Polystyrene interface with poly , fracture

One might wonder whether it is possible to correlate the interfacial fracture energy of an incompatible polymer pair more precisely to the width of the interface. Such a correlation clearly exists at a qualitative level. For example, polystyrene is substantially less miscible with poly(2-vinyl pyridine) (PVP) than it is with PMMA. This is reflected via equation (4.2.4) in the width of the... 

The O/C ratios observed on the corresponding polystyrene fracture surfaces were 0.01 or lower, indicating that crack growth at the polystyrene/ poly(methyl methacrylate) interface contains both cohesive and adhesive components, with cohesive fracture only occurring on the polystyrene side. 

Figure 7.4. Fracture energies of interfaces reinforced by block copolymers as a function of the effective areal density of chains crossing the interface. Triangles and squares are for polystyrene/poly(2-vinyl pyridine) interfaces reinforced with styrene-2-vinyl pyridine block copolymers (Creton et al. 1992) circles are for poly(xylenyl etherypoly(methyl methacrylate) interfaces reinforced with styrene-methyl methacrylate block copolymers (Brown 1991a, b). After Creton et al. (1992).

Figure 7.9. Interfacial reinforcement of a polystyrene/poly(vinyl pyridine) interface by a high relative molecular mass deuterated styrene-vinyl pyridine block copolymer, with degrees of polymerisation of each block 800 and 870, respectively. Circles (right-hand axis) show the measured interfacial fracture energy as a function of the areal chain density of the block copolymer 2, whereas crosses show the fraction of dPS found on the polystyrene side of the interface after fiacture. The discontinuity in the curves at 2 = 0.03 nm is believed to reflect a transition from failure by chain scission to failure by crazing. After Kramer et al. (1994).

By contrast, the poly(methyl methacrylate) homopolymer (also shown in Figure 12.5) yields a ratio of 0.38, in good agreement with the theoretical value of 0.40. The ratio 0.28/0.38 suggests that the fracture process is more adhesive than cohesive by a ratio of about 3 1 for this polystyrene/poly(methyl methacrylate) interface. 

The molecular weight of the reactive polymers, thus of the constitutive blocks of the compatibilizer, is also critical for efficient entanglements with the phases to be compa-tibilized. Indeed, good interfacial adhesion is essential for stress transfer from one phase to the other one to be efficient and for cracks initiated at the interface to be prevented from growth until catastrophic failure occurs. Kramer et al. studied the fracture mechanism of the polystyrene/poly(2-vinylpyridine) interface modified by the parent di-block copolymer. They found that the minimum degree of polymerization of PVP for entanglement (Npvp) was 255, below which the PVP block was pulled out in slow crack opening experiment [93, 94]. 

---