4.5 Article

Layered silicate/epoxy nanocomposites: synthesis, characterization and properties

期刊

POLYMERS FOR ADVANCED TECHNOLOGIES
卷 15, 期 5, 页码 251-259

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/pat.382

关键词

nanocomposites; epoxy-clay; Jeffamine; organoclay; resins

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Novel epoxy-clay nanocomposites have been prepared by epoxy and organoclays. Polyoxypropylene triamine (Jeffamine T-403), primary polyethertriamine (Jeffamine T-5000) and three types of polyoxypropylene diamine (Jeffamine D-230, D-400, D-2000) with different molecular weight were used to treat Na-montmorillonite (MMT) to form organoclays. The preparation involves the ion exchange of Na+ in MMT with the organic ammonium group in Jeffamine compounds. X-ray diffraction (XRD) confirms the intercalation of these organic moieties to form Jeffamine-MMT intercalates. Jeffamine D-230 was used as a swelling agent for the organoclay and curing agent. It was established that the d(001), spacing of MMT in epoxy-clay nanocomposites depends on the silicate modification. Although XRD data did not show any apparent order of the clay layers in the T5000-MMT/epoxy nanocomposite, transmission electron microscopy (TEM) revealed the presence of multiplets with an average size of 5 nm and the average spacing between multiplets falls in the range of 100 Angstrom. The multiplets clustered into mineral rich domains with an average size of 140 nm. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) reveals the absence of mineral aggregate. Nanocomposites exhibit significant increase in thermal stability in comparison to the original epoxy. The effect of the organoclay on the hardness and toughness properties of crosslinked polymer matrix was studied. The hardness of all the resulting materials was enhanced with the inclusion of organoclay. A three-fold increase in the energy required for breaking the test specimen was found for T5000-MMT/epoxy containing 7wt% of organoclay as compared to that of pure epoxy. Copyright (C) 2004 John Wiley Sons, Ltd.

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