4.7 Article

Molecular Simulation of Miscibility of Poly(2,6-dimethyl-1,4-phenylene ether)/Poly(styrene-co-acrylonitrile) Blend With the Compatibilizer Triblock Terpolymer SBM

Journal

POLYMER COMPOSITES
Volume 32, Issue 10, Pages 1671-1680

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1002/pc.21203

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) [50973028, 50703010]
  2. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities, Shanghai Leading Academic Discipline Project [B502]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Polymer blend of poly(2,6-dimethyl-1,4-phenylene ether) (PPE) and poly(styrene-co-acrylonitrile) (SAN), which has broad commercial interest, has limited miscibility. A triblock terpolymer, polystyrene-block-polybutadiene-block-poly(methyl methacrylate) (SBM), is often used as compatibilizer to improve the miscibility of PPE/SAN. In this work, dissipative particle dynamics and molecular dynamics of Material Studio were used to study the essentials that influence miscibility of the blend systems, and then Flory-Huggins parameter chi, radial distribution function (RDF) and morphologies are analyzed. It shows that the blends with more content of styrene in SAN (above 90 wt%), whose mass percentage is 60%, are best miscible. For the systems of PPE/SAN added with SBM, the miscibility increases and then decreases with the increase of SBM content. A longer chain of styrene (S) in SBM leads to wrapped structure of PMMA by PB, wrapped by PS, resulting in decrease of the miscibility. From studies and simulation of chi and RDF, the best blend system for commercial and industrial use is the one with mass ratio of PPE/SAN/SBM 36/54/10, in which S content in SAN is above 90 wt%. For SBM, the ratio of chain length styrene (S)/butadiene (B) is less than 1, while B and M are the same in chain length. POLYM. COMPOS., 32:1671-1680, 2011. (C) 2011 Society of Plastics Engineers

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available