New Multicomponent Compatibilization System for Polyolefin/Polystyrene Blends

Abstract

An efficient compatibilization system based on a combination of styrene-butadiene block copolymer (SBS) with ethenepropene random copolymer (EPM) has been developed for polyolefin/polystyrene blends. Model blends of polypropylene and polystyrene have been taken for compatibilization studies. Concentration of combined compatibilizer in all studied blends was 5 or 10 wt. %. The ratio of EPM/SBS in the compatibilizers was varied from 4/1 to 1/4. Tensile impact strength was used as the main criterion of compatibilization efficiency. Besides mechanical properties, basic morphological investigation of the prepared blends was carried out. The compatibilization efficiency of the EPM/SBS system in PS/PP blends depends on the type of blend matrix. Generally, the use of EPM/SBS leads to better or comparable mechanical properties of final polystyrene/polypropylene blends compared with those using common SBS compatibilizers.

Effect of the molecular structure of ethene–propene and styrene–butadiene copolymers on their compatibilization efficiency in low‐density polyethylene/polystyrene blends

“…4(a)]. This type of morphology, called a honeycomb‐like structure, has already been described in PP/PS blends with a PP matrix compatibilized with a commercial triblock SBS3, 43 or poly(styrene‐ block ‐ethene‐ co ‐propene) diblock copolymer 3. With the copolymer content reduced to 2.5 wt %, this morphology is still preserved, but the internal structure of the dispersed particles becomes less developed [Fig.…”

“…In our previous work, we have shown that the combination of an SB block copolymer and an EPM random copolymer can be a more efficient compatibilization system than a neat SB copolymer for polyolefin/PS blends, even though neat EPM does not act as a compatibilizer at all 40–43. Furthermore, it has been proved that this synergic activity is caused by the formation of an EPM/SB double layer at the interface; EPM is located on the polyolefin side and SB is located on the PS side of the interface 43. However, no systematic study of the influence of EPM properties on the compatibilization efficiency of EPM/SB systems has been carried out.…”

“…Surprisingly, a mixture of a styrene–butadiene (SB) block copolymer with an ethene–propene (EPM) random copolymer is in some cases a more efficient compatibilizer for PS/polyolefin blends than neat SB, even though the compatibilization efficiency of neat EPM is very poor 40–42. The effect of the composition of an SB/EPM mixture on its compatibilization efficiency in PS/polypropylene (PP) blends with various component ratios has been studied in detail 43. The positive effect of SB/EPM mixtures on the impact strength of PS/PP blends has in all cases been more pronounced than the additive effects of SB and EPM components.…”

Morphology and mechanical properties of polypropylene/polystyrene blends compatibilized with styrene–butadiene block copolymers

“…The size distribution of PS particles is very broad, and the amount of SB partitions increases with their size. This type of morphology, called a honeycomb‐like structure, has already been described in PP/PS blends with a PP matrix compatibilized with a commercial SBS [3, 56] or poly(styrene‐ block ‐ethene‐ co ‐propene) diblock copolymer [3] and in LDPE/PS blends compatibilized with SB1 and SB4 [28]. However, compression‐molded sample of LDPE/PS having LDPE matrix and compatibilized with SB3 contained simple PS particles [28].…”

Use of SEBS/EPR and SBR/EPR as Binary Compatibilizers for PE/PP/PS/HIPS Blends: A Work Oriented to the Recycling of Thermoplastic Wastes

“…This result can be due to the degradation of the polymers, since the polymeric chains at high temperature and long time can be degraded. [29] This assumption can be checked by analyzing the IR values corresponding to blends processed at 190 8C and different processing time, where the tensile impact is improved, whereas at 210 8C the IR is deteriorated. In addition, the MFI of the polymer after processing increased, indicating that degradation of the polymer has occurred (decreasing of the molecular weight).…”