REGULAR CONTRIBUTED ARTICLES
O. S. Carneiro*, J. A. Covas, C. Domingues
IPC/I3N – Institute for Polymers and Composites, Department of Polymer Engineering, University of Minho, Guimarães, Portugal
Bi-axially Oriented Blown Film Technology
Searching for Suitable Polymers and Processing Conditions
A set of commercial polyethylenes (three LDPE and three
LLDPE) was rheological characterized and processed in a la-
boratory double bubble extrusion line with the purpose of in-
vestigating: i) whether their relative processability could be
predicted in the laboratory and ii) the effect of operating and
machine variables on processability. Oscillatory shear and ex-
tensional measurements were able to differentiate the various
materials, who also behaved quite differently upon processing.
Those with a stronger shear thinning behaviour, higher elasti-
city and higher melt strength were the most suited to the pro-
by Kungliga Tekniska on August 28, 2015. For personal use only.
cess. Bubble stability and thickness uniformity were assumed
as the main requirements for processability. The former was
estimated by monitoring the time required to stabilize the bub-
ble and examining any variation/oscillation in size/shape. Bub-
ble stability depends on the interaction between various pa-
rameters, the most relevant being those related with the film
IPP 2012.27:348-357.
cooling stage, namely the axial position of the air rings, the
air flow rate and air velocity. The study was preceded by an as-
sessment of the performance of the re-heating oven and die/ca-
libration/centring, as these parameters could also narrow the
practical operating window.
1 Introduction
Bi-axially oriented blown films show improved mechanical,
optical, barrier and shrinkage properties when compared with
those produced using conventional film blowing equipment
(Bobobitch et al. 2006a, 2006b; Uehara et al., 2004a, 2004b,
2004c). A recent study (Takashige and Kanai, 2011) has shown
that bi-axially oriented blown films also compare favourably
with those produced with the tenter process in terms of ba-
lanced properties, namely thermal shrinkage and impact
strength. Since the technology was introduced several decades
ago, both the range of materials processed and the market ap-
plications have been growing steadily (Lamontagne, 2011;
Uehara et al., 2004a). Usually, these films are produced via
the double bubble process (currently, a triple bubble sequence
is also possible (http://www.macroeng.com/dxl-double-bub-
ble-lines.php), two main variants being available. One consists
in the extrusion of a relatively thick tube (denoted as primary
tube) that is intensively chilled at the die exit (to minimize
* Mail address: Olga S. Carneiro, IPC/I3N – Institute for Polymers
and Composites, Department of Polymer Engineering, University
of Minho, 4810 Guimarães, Portugal
E-mail: olgasc@dep.uminho.pt
348
Carl Hanser Verlag, Munich
any morphology development) and subsequently re-heated, bi-
axially stretched (via simultaneous blowing and axial drawing)
and cooled down by forced air convection. An alternative in-
volves the inflation of a conventional first bubble that is cooled
down by air convection or water, followed by similar re-heating
and stretching sequences. In both cases, bi-orientation is in-
duced at the lowest possible temperature (in the region of the
melting temperature), as polymer chains progressively disen-
tangle, unfold and orient. Even though this orientation is in-
duced approximately at the same time in two directions, its level
can be controlled to a certain extent in each direction via the ro-
tation speed of the nip rolls (axial direction) and air pressure in-
side the bubble (transversal direction). Takashige et al. (2003,
2004a, 2004b, 2005, 2011) cited a series of studies of the double
bubble technology, as well as of the processability, properties
and morphology of various polymers to be used in this process.
The blown film lines available to manufacture bi-axially ori-
ented films are, as expected, more expensive than conventional
equipment (but less costly than the machinery for the tenter
process), more difficult to operate and exhibit narrower proces-
sing windows. Bubble stability is a key parameter, as it deter-
mines production feasibility, film thickness uniformity and
properties. It depends strongly on the operating conditions (Di
Maio, 2002; Kang et al., 1990; Rhee and White, 2001; Uehara
et al., 2004a), but it is also well known that some resins are in-
trinsically more stable than others (Di Maio, 2002; Uehara et
al., 2004c). For conventional film blowing, White and co-
workers (Kanai and White, 1984; Minoshima and White,
1986; White and Yamane, 1987) compared the bubble stability
of a group of polyethylenes with different molecular structures
and found that those containing long chain branching (LCB)
were the most stable. This correlation was confirmed in other
reports (Ghaneh-Fard et al., 1996, 1997; Majumder et al.,
2007; Micic and Bhattacharya, 2000; Munstedt et al., 1998).
In fact, it is now well established that LCB confers high poly-
mer melt strength and that the latter is crucial in film blowing,
where extensional deformations are dominant (Field et al.,
1999; Ghijsels et al., 1990, 1992; La Mantia and Acierno,
1985; Micic et al., 1996; Muke et al., 2001).
An a priori appraisal of the processability of a given polymer
for bi-axial film blowing has considerable practical interest.
Rheological measurements are obviously suited for this pur-
pose. For example, for conventional film blowing it has been
reported that the more elastic polymers (with a higher storage
modulus, G’) exhibit good bubble stability and thus good pro-
cessability (Fang et al, 2003; Leal et al., 2006). However, it is
not clear whether these conclusions will hold for bi-axial film
blowing, due to the differences in the thermo-mechanical envir-
Intern. Polymer Processing XXVII (2012) 3
 O. S. Carneiro et al.: Bi-axially Oriented Blown Film Technology

