Découvrez votre prochain livre préféré

Devenez membre aujourd'hui et lisez gratuitement pendant 30 jours
Handbook of Fillers

Handbook of Fillers

Lire l'aperçu

Handbook of Fillers

Longueur:
2,865 pages
24 heures
Sortie:
Jan 28, 2021
ISBN:
9780323898959
Format:
Livre

Description

Covers available fillers and their properties, their effect on filled materials such as mechanical properties, rheology, morphology, flammability, and recycling, and their use in practical applications

Sortie:
Jan 28, 2021
ISBN:
9780323898959
Format:
Livre

À propos de l'auteur

George Wypych has a Ph.D. in chemical engineering. His professional expertise includes both university teaching (full professor) and research and development. He has published 18 books, 47 scientific papers, and he has obtained 16 patents. He specializes in polymer additives, polymer processing and formulation, material durability and the development of sealants and coatings.


Lié à Handbook of Fillers

En lire plus de George Wypych
Livres associé
Articles associés

Aperçu du livre

Handbook of Fillers - George Wypych

Handbook of Fillers

Fifth Edition

George Wypych

                         Toronto 2021

Table of Contents

Cover image

Title page

Copyright

Chapter 1: Introduction

1.1 EXPECTATIONS FROM FILLERS

1.2 TYPICAL FILLER PROPERTIES

1.3 DEFINITIONS

1.4 CLASSIFICATION

1.5 MARKETS AND TRENDS

Chapter 2: Fillers – Origin, Chemical Composition, Properties, and Morphology

2.1 PARTICULATE FILLERS

2.1.1 ALUMINUM FLAKES AND POWDERS

2.1.2 ALUMINUM BORATE WHISKERS

2.1.3 ALUMINUM NITRIDE

2.1.4 ALUMINUM OXIDE

2.1.5 ALUMINUM TRIHYDROXIDE

2.1.6 ANTHRACITE

2.1.7 ANTIMONATE OF SODIUM

2.1.8 ANTIMONY PENTOXIDE

2.1.9 ANTIMONY TRIOXIDE

2.1.10 AMMONIUM OCTAMOLYBDATE

2.1.11 APATITE

2.1.12 ASH, FLY

2.1.13 ATTAPULGITE

2.1.14 BARIUM METABORATE

2.1.15 BARIUM SULFATE

2.1.16 BARIUM & STRONTIUM SULFATES

2.1.17 BARIUM TITANATE

2.1.18 BENTONITE

2.1.19 BERYLLIUM OXIDE

2.1.20 BORON NITRIDE

2.1.21 CALCIUM CARBONATE

2.1.22 CALCIUM FLUORIDE

2.1.23 CALCIUM HYDROXIDE

2.1.24 CALCIUM PHOSPHATE

2.1.25 CALCIUM SILICATE

2.1.26 CALCIUM SULFATE

2.1.27 CARBON BLACK

2.1.28 CARBONYL IRON POWDER

2.1.29 CELLULOSE PARTICLES

2.1.30 CERAMIC BEADS

2.1.31 CHITOSAN

2.1.32 CLAMSHELL POWDER

2.1.33 CLAY

2.1.34 COBALT POWDER

2.1.35 COPPER

2.1.36 CORN COB POWDER

2.1.37 CRISTOBALITE

2.1.38 DIATOMACEOUS EARTH

2.1.39 DOLOMITE

2.1.40 EGGSHELL FILLER

2.1.41 FERRITES

2.1.42 FELDSPAR

2.1.43 GADOLINIUM OXIDE

2.1.44 GLASS BEADS

2.1.45 GOLD

2.1.46 GRAPHENE

2.1.47 GRAPHENE OXIDE

2.1.48 GRAPHITE

2.1.49 GROUND TIRE POWDER

2.1.50 HALLOYSITE

2.1.51 HUNTITE

2.1.52 HYDROUS CALCIUM SILICATE

2.1.53 ILLITE

2.1.54 IRON

2.1.55 IRON OXIDE

2.1.56 KAOLIN

2.1.57 LEAD OXIDE

2.1.58 LITHOPONE

2.1.59 MAGNESIUM OXIDE

2.1.60 MAGNESIUM HYDROXIDE

2.1.61 MAGNETITE

2.1.62 METAL-CONTAINING CONDUCTIVE MATERIALS

2.1.63 MICA

2.1.64 MOLYBDENUM

2.1.65 MOLYBDENUM DISULFIDE

2.1.66 MOLYBDENUM OXIDE

2.1.67 NANOFILLERS

2.1.68 NICKEL

2.1.69 NICKEL OXIDE

2.1.70 NICKEL ZINC FERRITE

2.1.71 NUTSHELL POWDER

2.1.72 PERLITE

2.1.73 POLYMERIC FILLERS

2.1.74 POTASSIUM HEXATITANATE WHISKER

2.1.75 PUMICE

2.1.76 PYROPHYLLITE

2.1.77 RUBBER PARTICLES

2.1.78 SEPIOLITE

2.1.79 SILICA

2.1.80 SILICON CARBIDE

2.1.81 SILICON NITRIDE

2.1.82 SILVER POWDER AND FLAKES

2.1.83 SLATE FLOUR

2.1.84 TALC

2.1.85 TITANIUM DIOXIDE

2.1.86 TUNGSTEN

2.1.87 VERMICULITE

2.1.88 WOLLASTONITE

2.1.89 WOOD FLOUR AND SIMILAR MATERIALS

2.1.90 ZEOLITES

2.1.91 ZINC BORATE

2.1.92 ZINC OXIDE

2.1.93 ZINC STANNATE

2.1.94 ZINC SULFIDE

2.2 FIBERS

2.2.1 ARAMID FIBERS

2.2.2 CARBON FIBERS

2.2.3 CARBON NANOTUBES

2.2.4 CELLULOSE FIBERS

2.2.5 CELLULOSE NANOFIBRILS

2.2.6 GLASS FIBERS

2.2.7 OTHER FIBERS

Chapter 3: Fillers Transportation, Storage and Processing

3.1 FILLER PACKAGING

3.2 EXTERNAL TRANSPORTATION

3.3 FILLER RECEIVING

3.4 STORAGE

3.5 IN-PLANT CONVEYING

3.6 SEMI-BULK UNLOADING SYSTEMS

3.7 BAG HANDLING EQUIPMENT

3.8 BLENDING

3.9 FEEDING

3.10 DRYING

3.11 DISPERSION

Chapter 4: Quality Control of Fillers

4.1 ABSORPTION COEFFICIENT

4.2 ACIDITY OR ALKALINITY OF WATER EXTRACT

4.3 ASH CONTENT

4.4 BRIGHTNESS

4.5 COARSE PARTICLES

4.6 COLOR

4.7 CTAB SURFACE AREA

4.8 DENSITY

4.9 ELECTRICAL PROPERTIES

4.10 EXTRACTABLES

4.11 FINES CONTENT

4.12 HEATING LOSS

4.13 HEAT STABILITY

4.14 HEGMAN FINENESS

4.15 HIDING POWER

4.16 IODINE ABSORPTION NUMBER

4.17 LIGHTENING POWER OF WHITE PIGMENTS

4.18 LOSS ON IGNITION

4.19 MECHANICAL AND RELATED PROPERTIES

4.20 OIL ABSORPTION

4.21 PARTICLE SIZE

4.22 PELLET STRENGTH

4.23 p H

4.24 RESISTANCE TO LIGHT

4.25 RESISTIVITY OF AQUEOUS EXTRACT

4.26 SIEVE RESIDUE

4.27 SOLUBLE MATTER

4.28 SPECIFIC SURFACE AREA

4.29 SULFUR CONTENT

4.30 TAMPED VOLUME

4.31 TINTING STRENGTH

4.32 VOLATILE MATTER

4.33 WATER CONTENT

4.34 WATER-SOLUBLE SULFATES, CHLORIDES & NITRATES

Chapter 5: Physical Properties of Fillers and Filled Materials

5.1 DENSITY

5.2 PARTICLE SIZE

5.3 PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION

5.4 PARTICLE SHAPE

5.5 PARTICLE SURFACE MORPHOLOGY AND ROUGHNESS

5.6 SPECIFIC SURFACE AREA

5.7 POROSITY

5.8 PARTICLE-PARTICLE INTERACTION AND SPACING

5.9 AGGLOMERATES

5.10 AGGREGATES AND STRUCTURE

5.11 FLOCCULATION AND SEDIMENTATION

5.12 ASPECT RATIO

5.13 PACKING VOLUME

5.14 p H

5.15 ZETA-POTENTIAL

5.16 SURFACE ENERGY

5.17 MOISTURE

5.18 ABSORPTION OF LIQUIDS AND SWELLING

5.19 PERMEABILITY AND BARRIER PROPERTIES

5.20 OIL ABSORPTION

5.21 HYDROPHILIC/HYDROPHOBIC PROPERTIES

5.22 OPTICAL PROPERTIES

5.23 REFRACTIVE INDEX

5.24 FRICTION PROPERTIES

5.25 HARDNESS

5.26 INTUMESCENT PROPERTIES

5.27 THERMAL CONDUCTIVITY

5.28 THERMAL EXPANSION COEFFICIENT

5.29 THERMAL DEGRADATION

5.30 MELTING TEMPERATURE

5.31 GLASS TRANSITION TEMPERATURE

5.32 ELECTRICAL PROPERTIES

5.33 RELATIVE PERMITTIVITY

5.34 ELECTRICAL PERCOLATION

5.35 EMI SHIELDING

5.36 MAGNETIC PROPERTIES

5.37 SHAPE MEMORY

Chapter 6: Chemical Properties of Fillers & Filled Materials

6.1 REACTIVITY

6.2 CHEMICAL GROUPS ON THE FILLER SURFACE

6.3 FILLER SURFACE MODIFICATION

6.4 FILLER MODIFICATION AND MATERIAL PROPERTIES

6.5 RESISTANCE TO VARIOUS CHEMICALS

6.6 CURE IN FILLERS PRESENCE

6.7 POLYMERIZATION IN FILLERS PRESENCE

6.8 GRAFTING

6.9 CROSSLINK DENSITY

6.10 REACTION KINETICS

6.11 MOLECULAR MOBILITY

Chapter 7: Organization of Interface and Matrix Containing Fillers

7.1 PARTICLE DISTRIBUTION IN THE MATRIX

7.2 ORIENTATION OF FILLER PARTICLES IN THE MATRIX

7.3 DISTANCE BETWEEN PARTICLES

7.4 VOIDS

7.5 MATRIX-FILLER INTERACTION

7.6 CHEMICAL INTERACTIONS

7.7 OTHER INTERACTIONS

7.8 INTERPHASE ORGANIZATION

7.9 INTERFACIAL ADHESION

7.10 INTERPHASE THICKNESS

7.11 FILLER-CHAIN LINKS

7.12 CHAIN DYNAMICS

7.13 BOUND RUBBER

7.14 DEBONDING

7.15 MECHANISMS OF REINFORCEMENT

7.16 BENEFITS OF THE ORGANIZATION ON A MOLECULAR LEVEL

Chapter 8: The Effect of Fillers on the Mechanical Properties of Filled Materials

