Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Blending polypropylene (PP) with biodegradable poly(3‐hydroxybutyrate) (PHB) can be a nice alternative to minimize the disposal problem of PP and the intrinsic brittleness that restricts PHB applications. However, to achieve acceptable engineering properties, the blend needs to be compatibilized because of the immiscibility between PP and PHB. In this work, PP/PHB blends were prepared with different types of copolymers as possible compatibilizers: poly(propylene‐g‐maleic anhydride) (PP–MAH), poly (ethylene‐co‐methyl acrylate) [P(E–MA)], poly(ethylene‐co‐glycidyl methacrylate) [P(E–GMA)], and poly(ethylene‐co‐methyl acrylate‐co‐glycidyl methacrylate) [P(E–MA–GMA)]. The effect of each copolymer on the morphology and mechanical properties of the blends was investigated. The results show that the compatibilizers efficiency decreased in this order: P(E–MA–GMA) > P(E–MA) > P(E–GMA) > PP–MAH; we explained this by taking into consideration the affinity degree of the compatibilizers with the PP matrix, the compatibilizers properties, and their ability to provide physical and/or reactive compatibilization with PHB.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sadi et al. (2011) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: