You are on page 1of 1

Department of Metallurgical Engineering and Materials Science Quiz -3 (18.10.

12) MM453: Engineering Polymers and composites Model Answer

Q.1. Both the micrographs show matrix dispersed droplet type of morphology. The difference in morphological features observed from the two micrographs are PA6/ABS blend system shows a coarse kind of morphology where the droplet sizes are bigger where as the second micrograph shows a finer morphology i.e. the droplet size is quite small. So we can conclude that the PA6/ ABS blend is uncompatibilized whereas PA6/ABS/SMA is a compatibilized blend system. The role of SMA here acts as a reactive compatibilizer for PA6/ABS blend. The styrene miscible with MA functionality reacts with NH2 funcional group of PA6. From the morphology of both the blends we can comment that the impact strength of PA6/ABS blend with SMA will have better impact strength. The explanation from the morphology is that SMA act as a reactive compatibilizer due to which polymer blend system will be more mis cible. This enhances the effective load transfer from PA6 phase to ABS phase which increases the impact strength. Q.2. (a) While making toughened plastics following factors are needs to be considered. i. ii. iii. iv. Finer domain size with narrower domain size distribution. Adequate interfacial interaction among the blend components that will help in stress transfer along the interface of the two components. The type of rubbery material used (the Tg ) and even content of rubbery material. The critical matrix ligament thickness also play an important role

Q.2.(b) The composite with dispersed phase of size of 50nm showed higher impact resistance than the other composite having higher dispersed particle size. Because in case of smaller size of particle size, the interparticle distance will also be lower and as result the crack propagation will be difficult.

Q.3. The rate of crystallization of PA6 would be lesser in presence of more viscous EVA. EVA will hinder the crystallization process by affecting both the rate of nucleation and growth of PA6. Yes, amorphous EVA would be a better choice in improving the impact strength of PA6/EVA blends.