4.7 Article

Influence of interfacial compatibility on the crystallization behavior of electrospun core-sheath fibers

期刊

POLYMER
卷 283, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.polymer.2023.126200

关键词

Co-electrospinning; Core -sheath fibers; Interfacial compatibility; Crystallization

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Core-sheath fibers composed of crystalline polymer (PEO) in the core and amorphous polymers (PS and PMMA) in the sheath were fabricated through coaxial electrospinning. PEO crystallization behavior was influenced by the hard confinement of the immobile sheath, resulting in decreased crystallite size, degree of crystallinity, and crystallization kinetics.
Core-sheath fibers composed of a crystalline polymer [poly(ethylene oxide) (PEO)] in the core and amorphous polymers [polystyrene (PS) and poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA)] in the sheath were fabricated through coaxial electrospinning. Because the melting temperature of PEO is lower than the glass transition temperatures of PS and PMMA, PEO crystallization was hard-confined within the immobile sheath. In immiscible PEO/PS fibers and miscible PEO/PMMA fibers, hard confinement reduced the crystallizability of PEO; therefore, its crystallite size, degree of crystallinity, and crystallization kinetics decreased with decreases in the degree of confinement. Confinement hindered PEO crystallization to a greater extent when the core and sheath polymers were miscible than when they were not. The favorable interaction between PEO and PMMA facilitated their interdiffusion during electrospinning, which caused the increased confinement of PEO in the core. Furthermore, when the compatibility between the solvents used for coaxial electrospinning increased, they enhanced the interdiffusion of the core and sheath polymers, which hindered PEO crystallization. However, the compatibility between polymers influenced the crystallization behavior of PEO to a considerably greater extent than did the compatibility between solvents.

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