Rheologica Acta

, Volume 46, Issue 4, pp 507–520 | Cite as

Rheology and morphology of polystyrene/polypropylene blends with in situ compatibilization

Original Contribution


Rheology and flow-induced morphology were studied in immiscible polypropylene (PP)/polystyrene (PS) blends with a droplet–matrix microstructure. Two reactive precursors, maleic anhydride grafted PP and amino terminated PS, were added during the melt-mixing process to form a graft copolymer. The effects of both the amount of compatibilizer and the shear history on the rheological and morphological behavior were investigated systematically. Small amplitude oscillatory experiments and scanning electron microscopy were used to study the phase morphology. Shear history has an important effect on the morphology of the uncompatibilized blends. The droplet size refines with increasing shear rate. The decrease of this effect with increasing degrees of in situ compatibilization is mapped out. The results are discussed in terms of interfacial tension and the interfacial coverage. It turns out that most of the conclusions that were previously obtained on physically compatibilized blends are also valid for chemically compatibilized ones.


In situ compatibilization Morphology Rheology Polymer blends 


  1. Asthana H, Jayaraman K (1999) Rheology of reactively compatibilized polymer blends with varying extent of interfacial reaction. Macromolecules 32:3412–3419CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Dedecker K, Groenincks G (1999) Interfacial graft copolymer formation during reactive melt blending of polyamide 6 and styrene–maleic anhydride copolymers. Macromolecules 32:2472–2479CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Dickie RA (1973) Heterogeneous polymer–polymer composites. 1. Theory of viscoelastic properties and equivalent mechanical models. J Appl Polym Sci 17:45–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Friedrich C, Gleinser W, Korat E, Maier D, Weese J (1995) Comparison of sphere-size distributions obtained from rheology and transmission electron-microscopy in PMMA/PS blends. J Rheol 39:1411–1425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Funke Z, Schwinger C, Adhikari R, Kressler J (2001) Surface tension in polymer blends of isotactic poly(propylene) and atactic polystyrene. Macromol Mater Eng 286:744–751CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Germain Y, Ernst B, Genelot O, Dhamani L (1994) Rheological and morphological analysis of compatibilized polypropylene/polyamide blends. J Rheol 38:681–697CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Grace HP (1982) Dispersion phenomena in high-viscosity immiscible fluid systems and application of static mixers as dispersion devices in such systems. Chem Eng Commun 14:225–277Google Scholar
  8. Graebling D, Muller R, Palierne JF (1993) Linear viscoelastic behavior of some incompatible polymer blends in the melt—interpretation of data with a model of emulsion of viscoelastic liquids. Macromolecules 26:320–329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gramespacher H, Meissner J (1992) Interfacial tension between polymer melts measured by shear oscillations of their blends. J Rheol 36:1127–1141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Harrats C, Omonov T, Groeninckx G, Moldenaers P (2004) Phase morphology development and stabilization in polycyclohexylmethacrylate/polypropylene blends: uncompatibilized and reactively compatibilized blends using two reactive precursors. Polymer 45:8115–8126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Honerkamp J, Weese J (1993) A nonlinear regularization method for the calculation of relaxation spectra. Rheol Acta 32:65–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Jacobs U, Fahrländer M, Winterhalter J, Friedrich C (1999) Analysis of Palierne’s emulsion model in the case of viscoelastic interfacial properties. J Rheol 43:1495–1509CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Jiao JB, Kramer EJ, de Vos S, Möller M, Koning C (1999) Morphological changes of a molten polymer/polymer interface driven by grafting. Macromolecules 32:6261–6269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Jo WH, Kim HC (1992) Morphology, rheological and mechanical-properties of poly(phenylene ether) and polyamide-6 blends with a compatibilizer. Polym Bull 27:465–471CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Joen HK, Feist BJ, Koh SB, Chang K, Macosko CW, Dion RP (2004) Reactively formed block and graft copolymers as compatibilizers for polyamide 66/PS blends. Polymer 45:197–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jones TD, Schulze JS, Macosko CW, Lodge TP (2003) Effect of thermodynamic interactions on reactions at polymer/polymer interfaces. Macromolecules 36:7212–7219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Macosko CW, Guegan Ph, Khandpur AK, Nakayama A, Marechal P, Inoue T (1996) Compatibilizers for melt blending: premade block copolymers. Macromolecules 29:5590–5598CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Milner ST, Xi HW (1996) How copolymers promote mixing of immiscible homopolymers. J Rheol 40:663–687CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Moan M, Huitric J, Médéric P (2000) Rheological properties and reactive compatibilization of immiscible polymer blends. J Rheol 44:1227–1245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Palierne JF (1990) Linear rheology of viscoelastic emulsions with interfacial tension. Rheol Acta 29:204–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Palmer G, Demarquette NR (2003) New procedure to increase the accuracy of interfacial tension measurements obtained by breaking thread method. Polymer 44:3045–3052CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Riemann RE, Cantow HJ, Friedrich C (1997) Interpretation of a new interface-governed relaxation process in compatibilized polymer blends. Macromolecules 30:5476–5484CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Scholz P, Froelich D, Muller R (1989) Viscoelastic properties and morphology of two phase polypropylene/polyamide 6 blends in the melt. Interpretation of results with an emulsion model. J Rheol 33:481–499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Sundararaj U, Macosko CW (1995) Drop breakup and coalescence in polymer blends: the effects of concentration and compatibilization. Macromolecules 28:2647–2657CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Underwood EE (1970) Quantitative stereology, Chap. 5. Addison-Wesley, MA, USAGoogle Scholar
  26. Van Hemelrijck E, Van Puyvelde P, Velankar S, Macosko CW, Moldenaers P (2004) Interfacial elasticity and coalescence suppression in compatibilized polymer blends. J Rheol 48:143–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Velankar S, Van Puyvelde P, Mewis J, Moldenaers P (2004) Steady-shear rheological properties of model compatibilized blends. J Rheol 48:725–744CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Vermant J, Cioccolo G, Golapan Nair K, Moldenaers P (2004) Coalescence suppression in model immiscible polymer blends by nano-sized colloidal particles. Rheol Acta 43:529–538CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Vinckier I, Moldenaers P, Mewis J (1996) Relationship between rheology and morphology of model blends in steady shear flow. J Rheol 40:613–631CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Yin Z, Koulic C, Pagnoulle C, Jérôme R (2001) Reactive blending of functional PS and PMMA: interfacial behavior of in situ formed graft copolymers. Macromolecules 34:5132–5239CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Yin Z, Koulic C, Jeon HK, Pagnoulle C, Macosko CW, Jérôme R (2002) Effect of molecular weight of the reactive precursors in melt reactive blending. Macromolecules 35:8917–8919CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Yin Z, Koulic C, Pagnoulle C, Jérôme R (2003) Probing of the reaction progress at a PMMA/PS interface by using anthracene-labeled reactive PS chains. Langmuir 19:453–457CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yanli Huo
    • 1
  • Gabriel Groeninckx
    • 2
  • Paula Moldenaers
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Chemical EngineeringKatholieke Universiteit LeuvenLeuvenBelgium
  2. 2.Department of Chemistry, Division of Molecular and Nanomaterials, Laboratory of Macromolecular Structural ChemistryKatholieke Universiteit LeuvenLeuvenBelgium

Personalised recommendations