Matrix-particle interaction

Typically, WPC based on polypropylene and polyethylene show deviation from the Cox-Merz rule. This is due to the different nature of flow. Capillary flow is a pressure-driven flow, including entrance and exit effects, wall slip, friction in the barrel, and orientation effects. Parallel-plate flow is pure drag shear flow, in which particle-particle and matrix-particle interactions result in higher viscosities for filled polymers. In other words, a straightforward question is a 100-fold increase in shear rate and 100-fold increase in frequency result in the same effects the answer would be yes for neat polymers, and no for wood-filled composites. 

From the tensile tests presented, it appeared that the nanocomposites made by alkyl silane-functionalized sepiolite give the best mechanical performances, in particular for what concerns the yield stress. In fact, the sepiolite surface fimctionalization by silane is a reactive treatment, which decreases the interparticle aggregation (improved dispersion) and, at the same time, increases the matrix-filler interactions. The addition of fimc-tionalized polymers is, instead, a nonreactive surface treatment. It leads to a decrease of the particle-particle interaction but can also reduce the matrix-particle interaction, which leads to lower yield stress and ultimate tensile stress. 

We values in both MD and TD orientations due to the matrix-particle interaction (Table 5.5). 

Polarization in the point dipole model occurs not at the surface of the particle but within it. If dipoles form in particles, an interaction between dipoles occurs more or less even if they are in a solid-like matrix [48], The interaction becomes strong as the dipoles come close to each other. When the particles contact each other along the applied electric field, the interaction reaches a maximum. A balance between the particle interaction and the elastic modulus of the solid matrix is important for the ER effect to transpire. If the elastic modulus of the solid-like matrix is larger than the sum of the interactions of the particles, the ER effect may not be observed macroscopically. Therefore, the matrix should be a soft material such as gels or elastomers to produce the ER effect. 

As we show later, the energy of the state of any system of N indistinguishable fermions or bosons can be expressed in terms of the Hamiltonian and D (12,1 2 ) if its Hamiltonian involves at most two-particle interactions. Thus it should be possible to find the ground-state energy by variation of the 2-matrix, which depends on four particles. Contrast this with current methods involving direct use of the wavefunction that involves N particles. A principal obstruction for this procedure is the A-representability conditions, which ensure that the proposed RDM could be obtained from a system of N identical fermions or bosons. 

This chapter focuses its attention on the discussion of the most relevant questions of interfacial adhesion and its modification in particulate filled polymers. However, because of the reasons mentioned in the previous paragraph, the four factors determining the properties of particulate filled polymers will be discussed in the first section. Interactions can be divided into two groups, parti-cle/particle and matrix/filler interactions. The first is often neglected although it may determine the properties of the composite and often the only reason for surface modification is to hinder its occurrence. Similarly important, but a very contradictory question is the formation and properties of the interphase a separate section will address this question. The importance of interfacial adhesion... 

The specific surface area of fillers is closely related to their particle size distribution however, it also has a direct impact on composite properties. Adsorption of both small molecular weight additives, and also that of the polymer is proportional to the size of the matrix/filler interface [14]. Adsorption of additives may change stability, while matrix/filler interaction significantly influences mechanical properties, first of all yield stress, tensile strength and impact resistance [5,6]. 

Surface free energy (surface tension) of the fillers determines both matrix/filler and particle/particle interaction. The former has a pronounced effect... 

Particle/particle interactions induce aggregation, while matrix/filler interaction leads to the development of an interphase with properties different from those of both components. Both influence composite properties significantly. Secondary, van der Waals forces play a crucial role in the development of these interactions. Their modiflcation is achieved by surface treatment. Occasionally reactive treatment is also used, although its importance is smaller in thermoplastics than in thermoset matrices. In the following sections of this chapter attention is focused on interfacial interactions, their modification and on their effect on composite properties. 

As was mentioned in the previous section two types of interactions must be considered in particulate filled polymers particle/particle and matrix/filler interaction. The first is often neglected even by compounders, in spite of the fact that its presence may cause composite properties to deteriorate significantly especially under the effect of dynamic loading conditions [18]. Many attempts have been made to change both interactions by the surface treatment of the filler, but the desired effect is often not achieved due to improper use of incorrect ideas. 

We will carry out our program in two steps. In this section we will derive the two-particle density operator Fn in a three-particle collision approximation for the application in the collision integral of Fl. As compared with Section II.2, the main difference will be the occurrence of bound states and, especially, the generalization of the asymptotic condition, which now has to account for bound states too. For the purpose of the application in the kinetic equation of the atoms (bound states) we need an approximation of the next-higher-order density matrix, that is, F 23 This quantity will be determined under inclusion of certain four-particle interaction. 

Y. Bomal and P. Goddard, Melt Viscosity of Calcium-carbonate-filled Low Density Polyethylene Influence of Matrix-filler and Particle-particle Interactions, Polym. Eng. Sci., 36, 237-243 (1996). 

The first term in eq. (1) Ho represents the spherical part of a free ion Hamiltonian and can be omitted without lack of generality. F s are the Slater parameters and ff is the spin-orbit interaction constant /<- and A so are the angular parts of electrostatic and spin-orbit interactions, respectively. Two-body correction terms (including Trees correction) are described by the fourth, fifth and sixth terms, correspondingly, whereas three-particle interactions (for ions with three or more equivalent f electrons) are represented by the seventh term. Finally, magnetic interactions (spin-spin and spin-other orbit corrections) are described by the terms with operators m and p/. Matrix elements of all operators entering eq. (1) can be taken from the book by Nielsen and Koster (1963) or from the Argonne National Laboratory s web site (Hannah Crosswhite s datafiles) http //chemistry.anl.gov/downloads/index.html. In what follows, the Hamiltonian (1) without Hcf will be referred to as the free ion Hamiltonian. 

---