onments created by the two technologies. Therefore, this work
has the following two objectives: i) to investigate whether the
feasibility of materials for bi-axial film blowing can be antici-
pated in the laboratory, namely via rheological measurements,
and ii) to study the effect of operating and machine variables
on processability. This work will be developed for the process
variant involving the extrusion of a tube followed by its bi-axial
stretching, as a prototype laboratory equipment is available and
was validated previously (Carneiro et al., 2008).
2 Experimental
2.1 Materials
Six commercial polyethylenes, most of them suggested by an
industrial manufacturer of bi-axially oriented films, were se-
lected for this study. They are produced by Total Petrochem-
icals, Polimeri Europa, Dow Plastics and Ineos Polyolefins.
As seen in Table 1 where their main characteristics are pre-
sented, three are low density polyethylenes (coded LDPE 1, 2
and 3) and the remaining three are linear low density polyethy-
by Kungliga Tekniska on August 28, 2015. For personal use only.
stress was adjusted to ensure that the measurements were per-
formed within the linear viscoelastic regime. The discs for the
experiments were prepared by compression moulding at
190 8C, under a pressure of 20 t.
The uniaxial melt strength was determined with a Göttfert
Rheotens 71.97 device kept at a vertical distance of 100 mm
from the die exit of a Göttfert Rheo-Tester 2000 capillary rhe-
ometer. The melt was extruded downwards (either at 190 8C, or
at 30 8C above the polymer melting temperature) with a ram
speed of 32 mm/s through a circular die with a diameter of
2 mm and a length of 30 mm, and then drawn axially by the ac-
celerating pair of counter-rotating rollers (set to 120 mm/s2).
The tensile force applied was plotted against the rollers velocity.
The maximum force reached during the experiment was taken
as the melt strength and the corresponding velocity as the melt
extensibility (Wagner and Bernnat, 1998).
2.3 Bi-oriented Blown Film Production
The experiments were conducted in a prototype line designed to
produce bi-oriented and conventional blown films. The compo-
nents used in this study are schematically represented in Fig. 1.

lenes (coded LLDPE 1, 2 and 3). The melt flow rates are simi-
lar, ranging between 0.25 and 0.80 and 0.75 and 1.00 g/ The two single screw extruders have a screw diameter (D) of
10 min for the LDPE and LLDPE, respectively. Therefore,
comparable viscosities at shear rates of the order of 1 s–1 are
anticipated. In the case of LLDPE, the densities and MFI match
well those of the grades selected by other authors studying the
IPP 2012.27:348-357.

stretchability and properties of LLDPE films obtained by the

double-bubble technology (Uehara et al., 2004a).

2.2 Rheological Measurements

The linear viscoelastic response of the materials was investi-

gated by means of small-amplitude oscillatory shear tests
(SAOS) using a TA Instruments AR-G2 rotational rheometer
with parallel plates (radius of 25 mm, 1 mm gap). The tests
were performed at 190 8C, at frequencies ranging from 0.01 to
100 Hz, in an inert (nitrogen) atmosphere. The applied shear Fig. 1. Diagram of the prototype bi-oriented blown film line

Polymer Producer Density(1) MFI*(1) Melting temp.(2)

kg/m3 g/10 min 8C

LDPE 1 Total Petrochemicals 923 0.30 112.3

LDPE 2 Polimeri Europa 924 0.80 112.2

LDPE 3 Dow Plastics 921 0.25 111.3

LLDPE 1 Ineos Polyolefins 920 0.90 123.5

LLDPE 2 Polimeri Europa 920 0.75 120.7

LLDPE 3 Polimeri Europa 925 1.00 123.0

*Melt flow index (at 190 8C/2.16 kg). (1) Data from polymer datasheet. (2) Determined from DSC (heating rate of 10 8C/min)
Table 1. Main characteristics of the polymers used

Intern. Polymer Processing XXVII (2012) 3 349

 O. S. Carneiro et al.: Bi-axially Oriented Blown Film Technology

25 mm and an L/D (length to diameter ratio) of 20. The two-

layer co-extrusion die has a diameter of 50 mm and a die gap
of 1.5 mm. It contains a unit for the internal calibration and
cooling of the primary tube with a diameter of 40 mm. The pri-
mary tube is further cooled down via an external water ring. Re-
heating is performed with the assistance of pre-heating and bi-
orientation ovens. Regulating the air flow inside the bubble as
well as the relative rotation speeds of the second and third pair
of pulling rolls sets the extent of the bi-orientation. Two air
rings cool down the film, which is then winded up. More details
about the features and functioning of this prototype that was de-
signed by scaling-down an industrial commercial equipment
can be found elsewhere (Carneiro et al., 2007, 2008).
Due to their practical importance for the present study, it is
convenient to describe in more detail the re-heating ovens. As
seen in Fig. 2A, they comprise five rows of heaters (coded
HR1 to HR5) containing, from top to bottom, 6, 6, 10, 18 and
18 equally spaced infrared ceramic heaters, respectively. The
heaters surface temperature was monitored with a ThermaCam
S640 thermographic camera and analyzed with the Therma-
Cam Researcher Professional software (see an example of a
thermogram in Fig. 2B). Measuring directly the film tempera-
ture is much more difficult, due to its transparency. To circum-
by Kungliga Tekniska on August 28, 2015. For personal use only.

