LB Chapter 4 7

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/317206470
Stress Cracking Resistance (Bent Strip Method) - Data
Chapter · January 2014

DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-55166-6_66
CITATIONS READS
0 816
2 authors:
Ralf Lach Wolfgang Grellmann

Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg
171 PUBLICATIONS 1,538 CITATIONS 413 PUBLICATIONS 3,382 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Conference "PolyMerTec 2018", June 13-15 2018, Merseburg (Germany) View project
15-jähriges Bestehen der Stiftung AMK View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Ralf Lach on 23 February 2021.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

332 4.7 Stress Cracking Resistance [R. Lach, W. Grellmann] [Ref. p. 354
4.7 Stress Cracking Resistance

[R. Lach, W. Grellmann]
For analysis of the stress cracking resistance conventional testing methods such as the constant tensile
load method (ISO 22088-2; incl. full notch creep test (FNCT) according to ISO 16770 and Pennsylvania
edge-notch tensile test (PENT) according to ASTM F 1473), the constant tensile deformation method
(ISO 22088-5), the slow strain rate test method (ISO 22088-6), the bent strip method (ISO 22088-3 using
unnotched samples; incl. bell telephone test using notched samples according to ASTM D 1693 or IEC
60811-4-1) and the ball or pin impression test (ISO 22088-4) as well non-conventional testing methods
such as the fracture mechanics method (KIscc) were generally applied (see [07Ram] and [98Ble] for com-
parison of the methods).
log σ
temperature
1
Applied load
region 1: ductile 4
region 2: quasi-brittle
region 3: endurance limit
region 4: brittle
Time to fracture log t B

Fig. 4.180. Scheme of the slow-crack growth behaviour of thermoplastic polymer parts as a function of
the temperature.
The constant tensile test method (Fig. 4.180.) where a well-defined constant tensile load smaller than the
yield stress has been applied for measuring a single parameter, the time to fracture, as a function of the
material and its specification, the medium and the temperature is the most common method. This tensile
test was performed mostly at room temperature (23 °C) but also at higher temperatures up to 80 °C (see
Table 4.24. and Figs. 4.182.–4.190.). Another conventional test method, the ball impression test, where an
oversized ball of steel is pressed into a hole inside a medium-embedded specimen for a given time of
loading has been only relatively rarely applied. After loading, the residual tensile or bending strength was
determined to quantify the influence of the medium (see Table 4.25.). For the very similar pin impression
test hardly any data are available in literature (except [98Ble]). For the bent strip method (see Table 4.26.
and Fig. 4.191.) a (notched) strip-like specimen inside a medium was loaded at a given bending strain and
the time to fracture was measured partly as a function of the temperature. The slow strain rate test method
rarely applied to polymers is a conventional tensile test at quasi-static loading conditions but using very
low strain rates to measure stress–strain curves as a function of the medium. Due to the fact that only the
onset of crazes formation and no crack growth or fracture have been analysed data obtained by means of
this test methods was not considered here. Furthermore, data of the constant tensile deformation method
are not available in literature.
Lan d o l t - Bör n s t e i n
New Series VIII/6A3
Ref. p. 354] 4.7 Stress Cracking Resistance [R. Lach, W. Grellmann] 333
break
sub-
. Crack speed, log a critical
no crack high-speed
propagation stable
slow
stable
onset
log K ISCC log K IC

Stress intensity factor, log K
Fig. 4.181. Crack speed as a function of the applied stress intensity factor at static long-term conditions
for thermoplastic polymers, KIscc – onset value of stress corrosion cracking (SCC), KIc – frac-
ture toughness at quasi-static loading conditions.
One of the most evident disadvantages of all conventional test methods is the low level of information by
using a single-parameter description of the stress cracking resistance. These methods give no insight into
the kinetics of damage evolution and crack propagation before final fracture. In contrast, the fracture
mechanic method, a non-conventional testing method applying pre-notched samples under constant load,
is based on assessment of the stress intensity factor KI as the fundamental parameter of linear-elastic frac-
ture mechanics as a function of the stable crack growth rate da/dt (Fig. 4.181.). At the onset of crack
growth the KI values KIscc were determined as a measure of the resistance against stress corrosion crack-
ing (SCC) depending on the material and its specification, the medium and the temperature (see Ta-
ble 4.27. and Figs. 4.182.–4.194.).
The stress cracking resistance of a given polymer has been found to be strongly affected by the solubility
parameter of the medium used (for the data and detailed information see [07Ram]).
Constant Tensile Test Method
Table 4.24. Time to fracture as a function of medium and applied load (unit MPa) or the stress intensity
factor K (unit MPa mm1/2) for thermoplastic materials by means of the constant (tensile) load
method (using notched samples; incl. FNCT and PENT).
Material Specification Medium T Load Time to Ref.

[°C] [MPa] fracture [s]
ABS - - 1.5 ⋅ 105 81Mor

air 44
olive oil/oleic 25
acid
turpentine 5
23 3.6 ⋅ 106 99Kaw
air 32
New Series VIII/6A3

non-ionic sur- 4.8

factant
PA 6 - methanol 23 21 3.6 ⋅ 106 98Bec
PA 66 - methanol 23 14.3 3.6 ⋅ 106 98Bec
PA 610 - methanol 23 19.3 3.6 ⋅ 106 98Bec
PBT/ - 80 2.0 04Kui

PBA air 2.4 ⋅ 107
copoly- water 4.7 ⋅ 105
ester phosphoric acid 9.2 ⋅ 104
solution
PC 23 1.35 ⋅ 105 07Ram