8.1 TENSILE STRENGTH AND ELONGATION

8.2 TENSILE YIELD STRESS

8.3 MULLINS’ EFFECT

8.4 ELASTIC MODULUS

8.5 FLEXURAL STRENGTH AND MODULUS

8.6 IMPACT RESISTANCE

8.7 HARDNESS

8.8 TEAR STRENGTH

8.9 COMPRESSIVE STRENGTH

8.10 FRACTURE RESISTANCE

8.11 WEAR

8.12 FRICTION

8.13 ABRASION

8.14 SCRATCH RESISTANCE

8.15 FATIGUE

8.16 FAILURE

8.17 ADHESION

8.18 THERMAL DEFORMATION

8.19 SHRINKAGE

8.20 WARPAGE

8.21 COMPRESSION SET

8.22 LOAD TRANSFER

8.23 RESIDUAL STRESS

8.24 CREEP

Chapter 9: The Effect of Fillers on Rheological Properties of Filled Materials

9.1 VISCOSITY

9.2 FLOW

9.3 FLOW-INDUCED FILLER PARTICLE ORIENTATION

9.4 TORQUE

9.5 VISCOELASTICITY

9.6 DYNAMIC MECHANICAL BEHAVIOR

9.7 COMPLEX VISCOSITY

9.8 SHEAR VISCOSITY

9.9 ELONGATIONAL VISCOSITY

9.10 MELT RHEOLOGY

9.11 YIELD VALUE

Chapter 10: Morphology of Filled Systems

10.1 CRYSTALLINITY

10.2 CRYSTALLIZATION BEHAVIOR

10.3 NUCLEATION

10.4 CRYSTAL SIZE

10.5 SPHERULITES

10.6 TRANSCRYSTALLINITY

10.7 ORIENTATION

Chapter 11: Effect of Fillers on Exposure to Different Environments

11.1 IRRADIATION

11.2 UV RADIATION

11.3 TEMPERATURE

11.4 LIQUIDS AND VAPORS

11.5 STABILIZATION

11.6 DEGRADARLE MATERIALS

Chapter 12: Flammability of Filled Materials

12.1 DEFINITIONS

12.2 LIMITING OXYGEN INDEX

12.3 IGNITION AND FLAME SPREAD RATE

12.4 HEAT TRANSMISSION RATE

12.5 DECOMPOSITION AND COMBUSTION

12.6 EMISSION OF GASEOUS COMPONENTS

12.7 SMOKE

12.8 CHAR

Chapter 13: Influence of Fillers on Performance of Other Additives and Vice Versa

13.1 ADHESION PROMOTERS

13.2 ANTISTATICS

13.3 BLOWING AGENTS

13.4 CATALYSTS

13.5 COMPATIBILIZERS

13.6 COUPLING AGENTS

13.7 DISPERSING AGENTS AND SURFACE-ACTIVE AGENTS

13.8 FLAME RETARDANTS

13.9 IMPACT MODIFIERS

13.10 UV STABILIZERS

Chapter 14: Testing Methods in Filled Systems

14.1 PHYSICAL METHODS

14.1.1 ATOMIC FORCE MICROSCOPY

14.1.2 AUTOIGNITION TEST

14.1.3 BOUND RUBBER

14.1.4 CHAR FORMATION

14.1.5 CONE CALORIMETRY

14.1.6 CONTACT ANGLE

14.1.7 DISPERSING AGENT REQUIREMENT

14.1.8 DISPERSION TESTS

14.1.9 DRIPPING TEST

14.1.10 DYNAMIC MECHANICAL ANALYSIS

14.1.11 ELECTRIC CONSTANTS DETERMINATION

14.1.12 ELECTRON MICROSCOPY

14.1.13 FIBER ORIENTATION

14.1.14 FLAME PROPAGATION TEST

14.1.15 GLOW WIRE TEST

14.1.16 IMAGE ANALYSIS

14.1.17 LIMITING OXYGEN INDEX

14.1.18 MAGNETIC PROPERTIES

14.1.19 OPTICAL MICROSCOPY

14.1.20 PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS

14.1.21 RADIANT PANEL TEST

14.1.22 RATE OF COMBUSTION

14.1.23 SCANNING ACOUSTIC MICROSCOPY

14.1.24 SMOKE CHAMBER

14.1.25 SONIC METHODS

14.1.26 SPECIFIC SURFACE AREA

14.1.27 THERMAL ANALYSIS

14.2 CHEMICAL AND INSTRUMENTAL ANALYSIS

14.2.1 ELECTRON SPIN RESONANCE

14.2.2 ELECTRON SPECTROSCOPY FOR CHEMICAL ANALYSIS

14.2.3 INVERSE GAS CHROMATOGRAPHY

14.2.4 GAS CHROMATOGRAPHY

14.2.5 GEL CONTENT

14.2.6 INFRARED AND RAMAN SPECTROSCOPY

14.2.7 NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE

14.2.8 UV AND VISIBLE SPECTROSCOPY

14.2.9 X-RAY ANALYSIS

Chapter 15: Fillers in Commercial Polymers

15.1 ACRYLICS

15.2 ACRYLONITRILE-BUTADIENE-STYRENE COPOLYMER

15.3 ACRYLONITRILE-STYRENE-ACRYLATE, ASA

15.4 ALIPHATIC POLYKETONE

15.5 ALKYD RESINS

15.6 BISMALEIMIDE

15.7 CELLULOSE ACETATE

15.8 CHITOSAN

15.9 ELASTOMERS, TPO

15.10 EPOXY RESINS

15.11 ETHYLENE-VINYL ACETATE COPOLYMER, EVA

15.12 ETHYLENE-VINYL ALCOHOL COPOLYMER, EVOH

15.13 ETHYLENE-ETHYL ACETATE COPOLYMER, EEA

15.14 ETHYLENE-PROPYLENE COPOLYMERS, EPR & EPDM

15.15 IONOMERS

15.16 LIQUID CRYSTALLINE POLYMERS, LCP

15.17 PERFLUOROALKOXY RESIN, PFA

15.18 PHENOLIC RESINS

15.19 POLY(ACRYLIC ACID), PAA

15.20 POLYACRYLONITRILE, PAN

15.21 POLYAMIDES, PA

15.22 POLYAMIDEIMIDE, PAI

15.23 POLYAMINES

15.24 POLYANILINE, PANI

15.25 POLYARYLETHERKETONE, PAEK

15.26 POLY(BUTYLENE SUCCINATE), PBS

15.27 POLY(BUTYLENE TEREPHTHALATE), PBT

15.28 POLYCAPROLACTONE, PCL

15.29 POLYCARBONATE, PC

15.30 POLYDICYCLOPENTADIENE

15.31 POLYETHERETHERKETONE, PEEK

15.32 POLYETHERIMIDE, PEI

15.33 POLYETHERSULFONE, PES

15.34 POLYETHYLENE, PE

15.35 POLYETHYLENE, CHLORINATED, CPE

15.36 POLYETHYLENE, CHLOROSULFONATED, CSM

15.37 POLY(ETHYLENE OXIDE), PEO & PEG

15.38 POLY(ETHYLENE TEREPHTHALATE), PET

15.39 POLYIMIDE, PI

15.40 POLY(LACTIC ACID)

15.41 POLYMETHYLMETHACRYLATE, PMMA

15.42 POLYOXYMETHYLENE, POM

15.43 POLY(PHENYLENE ETHER), PPO

15.44 POLY(PHENYLENE SULFIDE), PPS

15.45 POLYPROPYLENE, PP

15.46 POLYPYRROLE

15.47 POLYSTYRENE & HIGH IMPACT, PS & HIPS

15.48 POLYSULFIDE

15.49 POLYSULFONE, PSO

15.50 POLYTETRAFLUOROETHYLENE, PTFE

15.51 POLYURETHANES, PU & TPU

15.52 POLYVINYLACETATE, PVA

15.53 POLYVINYLALCOHOL, PVAL

15.54 POLYVINYLBUTYRAL, PVB

15.55 POLY(VINYL CHLORIDE), PVC

15.56 RUBBERS

15.56.1 NATURAL RUBBER, NR

15.56.2 NITRILE RUBBER, NBR

15.56.3 POLYBUTADIENE RUBBER, BR

15.56.4 BUTYL RUBBER, HR

15.56.5 POLYCHLOROPRENE, CR

15.56.6 POLYISOBUTYLENE, PIB

15.56.7 POLYISOPRENE, IR

15.56.8 STYRENE-BUTADIENE RUBBER, SBR

15.57 SILICONES, SI

15.58 STYRENE-ACRYLONITRILE COPOLYMER, SAN

15.59 TETRAFLUOROETHYLENE-PERFLUOROPROPYLENE

15.60 UNSATURATED POLYESTERS

15.61 VINYLIDENE-FLUORIDE TERPOLYMER, PVDF

Chapter 16: Fillers in Materials Combinations

16.1 BLENDS, ALLOYS, AND INTERPENETRATING NETWORKS

16.2 COMPOSITES

16.3 NANOCOMPOSITES

16.4 LAMINATES

Chapter 17: Formulation with Fillers

Chapter 18: Fillers in Different Processing Methods

18.1 BLOW MOLDING

18.2 CALENDERING AND HOT-MELT COATING

18.3 COMPRESSION MOLDING

18.4 DIP COATING

18.5 DISPERSION

18.6 EXTRUSION

18.7 FOAMING

18.8 INJECTION MOLDING

18.9 KNIFE COATING

18.10 MIXING

18.11 PULTRUSION

18.12 REACTION INJECTION MOLDING

18.13 RESIN TRANSFER MOLDING

18.14 ROTATIONAL MOLDING

18.15 SHEET MOLDING

18.16 SPINNING

18.17 THERMOFORMING

18.18 WELDING AND MACHINING

Chapter 19: Fillers in Different Products

19.1 ADHESIVES

19.2 AGRICULTURE

19.3 AEROSPACE

19.4 APPLIANCES

19.5 AUTOMOTIVE MATERIALS

19.6 BOTTLES AND CONTAINERS

19.7 BUILDING COMPONENTS

19.8 BUSINESS MACHINES

19.9 CABLE AND WIRE

19.10 COATED FABRICS

19.11 COATINGS AND PAINTS

19.12 COSMETICS AND PHARMACEUTICAL PRODUCTS

19.13 DENTAL RESTORATIVE COMPOSITES

19.14 ELECTRICAL AND ELECTRONIC MATERIALS

19.15 ELECTROMAGNETIC INTERFERENCE SHIELDING

19.16 FIBERS

19.17 FILM

19.18 FOAM

19.19 FOOD AND FEED

19.20 FRICTION MATERIALS

19.21 GEOSYNTHETICS

19.22 HOSES AND PIPES

19.23 MAGNETIC DEVICES

19.24 MEDICAL APPLICATIONS

19.25 MEMBRANES

19.26 NOISE DAMPENING

19.27 OPTICAL DEVICES

19.28 PAPER

19.29 RADIATION SHIELDS

19.30 RAILWAY TRANSPORTATION

19.31 ROOFING

19.32 TELECOMMUNICATION

19.33 TIRES

19.34 SEALANTS

19.35 SIDING

19.36 SPORTS EQUIPMENT

19.37 WATERPROOFING

19.38 WINDOWS

Chapter 20: Hazards in Filler Use

Index

Copyright

Published by ChemTec Publishing

38 Earswick Drive, Toronto, Ontario M1E 1C6, Canada

© ChemTec Publishing, 1993, 2000, 2010, 2016, 2021

ISBN 978-1-927885-79-6 (bound)

ISBN 978-1-927885-80-2 (epub)

Cover design: Anita Wypych

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored or transmitted in any form or by any means without written permission of copyright owner. No responsibility is assumed by the Author and the Publisher for any injury or/and damage to persons or properties as a matter of products liability, negligence, use, or operation of any methods, product ideas, or instructions published or suggested in this book.