vent this, a 4 mm thick PVC pipe with an outer black surface

and a diameter similar to that of the final bubble (200 mm)
was used to mimic the film surface. Grooves were machined
along the longitudinal and circumferential directions, in order
to create individual square areas with negligible heat conduc-
A)
IPP 2012.27:348-357.

tion between them (see pipe at the lower part of Fig. 2A). In
each experiment, the pipe was quickly raised and immobilized
in its position inside the bi-orientation oven (already kept at a
stabilized temperature), the temperature evolution of the
square elements being recorded during 20 s.
During film production the die was kept at 210 8C, the
throughput at 4 kg/h, and the distance between the die and the
water ring was maintained at 37 mm. The water flow rate in the
water ring and calibrator was regulated to 120 l/h and 100 l/h, re-
spectively. The following processing parameters were varied:
i) Temperatures of the re-heating ovens;
ii) The primary tube take-up ratio (TURP), given by:
TURP = velocity of the 1st pair of pulling rolls/extrudate
B)
velocity at die exit. (1)
Fig. 2. Re-heating ovens: A) pre-heating (HR1 and HR2) and bi-ori-
iii) The film blow up (BURF) and take-up (TURF) ratios, de- entation (HR3 to HR5) ovens, B) thermogram of the bi-orientation
fined as: oven (set to 200 8C)

BURF = bubble diameter/primary tube diameter. (2)
rd
TURF = velocity of the 3 pair of pulling rolls/velocity of
the 2nd pair of pulling rolls. (3)
Practice has shown (Carneiro et al., 2008) that BURF
should be kept preferably between 3 and 5, as lower values
would yield a too thick film, outside the range of practical
interest, while higher values would imply a too wide film
(the useful length of the pulling rolls is 300 mm). TURF
should obviously stay within the same limits if balanced
orientation is required.
iv) The cooling conditions, including the vertical position of
the upper air ring, air flow rate and air velocity (controlled
by the gap of the upper ring).
The thickness distribution of the primary tube and films was
measured with a digital micrometer both along the lay-flat
width (at 12 and 22 positions equally distanced, respectively)
and at axial increments of 20 cm. A homogeneity index (in per-
centage) was calculated from the relative standard deviation:
Homogeneity index (%) =
(1 – standard deviation/mean thickness) · 100. (4)
3 Results and Discussion
3.1 Rheological Properties of the Melts
The rheological ability of the candidate materials to the double
bubble technology should be estimated from the characteristics

350 Intern. Polymer Processing XXVII (2012) 3

 O. S. Carneiro et al.: Bi-axially Oriented Blown Film Technology

of their response to shear and extensional stresses, which are
determinant for the extrusion and blowing stages, respectively.
Fig. 3 presents the linear viscoelastic response of all the poly-
A)
by Kungliga Tekniska on August 28, 2015. For personal use only.
IPP 2012.27:348-357.
ethylenes studied in terms of complex viscosity and loss tan-
gent (tan d). As expected, the complex viscosity of all materials
is comparable in the range 0.3 to 1 Hz, but the behaviour of the
LDPEs is quite distinct from that of the LLDPEs. LDPE1 and
LDPE 3 exhibit the highest viscosity values at low frequencies
and a pronounced shear thinning behaviour that should be fa-
vourable to the extrusion step, since the die gap is relatively
small and power consumption should be minimized (the valid-
ity of the Cox-Merz rule is assumed here). The relative degree
of shear thinning is presented in Table 2, defined as the ratio
of the viscosities at 0.01 (where a Newtonian plateau is ob-
served) and 100 Hz. As most conventional polymer melts, the
materials show an elastic dominated response (tan d < 1) at
the higher frequencies and a viscous dominated behaviour
(tan d > 1) at the lower frequencies. Fig. 4 plots the crossover
modulus (at tan d = 1) against the crossover frequency. Since
polymers showing low values of the cross-over frequency have
higher elasticity and higher characteristic relaxation times
(Larson, 1988), it is expected that they will induce higher bub-
ble stability (Fang et al., 2003; Leal et al., 2006) and improved
orientation levels (Johnson et al., 2000). As seen in Fig. 4, the
LDPE resins have considerably lower values of the crossover
modulus and crossover frequency than the LLDPE resins.

B)
Fig. 3. Linear viscoelastic response of all materials at 190 8C, A) com- Fig. 4. Crossover modulus versus crossover frequency for all materi-
plex viscosity, B) loss tangent als (at 190 8C)