- air 47.6
quenched palatinol 4.9
slowly cooled palatinol 3.0
PC 60 13.8 00Ber
aqueous media 1.2 ⋅ 104
- pH = 11 6 ⋅ 104
- pH = 9 2.6 ⋅ 105
- pH = 8 1.2 ⋅ 106
- pH = 6.5 1.1 ⋅ 106
- pH = 4 8.3 ⋅ 105
non-ionic ten-
molecular weight: side
low 8.5 ⋅ 104
medium 0.85 – 1.1 ⋅ 106
high 1.3 ⋅ 106
high + chain branching 2.0 ⋅ 106 *
PE density (g cm-3) surfactant 50 4.2 67Mar

0.914 7.2 ⋅ 102
0.918 2.52 ⋅ 103
0.927 4.32 ⋅ 105
0.960 9.0 ⋅ 105
PE-HD solution viscosity (dl g-1) 5 % solution of 50 2.0 07Ram

1.5 nekanil 1.3 ⋅ 104
2.0 2.4 ⋅ 104
2.4 3.6 ⋅ 104
3.3 9.0 ⋅ 104
4.2 2.45 ⋅ 105
6.0 4.75 ⋅ 105
New Series VIII/6A3

molecular weight aqueous solu- 80 5.0 04Men

(105 g/mol): tion of argopal 1
Mw/Mn = 7.4 – 11.5 (N110)
1.2 8.3 ⋅ 102
2.1 2.2 ⋅ 103
2.6 2.9 ⋅ 103
3.2 5.0 ⋅ 103
4.1 9.4 ⋅ 103
6.8 2.8 ⋅ 104
6.2 3.8 ⋅ 104
8.1 8.1 ⋅ 104
Mw/Mn = 22
3.9 8.3 ⋅ 104
Mw/Mn = 38–44
(bimodal)
3.3 6.9 ⋅ 106
4.4 1.2 ⋅ 107
detergent solu- 75 3.0 05Kur
broad molecular weight tion (rhodocal 0.036 – 1.1 ⋅ 106
distribution DS50)
bimodal molecular 3.6 – > 7.2 ⋅ 106
weight distribution
PE-HD blends ethylene glycol 80 4–6 < 6.8 ⋅ 103 98Sch
density (g cm-3) 10 % solution 50 6.3 MPa 81Bub
0.935 of igepal (CO- mm1/2 + 1.2 ⋅ 104
0.962 630) 5.5 ⋅ 104
0.954 1.3 ⋅ 105
molecular weight (Mw) 10 % solution 50 - 08Che,
(105 g/mol): of igepal 11Che
injection moulding
resin (Mw/Mn = 4.0)
0.794 1.30 ± 0.19 ⋅ 104
blow moulding resins
(Mw/Mn = 7.6 – 7.8)
1.185 4.32 ± 0.61 ⋅ 103
1.275 1.73 ± 0.33 ⋅ 104
1.401 1.01 ± 0.09 ⋅ 104
pipe resins (Mw/Mn =
14.4 – 53.3)
2.201 (PE 80) 7.14 ± 0.16 ⋅ 105
2.179 (PE 100) 3.14 ± 1.22 ⋅ 106
2.228 (PE 100) 5.02 ± 1.22 ⋅ 106
3.154 (PE 100) > 1.08 ⋅ 107
PE-HD/ ethylene glycol 80 6 < 9.3 ⋅ 105 98Sch

PE-HB
blends
New Series VIII/6A3

PE-HD/ molecular weight (according to 80 2.4 08Gar

PE-MD (105 g/mol): ASTM F 1473)
blends 1.41 3.6 ⋅ 104
1.49 4.7 ⋅ 104
1.71 7.2 ⋅ 104
1.78 1.3 ⋅ 105
1.84 4.7 ⋅ 105
PE-HD/ ethylene glycol 80 6.0 0.1 – 3.7 ⋅ 105 98Sch

PE-LLD
blends
PE-LD - 10 % solution 50 3.2 MPa 1.2 ⋅ 103 07Ram

of igepal (CO- mm1/2 +
630)
PE-LLD copolymers with: 10 % solution 50 3.2 MPa 82Bub

propylene of igepal (CO- mm1/2 + 4.0 ⋅ 103
propylene/octene 630) 6.0 ⋅ 103
butene 1.0 ⋅ 104
butene/octene 1.9 ⋅ 104
hexene/octene 3.8 ⋅ 104
octene 5.8 ⋅ 104
molecular weight 2 % solution 23 10.5 08Max
(105 g/mol): of nonyl phe-
0.82 noxy- 1.5 ⋅ 0.2 × 107
1.17 (ethyleneoxy)- 8.9 ⋅ 1.1 × 106
1.18 ethanol 5.6 ⋅ 0.3 × 106
ethylene–octene copoly- air 6.0 ⋅ 104 91War
mer 34 7.0
42 6.3
50 5.1
60 3.7
70 2.0
10 % solution 30 7.0
of igepal (CO- 42 6.1
630) 50 5.3
60 4.1
80 2.3
ethylene–hexene copol- air 80 2.4 90War
ymer, molecular weight
(105 g/mol):
1.35 1.34 ⋅ 107
1.70 1.80 – 4.64 ⋅ 106
1.80 1.11 ⋅ 106
1.92 6 ⋅ 107
other 0.05 – 5.26 ⋅ 106
New Series VIII/6A3

