropylene/poly(ethylene terephthalate) blends compatibilized with three different maleic anhydride grafted compatibilizers were extruded five times via single-screw extrusion. The backbones of the compatibilizers are (1) polypropylene-based, (2) an elastomer block copolymer poly(styrene-co-[ethylene-butylene]-styrene), and (3) a polyolefin elastomer. The degradation and retained functionality of these compatibilizers was assessed by means of simultaneous thermo-gravimetric analysis, melt flow index, a morphology study, differential scanning calorimetry and tensile testing. The results show that degradation of the compatibilized blends during multiple processing is low, although the core stability of the blends depends on the initial stability of all of the components in the blend. The thermal stability across the five extrusions was the most favorable for the matrix based grafted compatibilized blend. The functionality of the compatibilizers did show minor morphological destabilization but did not affect the mechanical properties.

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

4.6
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