LDPE1 LDPE2 LDPE3 LLDPE1 LLDPE2 LLDPE3

Degree of shear thinning (g100/g0.01) 28.7 18.4 25.7 2.7 6.3 1.3

Crossover frequency (Hz) 0.13 0.79 0.06 19.95 19.95 12.59

Melt strength T = Tm+30 8C 41.4 34.8 39.7 12.0 17.9 11.0

(cN)
T = 190 8C 28.7 18.4 25.7 2.7 6.3 1.3

Melt extensibility T = Tm + 30 8C 238 246 226 187 187 188

(mm/s)
T = 190 8C 267 278 245 183 190 175

Table 2. Rheological properties of the studied polyethylene grades

Intern. Polymer Processing XXVII (2012) 3 351

 O. S. Carneiro et al.: Bi-axially Oriented Blown Film Technology
Among the LDPEs, LDPE1 and LDPE3 are the most elastic,
which could be attributed to their higher average molecular
weight (as inferred from their lower melt flow rates, see Ta-
ble 1). Table 2 compares the crossover frequency of all the ma-
terials.
The uni-axial forces measured by the Rheotens and the cor-
responding pulling speeds are depicted in Fig. 5 for two testing
temperatures (more precisely, set temperatures of the capillary
rheometer). For each polymer, these were 190 8C and a tem-
perature 30 8C above its melting temperature, as measured by
Differential Scanning Calorimetry (see Table 1). Since the
Rheotens requires testing a melt, the second temperature corre-
sponds to the minimum feasible value. The corresponding melt
strengths and melt extensibilities are identified in Table 2. Not
surprisingly, the LDPEs exhibit the highest force/melt strength
and extensibility, LDPE1 and LDPE3 showing the highest melt
strength.
Consequently, shear and extensional measurements seem to
indicate that LDPE1 and LDPE3 appear as the best candidates
for bi-axial orientation blown film processing.
by Kungliga Tekniska on August 28, 2015. For personal use only.
IPP 2012.27:348-357.
A)
B)
Fig. 5. Rheotens data (uniaxial force versus pulling rolls velocity) for
all materials, A) T = Tm + 30 8C, B) T = 190 8C
352
3.2 Effect of Machine Performance
As discussed above, the two sets of data on the variation of the
uni-axial forces with increasing pulling velocities represented
in Fig. 5 were obtained at two temperatures nearly 50 8C apart
(explicitly, at 142 8C and 190 8C for the LDPE). For each poly-
mer, the maximum force decreases with increasing test tem-
perature, but the strain-hardening characteristics of the LDPEs
and the maximum velocities attained remain similar. There-
fore, one would expect that some materials could allow for cer-
tain flexibility in terms of viable process operating conditions.
However, practice (both at the laboratory and industrial scales)
has demonstrated otherwise, i. e., that the operating window of
the double bubble process is usually quite narrow, particularly
concerning the bi-orientation stage. The scientific literature
supports these conclusions: for example, Uehara et al. (2004a)
varied extensively the set temperature of the pre-heating oven,
but were only able to produce stable LLDPE films within an in-
terval of 15 8C, corresponding to differences in film tempera-
ture of 8 8C after the pre-heater. Therefore, it seems important
to assess whether equipment design/operation/control limita-
tions may offset the eventual flexibility allowed by the materi-
als, thus creating the observed practical operating difficulties.
Focusing on the bi-orientation stage, apart from the rheological
response of the polymers, successful processing probably de-
pends also on the thermal homogeneity provided by the re-
heating ovens and on the thickness homogeneity of the primary
tube.
3.2.1 Thermal Conditions in the Re-heating Ovens
The ceramic heaters used in this type of machines create a sur-
face temperature field, as shown in Fig. 2B. Fig. 6 demon-
strates that for a set temperature of 200 8C the surface tempera-
ture of an individual heating element can vary more than
100 8C (the positions monitored correspond to the highest and
lowest surface temperature readings) and that the average tem-
perature can be well above the set value. Nevertheless, a satis-
factory steady state is reached (after roughly 10 min). Fig. 7
Fig. 6. Temperature evolution with time at two surface locations of a
ceramic heater set to 200 8C
Intern. Polymer Processing XXVII (2012) 3
 O. S. Carneiro et al.: Bi-axially Oriented Blown Film Technology

3.2.2 Thickness Homogeneity of the Primary Tube

Despite the excellent properties of bi-axially oriented blown

films, it is generally recognized that their thickness uniformity
is relatively poor (Takashige et al, 2004a). Moreover, it has
been demonstrated that the thickness non-uniformity of the
non-stretched film influences significantly that of the final film
(Takashige et al., 2004a, 2004b). Upon processing Polyamide
6, Takshige et al. (2004a) found a linear correlation between
the two, with an amplification factor of around 2 for optimized
operating conditions.
Fig. 9 shows the thickness distributions of the primary tube
of LDPE3 and of the resulting films, using two distinct cooling
conditions (cooling rings with high and low flow rate) – these
do not necessarily correspond to optimized conditions. The re-
lated homogeneity indices are 98.3, 88.7 and 93.1 %, respec-
tively (in the case of the film cooled down with high air flow
Fig. 7. Average surface temperature of the ceramic heaters in the re-
heating oven (set to 200 8C, 250 8C and 300 8C)

displays the average surface temperature of each heating row

along the machine direction for three uniform set temperatures.
The average standard variation fluctuates between 16 and
by Kungliga Tekniska on August 28, 2015. For personal use only.