PE-LLD 1.35 10 % solution 50 4.2 5.11 ⋅ 105

1.70 of igepal (CO- 4.97 – 5.71 ⋅ 105
1.80 630) 4.82 ⋅ 105
1.92 9.89 ⋅ 105
other 0.57 – 9.78 ⋅ 105
ethylene–butene copol- air 80 2.4
ymer, molecular weight
(105 g/mol):
1.50 0.17 – 6.90 ⋅ 104
2.00 2.71 ⋅ 107
2.67 1.24 ⋅ 105
4.29 1.79 ⋅ 106
other 4.49 ⋅ 106
1.50 10 % solution 50 4.2 5.64 ⋅ 105
2.00 of igepal (CO- 4.50 ⋅ 105
2.67 630) 2.07 ⋅ 106
4.29 1.88 ⋅ 106
other 4.98 – 7.98 ⋅ 103
ethylene–octene copoly- air 80 2.4 0.03 – 2.30 ⋅ 106
mer 10 % solution 50 4.2 0.28 – 2.49 ⋅ 105
of igepal (CO-
630)
ethylene–4-methyl pen- air 80 2.4 1.26 – 4.75 ⋅ 106
tene copolymer 10 % solution 50 4.2 2.54 – 4.50 ⋅ 105
of igepal (CO-
630)
gas pipe, extrusion direc- solution of 50 4.2 93Qia
tion igepal (CO-
(Mw = 1.28 ⋅ 105 g/mol) 630) (%)
0 (air) 1.41 ⋅ 104
0.15 1.18 ⋅ 104
1 1.41 ⋅ 104
5 1.89 ⋅ 104
10 1.89 ⋅ 104
20 1.61 ⋅ 104
30 1.25 ⋅ 104
50 1.95 ⋅ 104
100 2.64 ⋅ 104
0 (air) 2.42 ⋅ 105
compression moulded 0.15 1.03 ⋅ 105
(Mw = 1.28 ⋅ 105 g/mol) 1 9.10 ⋅ 104
5 1.03 ⋅ 105
10 9.38 ⋅ 104
20 4.11 ⋅ 104
30 2.86 ⋅ 104
50 3.22 ⋅ 104
70 3.57 ⋅ 104
100 1.09 ⋅ 105
New Series VIII/6A3

PE-LLD compression moulded 0 (air) 2.27 ⋅ 107

(Mw = 1.7 ⋅ 105 g/mol) 0.15 6.48 ⋅ 105
1 4.04 ⋅ 105
5 3.61 ⋅ 105
10 3.84 ⋅ 105
20 2.70 ⋅ 105
30 1.79 ⋅ 105
50 1.34 ⋅ 105
70 3.47 ⋅ 105
100 2.79 ⋅ 106
different grades 2 % solution of 50 9.0 0.21 – 1.52 ⋅ 105 09Wel,
igepal 11Wel
PE-MD - 50 08Ayy,
air 21 MPa 1.7 ⋅ 107 07Ayy
water mm1/2 + 2.1 ⋅ 107
solution of
igepal (CO-
630) (vol.-%)
0.001 5.7 ⋅ 106
0.003 3.6 ⋅ 106
0.01 9.8 ⋅ 105
1 8.9 ⋅ 105
10 6.2 ⋅ 105
air 28 MPa 1.0 ⋅ 107
solution of mm1/2 +
igepal (CO-
630) (vol.-%)
0.01 1.1 ⋅ 106
0.1 6.3 ⋅ 105
air 32 MPa 7.5 ⋅ 106
solution of mm1/2 +
igepal (CO-
630) (vol.-%)
0.01 5.7 ⋅ 105
0.1 3.3 ⋅ 105
10 3.2 ⋅ 105
10 vol.-% solu-
tion of igepal
CO-997 21 MPa 3.0 – 3.98 ⋅ 106
CO-850 mm1/2 + 1.1 ± 0.15 ⋅ 106
CO-997 32 MPa 1.85 ⋅ 106
CO-850 mm1/2 + 3.63 ⋅ 105
PET 0.1 % aqueous 30 7 09Zho

NaOH
not aged 5.1 – 6.4 ⋅ 105
physically aged 1.38 – 1.62 ⋅ 105
New Series VIII/6A3

PS
non-oriented air 23 26 * 1.35 ⋅ 105 07Ram
- - 27.7 3.6 ⋅ 106 96Bec
- 23 30.6 1.35 ⋅ 105 90Ram
oriented 23 37.7 * 1.35 ⋅ 105 07Ram
- isobutanol - 6.9 3.6 ⋅ 106 96Bec
non-oriented 23 8.2 1.35 ⋅ 105 07Ram
oriented 23 12.8 – 1.35 ⋅ 105
- 13.9 90Ram
- propanol - 3.6 ⋅ 106 96Bec
non-oriented 23 5.7 1.35 ⋅ 105 07Ram
oriented 23 6.1 1.35 ⋅ 105
- methanol 23 11.7 * 1.35 ⋅ 105 90Ram
- - 2.0 3.6 ⋅ 106 96Bec
- decan - 9.5 3.6 ⋅ 106
- 23 1.9 * 1.35 ⋅ 105
- palatinol A 23 9.7 1.35 ⋅ 105 90Ram
- - 7.4 3.6 ⋅ 106
- ethylenglycol - 10 3.6 ⋅ 106 96Bec
- hexamethyl- - 7.7 * – 3.6 ⋅ 106
disiloxan 20.2
PVC** gas pipe material 23 MPa 1 ⋅ 106 95Bre

mm1/2 +
air 39 *
high-pressure 44
condensate
natural gas 48 *
enriched with
benzene
n-octane 54
low-pressure 54
condensate
PVC/ gas pipe material 23 MPa 1 ⋅ 106 95Bre