Library and Archives Canada Cataloguing in Publication

Title: Handbook of fillers / George Wypych.

Other titles: Fillers

Names: Wypych, George, author.

Description: 5th edition. | Includes bibliographical references and index.

Identifiers: Canadiana (print) 20200307398 | Canadiana (ebook) 20200307436 | ISBN 9781927885796 (hardcover) | ISBN 9781927885802 (PDF)

Subjects: LCSH: Plastics-Additives-Handbooks, manuals, etc. | LCSH:

Fillers (Materials)-Handbooks, manuals, etc. | LCGFT: Handbooks and manuals.

Classification: LCC TP1142 .W96 2021 | DDC 668.4/11-dc23

Printed in Australia, United Kingdom, and United States of America

List of Illustrations

Figure 2.1.1.1 Aluminum flake produced by traditional method having typical corn flake shape (Sparkle Silver).

Figure 2.1.1.2 Aluminum flake produced by traditional method but with surface smoothness enhancements (Sparkle Silver Ultra).

Figure 2.1.1.3 Aluminum flake produced by vacuum metallization (StarBrite).

Figure 2.1.1.4 Synthesis strategy and reaction mechanism for the double-layered surface decoration of flaky aluminum pigments.

Figure 2.1.2.1 Aluminum borate whisker synthesized at 1075°C.

Figure 2.1.3.1 SEM of aluminum nitride powder

Figure 2.1.4.1 TEM micrographs of Nanodur aluminum oxide.

Figure 2.1.4.2 Aluminum oxide whiskers (300x).

Figure 2.1.4.3 Construction of a continuous segregated structure. (a) PP/polyolefin elastomer, POE/Al2O3 nanocomposites with a co-continuous structure, (b) PP/heptane/Al2O3 ternary system with released Al2O3 nanoparticles after the selective extraction of the POE phase; (c) continuous porous PP/Al2O3 nanocomposites with Al2O3 nanoparticles assembled on the pore walls; (d) PP/Al2O3 nanocomposites with a continuous segregated structure

Figure 2.1.5.1 SEM of aluminum trihydroxide (viscosity decreasing grade).

Figure 2.1.5.2 SEM of aluminum trihydroxide (viscosity increasing grade).

Figure 2.1.6.1 Antracite. a – raw material, b – filler.

Figure 2.1.11.1 SEM image of synthetic hydroxyapatite.

Figure 2.1.12.1 SEM micrographs of South African coal fly ash.

Figure 2.1.13.1 SEM photograph of Attagel 50.

Figure 2.1.15.1 SEM micrograph of blanc fixe micro at different magnifications: (upper – 1000x, middle – 5000x, and lower – 25,000x).

Figure 2.1.15.2 SEM micrograph of K2 grade at magnification of 2000x.

Figure 2.1.15.3 TEM microraph of Sacon P 401 at magnification of 350,000x.

Figure 2.1.15.4 Anti-flocculating action of Sachtoperse HU.

Figure 2.1.15.5 SEM micrograph of milled barite, Huberbrite.

Figure 2.1.17.1 Barium titanate nanofiber with insert of its diffraction pattern.

Figure 2.1.18.1 Bentonite ground ore.

Figure 2.1.18.2 Bentonite purified and spray-dried.

Figure 2.1.20.1 Boron nitride.

Figure 2.1.20.2 SEM image of hexagonal boron nitride platelets.

Figure 2.1.20.3 Boron nitride dispersed in polyester.

Figure 2.1.21.1a Different shapes of coccoliths found in Omya mines.

Figure 2.1.21.1b Different shapes of coccoliths found in Omya mines.

Figure 2.1.21.2 Different crystalline forms of calcium carbonate.

Figure 2.1.21.3 SEM of different calcium carbonates. upper – milled calcium carbonate, middle – ultrafine, ground calcium carbonate, bottom – chalk.

Figure 2.1.21.4 Schematic diagram showing the production of precipitated calcium carbonate.

Figure 2.1.21.5 SEM micrograph of Viscolite U.

Figure 2.1.21.6 TEM images of nano-calcium carbonates precipitated at different conditions. U1, U2, and U3 (CO2 flow rate of 100, 300, and 1000 ml/min, without surfactant); C1, C2, and C3 (CO2 flow rate of 100, 300, and 1000 ml/min, with 2% cetyltrimethylammonium bromide).

Figure 2.1.22.1 Cubic crystals of calcium fluoride.

Figure 2.1.24.1 TEM image of calcium phosphate nanoparticles.

Figure 2.1.25.1 Morphology of calcium silicate.

Figure 2.1.27.1 TEM micrograph of carbon black N326 (low structure).

Figure 2.1.27.2 TEM micrograph of carbon black N326 (high structure).

Figure 2.1.27.3 NMR-image of polyurethane matrix with different content of carbon black. 0, 15, 30 wt% carbon black, respectively.

Figure 2.1.27.4 TEX micrograph of Corax N330.

Figure 2.1.27.5 Length-scales covered by various scattering methods, and the hierarchical structure of rubber-filler systems.

Figure 2.1.28.1 Morphology of carbonyl iron powder.

Figure 2.1.28.2 SEM micrographs of (a) carbonyl iron powders and (b) silver-coated carbonyl iron powders.

Figure 2.1.29.1 SEM image of cellulose microbeads.

Figure 2.1.30.1 SEM of 3M ceramic spheres.

Figure 2.1.30.2 SEM of cross-section of Microlite.

Figure 2.1.34.1 Morphology of cobalt powder.

Figure 2.1.37.1 Cristobalite C-1 at 150x magnification.

Figure 2.1.38.1 SEM micrographs of diatomites.

Figure 2.1.38.2 Schematic representation of the production process of diatomaceous earth.

Figure 2.1.39.1 Ground dolomite (Dolofil).

Figure 2.1.40.1 Morphology of eggshell powder.

Figure 2.1.41.1 The morphology of ferrite on the surface of epoxy resin composite.

Figure 2.1.42.1 Morphology of feldspar (Unispar).

Figure 2.1.43.1 Chemical structures of contrast agents.

Figure 2.1.44.1 Coated and uncoated spheres in polymer matrix.

Figure 2.1.44.2 Stress distribution around fiber, irregular particle, and glass sphere.

Figure 2.1.44.3 Dicapearl HP-510. Magnification 1800x.

Figure 2.1.44.4 Micropearl solid glass beads.

Figure 2.1.44.5 Magnetic resonance imaging of cross-section of polymer matrix containing glass beads.

Figure 2.1.45.1 Gold powder (5250x) and thin and thick flake (3200x).

Figure 2.1.45.2 Schematic illustration of the fabrication of gold/conjugated polymers nanocomposites and their application for cell imaging and photothermal killing.

Figure 2.1.45.3 FESEM images of (a) Au nanoparticles, (b) Ag nanoparticles, and (c) Au10Ag10PANI nanocomposite and (d) PANI.

Figure 2.1.46.1 Structures of graphene and graphene oxide.

Figure 2.1.46.2 Morphology of pristine graphene powder (N008-N).

Figure 2.1.47.1 Functionalization of graphene oxide.

Figure 2.1.48.1 SEM micrograph of Timrex KS15.

Figure 2.1.48.2 Schematic illustrations of the fire retardant mechanism of the PP/EG/PDPFDE system. EG – expanded graphite, PDPFDE – ferrocene-based polymer.

Figure 2.1.48.3 Intercalation and its effect on conductivity.

Figure 2.1.50.1 Morphology of halloysite.

Figure 2.1.51.1 Morphology of huntite.

Figure 2.1.52.1 Schematic diagram of production of Micro-Cel.

Figure 2.1.53.1 Illite morphology. (a) unmodified, (b) modified with an aluminate coupling agent.

Figure 2.1.54.1 Characterization of iron (top) and 316L stainless steel (bottom) powders with (a) SEM; (b) laser diffraction particle size analysis; and (c) XRD.

Figure 2.1.55.1 TEM micrograph of NanoTec iron oxide.

Figure 2.1.56.1 SEM micrograph of china clay before processing.

Figure 2.1.56.2 SEM micrograph of kaolin.

Figure 2.1.56.3 SEM micrograph of calcinated kaolin.

Figure 2.1.56.4 SEM micrograph of Optiwhite, thermo-optic grade.

Figure 2.1.56.5 SEM micrograph of structured pigment.

Figure 2.1.56.6 SEM micrograph of Barrisurf, barrier kaolin.

Figure 2.1.61.1 TEM images of surface modification of magnetite with 10% (a) and 20% (b) of 3-aminopropyltriethoxysilane.

Figure 2.1.62.1 SEM micrograph of nickel-coated carbon fiber.

Figure 2.1.62.2 Micrograph of IncoFoam.

Figure 2.1.62.3 SEM micrographs of silver-coated flakes and spheres. Upper left – Novamet’s silver-coated nickel flakes, upper right – Conduct-O-Fil SC230F8, silver-coated copper flakes, bottom: Conduct-O-Fil solid glass spheres coated with silver, left – at 100x magnification, right – 1000x magnification of spheres in silicone resin.

Figure 2.1.63.1 The morphology of muscovite (left) and phlogopite (right) mica.

Figure 2.1.64.1 SEM micrograph of different grades of molybdenum powder.

Figure 2.1.65.1 SEM micrograph of molybdenum disulfide.

Figure 2.1.65.2 Schematic illustration of the reinforcing model and effective volume of MoS2 and polysulfone functionalized MoS2 in the bisphenol E cyanate ester resin matrix.

Figure 2.1.67.1 Structure of nanocomposite in relationship to the methods of dispersion.

Figure 2.1.67.2 Alkyd chain aggregation in clay minerals: a. monolayer, b. bilayer, c. psedotrimolecular layer of chain lying flat on the surface, d. paraffin-type monolayer.

Figure 2.1.67.3 Pathways of nanocomposite preparation: a – monomer exchange and in situ polymerization, b – direct polymer exchange, c – restacking the exfoliated layers over the polymer.

Figure 2.1.67.4 TEM micrograph of a bundle of single-walled carbon nanotube. Scale bar – 10 nm.

Figure 2.1.67.5 Compatibilization with second polymer.

Figure 2.1.67.6 Preparation of nanocomposites of oxidized multiwall carbon nanotube and positively charged PMMA particles.

Figure 2.1.67.7 Field emission SEM of mixture of carbon nanotube and positively charged PMMA particles.

Figure 2.1.67.8 Silica-nanotube hybrid.

Figure 2.1.67.9 Schematic illustration of formation carbon nanotube-platelet hybrid and making composite with PA-6.

Figure 2.1.67.10 Silica particles before (left) and after (right) modification.

Figure 2.1.68.1 INCO nickel powder: single particle (left) and chain (right).

Figure 2.1.68.2 Novamet nickel flakes.

Figure 2.1.68.3 Novamet spherical nickel, CNS.

Figure 2.1.69.1 Black nickel oxide.

Figure 2.1.72.1 SEM micrograph of Perlite FF-56.

Figure 2.1.73.1 Expancel 551(left) and 091 (right). The top micrograph – unexpanded, the bottom – expanded.

Figure 2.1.73.2 Expancel 007 before and after expansion.

Figure 2.1.73.3 SEM micrograph of Dualite microsphere.

Figure 2.1.73.4 SEM micrographs of PTFE powders. Left – Polymist F5 (5000x), center – Polymist XPH-284 (5000x), right Algoflon L203 (10000x).

Figure 2.1.74.1 Morphology of potassium hexatitanate whisker.

Figure 2.1.76.1 SEM image of the fracture surface of exfoliated pyrophyllite, (inset) pristine pyrophyllite.

Figure 2.1.78.1 TEM micrograph of sepiolite.

Figure 2.1.79.1 Production of Aerosil.

Figure 2.1.79.2 X-ray diagram of fumed silica (left) and quartz (right).

Figure 2.1.79.3 Chemical structure of untreated (left) and treated (right) fumed silica surface.

Figure 2.1.79.4 The origins of acidic properties of fumed silica (left and the mechanism of hydrogen bonding (right).

Figure 2.1.79.5 SEM micrograph of HDK N20.

Figure 2.1.79.6 TEM micrograph of Aerosil OX50.

Figure 2.1.79.7 Precipitated silica process. After Bomo, F, Meeting of the Rubber Division, ACS, Montreal, May 5–8, 1996, paper F.

Figure 2.1.79.8 Surface flatting mechanism by precipitated silica, Lo-Vel. Left – distribution of agglomerates, right – surface roughness of coating.

Figure 2.1.79.9 Novacite morphology. Left – single platelet, middle – distribution of sizes, right – cluster.

Figure 2.1.79.10 Silica sand (100x).

Figure 2.1.80.1 TEM of nano silicon carbide.

Figure 2.1.82.1 Silver powder and flake.

Figure 2.1.84.1 Molecular structure of talc.

Figure 2.1.84.2 Minstron grade of talc.

Figure 2.1.84.3 TEM micrograph of (90/10) PLA/talc composite.

Figure 2.1.84.4 Modification of hydrophobic properties of talc.

Figure 2.1.85.1 Brookite.

Figure 2.1.85.2 Rutile.

Figure 2.1.85.3 Anatase.

Figure 2.1.85.4 Schematic diagram of chloride and sulfate processes of TiO2 manufacture.

Figure 2.1.85.5 Comparison of pigment type and ultrafine titanium dioxide.

Figure 2.1.85.6 Anatase titanium dioxide.

Figure 2.1.85.7 Uncoated rutile titanium dioxide.

Figure 2.1.85.8 Coated rutile titanium dioxide.

Figure 2.1.85.9 TEM photographs of polysulfone with different TiO2 loadings: (a) 1 wt%, (b) 3 wt%, (c) 5 wt%, and (d) 7 wt%.

Figure 2.1.85.10 Sonodynamic therapy.

Figure 2.1.87.1 (a) SEM image of the vermiculite crystal (Inset: photograph of expanded vermiculite). (b, c) HRTEM images of exfoliated vermiculite nanolayers. (d) XRD patterns of the expanded vermiculite and exfoliated vermiculite nanolayers.

Figure 2.1.88.1 SEM micrographs of wollastonite.

Figure 2.1.88.2 SEM micrographs of polypropylene fracture area. Top – fracture at room temperature, bottom – fracture at liquid nitrogen; left – surface treated wollastonite, Tremlin 939, right – untreated wollastonite, Tremlin 939.

Figure 2.1.89.1 Transcrystallization of PP on the surface of wood fiber.

Figure 2.1.91.1 SEM of three kinds of zinc borates: (a) 2ZnO·3B2O3·3.5H2O, (b) 3ZnO·3B2O3·5H2O and (c) 2ZnO·3B2O3·7H2O.

Figure 2.1.91.2 TEM of two kinds of zinc borates: (a) 3ZnO·3B2O3·5H2O and (b) 2ZnO·3B2O3·7H2O (inset the SAED).

Figure 2.1.92.1 TEM micrographs showing NanoTec zinc oxide.

Figure 2.1.92.2 SEM micrograph of Kadox 915 manufactured by French process.

Figure 2.1.92.3 SEM image of tetrapod ZnO whisker.

Figure 2.1.94.1 SEM micrographs of zinc sulfide, Sachtolith, under three magnifications of 2000x, 10,000x, and 150,000x.

Figure 2.2.1.1 SEM of (a) control and (b) treated fibers.

Figure 2.2.1.2 Effect of modification on aramid fiber morphology. DVB – divinylbenzene, PAA – poly(acrylic acid), PEI – polyethyleneimine.

Figure 2.2.2.1 Morphology of pitch-based carbon fibers.

Figure 2.2.2.2 Schematic illustration and corresponding SEM images of the formation of hybridized carbon fibers. (a) Bare carbon fiber. (b) Carbon fibers coated with as-electrospun nanofibers. (c) Hybridized carbon fibers after solvent vapor treatment and thermal stabilization.

Figure 2.2.2.3 Lightning process recorded by a high-speed camera.

Figure 2.2.3.1 Structure of carbon nanotube.

Figure 2.2.3.2 Hollow graphite fibrils (left) mixed with carbon black (right).

Figure 2.2.3.3 TEM micrograph of CNT induced interfacial crystallization.

Figure 2.2.4.1 The morphology of cellulose fiber.

Figure 2.2.4.2 SEM micrograph of cellulose fiber, Interfibe WF (left) and Interfibe 231 (right).

Figure 2.2.4.3 Schematic diagram of the mechanochemical way to prepare spherulite-controlled PP composites.

Figure 2.2.5.1 Structure of wood pulp fibers. (a) The network of microfibrils covering the outer wall layer. (b) Microtomed cross section showing secondary wall layers, S1, S2 and S3 layers. (c) Cross-sectional fracture area, showing the microfibrils in the S2 layer.

Figure 3.1 Automatic line for mineral powders bagging.

Figure 3.2 Fully automated open-mouth bagger.

Figure 3.3 DB-700 series vacuum packer.

Figure 3.4 Vacuum-pressure unload system.

Figure 3.5 Load line assembly.

Figure 3.6 Manual railcar unloader.

Figure 3.7 Truck unloading system.

Figure 3.8 Bed activators.

Figure 3.9 Smart flowmeter bypass.

Figure 3.10 Vacuum conveyor.

Figure 3.11 Elements of pneumatic conveying system.

Figure 3.12 Schematic diagram of aero-mechanical conveyor system and its applications.

Figure 3.13 Schematic diagram of flexible screw conveyor, spiral design, and examples of application.

Figure 3.14 Bulk bag discharger.

Figure 3.15 Big bag discharging and emptying equipment.

Figure 3.16 Bag dump station.

Figure 3.17 Automatic bag slitter machine.

Figure 3.18 Vrieco Nauta.

Figure 3.19 MaxiBatch high capacity blender.

Figure 3.20 Bulk Solid Pump.

Figure 3.21 Weight belt feeder.

Figure 3.22 Loss-in-weight feeder.

Figure 3.23 Screws used in feeders.

Figure 3.24 Multicolor mass flow meter.

Figure 3.25 Vacuum drying system.

Figure 3.26 Forberg drying system.

Figure 5.1 Density of composite vs. concentration of carbon black around CVC.

Figure 5.2 Polymer density vs. volume fraction of filler.

Figure 5.3 Density of SBR containing 30 phr carbon black vs. mixing time.

Figure 5.4 Density of copper/polyamide composite vs. filler content.

Figure 5.5 Epoxy/alumina nanocomposite density vs. volume concentration of nanoalumina.

Figure 5.6 Izod impact strength of polypropylene composite containing 20 wt% calcium carbonates of different particle sizes.

Figure 5.7 Fusion time of PVC foam vs. particle size of calcium carbonate.

Figure 5.8 Particle size distribution of Britefil 80 Slurry (A) and Royal Slurry (B).

Figure 5.9 Particle size distribution of different grades of Aeorosil.

Figure 5.10 Particle size distribution of Sachtoperse.

Figure 5.11 Particle size distribution of different talcs.

Figure 5.12 Relative opacity vs. particle diameter.

Figure 5.13 Scattering of rutile titanium dioxide.

Figure 5.14 Packing volume fraction occupied by bimodal filler vs. ratio of diameters of its components.

Figure 5.15 Thermal conductivity of epoxy resin containing 20 vol% of different compositions of boron nitride. A – monomodal, untreated, hexagonal BN (0.6 μm), B – monomodal, treated, hexagonal BN (0.6 μm), C – bimodal, hexagonal BN (0.3 and 0.6 μm), D – bimodal mixture of hexagonal BN (0.3 μm) and cubical BN (1 μm).

Figure 5.16 The models of carbon black particles.

Figure 5.17 Specific surface area of carbon fibers vs. treatment time in oxygen plasma.

Figure 5.18 Potential energy curve for two colloidal particles.

Figure 5.19 Resistivity of epoxy resin vs. carbon black concentration.

Figure 5.20 Positive and negative charges on clay particles (a). Flocculated state (b).

Figure 5.21 Structure of carbon black: primary particle and aggregate.

Figure 5.22 Two views of N220 aggregate model obtained by 90° rotation.

Figure 5.23 TEM pictures of silica/SBR composite samples: (a) φ = 8.4 vol% (b) φ = 21.1 vol%.

Figure 5.24 A schematic representation of montmorillonite particles in dispersion.

Figure 5.25 Rate of carbon black flocculation at different temperatures.

Figure 5.26 Density of Al2O3 samples vs. compression pressure.

Figure 5.27 Excess storage modulus of carbon black filled polybutadiene vs. annealing time.

Figure 5.28 Critical volume fraction of carbon black vs. DBP absorption.

Figure 5.29 ζ-potential of unmodified nanosilica in water.

Figure 5.30 ζ-potential of nanosilica modified with γmethacryloxy-propyl-trimethoxy silane in water.

Figure 5.31 Spreading and failure characteristics predicted from theory of adhesion.

Figure 5.32 Surface energy components of carbon fibers treated with plasma in the presence of different gas compositions.

Figure 5.33 Notched Izod impact energy of polypropylene composite containing 12 vol% of different types of nano calcium carbonate. 1 – untreated, 2 – stearic acid treated under conventional speed, 3 – stearic acid treated at ultrahigh mixing speed.

