Thickness effects in microlayer composites of polycarbonate and poly(styrene-acrylonitrile)

Comparison of irreversible deformation and yielding in microlayers of polycarbonate with poly(methylmethacrylate) and poly(styrene-co-acrylonitrile)

“…Numerous studies of PC/SAN microlayers revealed the relation between macroscopic stress-strain properties and microdeformation mechanisms in this system. [12][13][14][15][16][17] A dramatic increase in toughness of PC/SAN was found as the number of layers increased. This was attributed to a change in the microdeformation mechanism to cooperative yielding of both PC and SAN as the individual layers became thinner.…”

“…An increase in toughness with increasing number of layers was attributed in past studies of PC/SAN to cooperative shearbanding in the thinner layers. [12][13][14][15][16] It might be expected that PC/ PMMA with 32 layers would be ductile at higher strain rates because cooperative shearbanding was observed. However, isolated surface crazes in the 32-layer specimens opened up into cracks and initiated fracture at low strains.…”

Interdiffusion in microlayered polymer composites of polycarbonate and a copolyester

“…Thus, mixing of the two components was complete before crystallization began, with the result that any subsequent crystallization occurred from the homogeneous blend. Some crystallization after 6 h of annealing accounted for the slight increase in the glass transition temperature between 4 and 48 h of annealing since crystallization of KODAR caused the amorphous phase to become richer in PC.…”

Characterization of the morphology of co-extruded, thermoplastic/rubber multi-layer tapes

“…layer break-up and interfacial phenomena, such as interfacial reactions and mutual diffusion. Various techniques to study the morphology of multi-layer tapes have been reported in the literature, which mostly involve optical microscopy (OM) [16,18,21,22], atomic force microscopy (AFM) [23,24] and, occasionally, scanning electron microscopy (SEM) [18,20,25]. Where OM is limited to relatively large and AFM to relatively small length scales of approximately 5-500 m and 10-100 nm, respectively, SEM covers a wider range of length scales of ∼100 nm up to 200 m. Although an accurate determination of the morphology is a crucial step in understanding the properties of multi-layer tapes, a systematic study on microscopy techniques to study the morphology has not yet been reported.…”