Premium
Interfacial effects produced by crystallization of polypropylene with polypropylene‐ g ‐maleic anhydride compatibilitzers
Author(s) -
Duvall J.,
Sellitti C.,
Myers C.,
Hiltner A.,
Baer E.
Publication year - 1994
Publication title -
journal of applied polymer science
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.575
H-Index - 166
eISSN - 1097-4628
pISSN - 0021-8995
DOI - 10.1002/app.1994.070520208
Subject(s) - maleic anhydride , polypropylene , materials science , crystallization , tacticity , polyamide , polymer chemistry , polymer blend , composite material , phase (matter) , morphology (biology) , chemical engineering , copolymer , polymer , chemistry , organic chemistry , polymerization , engineering , biology , genetics
Two anydride‐grafted isotactic polypropylene (PP) compatibilizers, HAC or high‐anydride compatibilizer (2.7 wt % grafted maleic anhydride) and LAC or low‐anydride compatibilizer (0.2 wt % anydride), were compared in PP‐rich blends with polyamide‐66 (25 wt %). A previous article demonstrated that LAC imparted a much higher fracture strain than did HAC at similar anydride concentrations. The present study shows that LAC is capable of cocrystallization with PP. HAC does not cocrystallize, but crystallizes as a second phase in binary PP/HAC blends studied by DSC and hot‐stage microscopy. A cocrystallization model is proposed to explain the higher fracture strain of PP/LAC/PA blends. A. separate phase crystallization model is proposed for PP/HAC/PA blends. The models are supported by peel tests, which demonstrate greater adhesion of PP with LAC than with HAC. © 1994 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.