Figure 5.34 Glass transition temperatures of composites containing carbon fiber under dry and wet conditions.

Figure 5.35 Interlaminar strength vs. moisture content in epoxy/aramid fiber laminates.

Figure 5.36 Water content in epoxy/glass beads composites.

Figure 5.37 Kerosene diffusion coefficient in SBR rubber vs. carbon black concentration.

Figure 5.38 Penetration rate of water through column packed with grafted and stearate coated barium sulfate.

Figure 5.39 Wear volume loss of PTFE composites containing variable amounts of carbon nanotubes.

Figure 5.40 Hardness of composite vs. graphite concentration and type. Left – PA-66, right – PP.

Figure 5.41 Weight difference of intumescent formulation based on LDPE vs. temperature.

Figure 5.42 Conductivity of epoxy resin filled with silver coated glass beads vs. volume concentration.

Figure 5.43 Resistivity of acrylic resin vs. concentration of carbon black.

Figure 5.44 Resistivity vs. adhesive layer thickness.

Figure 5.45 Relative permeability vs. nickel fiber orientation in HDPE matrix.

Figure 5.46 Relative permeability vs. volume fraction of nickel fibers in HDPE depending on article shape.

Figure 5.47 Deformation vs. magnetic field in polyacrylamide gel containing ferrite.

Figure 5.48 Different directions in design of shape memory polymers.

Figure 5.49 Various molecular structures of SMPs. A stable network and a reversible switching transition are the prerequisites for the SMPs.

Figure 6.1.1 Interaction between XNBR and carbon black.²

Figure 6.1.2 Reaction between monodispersed silica and silane.⁴

Figure 6.1.3 Acrylamide grafting on the 12-hydroxys-tearate previously reacted with the surface of BaSO4.⁷

Figure 6.3.3 Polymerization rate, Rp, vs. acrylamide concentration.

Figure 6.3.4 Polymerization rate, Rp, vs. ceric ion (catalyst) concentration.

Figure 6.3.5 Polymerization rate, Rp, vs. BaSO4 12-hydroxystearate modified concentration.

Figure 6.1.4 Coupling reaction of bis(triethoxysilylpropyl)tetrasulfane and styrene-butadiene rubber.

Figure 6.1.5 The schematic diagram for the fabrication of multiple-crosslinked network SiO2/PDMS composites.

Figure 6.2.1 Various groups on carbon black surface (numbers are reference numbers).

Figure 6.2.2 Silica, clay, and talc particles.

Figure 6.2.3 Silicate surface groups.¹¹

Figure 6.2.4 Structure of halloysite nanotube.

Figure 6.2.5 Mechanism of gas permeability through graphene-filled rubber nanocomposites.

Figure 6.3.1 Variation of O/C elemental ratio as a function of treatment time.

Figure 6.3.2 Effect of temperature on grafting poly(THF) onto carbon whisker.

Figure 6.3.6 Carboxyl group IR absorption vs. amount of dicarboxylic acid anhydride used for modification.

Figure 6.3.7 Retention of dicarboxylic anhydride after Soxhlet extraction of modified Al(OH)3 vs. amount of modifier.

Figure 6.3.8 Closely-packed molecular configuration for silanetriol oriented parallel (left) and perpendicular (right) to the substrate surface.

Figure 6.3.9 Silane arrangement on substrate surface.⁴²

Figure 6.3.10 Scheme of nanocomposite preparation.

Figure 6.4.1 Charpy impact of PP containing 30% glass beads, compatibilizer (PP-g-MA), and rubber (EPM).

Figure 6.4.2 Ratio of Raman peak intensities at 1355 and 1575 cm−1 vs. interlaminar shear strength of composites containing carbon fibers of different origin.

Figure 6.4.3 Sedimentation volume of Al(OH)3 vs. amount of dicarboxylic anhydride used for its modification.

Figure 6.4.4 Slurry viscosity vs. amount of dicarboxylic anhydride used for Al(OH)3 modification.

Figure 6.4.5 Stability of grafted carbon black (A), carbon black with physically absorbed polymer (B), and untreated carbon black (C).

Figure 6.4.6 Scanning electron microscopy images of (a) untreated silica particles and (b) modified silica particles (3% silane treated).

Figure 6.4.7 Modification of MoS2 and the synthesis of polymer composite.

Figure 6.6.1 Degree of conversion as a function of silica content.

Figure 6.6.2 Curing shrinkage of UV curable adhesive vs. filler content.

Figure 6.6.3 The effect of quartz filler on the depth of cure at three irradiation times.

Figure 6.6.4 Polyurethane formation in the presence of lead powder. Reaction time to reach certain viscosity.

Figure 6.6.5 Cure time of natural rubber vs. carbon black loading.

Figure 6.6.6 Torque difference vs. silica loading.

Figure 6.7.1 Effect of carbon black on polymerization efficiency of pyrrole.

Figure 6.9.1 Crosslink density of polychloroprene vs. silica content.

Figure 7.1.1 Shielding effectiveness.

Figure 7.1.2 TEM micrographs of 50/50 w/wPLA/PHBV with 5 wt% TiO2 at (a) 5700x and (b) 19000x magnifications.

Figure 7.1.3 Optical microscopic images of the morphology of Phthalcon 11 (phthalocyanine nanocrystals) particle networks in epoxy composites crosslinked with different Jeffamine crosslinkers: a – D230, b – D400, and c – D2000 (number equals to the average molecular weight of Jeffamine). Layer thickness ~ 200 nm.

Figure 7.1.4 Non-uniform (left) and uniform (right) distribution of filler particles in polymer matrix. [Examples taken from Sideridis, E; Kytopoulos, V N; Papadopoulos, G A; Bourkas, G D, J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 111, 203-16, 2009 (left) and Nagarajan, V S; Hockey B J; Jahanmir, S; Thompson, V P, J. Mater. Sci., 35, 487-96, 2000.]

Figure 7.1.5 Fabrication of 3D-carbon fiber/epoxy composites. (b) digital image and (c, d) cross-sectional SEM images of 3D-carbon fiber. (e) cross-sectional SEM images of fractured surface of 3D-carbon fiber/epoxy composites.

Figure 7.1.6 Schematic illustration of the molecular mechanism of shape memory polymers. Because chain segments in interfaces are restricted by fillers, their deformation is smaller than that of their neighbors. This difference in deformation (indicated by mark points) gives rise to the relative slippages between the chain segments in the interfaces and their neighbors. As a result, the relative slippages increase the final irrecoverable strains.

Figure 7.2.1 Orientation distribution function, J, vs. Hencky strain.

Figure 7.2.2 Feed arrangement to produce orientation of fibers.

Figure 7.2.3 Fiber orientation distribution.

Figure 7.2.4 Longitudinal selection of test plate segments.

Figure 7.2.5 Widthwise selection of test plate segments.

Figure 7.2.6 Tensile modulus of glass fiber-reinforced polypropylene vs. position of sample.

Figure 7.2.7 Relative magnetic permeability vs. fiber orientation function.

Figure 7.2.8 Specific wear rate vs. angle of fiber orientation.

Figure 7.2.9 SEM micrographs of freeze-fractured composites of polypropylene containing glass fiber, 15 phr (upper) and glass fiber, 15 phr, and carbon black, 4 phr (lower).

Figure 7.5.1 FTIR microscopic analyses of (a-d) polypropylene, PP/maleic anhydride grafted polypropylene, MAPP/silica sphere, SS and (e-f) PP/MAPP/ silica spheres modified with octadecyldimethyl groups, mSS: (a, c, e, g) optical images and (b, d, f, h) FTIR images constructed with integrated absorbance in the 1745-1675 cm−1 region. The MAPP contents in the composites are (a, b, e, f) 2.5 wt% and (c, d, g, h) 5.0 wt%.

Figure 7.6.1 Schematic model of morphological transformations in filled polymers. A – silica content less than 10 wt% (ddcr), D – silica content over 50 wt%.

Figure 7.6.2 The concept of segmental interaction with a carbon black surface.

Figure 7.6.3 A mechanism of interaction between filler and ionic groups in the restricted mobility region in EPDM.

Figure 7.6.4 Interaction parameter (a), I, and networking parameter (b), η, vs. concentration of 3-aminopropyl-triethoxysilane in NBR-carbon black system.

Figure 7.8.1 Conformation of a chain on the surface of carbon black. (a) direct view of surface, (b) cross-section through the surface. [After refs. 86, 87.]

Figure 7.8.2 The basic reinforcing component.

Figure 7.8.3 Interphase between paint and substrate.

Figure 7.8.4 Polymer chain absorption onto a solid surface.

Figure 7.8.5 Optical micrograph with crossed polars of bamboo fiber in maleated polypropylene.

Figure 7.9.1 Composites without (left) and with (right) adhesion between filler and matrix.

Figure 7.13.1 Bound rubber as a function of extraction temperature for N330.

Figure 7.13.2 Bound SBR vs. carbon black (N110) loading.

Figure 7.13.3 Bound rubber vs. CTAB surface area for various carbon blacks at 50 phr loading in SBR.

Figure 7.13.4 Bound rubber in various systems.

Figure 7.13.5 Molecular weight of extracted rubber vs. amount of bound rubber.

Figure 7.13.6 Bound rubber formation during mixing.

Figure 7.13.7 Bound rubber vs. storage maturation.

Figure 7.13.8 Effect of multifunctional additive on bound rubber.

Figure 7.13.9 Bound rubber vs. particle size of carbon black in polybutadiene rubber.

Figure 7.14.1 Yield stress prediction for different particle sizes.

Figure 7.14.2 Reduced tensile strength vs. volume fraction of filler.

Figure 7.14.3 Interaction between surface treated CaCO3 and PP vs. work of adhesion.

Figure 7.14.4 Possible crack growth mechanism.

Figure 7.14.5 Particle splitting.

Figure 7.14.6 SEM micrograph (5000x) of fractured surface of PTFE (left) and PTFE containing carbon nanotubes.

Figure 7.14.7 SEM micrograph of the fracture surface of epoxy nanocomposite containing silica nanoparticles.

Figure 7.15.1 Hydrodynamic reinforcement factor vs. filler volume fraction.

Figure 7.15.2 Molecular slippage model.

Figure 7.15.3 Modeling effectiveness factor.

Figure 7.15.4 tanδ of natural rubber filled with carbon black and silica vs. interaggregate distance, δaa.

Figure 7.16.1 Influence of filler’s surface on micro-heterogeneity coefficient of copolymers.

Figure 7.16.2 Conductivity of SBR-carbon black vs. excess concentration.

Figure 8.1.1 Tensile strength of POM filled with glass fibers and glass beads.

Figure 8.1.2 The effect of reciprocal interparticle spacing on the tensile strength of POM filled with glass beads.

Figure 8.2.1 Tensile yield stress of particulate filled PP vs. filler content.

Figure 8.2.2 Plot of Eq 8.10.

Figure 8.2.3 Tensile yield stress versus volume fraction of calcium carbonate and talc.

