Next Article in Journal
Development of Reverse Transcription Recombinase Polymerase Amplification (RT-RPA): A Methodology for Quick Diagnosis of Potato Leafroll Viral Disease in Potato
Next Article in Special Issue
New Insights into the Biological Response Triggered by Dextran-Coated Maghemite Nanoparticles in Pancreatic Cancer Cells and Their Potential for Theranostic Applications
Previous Article in Journal
Epicatechin Prevents Cryocapacitation of Bovine Spermatozoa through Antioxidant Activity and Stabilization of Transmembrane Ion Channels
Previous Article in Special Issue
The Effect of Pretreatment on a PtCu/C Catalyst’s Structure and Functional Characteristics
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
IJMS
Volume 24
Issue 3
10.3390/ijms24032515
ijms-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Analysis of Aluminum Oxides Submicron Particle Agglomeration in Polymethyl Methacrylate Composites

by
Vladimir Kuklin
1,2,
Sergey Karandashov
1,
Elena Bobina
1,
Sergey Drobyshev
1,
Anna Smirnova
1,
Oleg Morozov
1,* and
Maxim Danilaev
1
1
Department of Electronic and Quantum Information Transmission Devices, Kazan National Research Technical University n.a. A.N. Tupolev-KAI, Karl Marx St., 10, Tatarstan, 420111 Kazan, Russia
2
Radiophisics Department, Kazan Volga-Region Federal University, Kremlevskaya St., 18, Tatarstan, 420018 Kazan, Russia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24(3), 2515; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms24032515
Submission received: 27 December 2022 / Revised: 13 January 2023 / Accepted: 19 January 2023 / Published: 28 January 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Synthesis of Transition-Metal-Based Nanoparticles and Their Bioapplications)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Agglomeration of distributed particles is the main problem in polymer composites reinforced with such particles. It leads to a decrease in mechanical performance and its poor reproducibility. Thus, development of methods to address the agglomeration of particles is relevant. Evaluation of the size and concentration of agglomerates is required to select a method to address agglomeration. The paper analyzes aluminum oxide particles agglomeration in particles-reinforced polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) composites. Quantitative parameters of polystyrene-coated aluminum oxide particles agglomerates are obtained for the first time in this article. Unlike uncoated aluminum oxide particles, when coated aluminum oxide particles are used, agglomerates concentration in polymer composites decreases approx. 10 times. It demonstrates that modification of submicron particles by a polymer coating decreases the number of agglomerates in the polymer composite. The use of transmittance and opacity values to estimate particles agglomerates is reasonable in this article. It is shown that the difference in optical performance of specimens reinforced with coated and the original particles is related to the number and average size of agglomerates in the specimens. For example, when the concentration exceeds 0.2%, transmittance values for the specimens reinforced with coated particles are greater than the ones for the specimens reinforced with the original particles.

