11.12.2012 Views

Nondestructive testing of defects in adhesive joints

Nondestructive testing of defects in adhesive joints

Nondestructive testing of defects in adhesive joints

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

<strong>in</strong> comparison to that <strong>of</strong> the base res<strong>in</strong> was due to the high degree <strong>of</strong> compatibility aris<strong>in</strong>g from<br />

the polar groups <strong>of</strong> HTPB and UPR. The tensile strength <strong>of</strong> maleated HTPB blends gradually<br />

decreases on add<strong>in</strong>g progressively larger amounts <strong>of</strong> rubber due to the higher flexibility <strong>of</strong><br />

maleated HTPB.<br />

The elongation at break <strong>in</strong>creases with <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> elastomer concentration as shown <strong>in</strong> Fig.3.<br />

The addition <strong>of</strong> MA-g-HTPB produced the greatest <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> elongation at break compared to<br />

HTPB due to the higher flexibility and compatibility <strong>of</strong> maleated HTPB. The elongation at break<br />

<strong>of</strong> MA-g-HTPB/UPR is about 219 % <strong>of</strong> UPR<br />

The energy absorption <strong>of</strong> the cured res<strong>in</strong> as a function <strong>of</strong> rubber concentration is<br />

shown <strong>in</strong> Fig.4. At 3-wt % MA-g-HTPB concentration, the energy absorption <strong>of</strong> the blend was at<br />

a maximum (about 305 % <strong>of</strong> the energy absorption <strong>of</strong> UPR). The energy absorption is related to<br />

the toughness <strong>of</strong> the sample. Higher elongation at break values <strong>in</strong>creases the toughness <strong>of</strong> MA-g-<br />

HTPB. The performance <strong>of</strong> MA-g-HTPB was far superior to HTPB, due to better dispersion <strong>of</strong><br />

the rubber phase as particles <strong>in</strong> the cont<strong>in</strong>uous polyester phase.<br />

Flexural properties<br />

Fig. 5 shows the variation <strong>of</strong> flexural strength with rubber content. The flexural strength <strong>of</strong><br />

MA-g-HTPB/UPR blend decreases with elastomer concentration due to the higher flexibility and<br />

compatibility <strong>of</strong> maleated HTPB.<br />

Water absorption<br />

Water absorption <strong>of</strong> HTPB and maleated HTPB modified res<strong>in</strong>s is shown by Fig.6.<br />

The maleated HTPB has slightly higher water absorption compared to HTPB due to the higher<br />

functionalisation.<br />

CONCLUSIONS<br />

The study reveals the effect <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>corporat<strong>in</strong>g functional elastomers <strong>in</strong>to UPR at low<br />

concentrations by a physical method. Toughness and tensile/flexural properties show maximum<br />

improvement at about 2-3 wt % HTPB concentrations. Interest<strong>in</strong>gly, the <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> toughness (76<br />

% <strong>of</strong> the energy absorption <strong>of</strong> UPR) has been observed with simultaneous <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> tensile and<br />

flexural properties for HTPB.<br />

Maleation <strong>in</strong>creases the toughness and elongation at break <strong>of</strong> HTPB. At 3-wt % MA-g-<br />

HTPB concentration, the energy absorption <strong>of</strong> the blend was at a maximum (about 305 % <strong>of</strong> the<br />

energy absorption <strong>of</strong> UPR) with marg<strong>in</strong>al lower<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> tensile and flexural properties.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!