Figure 8.2.4 Tensile yield stress of PE composites in the case of perfect adhesion.

Figure 8.2.5 Tensile yield stress as a function of carbon fiber concentration in polycarbonate.

Figure 8.2.6 Tensile yield stress of filled HDPE with a coupling agent as a function of kaolin concentration.

Figure 8.2.7 Tensile yield stress of PVC vs. filler loading.

Figure 8.2.8 Effect of phosphate concentration on the tensile yield stress of talc filled polypropylene.

Figure 8.4.1 Comparison of the prediction of the Guth-Gold’s equation with experimental data for N330-filled SBR.

Figure 8.4.2 Tensile Young’s modulus of a copolycarbonate composite as a function of carbon fiber concentration.

Figure 8.4.3 Young’s modulus vs. volume fraction of filler.

Figure 8.4.4 Young’s moduli for fresh and aged silicone elastomer containing ZnO.

Figure 8.4.5 Young’s modulus of epoxy reinforced with silane-coated glass microspheres vs. volume fraction of filler.

Figure 8.5.1 Flexural strength of POM vs. volume fraction of glass beads and glass fibers.

Figure 8.5.2 Flexural modulus of polyketone with different fillers.

Figure 8.5.3 Flexural strength vs. moisture content in Kevlar reinforced epoxy.

Figure 8.5.4 SEM image of tetrapodal zinc oxide particles used as filler particles.

Figure 8.6.1 Falling ball impact strength vs. impact strength of filled polystyrene.

Figure 8.6.2 Charpy notched impact strength of calcium carbonate filled polypropylene.

Figure 8.7.1 Rubber hardness vs. surface area of silica filler.

Figure 8.7.2 Carbon black loading for the same hardness.

Figure 8.8.1 Silicone rubber tear strength vs. surface area of silica.

Figure 8.8.2 Tear strength of NR/BR vs. the amount of cellulose.

Figure 8.8.3 Representation of interaction between acrylonitrile-butadiene rubber and chitin nanowhiskers.

Figure 8.9.1 The effect of particulate fillers on the compressive strength of epoxy resin.

Figure 8.9.2 Compressive strength of Kevlar reinforced epoxy vs. moisture content.

Figure 8.10.1 Schematic representation of the five tensile fracture modes.

Figure 8.10.2 Schematic representation of mode A fracture.

Figure 8.10.3 Schematic representation of mode B fracture.

Figure 8.10.4 Schematic representation of mode C fracture.

Figure 8.10.5 Schematic representation of mode D fracture.

Figure 8.10.6 Map of fracture modes for various fillers and their concentrations.

Figure 8.10.7 Schematic diagrams of three representations of microstructure of fillers (x) and rubber particles (o) in polymer matrix.

Figure 8.10.8 Morphological model of impact fracture of composites.

Figure 8.10.9 SEM micrograph of the fracture surface of an epoxy resin modified with 10 vol% latex particles.

Figure 8.10.10 Atomic force micrograph of PVAl single-walled carbon nanotubes.

Figure 8.10.11 SEM micrograph of fracture zone of PVAl film containing 0.5 wt% single-walled carbon nanotubes. The white scale bar represents 1 µm.

Figure 8.10.12 Crosslinking of hydrogenated nitrile-butadiene rubber and amino-functionalized clay particles mediated by a peroxide and N,N’-m-phenylene bismaleimide coagent.

Figure 8.11.1 Wear volume vs. amount of filler.

Figure 8.11.2 Wear rate vs. filler content.

Figure 8.12.1 Friction coefficient of polytetrafluoroethylene/carbon nanofiber composites vs. concentration of carbon nanofiber.

Figure 8.13.1 Abrasion loss of SBR containing different types of carbon black vs. interaggregate distance.

Figure 8.13.2 Abrasion loss of EPDM vs. filler content.

Figure 8.14.1 Average scattering and scattering difference vs. talc load in polypropylene.

Figure 8.14.2 Reaction scheme and structural model of boehmite-based nanocomposite.

Figure 8.15.1 Crack growth rate of epoxy with and without glass beads vs. stress intensity factor.

Figure 8.15.2 Storage modulus of nitrile rubber with and without carbon black.

Figure 8.15.3 Crack front propagation slowed down by a pinning mechanism.

Figure 8.15.4 Effect of coupling on crack rate development in kaolin-filled HDPE.

Figure 8.15.5 Crack growth mechanism.

Figure 8.15.6 Failure mechanism in fiber reinforced system.

Figure 8.15.7 Crack length vs. number of cycles for talc filled PC/ABS blend.

Figure 8.15.8 Weight loss vs. filler amount in PDMS.

Figure 8.15.9 Weight loss vs. filler type.

Figure 8.16.1 Global stress vs. volume fraction of glass beads in polypropylene at -60°C.

Figure 8.16.2 Global stress vs. volume fraction of glass beads in polypropylene at 0°C.

Figure 8.17.1 Effect of fumed silica surface area on peel adhesion of silicone sealant.

Figure 8.17.2 Effect of filler type on adhesion of polyurethane adhesive.

Figure 8.17.3 Representations of main mechanisms that control metal/polymer adhesion: (a) mechanical interlocking mechanism, (b) adsorption mechanism, (c) chemical bonding.

Figure 8.18.1 Heat deflection temperature of polypropylene containing hydrated K-Mg aluminosilicate.

Figure 8.19.1 Mold shrinkage of mica/polypropylene composites vs. concentration of filler.

Figure 8.19.2 Mold shrinkage vs. holding time.

Figure 8.19.3 Thermal expansion coefficient of polyisoprene rubber vs. carbon black amount.

Figure 8.20.1 Warpage vs. filler content in polypropylene.

Figure 8.21.1 Compression set of vulcanized silicone rubber vs. surface area of silica.

Figure 8.21.2 Compression set of vulcanized silicone rubber vs. pH of silica.

Figure 8.21.3 Compression set of EPDM compounded with different fillers.

Figure 8.22.1 Finite element method stress analysis around the particulate in polystyrene. (a) the system with dispersed softer particles, (b) the system with dispersed harder particles, (c) the system with dispersed particles having a peeling layer (adsorbed polymer).

Figure 8.22.2 Concentration coefficient of the maximum principal stress vs. the highest stress concentration point. Particles types are labeled as in Figure 8.21.1.

Figure 8.22.3 Raman frequency shift vs. tensile strain applied to carbon fibers.

Figure 8.22.4 Preparation of amine-terminated butadiene-acrylonitrile-functionalized hexagonal boron nitride and (b) schematic diagram for the preparation of nanocomposite.

Figure 8.23.1 Internal shrinkage stress vs. interpenetrating network formation time for PU/PEA=10/90 network. (1) unfilled network, (2) alumina-filled, (3) fumed silica-filled.

Figure 8.24.1 Creep strain of LCP vs. time for different fillers.

Figure 8.24.2 Creep strain of LCP vs. time for different concentrations of magnesium carbonate.

Figure 9.1.1 The effect of carbon black on the viscosity of polycarbonate.

Figure 9.1.2 Reduced viscosity of polypropylene filled with different grades of calcium carbonate as a function of volume fraction.

Figure 9.1.3 Viscosity of formation of polyurethane in the presence of lead powder.

Figure 9.1.4 Viscosity of SBR filled with carbon black vs. mixing time.

Figure 9.1.5 Reduced viscosity of SBR vs. fraction of carbon black in relationship to quality of mixing.

Figure 9.1.6 Viscosity of plasticized PVC vs. fraction of Al(OH)3.

Figure 9.1.7 Mixing index as a function of volume fraction of filler and Reynolds number.

Figure 9.2.1 Water-clay mixtures.

Figure 9.2.2 Flow limits vs. filler content.

Figure 9.3.1 Coordinate system used to determine fiber orientation. Z is a direction of elongational flow.

.

Figure 9.3.3 Apparent magnetic permeability vs. effective aspect ratio.

Figure 9.3.4 The schematic diagram of styrene-butadiene rubber/montmorillonite in the static state after the steady flow at 10 s−1.

Figure 9.4.1 Torque vs. filler content.

Figure 9.5.1 Storage modulus of glass bead filled polyamide-6 vs. shear frequency.

Figure 9.5.2 tanδ of glass beads filled polyamide-6 vs. shear frequency.

Figure 9.6.1 Tanδ vs. temperature for styrene-methacrylic acid copolymer filled with glass beads of different diameter.

Figure 9.6.2 Peak positions of the first and second tan peaks vs. silica contents in PVAc composites.

Figure 9.6.3 Tg versus concentration of alumina.

Figure 9.7.1 Complex viscosity of talc-filled PP vs. frequency.

Figure 9.7.2 Complex viscosity of talc-filled PPS vs. frequency.

Figure 9.7.3 Complex viscosity of calcium carbonate-filled PP vs. frequency.

Figure 9.7.4 Complex viscosity of 31% TiO2 in polybutene vs. frequency.

Figure 9.7.5 Decay of reduced complex viscosity of PDMS filled with glass beads vs. determination time.

Figure 9.7.6 Effect of glass beads concentration on the decrease of reduced complex viscosity of PDMS vs. determination time.

Figure 9.8.1 Viscosity of talc-filled PP vs. shear stress.

Figure 9.8.2 Viscosity of talc-filled PPS vs. shear rate.

Figure 9.8.3 Shear viscosity vs. filler concentration.

Figure 9.9.1 Elongation to break of HDPE filled with talc vs. elongation rate.

Figure 9.9.2 Fiber orientation function vs. Hencky strain for PA-6 filled with glass fiber.

Figure 9.10.1 Melt flow index vs. weight fraction of calcium carbonate in PP.

Figure 9.10.2 Relative melt viscosity vs. fraction of calcium carbonate in LDPE.

Figure 9.10.3 Melt flow index of PP filled with talc vs. number of processing cycles.

Figure 10.1.1 Crystallinity of PP composites as a function of CaCO3 and talc concentration.

Figure 10.2.1 Crystallization rate of PDMS filled with silica as function of temperature.

Figure 10.2.2 Crystallization half-time of PET and PET/silica composite at different temperatures.

Figure 10.2.3 Crystallization half-time of polypropylene vs. concentration of single-walled carbon nanotube.

Figure 10.2.4 Crystallization half-time of PET containing variable concentrations of nano-antimony doped tin oxide (ATO).

Figure 10.3.1 Crystallization rate vs. temperature.

Figure 10.4.1 Effect of chalk and marble on the size of spherulites in HDPE.

Figure 10.4.2 Isothermal crystallization of PP containing different concentrations of CaCO3.

Figure 10.5.1 Polarization micrographs of PP/talc showing the nucleating effect of talc taken at different times of crystallization. (a) 0.5 min, (b) 7.5, (c) 31, and (d) 38. The left half of photograph is without filler and the right half of the photograph is with 0.5% talc.

Figure 10.5.2 Cluster size distribution for TiO2 particles in injection molded PP.

Figure 10.5.3 Spherulites of PP (left) and cylindrites of PP/0.56% v/v steel fibers isothermally crystallized at 135°C for 21 min.