1. Introduction

One of the challenges that polymer composites reinforced with distributed submicron particles face is agglomeration of these particles. It is well-known that agglomeration of particles affects substantially mechanical performance of such polymer composites [1,2]. For example, [3] demonstrates that a change in mechanical performance of ceramic composites with graphene is related to agglomeration radius and pore formation around these agglomerates. Among the main causes of submicron particles agglomerates formation are poor wettability of the particles in the polymer [4], a process used for composite production [5], and concentration of submicron particles in a composite [6].
It is possible to improve wettability of submicron particles in a polymer by modification of their surface, such as plasma treatment [7]; adding functional groups to the surface of the particles that change their wettability and can form chemical bonds with matrix polymer [8] or creating a polymer coating on the surface of the particles that ensures adhesion of matrix polymer to these particles [9,10]. It should be noted that it is impossible to get rid of the agglomerates completely even after modification of the submicron particles [11].
In the majority of studies there is no quantitative assessment of the agglomerates, including their number, average size, and concentration. For example, paper [10] analyzes how thickness of polymer coating on the surface of reinforcement particles impacts mechanical performance of a composite. Papers [12,13,14,15,16] estimate an impact of distributed particles concentration on mechanical performance of various composites. However, there are no data on the proportion of these particles’ agglomerates in the composite. Papers [17,18] should be mentioned as well. They study the effect of agglomerates on mechanical performance of polymer composites; however, they do not discuss agglomeration mechanism. So, it is impossible to find the most reasonable ways to reduce the number of agglomerates in polymer composites and formalize the challenge of production process optimization. Paper [19] suggests a method for analyzing the number and average size of agglomerates based on the results of processing photographs taken through electron microscopes. However, all experimental studies conducted to verify the suggested approach involve solutions where the kinetics of agglomerate formation is different compared to the viscous melt of the matrix polymer. Paper [20] also presents the studies of agglomerates in liquid dispersion medium: it is demonstrated that the size of Al2O3 agglomerates is reduced as nickel ions concentration in electrolyte decreases while there are no estimates of the effect that particles concentration has on the result. Optical methods used to study agglomerate properties in polymer composites need a special mention [21]. For example, paper [22] reviews the effect of silver nanoparticles agglomerates size on the optical performance of thin films: an increase in size leads to a dramatic decrease in reflectance and transmittance of thin polymer films. As it is required to solve an inverse problem, i.e., to define agglomerate parameters (their size and number) in this case, the results have low reliability because there is no unique solution of such a problem, especially taking into account measurement error [23].
The goal of this study is to discover how conformal coating of particles influences the parameters of agglomerates in particle-reinforced polymethyl methacrylate composites.
It is possible to determine agglomerates parameters over the entire volume of a polymer composite using optical microscopy, for example. This method provides a possibility to determine the dimensions of large agglomerates (1 micron and up) in optically transparent polymers. That is why this paper uses polymethyl methacrylate as a transparent matrix. Al2O3 submicron particles are originally spheres [9,10,24], and polystyrene coating changes their geometry. Due to this fact electron microscopy makes it possible to see if the coating is present on the particles.

2. Results

Figure 1 shows results of statistical analysis of specimens’ microphotographs: polymethyl methacrylate reinforced by original and coated submicron Al2O3 particles (Table 1). The figure has the following notations: D0—average agglomerate diameter. For the samples with original particles Dmax = 14 micron, with coated particles Dmax = 13 micron.
Images obtained using scanning electron microscope were analyzed to study wettability of submicron particles (original and coated). Figure 2 shows the examples of images. These are the images of the chips on specimens 1.3 and 2.3 (Table 1). It should be noted that coated particles are difficult to locate on the surface when obtaining images at secondary emission (Figure 3): particles in the chip area are coated with the polymer. Analysis of the images after secondary emission provides a possibility to distinguish surface areas with different molecular mass [25]. It is the analysis of these images (Figure 2c), e.g., the chip on specimen 2.3 (Table 1), that confirms better interaction of coated particles with the polymer than the original ones [10].
Figure 3 shows an example of agglomerates size distribution histogram for specimen 2.2. Figure 4 demonstrates an example of a micrograph for specimen 2.2. The number of submicron particles agglomerates was normalized to 230.
Figure 5 shows the changes in optical performance of composite specimens; these results were obtained by photometric method [26]. The figure has the following notations: MK, KK—opacity and transmittance of the specimens reinforced with coated particles, MH, KH—opacity and transmittance of the specimens reinforced with the original particles.