PE-C** mm1/2 +
air 71
n-octane 48
low-pressure 48
condensate
natural gas 37
enriched with
benzene
high-pressure 31
condensate
n-octane/ben- 31
zene 90/10
New Series VIII/6A3

sPS syndiotactic methanol - 18 1.35 ⋅ 105 07Ram
SAN - 23 1.35 ⋅ 105 07Ram

air 51.4
isobutanol 20.2
decan 10.4 *
propanol 4.8
methanol 4.0
* approximated value, ** tested under three-point bending, + stress intensify factor K, elsewhere load,
1
ethoxylated nonylphenol
30
PC a
Tensile stress at break σB [MPa]
25
20
15
non-ionic tenside
10
pH = 11
pH = 9
5 pH = 8
pH = 6.5
pH = 4
0
-1 0 1 2 3
10 10 10 10 10
Time to fracture t B [h]
Fig. 4.182a. Time to fracture as a function of applied load for polycarbonate using the constant tensile
stress method [00Ber]: (a) in aqueous media and non-ionic tenside at 60 °C as a function of
pH.
New Series VIII/6A3
35
PC b
Tensile stress at break σ B [MPa] 30
25
20
15
M w high
10 M w medium
M w low
5 M w high, chain branching
Mw medium, modified
0
-1 0 1 2 3
10 10 10 10 10
Fig. 4.182b.Time to fracture as a function of applied load for polycarbonate using the constant tensile
stress method [00Ber]: (b) different PC materials in non-ionic tenside at 60 °C.
100
PS a
Tensile stress at break σ B [MPa]
10
ethylene glycol
hexamethyldisiloxane
propanol
n-butanol
1
-1 0 1 2 3 4 5
10 10 10 10 10 10 10
Time to fracture t B [min]
Fig. 4.183a. Time to fracture as a function of medium and applied load for polystyrene using the constant
tensile stress method: (a) [96Bec].
New Series VIII/6A3
100
PS b
10
air
isobutanol
decane
palatinol A
methanol
1
-1 0 1 2 3 4 5
10 10 10 10 10 10 10
Fig. 4.183b.Time to fracture as a function of applied load for polycarbonate using the constant tensile
stress method: (b) at 23 °C [90Ram].
80
PS c
60
injection molded
40
molded
20
air
propanol
isobutanol
-2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
10 10 10 10 10 10 10
Fig. 4.183c. Time to fracture as a function of applied load for polycarbonate using the constant tensile
stress method: (c) for different processing conditions at 23 °C [07Ram].
New Series VIII/6A3
60
PA
45
30
15
PA 6
PA 610
PA 66
0
0 1 2 3 4
10 10 10 10 10
Fig. 4.184. Time to fracture as a function of applied load for different polyamide materials in methanol
at 23 °C using the constant tensile stress method [98Bec].
100
PE-HD
independently of molecular weight
10
increasing molecular weight

1
0 1 2 3 4
10 10 10 10 10
Fig. 4.185. Time to fracture as a function of applied load for high-density polyethylene materials having
different molecular weight in 5 % solution of nekantil at 50 °C using the constant tensile
stress method [07Ram].
New Series VIII/6A3
100
SAN
10
air
isobutanol
decane
propanol
methanol
1
-1 0 1 2 3 4 5
10 10 10 10 10 10 10
Fig. 4.186. Time to fracture as a function of medium and applied load for styrene–acrylonitrile at 23 °C
using the constant tensile stress method [07Ram].
80
ABS
60
40
20
air
olive oil/oleic acid
turpentine
0
-1 0 1 2 3 4 5
10 10 10 10 10 10 10
Fig. 4.187. Time to fracture as a function of medium and applied load for acrylonitrile–butadiene–
styrene using the constant tensile stress method [81Mor].
New Series VIII/6A3
5
10
PE-LLD
Time to fracture t B in igepal [min]
4
10
3
10
2
10 hexene
butene
octene
1
4-methyl pentene
10
1 2 3 4 5 6
10 10 10 10 10 10
Time to fracture t B in air [min]
Fig. 4.188. Time to fracture in igepal (load = 2.4 MPa, T = 80 °C) versus time to fracture in air (load =
4.2 MPa, T = 50 °C) for linear low density polyethylene with different comonomers [90War,
91War, 93Qia].
120
PVC a
Stress intensity factor K [MPa mm ]
1/2
100
80
60
40
air
20 benzene enriched natural gas
n-octane, low-pressure condensate
high-pressure condensate
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
10 10 10 10 10 10 10
Time to fracture t B [s]
Fig. 4.189a. Time to fracture as a function of applied stress intensity factor for poly(vinyl chloride) (a)
and poly(vinyl chloride)/chlorinated polyethylene blend [95Bre].
New Series VIII/6A3
120
PVC/PE-C b

1/2
100
80
60
40
air
20 benzene enriched natural gas
n-octane, low-pressure condensate
n-octane/benzene, high-pressure condensate
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
10 10 10 10 10 10 10
Fig. 4.189b.Time to fracture as a function of applied stress intensity factor for poly(vinyl chloride) (b)
using the constant bending stress method in different media at 23 °C [95Bre].
7
10
PE-LLD
6
10
5
10
4
10
gas pipe, M w = 128 kg/mol
compression moulded, M w = 128 kg/mol
compression moulded, M w = 170 kg/mol
3
10
0.1 1 10 100
Igepal concentration φ [%]
Fig. 4.190. Time to fracture of linear low density polyethylene (load = 4.2 MPa (black), 3 MPa (gray)
and 2 MPa (light gray), T = 50 °C) in igepal versus time to fracture in air (load = 4.2 MPa,
T = 50 °C) as a function of the igepal concentration (data from [93Qia]).
New Series VIII/6A3
Bent Strip Method
Table 4.25. Time to fracture by means of the Bent Strip Method (using notched samples; incl. Bell Tele-
phone Test).
Material Specification Medium T Strain Time to Ref.

[°C] conditions fracture [s]
PE igepal 23 * 06Caz
1st generation 0.36 –2.4 ⋅ 105
chromium-oxide
catalysis
2nd generation
chromium-oxide
catalysis:
lower density 5.4 ⋅ 106
higher density 1.7 – 4.1 ⋅ 106
tandem-reactor 2.2 ⋅ 106
Ziegler-Natta
catalysis
PE-HD 10 % solution of 50 * 09Sha

igepal (CO-630)
slowly cooled 1.1 ⋅ 105
controlled cooled 5.4 ⋅ 104
quenched 3.2 ⋅ 104
igepal (CO-630) - * 00Joa
ethylene homo- 4.0 ⋅ 104
polymer
made in single 1.3 – 6.6 ⋅ 105
slurry reactor
extruder blends of 1.4 – 2.5 ⋅ 105
two resins
gas-phase reactor 2.7 ⋅ 105
produced with two 1 – 3.3 ⋅ 106
reactors in series
PE-LD - 10 % solution of 30–70 ** 0.36 – 1.8 ⋅ 104 03Bor

igepal (CO-630)
PE-LD/ EVA fraction 10 % solution of ** 03Bor

EVA (wt.-%) igepal (CO-630)
blends 1.8 30–70 0.72 – 2.9 ⋅ 104
3.6 30–50 1.1 – 3.2 ⋅ 104
5.4 1.8 – 8.3 ⋅ 104
7.1 1.8 – 8.3 ⋅ 104
New Series VIII/6A3
Material Specification Medium T Strain Time to Ref.

[°C] fracture [s]
PP-PE ethylene fraction isopropanol - - 09Ree

copoly- (mol-%)
mers 6.5 3.1 ⋅ 105
9.5 9.4 ⋅ 104
12.0 5.6 ⋅ 104
* according to ASTM D 1693, ** according to IEC 60811-4-1
Ball Impression Test
Table 4.26. Flexural (*) or tensile (+) strength as a function of medium for thermoplastic materials using
the Ball Impression Test.
Material Specification Medium T Ball over- Strength Ref.

[°C] size [mm] [MPa]
ABS - (24 h) - 0.105 81Mor

air 66 *
olive oil/oleic acid 36 *
turpentine 13 *
ABS standard - 0.32 96Bec

specimens air 44 +
isopropanol/water 35/65 28.5 +
isopropanol 19 +
small-sized 0.11
specimens air 44 +
isopropanol/water 35/65 20 +
isopropanol 10.5 +
New Series VIII/6A3
80
ABS a
Bending strength σ M [MPa]
60
40
20
air
olive oil/oleic acid
turpentine
0
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Ball oversize Δ x [mm]
60
ABS b
Tensile strength σM [MPa]
45
30
15
air
isopropanol/water 35/65
isopropanol
0
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
Ball oversize Δ x [mm]
Fig. 4.191. Bending strength (a) [81Mor] and tensile strength (b) [96Bec] as a function of medium and
ball oversize for acrylonitrile–butadiene–styrene using the ball impression test.
New Series VIII/6A3
Fracture Mechanic Method (KIscc)
Table 4.27. Fracture mechanics values KIscc for „stress corrosion cracking“ (SCC) as a function of medi-
um for thermoplastic materials.
Material Specification Medium T [°C] KIscc [MPa mm1/2] Ref.
PA-G - 40 – 60 88Lei
air 57
water 57
PBS - aqueous NaOH solution, 03aTak

normality:
0.05 - 18
0.1 25 – 40 10 – 13
0.3 25 – 40 10 – 13
PBS/CTA CTA fraction: 0.3 normal aqueous 30 ~17 03aTak

blends 20–50 wt.-% NaOH solution
PLLA aqueous NaOH solution - 03bTak

as prepared and 2
annealed at 80 °C
annealed at 110 7
and 160 °C
PLLA/ TAC fraction aqueous NaOH solution - 03bTak

TAC (phr)
blends 100 6–9
150 15
PMMA - 23 – 25 75Mai
air 25
carbon tetrachloride 17
ethanol 9
air, relative humidity (%) 20 02Ish
11–33 22
54 22 – 25
75 23 – 27
98 30
PE MFI 20 70Mar
7 methanol 2.6
20 1.6
7 ethanol 2.5
20 1.4
PE-HD 1 molecular weight: methanol 22 72Mar

lower 1.8
higher 2.6
New Series VIII/6A3
Material Specification Medium T [°C] KIscc [MPa mm1/2] Ref.
5 % solution of disper- 25 84Hof

sant
lower 4.9
higher 7
higher 7*
23 83Wie
lower 15
higher 13
water 60 91Bro
lower 30
medium ~32
higher 36
density (g cm-3)
0.937 61
0.941 50
0.949 42
0.959 < 39
thermal treatment 10 % solution of igepal 24.5 ± 81bBan
(CO-630) 0.5
A at 85°C 10
A at 115°C 11
S 12
Q 4
PE-LD 1 MFI methanol 86aOga

4.0 (A) 0 – 30 19 – 29
0.8 – 4.0 (Q) 5 –10 59 – 67
4.0 methyl alcohol 2 – 30 8.1 – 9.6 86bOga
ethyl alcohol 7 – 37 8.5 – 9.3
n-butyl alcohol 7 – 37 8.2 – 10.2
n-propyl alcohol 7 – 37 8.2 – 9.1
- 10 % solution of igepal 22 3.4 86Ton
(CO-630)
25 81aBan,
79Ban
0.25 (Q, Q+A) 3.2 – 3.4
0.25 (S) 6.1
1.7 (S, Q, Q+A) 2.2 – 2.5
2.5 (S, Q+A) 1.7 – 1.8
2.5 (Q) 3.4
7 (S, Q+A) 1.2 – 1.3
7 (Q) 2.5
PET - phenol/tretrachloro- 23 6 98Mos

