A detailed analysis of the Bragg as well as of the diffuse X-ray diffraction scattering of isotactic polypropylene (i-PP) fiber samples, suitably crystallized in the α form under different conditions, is reported. A limit-ordered (α 2 form) and a limit-disordered (α 1 form) model structure have been described to account for the features of the experimental X-ray diffraction profiles of i-PP samples prepared in the α form. The disorder consists of the statistical occupation of the lattice sites of isomorphous helices having opposite up/down orientations. Depending on the conditions of crystallization, intermediate-disordered modifications between the limit-ordered and the limit-disordered, can be obtained. The analysis of the Bragg contribution to the X-ray diffraction scattering of isotactic polypropylene samples crystallized in the α form provides direct quantitative information regarding the amount of up/down disorder, whereas the analysis of the diffuse scattering subtending the Bragg reflections in the case of oriented samples may provide detailed information on the development of the up/down disorder within the unit cell. Fiber samples annealed at high temperatures (∼170 °C), hence recrystallized slowly, and thus nearer to thermodynamic equilibrium, show X-ray diffraction patterns very close to that of the ideal limit-ordered model structure for the α form (α 2 form). Almost perfect order is maintained inside the bilayers, as in the limit-ordered structural model, and only 5−10% of defects in the relative orientation (up or down) of the helices belonging to adjacent bilayers along b is probably present. The presence of this kind of defect is consistent with the chain-folding scheme proposed in past literature. In the case of unannealed fiber samples, a large amount of up/down disorder is also present within the bilayers, giving rise, in the case of samples crystallized at lower temperatures, to situations very close to the limit-disordered model structure. We assume that the chain folding might not develop according to the scheme proposed in the literature for kinetic reasons.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Auriemma et al. (2000) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: