Blends of thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU) and polypropylene (PP) are highly incompatible because of large differences in polarities and high interfacial tensions. On one hand, PP is added to TPU to improve TPU's thermal stability, chemical properties, mechanical properties (modulus, strength and hardness) and processing performance and to reduce TPU's cost. On the other hand, TPU is blended with PP to improve PP's properties (e.g. abrasion, flexibility, tear strength, shock absorbing capabilities, impact strength, adhesion and paintability/printability). Earlier works in polyurethane/organoclay nanocomposites, PP/organoclay nanocomposites and TPU/PP blends were studied. In our experimental work, both ester and ether based TPU nanocomposites were prepared by melt blending using 3 wt-% Cloisite 10A (organically modified montmorillonite clay) as the nanoscale reinforcement and blended with PP with/without PP-graft-maleic anhydride as the compatibiliser. Blends of nanoclay filled TPU/PP were evaluated for dynamic mechanical properties such as storage modulus E′, loss modulus E″ and dissipation factor tanδ.
PotschkeP., WallheinkeK., FritscheH. and StuzH.: ‘Morphology and properties of blends with different thermoplastic polyurethanes and polyolefines’, J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 1997, 64, 749–762.
2.
WallheinkeK., PotschkeP. and StuzH. J.: ‘Influence of compatibilizer addition on particle size and coalescence in TPU/PP Blends’, J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 1997, 65, 2217–2226.
3.
PotschkeP. and WallheinkeK.: ‘Blends of thermoplastic polyurethane and maleic – anhydride grafted polyethylene’, Polym. Eng. Sci., 1999, 39, (6), 1035–1048.
4.
WallheinkeK. and PotschkeP.: ‘Coalescence in blends of thermoplastic polyurethane with polylefins’, Polym. Eng. Sci., 1999, 39, (6), 1022–1034.
5.
PotschkeP., PionteckJ. and StuzH.: Surface tension, interfacial tension, and morphology in blends of thermoplastic polyurethanes and polyolefins, Polymer, 2002, 43, 6965–6972.
6.
LuQ. W., MacoskoC. W. and HorrionJ.: ‘Compatibilized blends of thermoplastic polyurethane and polypropylene’, Macromol. Symp., 2003, 198, 221–232.
7.
LuQ. W. and MacoskoC. W.: ‘Comparing the compatibility of various functionalised polypropylenes with thermoplastic polyurethane’, Polymer, 2004, 45, 1981–1991.
8.
LuQ. W., HoyeT. R. and MacoskoC. W.: ‘Reactivity of common functional groups with urethanes: Modela for reactive compatibilization of thermoplastic polyurethane blends’, J. Polym. Sci.A, 40A, 2002, 2310–2328.
9.
SongM., XiaH. S., YaoK. J. and HourstonD. J.: ‘A study on phase morphology and surface properties of polyurethane/organoclay nanocomposites’, Eur. Polym. J., 2005, 41, 259–266.
10.
StrankowskiM., HaponiukJ. T., GazdaM. and JanikH.: ‘Polyurethane nanocomposites obtained from organically modified montmorillonites’, e-Polymers, 2005, 23, 1–6.
11.
LertwimolnunW. and VergnesB.: ‘Influence of compatibilizer and processing conditions on the dispersion of nanoclay in a polypropylene matrix’, Polymer, 2005, 46, 3462–3471.
12.
FinniganB., MartinD., HalleyP., TrussR. and CambellK.: ‘Morphology and properties of thermoplastic polyurethane nanocomposites incorporating hydrophilic layered silicates’, Polymer, 2004, 45, 2249–2260.
13.
PattanayakA. and JanaS. C.: ‘Properties of bulk-polymerized thermoplastic polyurethane nanocomposites’, Polymer, 2005, 46, 3394–3406.
14.
PattanayakA. and JanaS. C.: ‘Thermoplastic polyurethane nanocomposites of reactive silicate clays: effects of soft segments on properties’, Polymer, 2005, 46, 5183–5193.
15.
KannanM., BhagawanS. S., KuruvillaJ. and ThomasS.: ‘Thermoplatic polyurethane based blends and nanocomposites: structure-properties relations’, Int. J. Plastic. Technol., 2006, 10, 588–597.
16.
DanC. H., LeeM. H., KimY. D., MinB. H. and KimJ.: ‘Effect of clay modifiers on the morphology and physical properties of thermoplastic polyurethane/clay nanocomposites’, Polymer, 2006, 47, 6718–6731.
17.
ChavarriaF. and PaulD. R.: ‘Morphology and properties of thermoplastic polyurethane nanocomposites: Effect of organoclay structure’, Polymer, 2006, 47, 7760–7774.
18.
PattanayakA. and JanaS. C.: ‘Synthesis of thermoplastic polyurethane nanocomposites of reactive nanoclay by bulk polymerization methods’, Polymer, 2005, 46, 3275–3288.
19.
YaoK. J., SongM., HourstonD. J. and LuoD. Z.: ‘Polymer/layered clay nanocomposites: 2 polyurethane nanocomposites’, Polymer, 2002, 43, 1017–1020.
20.
TortoraM., GorrasiG., VittoriaV. and GalliG.: ‘Structural characterization and transport properties of organically modified montmorillonite/polyurethane nanocomposites’, Polymer, 2002, 43, 6147–6157.
21.
KimB. K., SeoJ. W. and JeongH. M.: ‘Morphology and properties of waterborne polyurethane/clay nanocomposites’, Eur. Polym. J., 2003, 39, 85–91.
22.
Bindu SharmilaT. K., AyswaryaE. P., AbrahamB. T., Sabura BegumP. M. and ThachilE. T.: ‘Fabrication of partially exfoliated and disordered intercalated cloisite epoxy nanocomposites via in situ polymerization: Mechanical, dynamic mechanical, thermal and barrier properties’, Appl. Clay Sci., 2014, 102, 220–230.
23.
JingL., XuW., ChengZ., PeipeiZ., BoweiH., NinghaiG. and Li YaziJ.: ‘Synthesis and properties of epoxy-polyurethane silica nanocomposites by a novel sol method and in-situ solution polymerization route’, Appl. Surf. Sci., 2014, 303, 67–75.
24.
TianC., JinhaoQ., KongjunZ., XiaoyuanH., XinK. and E-liangD.: ‘Poly(methyl methacrylate)-functionalized graphene/polyurethane dielectric elastomer composites with superior electric field induced strain’, Mater. Lett., 2014, 128, 19–22.
25.
JulianoM., EricP., LucA. and RosarioE. S. B.: ‘Elaboration and properties of novel biobased nanocomposites with halloysite nanotubes and thermoplastic polyurethane from dimerized fatty acids’, Polymer, 2014, 55, (20), 5226–5234.
26.
WangS. and MiK.: ‘Solid polymer electrolytes of blends of polyurethane and polyether modified polysiloxane and their ionic conuctivity’, Polymer, 2010, 51, (12), 2621–2632.