ethane mixture 60/40
1
S – slowly cooled, Q – quenched, A – annealed
* constant crack opening, otherwise: constant load
New Series VIII/6A3
PMMA
-2
10
Crack speed a [m s ]
-1
-4
10
.
-6
10
10
-8 air
carbon tetrachloride
ethanol
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
1/2
Fig. 4.192. Stress intensity factor K related to the crack speed a for „stress corrosion cracking“ (SCC)
of poly (methyl methacrylate) using different media ([81Mor] with data from [75Mai].
-4
10
PBS
Crack speed a [m s ]
-1
-5
10
.
-6
10
0.05 N
0.1 N
0.3 N
-7
10
0 20 40 60 80 100
1/2
of poly(butylene succinate) as a function of the normality (N) of aqueous NaOH solution
[03aTat].
New Series VIII/6A3
1
6×10
PE-HD a
Crack speed a [mm min ]
-1
-1
6×10
-3
6×10
M w lower
M w higher
-5
6×10
0 2 4 6 8 10
1/2
-1
10
PE-HD b
-2
10
Crack speed a [mm min ]
-1
-3
10
.
-4
10
-5
10
M w lower
M w higher
-6
10
0 10 20 30 40
1/2
of lower and higher molecular weight (Mw) high density polyethylene using different media:
(a) methanol [72Mar], (b) 5 % solution of dispersant [84Hof].
New Series VIII/6A3
References Chapter 4.7

