Premium
Toughness of nanoscale and multiscale polyamide‐6,6 composites
Author(s) -
Nair Shanti V.,
Goettler Lloyd A.,
Lysek Bruce A.
Publication year - 2002
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.11080
Subject(s) - materials science , composite material , toughness , microstructure , fracture toughness , nanocomposite , volume fraction , exfoliation joint , nanotechnology , graphene
Fracture initiation and fracture propagation toughening (R‐curve behavior) of polyamide 6,6 (PA‐66) polymers with different types of layered silicate clay having nanoscale (fully dispersed) or multiscale (mixed nanoscale/microscale) structure were studied. These results were compared to fracture data for conventional kaolin clay particulate reinforcements and a PA‐66 polyblend containing rubber and rigid poly(styrene‐co‐acrylonitrile) particulates. The stiffness increase due to the intercalated clay was the same as would be predicted by classical models for conventional elongated reinforcements at the same volume fraction level. The special benefit of the nanoscale reinforcement derived from their high surface area of contact with the matrix. Toughness in layered silicate clay composites was enhanced by better dispersion of the clay, by exfoliation of the clay layers, and by a stronger clay/matrix interface. A multiscale microstructure was found to be the more desirable microstructure, combining toughness from the nanodispersed clay with resistance curve behavior from the micrometer‐sized particulates. Fracture toughness was proportional to the crack‐tip plastic zone size at fracture, indicating that the clay reinforcements, by influencing shear deformation in the crack tip region, played an important role in promoting toughness. There was indirect evidence for the formation of a zone of damage within the crack‐tip plastic zone that could explain why toughness was not optimal.