Figure 10.5.4 Schematic structure of filled and crystallized LDPE.

Figure 10.5.5 Polarized optical micrographs obtained for pure PCL (nucleation density=152 nuclei/mm²) after 100 s (a) and 600 s, (b) of isothermal crystallization at 42°C; PCL/M-DAC (nucleation density=431 nuclei/mm²)after 50 s (c) and 150 s (d) at 42°C; PCL/M-HTAB (nucleation density=4290 nuclei/mm²) after 5 s (e) and 15 s (f) at 42°C; and PCL/M (nucleation density=4210 nuclei/mm²) after 5 s and 15 s of isothermal crystallization at 42°C.

Figure 10.5.6 AFM image of etched PP containing spherulites.

Figure 10.5.7 AFM image of etched SiO2-g-PS/PP: (a) spherulites of PP in which the nanoparticles act as nucleation sites at the right upper corner of the figure, (b) radiated lamellae nucleated by the nanoparticles.

Figure 10.5.8 Schematic diagram of mechano-chemical way to prepare spherulite-controlled PP composites.

Figure 10.6.1 Optical micrograph with crossed polars of bamboo fiber in PP matrix (x100).

Figure 10.6.2 The thickness of transcrystalline layer versus time at different melt temperatures in cellulose reinforced PP.

Figure 10.6.3 Fracture energy vs. interlayer thickness in glass beads-reinforced epoxy.

Figure 10.7.1 The ratio of intensities of the 130 and 040 reflections as a function of CaCO3 concentration.

Figure 11.1.1 Molecular weight between crosslinks vs. dose of γ-radiation at different levels of calcium carbonate.

Figure 11.1.2 Elongation vs. γ-rays dose for PVC filled with 15 phr CaCO3.

Figure 11.1.3 Free radical decay in silica filled PE.

Figure 11.1.4 Effect of irradiation on crosslink density of SBR filled with carbon fiber.

Figure 11.1.5 Effect of irradiation on tensile strength of SBR filled with carbon fibers.

Figure 11.1.6 Tensile strength retention after exposure to γ-radiation at 3.5 MRad.

Figure 11.2.1 Mass loss of a durable binder vs. exposure time relative to pigment load.

Figure 11.2.2 Mass loss of a non-durable binder vs. exposure time relative to pigment load.

Figure 11.2.3 Model of binder degradation.

Figure 11.2.4 Carbonyl content in photooxidized EP copolymer film vs. filler concentration.

Figure 11.3.1 Heat aging of 40% talc in PP at 150°C.

Figure 11.3.2 Dehydrochlorination rate of PVC with and without 10% calcium carbonate.

Figure 11.4.1 Moisture absorption of epoxy containing jute fiber vs. exposure time.

Figure 11.4.2 Weight increase vs. time of exposure of aramid fibers to 100% relative humidity at room temperature.

Figure 11.4.3 Yield stress of carbon fiber/polycarbonate composite vs. aging time in boiling water.

Figure 11.4.4 Tensile strength of laminates with fibers oriented parallel to the surface.

Figure 11.4.5 Tensile strength of laminates with fibers oriented perpendicular to the surface.

Figure 11.4.6 Illustration of morphological evolution of ZnO with water content and citric acid dosage.

Figure 11.5.1 Exposure of PE stabilized by carbon black vs. concentration.

Figure 11.6.1 Kinetics of degradation in soil aerobic test.

Figure 12.2.1 Limiting oxygen index vs. filler concentration in PA-66.

Figure 12.3.1 Autoignition temperature of fluoroelastomer vs. carbon black concentration.

Figure 12.3.2 Autoignition time measured @ 430°C for PP containing talc and Mg(OH)2.

Figure 12.3.3 Autoignition temperature measured by glow wire test for PP containing talc and Mg(OH)2.

Figure 12.3.4 Rate of flame spread vs. Portacarb concentration.

Figure 12.5.1 Thermogravimetric analysis of Al(OH)3 and Mg(OH)2.

Figure 12.5.2 Thermogravimetric analysis of zinc borate.

Figure 12.5.3 Rate of combustion of filled PP.

Figure 12.5.4 Decomposition of Mg(OH)2 filled PP.

Figure 13.1.1 Glass bead-epoxy matrix debonding on fracture surface.

Figure 13.3.1 Cell size of vulcanized EPDM vs. concentration of carbon black.

Figure 13.4.1 Adsorption of rubber accelerators on a silica surface.

Figure 13.5.1 N1 vs. for HDPE/carbon black composites.

Figure 13.5.2 XRD spectra and TEM microphotographs of the SAN/Na-montmorillonite composite and the SAN/PCL/Na-montmorillonite nanocomposite.

Figure 13.5.3 TEM micrograph of sPP with 5 wt% of layered silicate (left) and sPP with 2.5 wt% of layered silicate and 7.5 wt% of iPP-g-MA (compatibilizer).

Figure 13.7.1 Dispersion agent requirement vs. pH in water dispersions of carbon black.

Figure 13.7.2 Micrographs of rigid polyurethane foams. left – surfactant/silica foam, right – control. Magnification 30x.

Figure 13.8.1 Oxygen index vs. ratio of ammonium polyphosphate/filler.

Figure 13.8.2 Total smoke release vs. time.

Figure 13.8.3 The effect of a zinc hydroxystannate coating on limiting oxygen index.

Figure 13.9.1 Elastomer content vs. impact strength of polypropylene containing 15% talc and maleic anhydride modified ethylene-propylene copolymer.

Figure 13.10.1 Carbonyl absorption during photooxidation of PP containing 0.3% HALS and fillers.

Figure 14.1.3.1 Polymer-filler gel vs. bound rubber fraction.

Figure 14.1.3.2 (a) Adhesion force and (b) DMT Modulus image and the corresponding AFM force ramps plotted as a function of width from SiO2 to rubber matrix across interphase.

Figure 14.1.4.1 Carbon residue remaining from the decomposition of EPDM at 600°C for 5 min vs. percentage of Mg(OH)2 in the mixture with Al(OH)3.

Figure 14.1.6.1 Contact angle of carbon fibers vs. interlaminar shear strength of epoxy composites.

Figure 14.1.6.2 Effect of surface treatment time on contact angle of carbon fiber.

Figure 14.1.6.3 Contact angle vs. peel strength of SBR/polyurethane joints.

Figure 14.1.8.1 Glass loading determined by two methods.

Figure 14.1.11.1 Resistivity of aluminum powder filled PMMA.

Figure 14.1.11.2 Conductivity of butyl rubber filled with carbon black vs. temperature.

Figure 14.1.13.1 Fiber distribution at different strains.

Figure 14.1.14.1 Rate of flame spread vs. loading of huntite/hydromagnesite filler in ethylene-propylene copolymer.

Figure 14.1.16.1 The average length of fiber prior to and after processing in glass fiber filled polypropylene.

Figure 14.1.16.2 Average object diameter vs. rpm of Banbury mixer during incorporation of 10% calcium carbonate in polypropylene.

Figure 14.1.16.3 Average object diameter vs. CaCO3 concentration after mixing in Banbury mixer with polypropylene.

Figure 14.17.1 Limiting oxygen index vs. filler loading in PP.

Figure 14.1.18.1 Magnetic permeability of LDPE filled with HyMu.

Figure 14.1.25.1 The effect of mean particle size of silica on total acoustic emission of epoxy filled with 70% silica.

Figure 14.1.25.2 Longitudinal modulus vs. volume fraction of tungsten in epoxy. Tungsten having particle sizes from 0.5, 1, 5, and 10 µm is plotted on the graph.

Figure 14.1.25.3 Attenuation vs. volume fraction of different fillers.

Figure 14.1.27.1 Crystallization temperature of talc-filled PP vs. UV exposure time.

Figure 14.1.27.2 TGA curve for Mg(OH)2.

Figure 14.2.1.1 Rate constant of free radical decay at 40°C vs. content of silica in PE.

Figure 14.2.3.1 Disperse component of carbon black vs. temperature of thermal treatment under nitrogen.

Figure 14.2.3.2 Disperse component vs. density of carbon black on compression.

Figure 14.2.3.3 Disperse component vs. extraction time of carbon black by boiling toluene.

Figure 14.2.3.4 Disperse component of fumed silica vs. temperature of thermal treatment.

Figure 14.2.3.5 Disperse component vs. water coverage ratio.

Figure 14.2.6.1 Infrared spectra of fumed silica.

Figure 14.2.6.2 Strain induced shift of Raman spectra for a single filament Kevlar.

Figure 14.2.6.3 Peak surface areas at 1720 cm−1 vs. treatment time of carbon fibers.

Figure 14.2.7.1 Relaxation time, T2, vs. filler concentration in solid racket propellant.

Figure 14.2.7.2 Crosslink parameter vs. torque for carbon black filled SBR.

Figure 14.2.7.3 The effect of carbon black on network density of natural rubber.

Figure 14.2.8.1 Relative diffuse UV/VIS transmittance spectra of PU after UV cure.

Figure 14.2.8.2 UV/VIS spectra of good and bad dispersions.

Figure 15.1.1 Configuration of polyacrylate adsorbed at different pH.

Figure 15.2.1 Shielding effectiveness of nickel-coated carbon fiber in ABS depending on method of mixing.

Figure 15.2.2 Resistivity of ABS composite vs. content of fibers.

Figure 15.9.1 TEM of TPO blend (see text for explanations).

Figure 15.10.1 Thermal expansion and electric resistivity vs. temperature for epoxy filled with 46 vol% titanium boride.

Figure 15.10.2 Resistivity of epoxy resin vs. filler load.

Figure 15.10.3 Thermal conductivity of filled epoxies vs. temperature.

Figure 15.10.4 Tensile strength of epoxy/montmorillonite nanocomposite vs. filler concentration.

Figure 15.10.5 Schematic representation of surface modifications and hybridization of graphene filler.

Figure 15.18.1 Friction coefficient and specific wear rate of phenolic brake pads containing varying concentrations of aramid fiber.

Figure 15.18.2 Degree of conversion vs. cure time of novolac resin.

Figure 15.21.1 Weight fraction of copper for lower percolation concentration vs. particle diameter of copper particles in polyamide.

Figure 15.21.2 Tensile modulus of composites made from nylon and different fillers (montmorillonite, saponite, hectorite, and mica) vs. ¹⁵N-NMR chemical shifts of model compounds of fillers.

Figure 15.21.3 Young’s modulus of PA-6/montmorillonite composite vs. concentration of filler.

Figure 15.25.1 Maximum stress vs. cycles to failure for composites based on poly(phenylene ether ketone).

Figure 15.29.1 Young’s modulus of polycarbonate vs. amount of carbon fiber.

Figure 15.29.2 Strain-stress curve of 10% zinc oxide filled polycarbonate.

Figure 15.31.1 Energy release rate, GIc, vs. moisture content.

Figure 15.31.2 Schematic of the interaction mechanism between PEEK and GO.

Figure 15.34.1 Limiting oxygen index of polyethylene vs. concentration of filler.

Figure 15.34.2 Electric conductivity of polyethylene filled with carbon fibers of different aspect ratios vs. volume content.