67Mar Mark, H.F. (ed.): Encycyclopedia of polymer science and technology – Plastics, resins,
rubbers, fibers. Vol. 7: Fire retardancy to isotopic labeling. Interscience Publ., New York,
1967.
70Mar Marshall, G. P., Culver, L. E., Williams, J. G.: Environmental stress crack growth in low-
density polyethylenes. Plastics & Polymers 38 (1970) 95–101.
72Mar Marshall, G. R., Williams, J. G., Culver, L. E., Linkins, N. H.: Environmental stress crack-
ing in polyolefins. SPE Journal 28 (1972) 26.
75Mai Mai, Y. W.: On the environmental fracture of polymethylmetacrylate. J. Mater. Sci. 10
(1975) 943–954.
79Ban Bandyopadhyay, S., Brown, H. R.: K– a relationship in the environmental stress cracking
of high molecular weight polyethylene. Int. J. Fracture 15 (1979) R175–R177.
81aBan Bandyopadhyay, S., Brown, H. R.: Studies of environmental stress-crack propagation in
low-density polyethylene. J. Polym. Sci. – Polym. Phys. Ed. 19 (1981) 749–761.
81bBan Bandyopadhyay, S., Brown, H. R.: Environmental stress cracking of low molecular weight
high density polyethylene. Polymer 22 (1981) 245–249.
81Bub Bubeck, R. A: Kinetics of environmental stress cracking in high density polyethylene. Poly-
mer 22 (1981) 682–686.
81Mor Morbitzer, L.: „Spannungsrisskorosion“ in Polymeren. Colloid & Polym. Sci. 259 (1981)
832–851.
82Bub Bubeck, R.A., Baker, H.M.: The influence of branch length on the deformation and micro-
structure of polyethylene. Polymer 23 (1982) 1680–1684.
83Wie Wiersdorf, G.: Untersuchungen zum stabilen Risswachstum in Plastwerkstoffen bei media-
ler Beanspruchung. Masterthesis, TH Leuna-Merseburg, Merseburg, 1983.
84Hof Hoffmann, H., Rufke, B., Pogert, M.: Anwendung der Bruchmechanik zur Beurteilung des
Spannungsrissverhaltens von medial beanspruchtem Polyethylen hoher Dichte. Wissen-
schaftliche Zeitschrift der TH Leuna-Merseburg 26 (1984) 157–167.
86aOga Ogata, N., Yanagawa, T., Yoshida, K.: Effects of loading conditions and temperature on
environmental stress cracking of low-density polyethylene. J. Polym. Sci. Part B – Polym.
Phys. 24 (1986) 1917–1929.
86bOga Ogata, N., Yanagawa, T., Yoshida, K.: Environmental stress cracking of low-density poly-
ethylene in normal alcohols. J. Polym. Sci. – Polym. Phys. Ed. 24 (1986) 89–97.
86Ton Tonyali, K., Brown, H. R.: On the applicability of linear elastic fracture mechanics to envi-
ronmental stress cracking of low-density polyethylene. J. Mater. Sci. 21 (1986) 3116–3124.
88Lei Leidert, K.: Bruchmechanische Untersuchungen an Polyamidwerkstoffen. Masterthesis, TH
Leuna-Merseburg, Merseburg, 1988.
90Ram Ramsteiner, F.: Zur Spannungsrissbildung in Thermoplasten durch flüssige Umgebungs-
medien. Kunststoffe 80 (1990) 695–700.
90War Ward, A. L., Lu, X., Brown, N.: Accelerated test for evaluating slow crack growth of poly-
ethylene copolymers in igepal and air. Polym. Eng. Sci. 30 (1990) 1075–1079.
91Bro Brostow, W., Fleissner, M., Müller, W. F.: Slow crack propagation in polyethylene: deter-
mination and prediction. Polymer 32 (1991) 419–425.
91War Ward, A. L., Lu, X., Huang, Y., Brown, N.: The mechanism of slow crack-growth in poly-
ethylene by an environmental-stress cracking agent. Polymer 32 (1991) 2172–2178.
93Qia Qian, R., Lu, X., Brown, N.: The effect of concentration of an environmental-stress crack-
ing agent on slow crack-growth in polyethylenes. Polymer 34 (1993) 4727–4731.
95Bre Breen, J.: Environmental stress cracking of PVC and PVC-CPE – Part III: Crack growth. J.
Mater. Sci. 30 (1995) 5833–5840.
96Bec Becker, G., Braun, D.: Kunststoff Handbuch 4, Polystyrol. Carl Hanser Verlag, Munich,
1996.
98Bec Becker, G., Braun, D.: Kunststoff Handbuch 3-4, Polyamide. Carl Hanser Verlag, Munich,
1998.
New Series VIII/6A3
98Ble Bletzki, K. A., Barth, C.: Fast and significant determination of environmental stress crack-
ing resistance of polycarbonate. Materialprüfung 40 (1998) 404–410.
98Mos Moskala, E. J.: A fracture mechanics approach to environmental stress cracking in
poly (ethyleneterephthalate). Polymer 39 (1998) 675–680.
98Sch Schellenberg, J., Fienhold, G.: Environmental stress cracking resistance of blends of high-
density polyethylene with other polyethylenes. Polym. Eng. Sci. 38 (1998) 1413–1419.
99Kaw Kawaguchi, T., Nishimura, H., Miwa, F., Abe, K., Kuriyama, T., Narisawa, I.: Environ-
mental stress cracking of poly(acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene). Polym. Eng. Sci. 39 (1999)
268–273.
00Ber Berlich, R., Schmachtenberg, E., Ehrenstein, G. W., Pongratz. S. (Hrsg.): Alterung von
Polycarbonat unter Medieneinfluss. In: Thermische Einsatzgrenzen von Kunststoffen wäh-
rend der Verarbeitung und in der Anwendung. Springer VDI-Verlag, Düsseldorf, 2000.
00Soa Soares, J. B. P., Abbott, R. F., Kim, J. D.: Environmental stress cracking resistance of poly-
ethylene: The use of CRYSTAF and SEC to establish structure-property relationships. J.
Polym. Sci. Part B – Polym. Phys. 38 (2000) 1267–1275.
02Ish Ishiyama, C., Sakuma, T., Shimojo, M., Higo, Y.: Effects of humidity on environmental
stress cracking behavior in poly (methyl methacrylate). J. Polym. Sci. Part B – Polym.
Phys. 40 (2002) 1–9.
03Bor Borisova, B., Kressler, J.: Environmental stress-cracking resistance of LDPE/EVA blends.
Macromol. Mater. Eng. 288 (2003) 509–515.
03aTak Tatsushima, T., Ogata, N., Nakane, K., Ogihara, T.: Environmental stress cracking of
poly(butylene succinate)/cellulose triacetate blend films. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 87 (2003)
510–515.
03bTak Tatsushima, T., Ogata, N., Ogihara, T., Nakane, K.: Environmental stress cracking of poly
l-lactic acid/triacetin blend film. Sen-I Gakkaishi 59 (2003) 272–277.
04Kui Kuipers, N. B., Riemslag, A. C., Lange, R. F. M., Janssen, M., Bakker, A., Marissen, R.:
Environmental stress cracking of a chemical nature in a PBT/PBA co-poly(ester ester).
Polym. Eng. Sci. 44 (2004) 1319–1327.
04Men Men, Y. F., Rieger, J., Enderle, H. F., Lilge, D.: The mobility of the amorphous phase in
polyethylene as a determining factor for slow crack growth. European Phys. J. E – Soft
Matter 15 (2004) 421–425.
05Kur Kurelec, L., Teeuwen, M., Schoffeleers, H., Deblieck, R.: Strain hardening modulus as a
measure of environmental stress crack resistance of high density polyethylene. Polymer 46
(2005) 6369–6379.
06Caz Cazenave, J., Sixou, B., Seguela, R.: Structural approaches of polyethylene environmental
stress-crack resistance. Oil & Gas Science and Technology-Revue de l Francais du Petrole
61 (2006) 735–742.
07Ayy Ayyer, R., Hiltner, A., Baer, E.: A fatigue-to-creep correlation in air for application to envi-
ronmental stress cracking of polyethylene. J. Mater. Sci. 42 (2007) 7004–7015.
07Ehr Ehrenstein, G. W., Pongratz, S.: Beständigkeit von Kunststoffen, Band 1. Carl Hanser Ver-
lag, Munich, 2007.
07Ram Ramsteiner, F.: Evaluating environmental stress cracking resistance. In: Grellmann, W.,
Seidler, S. (eds.): Polymer testing. Carl Hanser Verlag, Munich, 2007, chapter 7, 383–428.
08Ayy Ayyer, R., Hiltner, A., Baer, E.: Effect of an environmental stress cracking agent on the
mechanism of fatigue and creep in polyethylene. J. Mater. Sci. 43 (2008) 6238–6253.
08Che Cheng, J. J., Polak, M. A., Penlidis, A.: A tensile strain hardening test indicator of envi-
ronmental stress cracking resistance. J. Macromol. Sci. Part A – Pure Appl. Chem. 45
(2008) 599–611.
08Gar Garcia, R. A., Carrero, A., Aroca, M., Prieto, O., Dominguez, C.: Slow crack growth re-
sistance in resin blends of chromium and metallocene catalyzed ethylene-hexene copoly-
mers for pipe applications. Polym. Eng. Sci. 48 (2008) 825–933.
08Max Maxwell, A. S., Pilkington, G.: Prediction of environmental stress cracking resistance in
linear low density polyethylenes. Polym. Eng. Sci. 48 (2008) 360–364.
New Series VIII/6A3
09Ree van Reenen, A. J., Shebani, A. N.: The effect of molecular composition and heterogeneity
on the environmental stress cracking resistance (ESCR) of propylene impact copolymers.
Polym. Degr. Stab. 94 (2009) 1558–1563.
09Sha Sharif, A., Mohammadi, N., Ghaffarian, S. R.: Model prediction of the ESCR of semicrys-
talline polyethylene: Effects of melt cooling rate. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 112 (2009) 3249–
3256.
09Wel Weltschev, M.: Vergleich der Materialkennwerte von Formstoffen aus Polyethylen hoher
Dichte mit dem Baumusterverhalten von Gefahrgutverpackungen. PhD thesis, Bergischen
Universität Wuppertal, Wuppertal, 2009
09Zho Zhou, H. X., Lofgren, E. A., Jabarin, S. A.: Effects of microcrystallinity and morphology
on physical aging and its associated effects on tensile mechanical and environmental stress
cracking properties of poly(ethylene terephthalate). J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 112 (2009) 2906–
2917.
11Che Cheng, J. J., Polak, M. A., Penlidis, A.: Influence of micromolecular structure on environ-
mental stress cracking resistance of high density polyethylene. Tunnelling Underground
Space Technol. 26 (2011) 582–593.
11Wel Weltschev, M.: Comparison between material parameters of polyethylene grades and the
test performance behaviour of packaging for the transport of dangerous goods. Packaging
Technol. Sci. 24 (2011) 361–371.
Standards Chapter 4.7

