Effects of blend composition on the morphologies and physical properties of polycarbonate/acrylonitrile‐butadiene‐styrene blends

Abstract

The morphologies and physical properties of twin‐screw‐extruded polycarbonate/acrylonitrile‐butadiene‐styrene (PC/ABS) blends with various blend ratios are studied. The needle‐like co‐continuous phase in PC‐rich blends changes to the sea‐island phase for blend ratios of more than 50 wt% ABS. While pure PC exhibits an almost‐Newtonian flow behavior, PC/ABS blends exhibit the interesting rheological transition. The viscosities of the ABS‐rich blends at low shear rates are almost equal to those of the pure ABS polymer. The yield stress for the PC/ABS blend ratio of 3:7 is the highest in composition. At the frequency of 10 rad/s, the PC‐rich blends exhibit highly viscous properties, whereas the ABS‐rich blends present highly elastic properties as the temperature increases. Moreover, the ABS polymer in the PC/ABS polymer blend induces significant change at the fracture surface of PC, transitioning from brittle to ductile nature.

Recycled polycarbonate and polycarbonate/acrylonitrile butadiene styrene feedstocks for circular economy product applications with fused granular fabrication-based additive manufacturing

“…The mean stress-strain curves of rPC and rPC/ABS confirm the comparability of the results from the tests, especially in the first part of the curve. In this case, the low percentage of ABS in the blend, hence its rubber component, has a low influence on the decrease in the elastic modulus value [58] with similar decreasing trends of tensile strength and elongation at break [57].…”

“…of rABS pellets. This percentage was selected by considering the state of the art in 3-D printed PC/ABS blends with FFF and FGF systems [57,64,65], as well as the aim to maximize the percentage of rPC feedstock of the blend and increase its mechanical properties.…”

“…PC, however, has disadvantages, such as poor processability, hygroscopic behavior, low scratch resistance, and high production costs [56]. These disadvantages can be overcome using a blend of PC and ABS, improving the processability of PC and keeping good tensile, impact, and flexural properties [57,58]. PC/ABS blends usually show good heat resistance and high values of impact strength and toughness [59].…”

An attempt for morphology‐based quantitative prediction of adhesion strength between metal‐polymer interface

“…Other researches on the morphology of PC/ABS reveal that the material forms different phases depending on the blend ratio. [44][45][46] Specifically, PC-rich blends form a needle-like co-continuous structure, while ABS-rich blends undergo phase inversion and form a sea-island structure. Therefore, in the case of ABSrich blends, the etched surface has a more uniformly dispersed PBD distribution, leading to a drastic increase in average roughness with increasing etching time.…”

Cyclo‐olefin copolymer/poly(acrylonitrile‐butadiene‐styrene) blends: Structure–property relationships and morphological, rheological, and mechanical properties

“…On the other hand, ABS has also some drawbacks, especially for high‐performance applications, such as poor solvent, fatigue, and UV resistance, lower HDT/Vicat temperature, and impact resistance than high‐performance engineering plastics. In this context, blends of ABS with other engineering thermoplastics such as polycarbonate (PC), [ 18,19 ] polyamides (PA), [ 20,21 ] polybutylene terephthalate (PBT), [ 22,23 ] and styrene–acrylonitrile [ 24,25 ] are of significant scientific and commercial interest. In blending efforts of ABS and high‐performance engineering thermoplastics, ABS provides ease of processability and reliable notched impact resistance, [ 26,27 ] whereas other engineering thermoplastics improve mechanical, thermal and energy absorption properties.…”