Crystallization kinetics of J-1 polymer under different thermal treatments
- 44 Downloads
A bis-para-amino cyclohexylmethane (PACM)-based polyamide homopolymer (J-1 polymer produced by Du Pont), utilized as a matrix for composites, was subjected to different thermal treatments in order to investigate its crystallization thermodynamics and crystallization kinetics. Various J-1 samples, quenched, annealed from the glassy state, isothermally crystallized from the melt and slowly cooled, were studied by differential scanning calorimetry (DSC). A thermodynamic melting temperature of 352.6 °C was determined from a Hoffman-Weeks diagram of polymer samples annealed at different temperatures between the glass transition and melting temperature. By using DSC isothermal crystallization data from the melt, the existence of two crystallization regimes, already found in a previous investigation, was confirmed, and a transition temperature between the two regimes, equal to 262.2 °C was determined, in good agreement with 260.5 °C, obtained by depolarized light measurements, reported elsewhere. Moreover, the ratio between the crystallization kinetics factor of two crystallization regimes is 1.87, very close to the value of 2 predicted by the Huffman theory. Crystallization of samples from the melt, at different cooling rates, was also performed. The Arrhenius plot of data indicated that the crystallization process proceeds with two distinct activation energies (589 and 244 kJ mol−1), below or above a cooling rate of 2.67 °C min−1, corresponding to a temperature of 253.9 °C. This result is in good agreement with the two crystallization regimes reported above.
KeywordsCrystallization Differential Scanning Calorimetry Thermal Treatment Cooling Rate Arrhenius Plot
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.S. W. Shalaby, in “Thermal characterization of polymeric materials”, edited by E. A. Turi (Academic Press, Orlando, FL, 1981) p. 294.Google Scholar
- 4.J. A. Nairn and P. Zoller, in “Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Composite Materials”, San Diego, 1985, edited by W. C. Harrigan Jr, J. Strife and A. K. Dhingra (TMS-AIME, Warrendale, PA, 1985) p. 931.Google Scholar
- 5.W. J. Lee, B. K. Fukai, J. C. Seferis and I. Y. Chang, Soc. Plast. Eng. Inc. Technical Papers XXXIII (1987) 942.Google Scholar
- 8.R. Barton Jr, Bull Am. Phys. Soc. 32 (1987) 701.Google Scholar
- 10.A. R. Wedgewood, K. B. Su and J. A. Nairn, SAMPE J. 24 (1) (1988) 41.Google Scholar
- 11.D. C. Lin and P. H. Geil, ONR-URI Composites Program, National Center for Composite Materials Research at University of Illinois, Urbana, June 1991, Technical Report 91-06.Google Scholar
- 12.D. C. Dean, A. Miyase and P. H. Geil, ibid. Technical Report 91-07.Google Scholar
- 19.J. N. Leckenby, D. C. Karget, W. J. Sichina and P. S. Gill, in “Proceedings of 3rd International Conference on Carbon Fibres”, London, October 1989 (Conference Booklet Publishers, PRI, London, 1989) p. 11(1).Google Scholar
- 25.E. J. Clark and J. D. Huffman, Macromolecules 17 (1984) 876.Google Scholar
- 26.J. D. Hoffman, G. T. Davis and J. I. Lauritzen, Jr, in “Treatise on solid state chemistry”, Vol. 3, edited by N. B. Hannay (Plenum Press, New York, 1976) Ch. 7.Google Scholar