Hostname: page-component-797576ffbb-42xl8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2023-12-02T00:28:47.905Z Has data issue: false Feature Flags: { "corePageComponentGetUserInfoFromSharedSession": true, "coreDisableEcommerce": false, "useRatesEcommerce": true } hasContentIssue false

Structural, thermal and rheological studies on newly developed polyesters randomly copolymerized with poly (tetramethylene glycol) (PTMG)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 April 2012

Matsumoto Osamu
Affiliation:
Keio University, Graduate School of Science and Technology, Yokohama, Japan
Hotta Atsushi
Affiliation:
Keio University, Graduate School of Science and Technology, Yokohama, Japan
Get access

Abstract

Poly (cyclohexanedimethanol cyclohexanedicarboxlic acid) (PCC), a fairly newly synthesized polyester, has been studied. Having a good experience of increasing both thermal stability and service temperature when applied to typical polymers, poly (tetramethylene glycol) (PTMG) was selected as a softening agent that was randomly copolymerized into the PCC chains. Another widely-used polyester, poly (ethylene terephthalate) (PET) was also produced in order to investigate the effect of PTMG, which was compared with the properties of the newly developed random PCC-PTMG copolymers (PCCP). In this study, the crystalline structures, the thermal and the mechanical properties of both PCC and PET containing different ratios of the random segment of PTMG were investigated by differential scanning calorimetery (DSC) and tensile tester.

It was found that the crystallization rate of pure PCC was significantly slow, whereas for PCCP, PTMG effectively accelerated the crystallization rate with increasing PTMG, and the sample with 25 wt% of PTMG had the fastest crystallization rate in all PCCP samples. Here, the PTMG acted as an accelerator, simultaneously depressing the movement of PCC molecular chains. The elastic recovery test indicated that the ability of PTMG as a softening agent was highly demonstrated at 20 wt% of PTMG. The results of PCCP were compared with those of PET-PTMG copolymers (PETP) and it was found that there were optimum values of PTMG for the crystallization rate on both samples. Additionally, the results of the elastic recovery test indicated that the softening effects observed in PCCP were more pronounced than those observed in PETP.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Sanchez-Arrieta, N., et al., European Polymer Journal, 2005. 41(7): p. 14931501.Google Scholar
2. Dupaix, R.B. and Boyce, M.C., Polymer, 2005. 46(13): p. 48274838.Google Scholar
3. Jabarin, S.A., Journal of Applied Polymer Science, 1987. 34(1): p. 97102.Google Scholar
4. Jayakannan, M. and Anilkumar, P., Journal of Polymer Science Part a-Polymer Chemistry, 2004. 42(16): p. 39964008.Google Scholar
5. Berti, C., et al., European Polymer Journal, 2007. 43(9): p. 39433952.Google Scholar
6. Berti, C., et al., Journal of Polymer Science Part B-Polymer Physics, 2008. 46(6): p. 619630.Google Scholar
7. Berti, C., et al., Macromolecular Chemistry and Physics, 2008. 209(13): p. 13331344.Google Scholar
8. Brunelle, D.J. and Jang, T., Polymer, 2006. 47(11): p. 40944104.Google Scholar
9. Brunelle, ; Daniel Joseph, J.T., United States Patent 2000. 6,084,055.Google Scholar
10. Brunelle, ; Daniel Joseph, B.C., Celli, ; Annamaria, United States Patent 2002. 6,828,410.Google Scholar
11. Brunelle, ; Daniel Joseph, B.C., Celli, ; Annamaria, United States Patent 2004. 6,828,410.Google Scholar
12. Vanhaecht, B., et al., Journal of Polymer Science Part a-Polymer Chemistry, 2001. 39(6): p. 833840.Google Scholar
13. Zhang, T., Gu, M., and Yu, X.H., Polymer Bulletin, 2000. 45(3): p. 223229.Google Scholar
14. Turner, S.R., Journal of Polymer Science Part a-Polymer Chemistry, 2004. 42(23): p. 58475852.Google Scholar
15. Yen, M.S., Tsai, H.C., and Hong, P.D., Journal of Applied Polymer Science, 2007. 105(3): p. 13911399.Google Scholar
16. Rahman, M.M. and Kim, H.D., Journal of Adhesion Science and Technology, 2007. 21(1): p. 8196.Google Scholar
17. Shibayama, M., et al., Macromolecules, 1991. 24(23): p. 62546262.Google Scholar
18. Mondal, S. and Hu, J.L., Polymer International, 2006. 55(9): p. 10131020.Google Scholar
19. Takigawa, T., et al., Journal of Applied Polymer Science, 1996. 59(10): p. 15631568.Google Scholar
20. Chun, B.C., Cho, T.K., and Chung, Y.C., Journal of Applied Polymer Science, 2007. 103(3): p. 14351441.Google Scholar
21. Elidrissi, A., et al., Journal of Applied Polymer Science, 2007. 105(3): p. 16231631.Google Scholar
22. Muramatsu, S. and Lando, J.B., Macromolecules, 1998. 31(6): p. 18661870.Google Scholar