24 8C, 18 and 29 8C and 21 and 36 8C, for the set temperatures

of 200, 250 and 300 8C, respectively. For each set temperature,
the average surface temperature increases in the machine direc-
tion, up to a difference of 50 8C. The consequences in terms of
the surface temperature homogeneity of the PVC pipe with an
IPP 2012.27:348-357.

outer painted black surface with the same diameter of that of

the film, after being exposed to radiant heating for 20 s, are
shown in Fig. 8, where R1 to R12 refer to rows of square pipe
surface elements from top to bottom. The location of the bi-ori-
entation oven is also identified. As expected, the pipe central
rows are the hottest, a roughly symmetrical gradient develop-
ing towards the edges.
For the uniform set temperatures of 200 8C, 250 8C and
300 8C, the minimum and maximum standard deviations of
the pipe surface temperature in each row are 1.3 and 4.0 8C,
0.8 and 3.6 8C, 0.7 and 3.3 8C, respectively. These values are
within the expected range, but they reveal some limitations of
the temperature control system.

Fig. 8. Pipe surface temperature in the bi-orientation oven after

20 seconds of radiant heating (oven set to 200 8C, 250 8C and 300 8C).
R1 to R12 denote rows of pipe surface square elements from top to bot- Fig. 9. Thickness distribution along the perimeter of the primary tube
tom and film (for two different cooling conditions)

Intern. Polymer Processing XXVII (2012) 3 353

 O. S. Carneiro et al.: Bi-axially Oriented Blown Film Technology

rate, the localized film over-thickness in the region of 2558
causes a deterioration of 2.7 % in the homogeneity index).
The value of 98.3 % for the homogeneity index of the primary
tube is quite good – it corresponds to 2.5 % if calculated using
the definition adopted by Takashige et al. (2004b), who ob-
tained a value of 4 %. Similarly, values of 88.7 and 93.1 % for
the film correspond to 25 and 13 % using the other definition,
which are well within the range obtained by the same authors.
Nevertheless, the decrease from 98.3 to 88.7 and 93.1 corre-
sponds to an amplification factor of the non-uniformity of 5 –
10 using again the alternative definition, which is much larger
than the above suggested value of 2.
For LLDPE, Uehara et al (2004a) reported fluctuations of
the transversal bubble deformation of the order of 20 %, which
should induce significant thickness variations in the stretched
film. Takashige et al (2004a) also found a linear relationship
between the local thicknesses of the non-stretched and
stretched films. Such a direct correlation is not apparent in
Fig. 9.
laboratory extrusion line used in this work showed that bubble
stability depends on the interaction between the re-heating
temperature, the stretching ratios (TURP, BURF and TURF)
and the cooling conditions (vertical position of the air rings,
air flow rate and air velocity), which is in agreement with the
observations of Takashige et al. (2004a), even if using another
variant of the double bubble technology.
Air flow rate seems to have the highest effect. For example,
using higher air flow rates limits the maximum TURP to 4.5
and BURF and TURF to 3.5, requires the re-heating ovens to
be set around 340 8C and 360 8C (pre-heating and bi-orienta-
tion, respectively) and that the top air ring is at least 0.1 m
away from the re-heating oven. Conversely, if the air flow rate
is sufficiently low, the onset of bi-orientation shifts from the
outlet of the bi-orientation oven to immediately below the air
ring on top (see Fig. 11). This effect has been experimentally
observed and theoretically predicted by Zatloukal and co-
workers (2004, 2006). A decrease in the heat transfer coeffi-
cient causes an increase in neck height, i.e, a change in the cur-
vature of the bubble from a LDPE-type bubble to a high stalk

3.3 Effect of Operating Conditions

by Kungliga Tekniska on August 28, 2015. For personal use only.

The LLDPE resins proved to be very difficult to process using

the available laboratory bi-oriented blown film line. All at-
tempts to attain a stable bubble and a steady operating regime
were unsuccessful. An axisymmetric periodic fluctuation of
the bubble diameter developed, similar to that reported for
IPP 2012.27:348-357.

polyethylene terephthalate (Kang et al., 1990), polybutylene

terephthalate (Song and White, 2000) and polyamide 12 (Rhee
and White, 2001) under certain operating conditions. LLDPE
is known to possess a narrow stretchability range. Uehara et
al. (2004a) studied the biaxial orientation of an LLDPE with a
density of 920 kg/m3 and a MFI of 1.0 g/10 min and, in order
to improve processability, reported the need to blend this mate-
rial with two other LLDPE grades as 15 wt.% of the total,
yielding a global density of 915 kg/m3 and a MFI of 1.1 g/
10 min (i. e., with slightly lower density and higher fluidity
Fig. 10. Correlation between bubble stability and rheological behav-
than the resins available for this study). The addition of erucic ior for all materials
acid amide and silica based slip agents is also mentioned. In a
separate study, the same authors (Uehara et al., 2004b), pre-
pared various LLDPE blends and concluded that the addition
of lower density material reduces the stretching stress and ex-
tends the lower temperature range for stretching, while the
higher density material guarantees a uniform high stretching
stress and uniform film thickness. This type of blending studies
was not pursued here, as it lays outside the scope of this work.
The most stable processing behaviour was observed for LDPE1
and LDPE 3. Contrasting with LDPE2, for any given operating
set point the bubble stabilized in a few minutes, without the
need of additional tuning of the processing parameters. If the
relative bubble stability (where 0 % corresponds to bubble rup-
ture and 100 % to a easily obtainable and dimensionally stable
film) is plotted against melt strength (at Tm + 30 8C) and degree
of shear thinning (see Table 2) for the various materials se-
lected for this study, the diagram of Fig. 10 is obtained. The
various Polyethylenes are well discriminated, strengthening
the conclusions of Section 3.1. A) B)
The effect of the processing conditions on processability Fig. 11. Influence of cooling air flow rate on onset of bi-orientation
was predominantly investigated using LDPE3. Practice in the and bubble shape (LDPE3), A) low air flow rate, B) high air flow rate

