Dynamics of polybutadienes with different microstructures. 2 Dielectric response and comparisons with rheological behavior

Journal of Chemical Physics

Volumn 107, Issue 9, 1997, Pages 3645-3655

  Zorn, Reiner ^a   Mopsik, Frederick I ^b   McKenna, Gregory B ^b   Willner, Lutz ^a   Richter, Dieter ^a  

^a FORSCHUNGSZENTRUM JÜLICH   (Germany)

^b NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANELASTIC RELAXATION; ANIONIC POLYMERIZATION; DIELECTRIC RELAXATION; DIFFERENTIAL SCANNING CALORIMETRY; DYNAMICS; LAPLACE TRANSFORMS; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; MICROSTRUCTURE; MOLECULES; RHEOLOGY; SPECTROSCOPY; THERMAL EFFECTS;

TIME DOMAIN DIELECTRIC SPECTROSCOPY; TIME TEMPERATURE SUPERPOSITION;

POLYBUTADIENES;

EID: 0031235921     PISSN: 00219606     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1063/1.474722     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. N. G. McCrum, B. E. Read, and G. Williams, Anelastic and Dielectric Effects in Polymeric Solids (Wiley, London, 1967).
2. S. Havriliak and S. Negami, J. Polym. Sci., Part C 14, 99 (1966).
3. F. Kohlrausch, Poggendorff's Annalen der Physik 12, 393 (1847).
4. G. Williams and D. C. Watts, Trans. Faraday Soc. 66, 80 (1970).
5. R. H. Cole and K. S. Cole, J. Chem. Phys. 10, 98 (1942).
6. L. Wu and S. R. Nagel, Phys. Rev. Lett. 46, 11198 (1992).
7. G. P. Johari, J. Chem. Phys. 58, 1766 (1970).
8. F. Garwe, A. Schönhals, M. Beiner, K. Schröter, and E. Donth, J. Phys., Condens. Matter 6, 6941 (1994).
9. A. Arbe, D. Richter, J. Colmenero, and B. Farago, Phys. Rev. E 54, 3853 (1996).
10. R. Zorn, G. B. McKenna, L. Willner, and D. Richter, Macromolecules 28, 8552 (1995).
11. C. A. Angell and W. Sichina, Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 279, 53 (1967).
12. C. A. Angell, J. Phys. Chem. Solids 49, 863 (1988).
13. M. Morton and L. J. Fetters, Rubber Chem. Technol. 48, 359 (1975).
14. F. I. Mopsik, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 55, 79 (1984).
15. F. I. Mopsik, IEEE Trans. Electr. Insul. EI-20, 957 (1985).
16. The absolute values of ∈″ obtained here for PB 7 are ≈26% higher than those published by Quan et al. (Ref. 17) for 11% 1,2-polybutadiene at 1 kHz and ≈31% higher than those published by Hofmann et al. (Ref. 18) for a 7% 1,2-polybutadiene at -92.1 °C.
17. X. Quan, G. E. Johnson, E. W. Anderson, and F. S. Bates, Macromolecules 22, 2451 (1989).
18. A. Hofmann, A. Alegria, J. Colmenero, and L. Willner, Macromolecules 29, 129 (1996).
19. F. I. Mopsik, in Electrically Based Microstructural Characterization, edited by R. A. Gerhard, S. A. Taylor, and E. J. Garboczi [Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 147, 357 (1996)].
20. R. D. Deegan and S. R. Nagel, Phys. Rev. B 52, 5653 (1995).
21. P. K. Dixon, L. Wu, S. R. Nagel, B. D. Williams, and J. P. Carini, Phys. Rev. Lett. 65, 1108 (1990).
22. J. D. Ferry, Viscoelastic Properties of Polymers (Wiley, New York, 1961).
23. A. Schönhals, F. Kremer, and E. Schlosser, Phys. Rev. Lett. 67, 999 (1991).
24. F. S. Howell, H. A. Bose, P. B. Macedo, and C. T. Moyniham, J. Chem. Phys. 78, 639 (1974).
25. Deviations from thermorheological simplicity were only detected when glassy and terminal dispersion shift factors were compared. Each of the dispersions individually followed the time-temperature superposition principle.
26. F. Alvarez, A. Alegría, and J. Colmenero, Phys. Rev. B 44, 7306 (1991).
27. F. Alvarez, A. Algería, and J. Colmenero, Phys. Rev. B 47, 125 (1993).
28. An estimate of the systematic error which results from doing this can be obtained by extrapolation of the mismatch between glassy and terminal shift factors in the overlap region reported in Ref. 10 to the highest temperature used here. For PB 7 through PB 70 we expect errors less than a factor of 2, i.e., 0.3 offset on the logarithmic scales of Figs. 11 and 12. Only in the case of PB 95 the factor may rise to about 15, i.e., an offset of 1.2 on the logarithmic scales, for the highest temperature because there the observed mismatch was much larger than for the other microstructures.
29. C. A. Angell, Solid State Ion. 9&10, 3 (1983).
30. C. T. Moynihan, N. Balitactac, L. Boone, and T. A. Litovitz, J. Chem. Phys. 55, 3013 (1971).
31. S. Havriliak, Jr. and S. J. Havriliak, J. Polym. Sci. B, Polym. Phys. 33, 2245 (1995).
32. E. A. DiMarzio and M. Bishop, J. Chem. Phys. 60, 3802 (1974).
33. Among the other models reported only the one of Havriliak and Havriliak (HH) (Refs. 34 and 35) seems to be sufficiently elaborate to accommodate the complicated situation of polymer viscoelasticity. The HH model needs the tensile creep compliance D(t) as an input of rheological data. The conversion of the rheological data in Ref. 10 would require a transform into the time domain. Because of the complication and numerical uncertainty involved with this we did not test the HN model. Additionally, we point out that Havriliak and Havriliak (Ref. 31) showed that the results of their model and the DB model are very similar despite their different derivations.
34. S. Havriliak, Jr., Macromolecules 23, 2384 (1990).
35. S. Havriliak, Jr. and S. J. Havriliak, Polymer 33, 938 (1991).
36. P. Debye, Polar Molecules (Dover, New York, 1929).
37. K. L. Ngai and D. J. Plazek, Rubber Chem. Technol. 68, 376 (1995).
38. C. Cramer, K. Funke, and T. Saatkamp, Philos. Mag. B 71, 701 (1995).