4.5 Article

Curing kinetics and mechanical properties of cyanate ester/hyperbranched benzoxazine copolymers

期刊

POLYMERS FOR ADVANCED TECHNOLOGIES
卷 33, 期 5, 页码 1606-1616

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/pat.5624

关键词

curing kinetics; cyanate ester; hyperbranched benzoxazine; mechanical properties

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51773048]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Heilongjiang Province [E2018055]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found that blending a small amount of HB-PED230 can effectively reduce the curing temperature of CE resin, while improving the bending strength and impact strength. Additionally, it was observed that as the amount of HB-PED230 increased, the flexural strength and flexural modulus of the copolymers were improved.
In the current study, three different curing kinetics models were used to analyze the curing kinetics of hyperbranched benzoxazine (HB-PED230) and monofunctional benzoxazine (P-a) modified cyanate ester (CE) resin by non-isothermal differential scanning calorimeter. Moreover, the effects of two benzoxazines on the copolymerization behavior, thermal stability, and mechanical properties of CE resin were studied. Compared with the P-a modified CE resin, HB-PED230 greatly reduces the curing temperature of the copolymer, while improving the bending strength and impact strength. The curing temperature of HB-PED230 modified CE resin was 79 degrees C lower than neat CE resin, while the CE/P-a blended resin only reduce 48 degrees C. As the amount of HB-PED230 increased, the flexural strength and flexural modulus of the copolymers were improved. Surprisingly, when 7 wt% of HB-PED230 was added, the impact strength of the copolymer was increased by 177.6%, implying that the toughness of CE resin had been greatly improved. Moreover, the fracture morphology of the copolymers was observed by scanning electron microscope. In summary, a small amount of HB-PED230 blending can effectively improve the overall performance of CE resin.

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

4.5
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