354 Intern. Polymer Processing XXVII (2012) 3

 O. S. Carneiro et al.: Bi-axially Oriented Blown Film Technology

HDPE-type bubble. Using a low air flow rate, stable bubbles strain hardening behavior, resulting in a less uniform primary
can be obtained up to 4.8 · 4.8 stretching ratios (BURF · tube and in a more unstable bubble. High BUR · TUR will
TURF) and 10 8C lower set temperatures in the re-heating cause helical instability, as reported previously by White
ovens (330 and 350 8C, respectively). The effect of the air flow (Kang et al., 1990; Song and White, 2000).
rate on the range of stretching ratios where a continuous stable Given the above discussion, the operating condition pre-
bubble is obtained is represented in Fig. 12. In the interval sented in Fig. 13 was used as the initial set point to study the ef-
tested, a low air flow rate yields a wider operating window fect of TURP, BURF, re-heating temperature, position of top air
and brings about more uniform films (see Fig. 9). The effect ring and air velocity. The results obtained are summarized in
should be similar to that of cooling air velocity, to be discussed Table 3 in terms of the ease to obtain a stable bubble and homo-
below. In fact, at constant air ring gap, an increase in air flow geneity index. Decreasing TURP from 4.5 to 3.5 facilitates pro-
rate results in an increase of air velocity. Probably, a high cool-
ing rate makes the polymer too rigid to allow the highest
stretching ratios. This effect was also observed by other re-
searchers (DiMaio et al., 2002; Song and White, 2000). It has
been demonstrated that bubble breakage occurs over a limiting
stress and that bubble instabilities develop below that stress
(DiMaio et al., 2002; Rhee and White, 2001; Takashige et al.,
2004a, 2004b; Song and White, 2000). Too small stretching ra-
tios generate a thick film, lowering the stretching stress and the
by Kungliga Tekniska on August 28, 2015. For personal use only.
IPP 2012.27:348-357.

Fig. 13. Initial operating condition used to study the effect of process-
ing parameters on processability
A)

Bubble Homogeneity
stability index
%

Reference operating condition – 88.7

Decrease TURP ? 92.6

(TURP = 4.5? TURP = 3.5)

Decrease BURF ? 87.7

(BURF = 3.5 ? BURF = 3)

Decrease Re-heating temp. / 88.8

(DT = –10 8C)

Increase Re-heating temp. ? 84.0

B)
(DT = +10 8C)

Decrease 1st air ring axial position ? 89.7

(D1 = 0.1 m ? D1 = 0.2 m)

Increase air velocity / 80.0

(Vmin ? Vmax)

Fig. 12. Stability window for two different cooling conditions Table 3. Effect of processing conditions on bubble stability and thick-
(LDPE3), A) low air flow rate, B) high air flow rate ness homogeneity

