Thermal, rheological and mechanical properties of poly(propylene carbonate)/methyl methacrylate–butadiene–styrene blends

Li, Zonglin; Li, Wu; Zhang, Huiliang; Dong, Lisong

doi:10.1007/s13726-015-0374-8

Cited by 8 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 27 publications

(26 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Only ductile surfaces were formed near the fractured surface because the PMA shell in CSS NPs could absorb the energy from the outside and lead to plastic deformation, while the starch core caused stress concentration due to the difference in modulus with PPC. 26 As a conclusion, there was a stronger interface interaction between PPC and CSS NPs rather than that between PPC and NS; it was also because of the fact that PPC/CSS composites behaved with excellent toughness. By using differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) characterization, the effect of CSS on the T g of the PPC/CSS composite was investigated.…”

Section: ■ Results and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…Even when the CSS NPs content reached to 40 wt %, no significant phase separation was observed. Only ductile surfaces were formed near the fractured surface because the PMA shell in CSS NPs could absorb the energy from the outside and lead to plastic deformation, while the starch core caused stress concentration due to the difference in modulus with PPC . As a conclusion, there was a stronger interface interaction between PPC and CSS NPs rather than that between PPC and NS; it was also because of the fact that PPC/CSS composites behaved with excellent toughness.…”

Section: Results and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…By precise design, a synergistic effect could take place in the new functional structure, because the core and the shell properties could both involve the core− shell particles. By melt-blending a core−shell methyl methacrylate−butadiene−styrene (MBS) modifier with PPC, Zhang et al 26 found that the T 5% and T g of PPC increased by 34.8 and 3.4 °C, respectivel,y when 15% MBS was added. However, the fully nondegradable MBS as a PPC modifier will reduce the biodegradability of PPC.…”

Section: ■ Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Core–Shell Starch Nanoparticles Improve the Mechanical and Thermal Properties of Poly(propylene carbonate)

Liu

Wang

et al. 2019

ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Poly(propylene carbonate) (PPC) is a green biodegradable polymer material, but its poor mechanical properties and thermal properties severely limit its wider application. PPC-based nanocomposites with improved mechanical properties and thermal properties were prepared by melt-blending of core–shell starch nanoparticles (CSS NPs) and PPC, in which a starch core covered by outer shell was formed in that process. The core was formed by synthesized CSS NPs as the product of gelatinization of the esterified starch; on the other hand, the outer shell was a poly(methyl acrylate) (PMA) produced in the soap-free emulsion copolymerization of methyl acrylate. The synergistic association of hard starch and soft PMA induces a significant increase in the mechanical and thermal properties of PPC. When the addition of CSS NPs was 20 wt %, the tensile strength and initial Young’s modulus of PPC/CSS composite were 3.2 times and 50.4 times those of neat PPC, respectively, while the toughness increased by 44%. In addition, the glass transition temperature (T g) increased by 6.2 °C and the thermal degradation temperature at 5% weight loss (T 5%) increased by 81.2 °C.

show abstract

Section: ■ Results and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Section: Results and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: ■ Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Core–Shell Starch Nanoparticles Improve the Mechanical and Thermal Properties of Poly(propylene carbonate)

Liu

Wang

et al. 2019

ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…26 Poly(propylene carbonate) (PPC), as an amorphous aliphatic polycarbonate, has garnered significant attention due to its biodegradability and biocompatibility. [27][28][29] In our previous research, the introduction of PPC greatly improved the barrier performance of TPS/PBAT films. The addition of 40 wt% PPC led to significant reductions in water vapor permeability, oxygen permeability, and carbon dioxide permeability of PBAT/TPS/PPC films by 53.1%, 74.4%, and 78.9%, respectively.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 90%

Study on morphological, mechanical, thermal, barrier, rheological, and biodegradation properties of poly(butylene adipate‐co‐terephthalate)/thermoplastic starch/poly(propylene carbonate)‐g‐polyurethane biodegradable films

