Abstract
AbstractThe simple cup and rotor mini‐mixer, designed to blend very small polymer batches (0.3 g, MiniMAX), was compared to larger lab scale extruder (5 g, DACA): and a 16 mm co‐rotating twin screw (300 g/hr. PRISM). All were compared at the maximum shear rate in the cup and rotor mixer, 110 s−1. Particle sizes of poly(propylene) [PP] dispersed in poly(styrene) (80 wt% PS) were meausred by dissolving the PS, filtering and using scanning electron microscopy. The 16 mm twin screw gave somewhat smaller particle sizes than the lab scale mixers (102 μ vs 1.7 and 1.9 μ), but dispersion in the cup and rotor mini‐mixer was much poorer. Simply adding three steel balls to the cup as suggested by Maréchal et al. (Polym Networks Blends, 1997) greatly improved the dispersion (1.8 μm). Modifying the rotor design to allow recirculation yielded similar improvement. The benefit of adding three balls was confinmed in blends of low viscosity poly(dimethyl siloxane) PDMS in PS. When anhydride terminal PDMS was blended with amino terminal PS, the particle sizes were much smaller (10 vs. 0.3 μm) and the differences between the three versions of the cup and rotor were much less pronounced.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
