Recycled poly(ethylene terephthalate) (R‐PET) was blended with four types of polyethylene (PE), linear low density polyethylene (LLDPE; LL0209AA, Fs150), low density polyethylene (LDPE; F101‐1), and metallocene‐LLDPE (m‐LLDPE; Fv203) by co‐rotating twin‐screw extruder. Maleic anhydride‐grafted poly(styrene‐ethylene/butyldiene‐styrene) (SEBS‐g‐MA) was added as compatibilizer. R‐PET/PE/SEBS‐g‐MA blends were examined by scanning electron microscopy (SEM), differential scanning calorimeter (DSC), dynamic mechanical analysis (DMA), and mechanical property testing. The results indicated that the morphology and properties of the blends depended to a great extent on the miscibility between the olefin segments of SEBS‐g‐MA and PE. Due to the proper interaction between SEBS‐g‐MA and LDPE (F101‐1), most SEBS‐g‐MA, located at the interface between two phases of PET and LDPE to increase the interfacial adhesion, lead to better mechanical properties of R‐PET/LDPE (F101‐1) blend. However, both the poor miscibility of SEBS‐g‐MA with LLDPE (LL0209AA) and the excessive miscibility of SEBS‐g‐MA with LLDPE (Fs150) and m‐LLDPE (Fv203) reduced the compatibilization effect of SEBS‐g‐MA. DSC results showed that the interaction between SEBS‐g‐MA and PE obviously affected the crystallization of PET and PE. DMA results indicated that PE had more influence on the movement of SEBS‐g‐MA than PE did.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhang et al. (2010) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: