Interfacial adhesion mechanisms in incompatible semicrystalline polymer systems

Chieh-Tsung Lo, Francis C. Laabs, Balaji Narasimhan

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

19 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The mechanism of adhesion at semicrystalline polymer interfaces between isotactic polypropylene (iPP) and linear low-density polyethylene (PE) was studied with transmission electron microscopy (TEM) and an asymmetric-double- cantilever-beam test. From the TEM images, both the interfacial width and the lamellar thickness of the polymers were extracted. During annealing, the interfacial width increased with the annealing temperature, and this indicated the accumulation of amorphous polymers at the interface. The interfacial strength, determined from the critical fracture energy (G c), also increased with the annealing temperature and reached a maximum above the melting temperatures of iPP and PE, whereas the smallest G c value was obtained below the melting temperatures of the two materials. A mechanism of interfacial strengthening was proposed accounting for the competition between the inter diffusion of PE and crystallization of iPP. As the annealing temperature increased, the rates of PE diffusion and iPP crystallization increased. Although the crystallization of iPP hindered the interdiffusion of PE, both the interfacial width and the fracture energy increased with the temperature, and this indicated that PE interdiffusion dominated iPP crystallization. Below the critical temperature, the fracture surfaces of both iPP and PE were smooth, and chain pullout dominated the fracture mechanism. Above the critical temperature, iPP crystallization still hindered the interdiffusion, and crazes could be seen on the iPP side. Above the melting temperatures of the two materials, ruptured surfaces could also be seen on the PE side, and crazing was the fracture mechanism.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)2667-2679
Number of pages13
JournalJournal of Polymer Science, Part B: Polymer Physics
Volume42
Issue number14
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2004 Jul 15

Fingerprint

Polypropylenes
polypropylene
Polyethylene
Polymers
adhesion
Adhesion
polyethylenes
Polyethylenes
Crystallization
polymers
crystallization
Annealing
Melting point
annealing
Fracture energy
melting
temperature
Temperature
critical temperature
Transmission electron microscopy

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Condensed Matter Physics
  • Physical and Theoretical Chemistry
  • Polymers and Plastics
  • Materials Chemistry

Cite this

@article{771986490c82420bbbe49221be49a0d8,
title = "Interfacial adhesion mechanisms in incompatible semicrystalline polymer systems",
abstract = "The mechanism of adhesion at semicrystalline polymer interfaces between isotactic polypropylene (iPP) and linear low-density polyethylene (PE) was studied with transmission electron microscopy (TEM) and an asymmetric-double- cantilever-beam test. From the TEM images, both the interfacial width and the lamellar thickness of the polymers were extracted. During annealing, the interfacial width increased with the annealing temperature, and this indicated the accumulation of amorphous polymers at the interface. The interfacial strength, determined from the critical fracture energy (G c), also increased with the annealing temperature and reached a maximum above the melting temperatures of iPP and PE, whereas the smallest G c value was obtained below the melting temperatures of the two materials. A mechanism of interfacial strengthening was proposed accounting for the competition between the inter diffusion of PE and crystallization of iPP. As the annealing temperature increased, the rates of PE diffusion and iPP crystallization increased. Although the crystallization of iPP hindered the interdiffusion of PE, both the interfacial width and the fracture energy increased with the temperature, and this indicated that PE interdiffusion dominated iPP crystallization. Below the critical temperature, the fracture surfaces of both iPP and PE were smooth, and chain pullout dominated the fracture mechanism. Above the critical temperature, iPP crystallization still hindered the interdiffusion, and crazes could be seen on the iPP side. Above the melting temperatures of the two materials, ruptured surfaces could also be seen on the PE side, and crazing was the fracture mechanism.",
author = "Chieh-Tsung Lo and Laabs, {Francis C.} and Balaji Narasimhan",
year = "2004",
month = "7",
day = "15",
doi = "10.1002/polb.20148",
language = "English",
volume = "42",
pages = "2667--2679",
journal = "Journal of Polymer Science, Part B: Polymer Physics",
issn = "0887-6266",
publisher = "John Wiley and Sons Inc.",
number = "14",

}

Interfacial adhesion mechanisms in incompatible semicrystalline polymer systems. / Lo, Chieh-Tsung; Laabs, Francis C.; Narasimhan, Balaji.

In: Journal of Polymer Science, Part B: Polymer Physics, Vol. 42, No. 14, 15.07.2004, p. 2667-2679.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Interfacial adhesion mechanisms in incompatible semicrystalline polymer systems

AU - Lo, Chieh-Tsung

AU - Laabs, Francis C.

AU - Narasimhan, Balaji

PY - 2004/7/15

Y1 - 2004/7/15

N2 - The mechanism of adhesion at semicrystalline polymer interfaces between isotactic polypropylene (iPP) and linear low-density polyethylene (PE) was studied with transmission electron microscopy (TEM) and an asymmetric-double- cantilever-beam test. From the TEM images, both the interfacial width and the lamellar thickness of the polymers were extracted. During annealing, the interfacial width increased with the annealing temperature, and this indicated the accumulation of amorphous polymers at the interface. The interfacial strength, determined from the critical fracture energy (G c), also increased with the annealing temperature and reached a maximum above the melting temperatures of iPP and PE, whereas the smallest G c value was obtained below the melting temperatures of the two materials. A mechanism of interfacial strengthening was proposed accounting for the competition between the inter diffusion of PE and crystallization of iPP. As the annealing temperature increased, the rates of PE diffusion and iPP crystallization increased. Although the crystallization of iPP hindered the interdiffusion of PE, both the interfacial width and the fracture energy increased with the temperature, and this indicated that PE interdiffusion dominated iPP crystallization. Below the critical temperature, the fracture surfaces of both iPP and PE were smooth, and chain pullout dominated the fracture mechanism. Above the critical temperature, iPP crystallization still hindered the interdiffusion, and crazes could be seen on the iPP side. Above the melting temperatures of the two materials, ruptured surfaces could also be seen on the PE side, and crazing was the fracture mechanism.

AB - The mechanism of adhesion at semicrystalline polymer interfaces between isotactic polypropylene (iPP) and linear low-density polyethylene (PE) was studied with transmission electron microscopy (TEM) and an asymmetric-double- cantilever-beam test. From the TEM images, both the interfacial width and the lamellar thickness of the polymers were extracted. During annealing, the interfacial width increased with the annealing temperature, and this indicated the accumulation of amorphous polymers at the interface. The interfacial strength, determined from the critical fracture energy (G c), also increased with the annealing temperature and reached a maximum above the melting temperatures of iPP and PE, whereas the smallest G c value was obtained below the melting temperatures of the two materials. A mechanism of interfacial strengthening was proposed accounting for the competition between the inter diffusion of PE and crystallization of iPP. As the annealing temperature increased, the rates of PE diffusion and iPP crystallization increased. Although the crystallization of iPP hindered the interdiffusion of PE, both the interfacial width and the fracture energy increased with the temperature, and this indicated that PE interdiffusion dominated iPP crystallization. Below the critical temperature, the fracture surfaces of both iPP and PE were smooth, and chain pullout dominated the fracture mechanism. Above the critical temperature, iPP crystallization still hindered the interdiffusion, and crazes could be seen on the iPP side. Above the melting temperatures of the two materials, ruptured surfaces could also be seen on the PE side, and crazing was the fracture mechanism.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=3142599352&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=3142599352&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/polb.20148

DO - 10.1002/polb.20148

M3 - Article

VL - 42

SP - 2667

EP - 2679

JO - Journal of Polymer Science, Part B: Polymer Physics

JF - Journal of Polymer Science, Part B: Polymer Physics

SN - 0887-6266

IS - 14

ER -