Abstract

AbstractPolypropylene (PP)‐based nanocomposites containing 4 wt% maleic anhydride grafted PP (PP‐g‐MA) and 2 wt% Cloisite 20A (C20A) were prepared using various processing devices, viz., twin‐screw extruder (TSE), single‐screw extruder (SSE), and SSE with an extensional flow mixer (EFM). Two processing methods were employed: (I) masterbatch (MB) preparation in a TSE (with 10 wt% C20A and clay/compatibilizer ratio of 1:2), followed by dilution in TSE, SSE, or SSE + EFM, to 2 wt% clay loading; (II) single pass, i.e., directly compounding of dry‐blended PP‐g‐MA/clay in TSE, SSE, or SSE + EFM. It has been indicated that the quality of clay dispersion, both at micro‐ and nanolevel, of the nanocomposites depends very much on the operating conditions during processing, such as mixing intensity and residence time, thus affecting the mechanical performance. Besides that the degradation of the organoclay and the matrix is also very sensitive to these parameters. According to results of X‐ray diffraction, field emission gun scanning electron microscopy, transmission electron microscopy, and mechanical tests, the samples prepared with MB had better overall clay dispersion, which resulted in better mechanical properties. The processing equipment used for diluting MB had a marginal influence on clay dispersion and nanocomposite performance. POLYM. ENG. SCI., 47:1447–1458, 2007. © 2007 Society of Plastics Engineers

Full Text
Paper version not known

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 call

Disclaimer: 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.