Premium
Influence of temperature, molecular weight, and molecular weight dispersity on the surface tension of PS, PP, and PE. I. Experimental
Author(s) -
Moreira José Carlos,
Demarquette Nicole Raymonde
Publication year - 2001
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.2036
Subject(s) - surface tension , dispersity , polystyrene , polymer , drop (telecommunication) , polymer chemistry , surface energy , materials science , molar mass distribution , contact angle , thermodynamics , polypropylene , chemistry , composite material , physics , telecommunications , computer science
Abstract In this work, the influence of temperature, molecular weight ( M̄ n ), and molecular weight dispersity (MWD) on the surface tension of polystyrene (PS) was evaluated using the pendant drop method. The influence of temperature on the surface tension of isotatic polypropylene (i‐PP) and of linear low‐density polyethylene (LLDPE) was also studied here. It was shown that surface tension decreases linearly with increasing temperature for all the polymers studied. The temperature coefficient − d γ/ dT (where γ is the surface tension, and T , the temperature) was shown to decrease with increasing molecular weight and to increase with increasing MWD. The surface tension of PS increased when the molecular weight was varied from 3400 to 41,200 g/mol. When the molecular weight of PS was further increased, the surface tension was shown to level off. The surface tension was shown to decrease with increasing molecular weight distribution. Contact angles formed by drops of diiomethane and water on films of PS with different molecular weights were measured at 20°C. The surface energies of those polymers were then evaluated using the values of the different pairs of contact angles obtained here using two different models: the harmonic mean equation and the geometric mean equation. It was shown that the values of the surface energy obtained are slightly less than are the ones extrapolated from surface‐tension measurements in the rubbery state. © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 82: 1907–1920, 2001