4.7 Article

Toughening polylactide using epoxy-functionalized core-shell starch nanoparticles

期刊

POLYMER TESTING
卷 93, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.polymertesting.2020.106926

关键词

Polylactide; Toughness; GMA-Functionalized; Core-shell starch-based nanoparticles

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21975108]
  2. MOE & SAFEA, 111 Project [B13025]
  3. National First-Class Discipline Program of Light Industry Technology and Engineering [LITE2018-19]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

By blending glycidyl methacrylate (GMA)-functionalized core-shell starch-based nanoparticles (GMA-CSS) with polylactide (PLA), the toughness of PLA was significantly improved, with a notable increase in elongation at break and toughness compared to neat PLA. This work presents an efficient and novel toughening strategy for the preparation of high-performance PLA, which could potentially expand its applications in the field of agriculture.
Polylactide (PLA) is one of the most attractive biodegradable polymers owing to advantages such as high mechanical properties, biocompatibility and renewable raw material. However, wide applications of PLA are hindered by its inherent brittleness. In this work, glycidyl methacrylate (GMA)-functionalized core-shell starch-based nanoparticles (GMA-CSS) were prepared via soap-free emulsion polymerization and melt-blended with PLA. The combination of GMA and core-shell structure imparted the PLA with superior toughness. Specifically, with addition of 10 wt% GMA-CSS, the elongation at break of the PLA was improved to 449%, which was 63 times higher than that of neat PLA. Besides, the calculated toughness of PLA/GMA-CSS-10 blends was as high as 130.71 MJ/m(3), which was 54 times higher than that of neat PLA. The toughening mechanism was revealed by TEM, SEM and DMA results. We envision this work establishes an efficient yet novel toughening strategy to prepare high-performance PLA and will promote the wide application in agriculture field of PLA.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据