Wang,

Tian,

et al. 2024

Polymers for Advanced Techs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bioplastic films with excellent physical properties and barrier properties were successfully prepared from poly(butylene adipate‐co‐terephthalate) (PBAT), thermoplastic starch (TPS), and poly(propylene carbonate)‐g‐polyurethane (PPCU). The rheological, mechanical, barrier, dynamic mechanical properties, and microstructure of the PBAT/TPS/PPCU blend films were studied. The proportion of PPCU controlled the morphology and continuous development of PBAT/TPS/PPCU blends. The increase of PPCU led to the formation of different phase morphologies of the PBAT/TPS/PPCU blends, including “island‐sea,” “quasi‐co‐continuous,” and “co‐continuous” structures. This phase transformation of PPCU emerges as a pivotal driver in the improvement of mechanical properties, resulting in a substantial enhancement from 23.4/24.7 MPa to 37.7/35.6 MPa. Furthermore, the addition of 40%PPCU led to a remarkable 29.6% reduction in the water vapor permeability of the PBAT/TPS/PPCU film. Finally, the increase of PPCU can improve the aging resistance of PBAT/TPS/PPCU films. The films exhibit good mechanical properties and barrier performance, indicating PBAT/TPS/PPCU film potential as environmentally viable substitutes for conventional plastics in the packaging domain.

show abstract

“…The typical methyl methacrylate‐butadiene‐styrene (MBS) particle often has a soft core of a random styrene‐butadiene copolymer and a glassy shell composed of a random copolymer of polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) . MBS has displayed a significant impact‐modifying effect at low temperature and is the most common impact modifier used to improve the impact strength of poly(vinyl chloride) (PVC) and poly(propylene carbonate) (PPC) , there are also used to toughen polylactic acid (PLA) . MBS as the modifiers are used regularly to improve the toughness of PLA due to the major attractive features, the rubbery core of a random styrene‐butadiene copolymer provides resistance to impact, especially at low temperatures, whereas the grafted glassy shell of polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) gives “good adhesion” with PLA because of the similar structures, which PLA just has a chemical structure like that of PMMA, and provides rigidity and compatibility with the polymer matrix, keeping the particles desired shape and dispersibility.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of methyl methacrylate‐butadiene‐styrene copolymer on plasticized polylactide blown films

Zhao

Yan

et al. 2017

Polymer Engineering & Sci

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Polylactide (PLA) was first toughened with methyl methacrylate‐butadiene‐styrene (MBS) copolymer. Then the toughened PLA was further blended with diethylene glycol monobutyl ether adipate (DGBEA) using a twin‐screw extruder. Finally, the extruded samples were blown using the blown film technique. The PLA/DGBEA/MBS blends were characterized by dynamic rheometer, dynamic mechanical analysis (DMA), differential scanning calorimetry (DSC). Rhelological investigation demonstrated that there was a significantly dependence of viscosity on composition. DMA results displayed that the PLA/DGBEA/MBS blends showed a single peak, which suggested that PLA and the shell of MBS be compatible. So, DGBEA could act as a plasticizer and improve the miscibility of PLA/MBS blends. The crystallization morphology, mechanical properties, optical properties, the morphology of the tear‐fracture surfaces, and enzymatic degradation of the PLA/DGBEA/MBS films were further studied. The Maltese cross pattern phenomenon weakens and the spherulite size becomes smaller from the observation of the polarized microscope. With an increase of MBS content from 3% to 12%, the tensile strength of the films decreased from 38.2/37.5 MPa (MD/TD) to 25.2/26.4 MPa (MD/TD), however, the elongation at break increased significantly from 72.3/83.1% (MD/TD) to 289.5/286.8% (MD/TD), which indicated the toughening effects of the MBS on PLA. POLYM. ENG. SCI., 58:E4–E13, 2018. © 2017 Society of Plastics Engineers

show abstract

Thermal, rheological and mechanical properties of poly(propylene carbonate)/methyl methacrylate–butadiene–styrene blends

Abstract: below 10 %, whereas the aggregation could be clearly seen when the content of MBS was over 15 %.

Cited by 8 publications

References 27 publications

Core–Shell Starch Nanoparticles Improve the Mechanical and Thermal Properties of Poly(propylene carbonate)

Core–Shell Starch Nanoparticles Improve the Mechanical and Thermal Properties of Poly(propylene carbonate)

Study on morphological, mechanical, thermal, barrier, rheological, and biodegradation properties of poly(butylene adipate‐co‐terephthalate)/thermoplastic starch/poly(propylene carbonate)‐g‐polyurethane biodegradable films

Influence of methyl methacrylate‐butadiene‐styrene copolymer on plasticized polylactide blown films

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About