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

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

nanocomposites respectively. However, graft<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> PBAT with MA results <strong>in</strong> improved dispersion<br />

characteristics <strong>of</strong> organically modified clays with<strong>in</strong> MA-g-PBAT matrix with a smaller amount <strong>of</strong> stack<br />

platelets <strong>in</strong> broad and obscure regions & regions <strong>of</strong> exfoliated clay galleries along with <strong>in</strong>tercalated<br />

stacks.<br />

The mechanical properties <strong>of</strong> bio-nancomposite hybrid is depicted <strong>in</strong> Table-1 It is evident that<br />

<strong>in</strong>corporation <strong>of</strong> nanoclays results <strong>in</strong> an <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> the tensile modulus <strong>of</strong> matrix polymer <strong>in</strong> both<br />

transverse and as well as <strong>in</strong> mach<strong>in</strong>e direction respectively. In case <strong>of</strong> the nanocomposite prepared us<strong>in</strong>g<br />

C30B nanoclay an <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>of</strong> Young’s modulus to the tune <strong>of</strong> 30.59% and 31.99% respectively was<br />

observed. A similar <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> Young’s modulus <strong>of</strong> PBAT/B109, PBAT/C20A nanocomposite hybrids<br />

was also noticed to the tune <strong>of</strong> 38.88% 46.94%, and 14.50% 7.22% <strong>in</strong> transverse and mach<strong>in</strong>e direction<br />

respectively as compared with the virg<strong>in</strong> matrix. The <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> Young’s modulus <strong>of</strong> virg<strong>in</strong> PBAT matrix<br />

follows the follow<strong>in</strong>g order PBAT/B109>PBAT/C30B>PBAT/C20A> PBAT/Na + MMT. The<br />

nanocomposite hybrid with B109 exhibited optimum performance as compared with the other<br />

nanocomposite hybrids. This behavior is probably due to the homogeneous distribution and micro<br />

dispersion <strong>of</strong> nanoclay facilitat<strong>in</strong>g separation <strong>of</strong> tactoids and platelets <strong>in</strong> partial exfoliation and<br />

<strong>in</strong>tercalations accomplished through shear stress dur<strong>in</strong>g melt compound<strong>in</strong>g. In all the cases, the<br />

nanocomposite hybrids exhibited higher performance <strong>in</strong> the mach<strong>in</strong>e direction, which is probably due to<br />

the uniform alignment and improved <strong>in</strong>terfacial adhesion <strong>of</strong> the nanoscale re<strong>in</strong>forcement with<strong>in</strong> the PBAT<br />

matrix. However, addition <strong>of</strong> nanoclays leads to a decrease <strong>in</strong> tensile strength as well as elongation at<br />

break. The MA-g-PBAT bio-nanocomposite hybrids exhibited improved tensile modulus as compared<br />

with the ungrafted bio-nanocomposite hybrids. This is probably due to the formation <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>ter molecular<br />

hydrogen bond<strong>in</strong>g between hydrogenated tallow groups <strong>of</strong> B109 and C20A and MA-g-PBAT matrix. The<br />

bio-nanocomposite hybrid prepared us<strong>in</strong>g B109 clay exhibited maximum Young’s modulus, which can be<br />

expla<strong>in</strong>ed due to similar cause that B109 provides <strong>in</strong>creased clay platelets per surface area <strong>of</strong> contact with<br />

virg<strong>in</strong> matrix.<br />

The tear resistance <strong>of</strong> PBAT matrix and the bio-nanocomposite hybrids also exhibits a l<strong>in</strong>ear <strong>in</strong>crease<br />

with the addition <strong>of</strong> nanoclays and MA. Nearly 19% <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> the tear strength <strong>of</strong> PBAT matrix was<br />

observed <strong>in</strong> PBAT/B109 bio-nanocomposite hybrid. PBAT/C30B as well as PBAT/C20A bionanocomposite<br />

hybrid also exhibited an <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> tear strength <strong>of</strong> PBAT from 335.3 g/mm to 343.17<br />

g/mm and 283.00 g/mm respectively. Further, functionalization <strong>of</strong> PBAT matrix with MA through<br />

reactive extrusion results <strong>in</strong> modification <strong>of</strong> the <strong>in</strong>terfacial region between PBAT and nanoclays through<br />

formation <strong>of</strong> covalent bonds/hydrogen bonds with suitable chemical/pendent groups [24]. The bionanocomposite<br />

hybrid <strong>of</strong> MA-g-PBAT/B109 exhibited a tear resistance <strong>of</strong> 445.39 g/mm where as MA-g-<br />

PBAT/C30B exhibited a tear resistance <strong>of</strong> 375.05 g/mm respectively.<br />

The storage modulus verses temperature <strong>of</strong> the virg<strong>in</strong> matrix and nanocomposite hybrid is represented <strong>in</strong><br />

fig 3. It is evident that storage modulus <strong>of</strong> PBAT biopolymer <strong>in</strong>creases with <strong>in</strong>corporation <strong>of</strong> nan<strong>of</strong>iller<br />

which is probably due to the efficient stress transfer from the filler to matrix. Further the grafted sample<br />

exhibited improved modulus as compared with the ungrafted nanocomposite hybrids. This further<br />

confirms improved <strong>in</strong>terface between the nan<strong>of</strong>iller and the biopolymer matrix upon functionalisation<br />

with MA. MA-g-PBAT/B109 sample exhibited optimum storage modulus as compared with MA-g-<br />

PBAT/C30B nanocomposite hybrid which is probably due to better exfoliated structure.<br />

The melt<strong>in</strong>g temperature <strong>of</strong> PBAT matrix depicted <strong>in</strong> DSC Thermograms (fig.4)also showed a substantial<br />

<strong>in</strong>crease from 109.2°C to 125°C <strong>in</strong> PBAT/C30B, 126.72°C <strong>in</strong> PBAT/B109, 138.25°C <strong>in</strong> MA-g-<br />

PBAT/C30B and 139.02°C <strong>in</strong> MA-g-PBAT/B109 nanocomposite hybrids respectively.<br />

The variation <strong>of</strong> crystallization temperature (Tc) <strong>of</strong> virg<strong>in</strong> matrix and nanocomposite hybrids is presented<br />

fig 5. The virg<strong>in</strong> matrix exhibits a crystallization peak around 66.14°C which <strong>in</strong>creased substantially with<br />

the <strong>in</strong>corporation <strong>of</strong> nanoclays as well as functionalization <strong>of</strong> PBAT with MA. PBAT/C30B bionanocomposite<br />

hybrid exhibits optimum crystallization peak around 96.45°C. This is primarily due to<br />

heterogeneous nucleation effect <strong>in</strong> presence <strong>of</strong> nanoclay which <strong>in</strong>crease the nucleation sites <strong>in</strong> the<br />

polymer matrix. However, graft<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> virg<strong>in</strong> matrix does not show any appreciable <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> the

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!