ISO 16770 Plastics – Determination of environmental stress cracking (ESC) of polyethylene –
(2004) Full-notch creep test (FNCT)
ISO 22088-2 Plastics – Determination of resistance to environmental stress cracking (ESC) –
(2006) Part 2: Constant tensile load method
(2006) Part 3: Bent strip method
(2006) Part 4: Ball or pin impression method
(2006) Part 5: Constant tensile deformation method
(2006) Part 6: Slow strain rate test method
ASTM F 1473 Standard test method for notch tensile test to measure the resistance to slow crack
(2011) growth of polyethylene pipes and resins
ASTM D 1693 Standard test method for environmental stress-cracking of ethylene plastics
(2012)
IEC 60811-1 Insulating and sheathing materials of electric and optical cables – Common test
(2004) methods – Part 4-1: Methods specific to polyethylene and polypropylene com-
pounds – Resistance to environmental stress cracking – Measurement of the melt
flow index – Carbon black and/or mineral filler content measurement in polyethy-
lene by direct combustion – Measurement of carbon black content by thermogravi-
metric analysis (TGA) – Assessment of carbon black dispersion in polyethylene us-
ing a microscope
New Series VIII/6A3
View publication stats

LB Chapter 4 7

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

LB Chapter 4 7

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

Stress Cracking Resistance (Bent Strip Method) - Data

Chapter · January 2014

Ralf Lach Wolfgang Grellmann

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

15-jähriges Bestehen der Stiftung AMK View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

4.7 Stress Cracking Resistance

Time to fracture log t B

log K ISCC log K IC

Constant Tensile Test Method

Material Specification Medium T Load Time to Ref.

ABS - - 1.5 ⋅ 105 81Mor

Material Specification Medium T Load Time to Ref.

non-ionic sur- 4.8

PA 6 - methanol 23 21 3.6 ⋅ 106 98Bec

PA 66 - methanol 23 14.3 3.6 ⋅ 106 98Bec

PA 610 - methanol 23 19.3 3.6 ⋅ 106 98Bec

PBT/ - 80 2.0 04Kui

PC 23 1.35 ⋅ 105 07Ram

PE density (g cm-3) surfactant 50 4.2 67Mar

PE-HD solution viscosity (dl g-1) 5 % solution of 50 2.0 07Ram

Material Specification Medium T Load Time to Ref.

molecular weight aqueous solu- 80 5.0 04Men

PE-HD/ ethylene glycol 80 6 < 9.3 ⋅ 105 98Sch

Material Specification Medium T Load Time to Ref.

PE-HD/ molecular weight (according to 80 2.4 08Gar

PE-HD/ ethylene glycol 80 6.0 0.1 – 3.7 ⋅ 105 98Sch

PE-LD - 10 % solution 50 3.2 MPa 1.2 ⋅ 103 07Ram

PE-LLD copolymers with: 10 % solution 50 3.2 MPa 82Bub

Material Specification Medium T Load Time to Ref.

PE-LLD 1.35 10 % solution 50 4.2 5.11 ⋅ 105

Material Specification Medium T Load Time to Ref.

PE-LLD compression moulded 0 (air) 2.27 ⋅ 107

PET 0.1 % aqueous 30 7 09Zho

Material Specification Medium T Load Time to Ref.

PVC** gas pipe material 23 MPa 1 ⋅ 106 95Bre

PVC/ gas pipe material 23 MPa 1 ⋅ 106 95Bre

Material Specification Medium T Load Time to Ref.

sPS syndiotactic methanol - 18 1.35 ⋅ 105 07Ram

SAN - 23 1.35 ⋅ 105 07Ram

Tensile stress at break σ B [MPa] 30

Tensile stress at break σ B [MPa]

independently of molecular weight

increasing molecular weight

Tensile stress at break σ B [MPa]

Stress intensity factor K [MPa mm ]

Bent Strip Method

Material Specification Medium T Strain Time to Ref.

PE-HD 10 % solution of 50 * 09Sha

PE-LD - 10 % solution of 30–70 ** 0.36 – 1.8 ⋅ 104 03Bor

PE-LD/ EVA fraction 10 % solution of ** 03Bor

Material Specification Medium T Strain Time to Ref.

PP-PE ethylene fraction isopropanol - - 09Ree

* according to ASTM D 1693, ** according to IEC 60811-4-1

Ball Impression Test

Material Specification Medium T Ball over- Strength Ref.

ABS - (24 h) - 0.105 81Mor

ABS standard - 0.32 96Bec

Fracture Mechanic Method (KIscc)

Material Specification Medium T [°C] KIscc [MPa mm1/2] Ref.

PBS - aqueous NaOH solution, 03aTak