Premium
Fracture and yielding behaviors of polystyrene/ethylene‐propylene rubber blends: Effects of interfacial agents
Author(s) -
Haanh T.,
VuKhanh T.
Publication year - 2001
Publication title -
polymer engineering and science
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.503
H-Index - 111
eISSN - 1548-2634
pISSN - 0032-3888
DOI - 10.1002/pen.10903
Subject(s) - materials science , brittleness , composite material , natural rubber , copolymer , activation energy , polystyrene , ethylene propylene rubber , fracture (geology) , volume (thermodynamics) , polymer , thermodynamics , organic chemistry , chemistry , physics
The aim of this work is to investigate the effects of two triblock copolymers, used as coupling agents, on fracture and yielding behaviors of a blend of 80 volume % of polystyrene (PS) and 20 volume %of ethylene‐propylene rubber (EPR), over a large range of loading rates and temperatures. For this purpose, blends containing different concentrations of two triiblock copolymers were studied at various test conditions. The focus was put on the time‐temperature dependence of fracture performance of the blends. Addition of triblock copolymer makes the PS/EPR blend more ductile. The time‐temperature dependence of the brittle‐ductile transition in fracture performance of the blend is controlled by an energy activation process. The interfacial agent lowers the temperature at brittle‐ductile transition and reduces the energy barrier controlling the fracture process. This effect, however, is much more pronounced for the lower molecular weight interfacial agent. The correlation between temperature, loading rate and yield stress of the blends seems to be controlled by a molecular relaxation process according to the Ree‐Eyring theory. This model, based on the assumption of two relaxation processes (α and β) acting in parallel, allows prediction of yield stress at various loading rates and temperatures. Addition of the interfacial agents results in a reduction of the activation energy and an increase in the activation volume V * for both the α and β processes. Furthermore, the similarity of the value of the activation energy Δ H β in the β yielding process and the energy barrier Δ H controlling the brittle‐ductile transition in fracture seems to suggest that a similar secondary relaxation mechanism controls the yielding and the fracture behavior of the blend.