Intern. Polymer Processing XXVII (2012) 3 355

 O. S. Carneiro et al.: Bi-axially Oriented Blown Film Technology
cessing and yields a more uniform film. Two opposing effects
develop: i) the increasing thickness slows down cooling, fa-
vouring crystallinity; ii) due to its lower velocity, the time the
tube is subjected to forced cooling increases, hindering crystal-
linity. The lower the degree of crystallinity, the higher the flex-
ibility and the ability of the primary to be bi-axially stretched
(Song and White, 2000). Apparently, here the two effects are
balanced as the degree of crystallinity of the two primaries
was found to be similar (circa 29.0 % and 30.8 % for a TURP
of 3.5 and 4.5, respectively, as determined by DSC). Therefore,
the beneficial effect of reducing TURP must be credited to the
higher primary tube thickness upon bi-orientation, enabling
higher stretching ratios. As expected and reported by other
authors (Takashige et al., 2004a), the higher the bi-orientation
temperature the lower the thickness uniformity, as the stress
levels decrease. The strain hardening character could also pro-
gressively decline, although this is not evident in Fig. 5 under
the conditions tested. Conversely, the lower bi-orientation tem-
perature was found to be 10 8C below the reference value. A
decrease in film thickness uniformity and improved processa-
bility were observed when BURF was reduced from 3.5 to 3.0.
BURF values under 3 have no practical interest, as the final
film becomes too thick, while the value of 3.5 is close to the
by Kungliga Tekniska on August 28, 2015. For personal use only.
operating limit (when the bubble would break).
Finally, Table 3 provides evidence that the position of the
top air ring and the air velocity have a strong influence on the
film cooling conditions. It was not possible to produce film
when the air ring was less than 0.1 m away from the bi-orienta-
IPP 2012.27:348-357.
tion oven; for distances between 0.1 and 0.2 m thickness uni-
formity increased; distances beyond 0.2 m would enable a
higher relaxation of orientation, affecting negatively the film
properties. In general, and as discussed above, too fast cooling
hinders the polymer ability to stretch without rupture.
4 Conclusions
A relatively compact prototype extrusion line was used to pro-
duce bi-axially oriented polyethylene films in a range of oper-
ating conditions. The performance of the re-heating oven and
the uniformity of the primary tube were specifically monitored.
The temperature control system showed some limitations since
there is a substantial difference between the set and the real
temperatures developed, but provided that a compensation for
this offset is made, the temperature standard deviations along
the oven perimeter are small and steady operation is ensured.
As for the primary tube, good thickness uniformity was
achieved.
Oscillatory shear and extensional (Rheotens) experiments
were able to differentiate the response of six commercial poly-
ethylenes (three LDPE and three LLDPE), all suited to blown
film extrusion. After processing (or, in a few cases, attempting
to process) these materials in the extrusion line, it could be con-
cluded that those polymers with pronounced shear thinning and
high melt elasticity, as well as high melt strength and extensi-
bility, were the most adequate. Specifically, the LDPE were
much more appropriate than any of the LLDPE, that is, as in
conventional blown film, in bi-axial film blowing branched
polymers with high molecular weight are the most suitable.
The processability parameters discussed here may point to an
356
operating window that might not assure the best performance
of the films. Hence, identifying the correlations between feasi-
ble operating window, structure development and properties is
also mandatory and will be considered in a separate study.
Among the processing parameters investigated in this work,
the air flow rate from the air cooling rings, together with their
axial position and air velocity showed to be the most influent
on bubble stability and film thickness homogeneity. In general,
any combination of processing conditions leading to fast bub-
ble cooling affects negatively both film stability and thickness
homogeneity.
References
Bobovitch, A. L., et al., “Orientation, Structure and Properties of Dou-
ble-Bubble Oriented LLDPE Films”, J. Plastic Film and Sheeting,
22, 133 – 143 (2006a),
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/8756087906064891
Bobovitch, A. L., et al., “Mechanical Properties, Stress-relaxation and
Orientation of Double Bubble Biaxially Oriented Polyethylene
Films”, J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 100, 3545 – 3553 (2006b),
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/app.22727
Carneiro, O. S., et al., Portuguese Patent 103380 (2007)
Carneiro, O. S., et al., “Small-scale Production of Co-extruded Biaxi-
ally Oriented Blown Film”, Polym. Test., 27, 527 – 537 (2008)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.polymertesting.2008.02.010
Di Maio, L., et al., “Biaxial Orientation of Polyamide Films: Processa-
bility and Properties”, Macromol. Symp., 180, 1 – 8 (2002)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/1521-3900(200203)180:1<1::
AID-MASY1>3.0.CO;2-X
Fang, Y. L., et al., “Rheological Effects of Polyethylenes in Film
Blowing” Polym. Eng. Sci., 43, 1391 – 1406 (2003),
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pen.10118
Field, G. J., et al., “Melt Strength and Film Bubble Instability of
LLDPE/LDPE Blends”, Polym. Intern., 48, 461 – 466 (1999),
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097- 0126(199906)48:6<461::
AID-PI169>3.0.CO;2-7
Ghaneh-Fard, et al., “Study of Instabilities in Film Blowing”, AICHE
J., 42, 1388 – 1396 (1996), http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/aic.690420519
Ghaneh-Fard, A., et al., “Study of Kinematics and Dynamics of Film
Blowing of Different Polyethylenes”, Polym. Eng. Sci., 37, 1148 –
1163 (1997), http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pen.11759
Ghijsels, A., et al., “Melt Strength Behavior of PE and its Relation to Bub-
ble Stability in Film Blowing”, Int. Polym. Proc., 5, 284 – 286 (1990)
Ghijsels, A., et al., “Melt Strength Behavior of Polyethylene Blends”,
Int. Polym. Proc., 7, 44 – 50 (1992)
Johnson, M. B., Wilkes, G. L., “Optical Properties of Blown and Cast
Polyethylene Films: Surface versus Bulk Structural Considerations”
J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 77, 2845 – 2864 (2000),
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/1097-4628(20000923)77:13<2845::
AID-APP6>3.0.CO;2-7
Kanai, T., White, J. L. “Kinematics, Dynamics and Stability of Tubular
Film Extrusion of Various Polyethylenes”, Polym. Eng. Sci., 24,
1185 – 1201 (1984), http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pen.760241508
Kang, H. J., et al, “Single and Double Bubble Tubular Film Extrusion
of Polyethylene Terephtalate”, Int. Polym. Proc., 5, 62 – 73 (1990)
La Mantia, F. P., Acierno, D., “Influence of the Molecular Structure on
the Melt Strength and Extensibility of Polyethylenes” Polym. Eng.
Sci., 25, 279 – 283 (1985), http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pen.760250505
Lamontagne, N. D., “Flexible Packaging Offers Convenience and Cost
Savings”, Plastics Engineering, 67, 1 – 11 (2011)
Larson, R. G.: Constitutive Equations for Polymer Melts and Solutions,
Butterworth-Heinemann, Stoneham (1988)
Leal, V., et al., “New Results on the Correlation Molecular Architec-
ture Melt Elasticity Blowing Process Film Properties for Conven-
tional and Metallocene-catalyzed Polyethylenes”, Macromol. Ma-
ter. Eng., 291, 670 – 676 (2006),
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/mame.200600072
Intern. Polymer Processing XXVII (2012) 3
 O. S. Carneiro et al.: Bi-axially Oriented Blown Film Technology

