Ternary polymer blend with core–shell dispersed phases: effect of the core-forming polymer on phase morphology and mechanical properties

Abstract

Phase morphology and mechanical properties of ternary blends consisting of PS (polystyrene), SBR (styrene butadiene rubber) and different polyolefins (POs) have been studied. PS, systematically forms the matrix, SBR and PO being combined in the dispersed phase. Although POs of various melt viscosity and stiffness are used, the binary (SBR/PO) dispersed phase is of a core-shell structure, in which PO forms the core. Upon increasing the viscosity of PO, the average size of the cores and the SBR domains including them increases. Comparison of the experimental shear storage modulus of the blends with theoretical predictions indicates that the stress transfer from the PS matrix to the PO core through the SBR shell depends on the modulus of the SBR envelope. The ultimate mechanical properties of the ternary blends are sensitive to the stiffness of the PO core.

Encapsulated phase structure and morphology evolution during quiescent annealing in ternary polymer blends with PA6 as matrix

“…However, in some cases, the “multicore structure,” i.e., several subinclusions of one minor phase are embedded in a larger particle of the second minor phase morphology cannot be successfully predicted by employing the spreading coefficient theory. Also, the morphology of subinclusions formation is related to various factors such as viscosity ratio, elastic effect, composition ratio effect, interfacial reaction, etc. Luzinov et al investigated the morphologies of ternary polystyrene/styrene–butadiene rubber/polyethylene (PS/SBR/PE) blends with a constant content of the major component (PS: 75 wt %), and found that according to the predication of spreading coefficients theory, the PE/SBR core–shell structure should be formed.…”

Role of nanosilica localization on morphology development of HDPE/PS/PMMA immiscible ternary blends

“…Obviously, the degree of success to achieve such polymer blends with prescribed properties is strongly influenced by their interfacial interaction. Therefore understanding the role of parameters which control the morphology development of the blends has become important issue for both academic researchers and manufacturers [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10].…”

Evaluation of mechanical properties of polypropylene/polycarbonate/SEBS ternary polymer blends using Taguchi experimental analysis

“…In both polypropylene (PP)/ polyamide‐6 (PA‐6) binary and PP/PA‐6/Poly(styrene‐b‐(ethylene‐ co ‐butylene)‐b‐styrene) (SEBS) ternary systems, using maleated SEBS (SEBS‐ g ‐MAH) as a compatibilizer, strongly influenced the blend morphology and mechanical properties by variation in the degree of interfacial reaction between the succinc anhydride groups of the SEBS‐ g ‐MAH and the terminal amino groups of PA6 2–4. Recently, the study of ternary blends has raised the attention of researches cause of wide range of variation in mechanical and morphological properties in these systems 5–17. It is observed that for the systems containing two minor phases, three distinct types of phase morphology have to be specified.…”

“…For some ternary systems, one of the minor components formed an encapsulating layer around domains of another minor component, whereas in other systems, two minor components formed independent phases separately. The third type is the intermediate case, where mixed phases of the two components are formed without any ordered structures 5–11. To predict the tendency for one minor phase to encapsulate a second one, the alternative form of Harkin's equation have been used as follows: where γ AC , γ AB , and γ BC are the interfacial tension for each component pair, and λ BC is defined as the spreading coefficient for the shell forming component B on the core of component C. The index A corresponds to the matrix continuous phase.…”

“…In addition, they have successfully converted the phase structures of ternary blends from one type to other using interfacial active block copolymers. Luzinov et al have shown that the morphology of the ternary polystyrene (PS)/styrene‐butadiene‐rubber (SBR)/polyethylene (PE) blend is influenced by the weight ratio of the minor component (SBR and PE) and stress transfer from the matrix through the shell to the core occurs when the ratio of the core size to thickness of the SBR layer is high enough 6–8. Also upon increasing the viscosity of polyolefin's, the size of the cores and SBR domains including them increases.…”