Figure 15.34.3 Effective heat conductivity of polyethylene vs. filler volume fraction.

Figure 15.34.4 Thermal conductivity of polyethylene vs. volume content of carbon fiber.

Figure 15.34.5 The in-plane thermal conductivity, TC, of multilayer and random films vs. loading. (b) Enhanced TC (ΔTC) compared to pure HDPE film. (c) The photograph of a multilayer film. (d) Infrared thermal images of (I) multilayer film, (II) random film and (III) pure HDPE film, (e) Thermal dissipation mechanisms.

Figure 15.37.1 The depth of trap vs. temperature.

Figure 15.38.1 PET crystallinity vs. ATO concentration.

Figure 15.39.1 Basal spacing of montmorillonites vs. the number of carbon atoms.

Figure 15.39.2 CO2 permeability of cured polyimide films containing montmorillonite vs. volume fraction of filler.

Figure 15.39.3 Glass transition temperature of PI/carbon nanofiber, CNF, composite vs. CFN’s content.

Figure 15.39.4 Thermal conductivity of PI/carbon nanofiber, CNF, composite vs. CFN’s content.

Figure 15.41.1 Affinity index of bone cement based on PMMA vs. concentration of glass powder.

Figure 15.45.1 Tensile strength of polypropylene vs. concentration of three fillers.

Figure 15.45.2 Normalized composite properties vs. fiber length.

Figure 15.45.3 The effect of magnesium hydroxide on heat release from polypropylene.

Figure 15.45.4 (a) Schematic illustration of the fabrication process of PP/polydopamine/graphene composites. SEM images of surfaces of pure PP (b), PP/polydopamine (c) and PP/polydopamine/graphene (d) particles and (e) cross-section of PP/polydopamine/27 vol% graphene.

Figure 15.47.1 Debonded glass bead fraction vs. strain for polystyrene composites.

Figure 15.47.2 A representative drawing showing the effect of graphene nanoplatelets and multiwalled carbon nanotubes on DC electrical percolation.

Figure 15.48.1 Functional porous polymeric nanocomposites as advanced battery interlayers for Li-S batteries. (a) Schematic of the fabrication strategy by a combination of a functional polymer (e.g., PEO), a structural polymer (e.g., PVDF), and conductive fillers (e.g., carbon black); (b) Illustration of the possible functions and important properties of the battery interlayer in Li-S batteries.

Figure 15.50.1 Elongation vs. filler content.

Figure 15.51.1 Stress-strain curves for glass bead filled polyurethane with different concentrations of glass beads.

Figure 15.51.2 Stress-strain curves for glass bead filled polyurethane with different diameter of glass beads.

Figure 15.51.3 Stress-strain curves for glass bead filled polyurethane with coated and uncoated glass beads.

Figure 15.55.1 Schematic illustration of hybrid filler formation.

Figure 15.56.1.1 Benzene uptake for natural rubber.

Figure 15.56.1.2 Cure rate of carbon black-filled natural rubber vs. bound rubber content.

Figure 15.56.2.1 Bound rubber vs. oxygen content in carbon black determined for NBR compositions.

Figure 15.56.2.2 Storage modulus vs. oxygen content in carbon black in NBR compositions.

Figure 15.56.2.3 Interaction parameter vs. oxygen content in carbon black determined for NBR compositions.

Figure 15.56.4.1 Electric conductivity vs. surface area of carbon black incorporated into butyl rubber.

Figure 15.56.5.1 Electric conductivity of polychloroprene vs. concentration of carbon black.

Figure 15.56.5.2 Plot of vs. (P – Pc) in a logarithmic scale.

Figure 15.56.8.1 Tensile strength of SBR vs. carbon black loading.

Figure 15.56.8.2 Properties of SBR vs. specific surface area of carbon black.

Figure 15.57.1 Toluene uptake vs. filler concentration.

Figure 15.57.2 Tensile strength of PDMS filled with in situ formed silica.

Figure 15.57.3 Schematic diagram of the self-healing process of composites. (b) Self-healing process for the composite with 50 wt% boron nitride.

Figure 15.57.4 The fabrication process of milled carbon fiber/silicone rubber composites. (b) printing tool path (c) The piezoelectric-pneumatic material jetting printhead enables drop-on-demand jetting the droplets of high viscous ink. The cross-section view of the printhead is represented. (d) The optical images of the printed sensors. Scale bars: 7 mm.

Figure 15.60.1 Weight gain by unsaturated polyester filled with quartz vs. time in boiling water.

Figure 15.60.2 Coupling agent effect on mechanical performance of unsaturated polyester filled with quartz.

Figure 16.1.1 Models of interaction of a two component blend with filler. (a) polymers immiscible but both interacting with filler; (b) polymers immiscible but polymer B interacts with filler; (c) polymers miscible but only polymer B interacts with filler; (d) polymers miscible and both interact with filler; (e) polymers immiscible but both interact with filler forming a miscible interphase on the surface of filler.

Figure 16.1.2 SEM photographs of PP/EP blends. (a) PP/EP blend; (b) PP/EP/talc blend with separated microstructure; (c) PP/EP/talc blend with core-shell microstructure.

Figure 16.1.3 TEM micrograph of PP droplet. See explanations in the text.

Figure 16.1.4 Impact strength vs. EP content for PP/EP blend containing 17 wt% talc.

Figure 16.1.5 Impact strength vs. volume fraction of EP and filler for PP/EP blends.

Figure 16.1.6 Structure of UHMWPE particles covered with carbon black.

Figure 16.1.7 Crack length vs. the number of fatigue cycles for PC/ABS blends filled with 8 wt% talc and unfilled.

Figure 16.1.8 Spherulite diameter vs. crystallization time for PCL/PVB blend with (5 wt%) and without carbon black.

Figure 16.1.9 Resistivity vs. carbon black content in a PE/PS blend, depending on annealing regime.

Figure 16.1.10 Resistivity vs. carbon black content.

Figure 16.1.11 Resistivity vs. carbon black content for polymers and blends.

Figure 16.1.12 Model of morphology shown by two-dimensional cut for carbon black filled blend.

Figure 16.1.13 Conductivity of simulated blend vs. carbon black fraction.

Figure 6.1.14 TEM micrographs of 50/50 w/w PLA/PHBV blend with 5 wt% TiO2 at 19000x magnification.

Figure 16.2.1 Relative values of mechanical performance for polyamide-66 reinforced with 15 wt% glass fiber (A), 15 wt% microspheres (B), and their combination of 15 wt% each (C).

Figure 16.2.2 Viscosity of polyester resin filled with calcium carbonate and microspheres (total content of filler (CaCO3+microspheres) is 60 wt%).

Figure 16.2.3 Fiber strain vs. distance along composite recalculated from stress-induced Raman band shifts.

Figure 16.2.4 Water sorption kinetics of aramid fibers vs. time.

Figure 16.2.5 Schematic illustration of hot filament chemical vapor deposition. (b) Chemical reactions in the hot filament chemical vapor deposition. (c) Model illustration and (d) SEM image of barnacle-like nanocrystalline diamond@silicon carbide particle. (e) Entities of the barnacles on the rocks.

Figure 16.3.1 Ex situ synthesis of optical composite for laser amplifying films.

Figure 16.3.3 Schematic diagram of the synthesis of a polymer/metal nanocomposite.

Figure 16.3.4 Thiol-derivatized nanometric gold.

Figure 16.3.2 Particulate nanocomposite formation.

Figure 16.3.5 Layered composite synthesis.

Figure 16.3.6 Schematic representation of layered nanocomposite with ion mobility.

Figure 16.3.7 Interlayer spacing vs. molar ratio of PEO to V2O5.

Figure 16.3.8 Schematic structures of PEO conformation in V2O5 xerogel and their expected electron density projections along the c axis. (a) coil conformation, (b) zigzag conformation forming bilayer.

Figure 16.3.9 Three possible types of polymer/clay composites.

Figure 16.3.10 Water permeability of nanocomposite and polyamide composite conventionally filled with silicate.

Figure 16.4.1 SEM images of the fracture morphologies of single glass fibers from laminates a, b, and c (see text for further explanations).

Figure 18.1.1 Extrudate diameter swell vs. distance from die exit.

Figure 18.1.2 Extrudate sag vs. time.

Figure 18.3.1 Orientation function vs. volume loading of talc in compression molded polystyrene.

Figure 18.3.2 Resistivity of PS/PIB blend vs. concentration of carbon black.

Figure 18.3.3 Resistivity of neoprene and butyl rubber filled with 40 phr N550 vs. pressure during the cure.

Figure 18.3.4 Morphology of (a) aluminum nitride particles and (b) hexagonal boron nitride platelets. Micro-structures of cross-sections of (c) pure PTFE, (d) 30 vol% aluminum nitride/PTFE, (e) 30 vol% hexagonal boron nitride/PTFE and (f) 30 vol% hybrid fillers/PTFE composites (the volume ratio of aluminum nitride to hexagonal boron nitride is 1:2). The white arrows indicate the thickness direction of specimens. Insets are schematic illustrations of aluminum nitride particles and hexagonal boron nitride platelets dispersion states in PTFE composites.

Figure 18.5.1 Torque vs. mixing time of silica in rubber.

Figure 18.5.2 Color intensity vs. mixing time and shear rate.

Figure 18.5.3 Fracture toughness vs. area fraction of agglomerates, a.

Figure 18.5.4 The multiscale network structures of natural rubber/polybutadiene rubber blend modified with trans-1,4-poly (butadiene-co-isoprene) copolymer.

Figure 18.6.1 The effect of talc particle size on extruder output.

Figure 18.6.2 Throughput, Q, screw speed, Ns ratio vs. talc loading.

Figure 18.6.3 Lacing value vs. time of moisture absorption. A, B – different grades of pigment.

Figure 18.8.1 Frequency vs. orientation angle for ferromagnetic particles incorporated into a cylindrical part which was injection molded with a magnetic field applied parallel to the direction of flow.

Figure 18.8.2 Relative permeability vs. concentration of ferromagnetic fibers in PE.

Figure 18.8.3 Part weight vs. holding time for neat PP and 40% calcium carbonate filled PP.

Figure 18.10.1 Relative viscosity of SBR rubber containing 30 phr carbon black vs. mixing time.

Figure 18.10.2 Carbon black incorporation time vs. DBPA adsorption.

Figure 18.10.3 Dump temperature vs. mixing time of SBR rubber.

Figure 18.10.4 Carbon black incorporation time in SBR vs. rotor speed.

Figure 18.10.5 Bound rubber vs. mixer rotor speed for natural rubber filled with carbon black.

Figure 18.11.1 Tensile strength vs. glass fiber loading.

Figure 18.12.1 Tensile strength of wood filled

Vous avez atteint la fin de cet aperçu. Inscrivez-vous pour en savoir plus !
Page 1 sur 1

Avis

Ce que les gens pensent de Handbook of Fillers

0
0 évaluations / 0 Avis
Qu'avez-vous pensé ?
Évaluation : 0 sur 5 étoiles

Avis des lecteurs