Majumder, K. K., et al., “Molecular, Rheological and Crystalline Prop-
erties of Low-density Polyethylene in Blown Film Extrusion”,
Polym. Eng. Sci., 47, 1983 – 1991 (2007),
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pen.20825
Micic, P., et al., “Melt Strength and Elastic Behavior of LLDPE/LDPE
Blends”, Int. Polym. Proc., 11, 14 – 20 (1996)
Micic, P., Bhattacharya, S. N., “Rheology of LLDPE, LDPE and
LLDPE/LDPE Blends and Its Relevance to the Film Blowing Pro-
cess”, Polym. Int., 49, 1580 – 1589 (2000),
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/1097-0126(200012)49:12<1580::
AID-PI547>3.0.CO;2-Q
Minoshima, W., White, J. L., “Instability Phenomena in Tubular Film
and Melt spinning of Rheologically Characterized High Density,
Low Density and Linear Low Density Polyethylenes”, J. Non-New-
tonian Fluid Mech., 19, 275 – 302 (1986),
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0377-0257(86)80053-2
Muke, S., et al., “Extensional Rheology of Polypropylene Melts from
the Rheotens Test”, J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech., 101, 77 – 93
(2001), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0377-0257(01)00142- 2
Munstedt, H., et al., “Influence of Molecular Structure on Rheological
Properties of Polyethylenes”, Rheol. Acta, 37, 21 – 29 (1998),
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s003970050087
Rhee, S., White, J. L., “PA612 Double Bubble Tubular Film Process –
Processability and Structure Development”, Int. Polym. Proc., 16,
272 – 284 (2001)
Song, K., White, J. L., “Single and Double Bubble Tubular Film Extru-
sion of Polybutylene Terephthalate”, Int. Polym. Proc., 15, 157 – 165
by Kungliga Tekniska on August 28, 2015. For personal use only.
Wagner, M. H., Bernnat, A., “The Rheology of the Rheotens Test”, J.
Rheol., 42, 917 – 928 (1998), http://dx.doi.org/10.1122/1.550907
White, J. L., Yamane, H., “A Collaborative Study of the Stability of
Extrusion, Melt Spinning and Tubular Film Extrusion of some High-
Low- and Linear-Low Density Polyethylene Samples”, Pure and
Applied Chemistry, 59, 193 – 216 (1987),
http://dx.doi.org/10.1351/pac198759020193
Zatloukal, M., Mavridis, H., Vlcek, J., Saha, P., “Modeling of Non-Iso-
thermal Film Blowing Process by Using Variational Principles”,
SPE ANTEC Tech. Papers, Charlotte, USA, p. 825 – 829 (2006)
Zatloukal, M., Vlcek, J., “Modeling of the Film Blowing Process by
Using Variational Principles”, J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech., 123,
201 – 213 (2004), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jnnfm.2004.07.018
Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge funding by FEDER via
FCT, Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia, under the project
PTDC/CTM/67025/2006 and Plurianual Programs. Thanks
are also due to Fibope – Filmes Biorientados, S.A. for practical
advice and material donation.
Date received: July 14, 2011
Date accepted: December 8, 2011

(2000)
Takashige, M., et al., “Scale-up Rule for Double Bubble Tubular Pro-
cess of PA6 Film”, Int. Polym. Proc., 19, 368 – 375 (2003)
Takashige, M., et al., “Thickness Uniformity of Double Bubble Tubu-
lar Film Process for Producing Biaxially Oriented PA 6 Film”, Int.
Polym. Proc., 19, 47 – 55 (2004a)
IPP 2012.27:348-357.

Takashige, M., et al., “Easy Tear Film of Biaxially Oriented PA6/MXD

6 Blend by Double Bubble Tubular Film Process”, Int. Polym. Proc.,
19, 147 – 154 (2004b) Bibliography
Takashige, M., Kanai, T., “Easy Tear Multilayer Film of Biaxially Ori- DOI 10.3139/217.2538
ented PA6/MXD6 by Double Bubble Tubular Film Process”, Int. Intern. Polymer Processing
Polym. Proc., 20, 100 – 104 (2005) XXVII (2012) 3; page 348 – 357
Takashide, M., Kanai T., “Physical Properties of Biaxially oriented ª Carl Hanser Verlag GmbH & Co. KG
PA6 Film for Simultaneous Stretching and Sequential Processing”, ISSN 0930-777X
J. Polym. Eng., 31, 29 – 35 (2011),
http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/polyeng.2011.005
Uehara, H., et al., “Deformation, Behavior, Processability and Physical
Properties for Biaxially Oriented Film of LLDPE”, Int. Polym.
Proc., 19, 155 – 162 (2004a)
Uehara, H., et al., “Stretchability and Properties of LLDPE Blends for You will find the article and additional material by enter-
Biaxially Oriented Film”, Int. Polym. Proc., 19, 163 – 171 (2004b) ing the document number IPP2538 on our website at
Uehara, H., et al., “Stretchability and Properties of Various LLDPE for www.polymer-process.com
Biaxially Oriented Film”, Int. Polym. Proc., 19, 172 – 179 (2004c)

Intern. Polymer Processing XXVII (2012) 3 357