3. Discussion

Agglomeration takes place when two processes run at the same time:
  • A decrease in the number and size of agglomerates due to an increase in PMMA melt viscosity while particles concentration increases;
  • An increase in the number and size of agglomerates while particles concentration increases due to an increase in the number of particle collisions, including inelastic collisions [27].
When particles concentration grows, the distance between them decreases, the frequency of inelastic collisions increases, respectively. This leads to an increase in the number of agglomerates in the specimens reinforced with the original (non-coated) particles. Together with an increase in concentration, material viscosity increases [28], and when the viscosity is high, particle mobility decreases as well as the frequency of collisions [29]. Apparently, the first process prevails in specimens reinforced with the original particles; that explains the increase in agglomerates concentration (Figure 6a).
The size of the particles and the quality of their surface determine the likelihood of inelastic collisions [30]. We believe that inelastic collisions of coated particles are more likely than of the original ones. The reason behind that is low molecular mass of polystyrene on the surface of the coated particles. Low molecular polymers have high plasticity [31]. So, when coated particles collide, a part of kinetic energy transfers into deformation of the coating which leads to an increased probability of inelastic collisions [30].
Due to a better adhesion of polymer matrix to coated particles, their drag in the polymer melt increases compared to the original particles [30]. It is an additional reason behind the decrease in the frequency of coated particles collisions in the melt, illustrated by the curve steadily going downwards in Figure 1a. It should be noted that the dimensions of coated and the original agglomerates in polymer composite specimens are close (Figure 1b): the frequency of collisions between the original particles is higher than between the coated ones and inelastic collisions between coated particles are more likely than between the original ones.
Optical performance of the specimens with the same mass concentration of coated and original particles in an ideal case (when there are no agglomerates) has to be the same [32]. It is explained by the little thickness of the polystyrene coating on the surface of these particles [10,33]. So, different optical performance of the two types of specimens may be explained only by agglomerates of submicron particles with different parameters (concentration and average size).
Agglomerates fraction in the specimens compared to distributed submicron particles and the average size of agglomerates govern opacity and transmittance [34]. Specimens reinforced with coated particles demonstrate better transmittance than specimens reinforced with the original particles when the concentration of the particles exceeds 0.2%. This happens because starting from 0.2% agglomerates concentration in specimens 2.1–2.3 (Table 1) is substantially lower than in specimens 1.1–1.3 while the average size of agglomerates is virtually the same. At lower concentrations (up to 0.2%), agglomerates in the specimens reinforced with coated particles are approx. twice as large as the ones in the specimens reinforced with the original particles. That is why, apparently, the transmittance of specimen 1.4 is lower and opacity is higher compared to the specimen 2.4.

4. Materials and Methods

4.1. Materials and Their Properties

Polymer composite specimens with submicron particles mass fraction of up to approx. 1% were studied. Submicron aluminum oxide (Al2O3) particles were used: Al2O3 (a mixture of δ- and θ-phases in a size range of 40/190 nm) submicron particles were produced by Plasmotherm (Product number: PL1344281). Optically transparent polymethyl methacrylate (SP-2) was used as a polymer matrix. Aluminum oxide particles were modified by application of a polystyrene coating on their surface using vapor phase method, described in [10].
Coated particles were deposited on polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) powder while stirring to obtain uniform distribution of coated particles in PMMA. For that purpose, a powder of coated particles was gradually added to PMMA powder while stirring using ITA-07 powder mixer (Italy). Mixing speed was 20 ± 5 rpm. After mixing, the specimens of PMMA composite were obtained within 30 ± 5 min. Specimens of Al2O3 particles-reinforced PMMA composite (both the original ones and the ones coated with polystyrene) were produced by injection molding at the following conditions: solution temperature 190 ± 5 °C; mold temperature 200 ± 5 °C; time under pressure of 41.6 MPa (424.4 kg-force/cm2) 10 min; cooling time 60 ± 10 min. The specimens were cooled down naturally at an ambient temperature of 24 ± 2 °C. Four types of specimens with different mass concentration of particles were produced for experimental study of agglomerates (Table 1). Specimens’ dimensions were 120 × 20 × 3 mm.

4.2. Methods

4.2.1. Al2O3 Particles Coating

Aluminum oxide particles were modified by application of a polystyrene coating on their surface using vapor phase method, described in [9,10,24]. The main idea behind this method is to generate a two-phase gas flow of Al2O3 particles agglomerates, their dispersion in corona and then mixing of these particles with styrene vapor. The coating is generated due to condensation of styrene on the surface of the particles. It should be noted that polystyrene in the coating has low molecular mass of approx. 40,000 Da [24]. The coating on the surface of the particles was controlled by scanning electron microscopy (Figure 1).
A study of adhesion between polystyrene coating and aluminum oxide particles [9] demonstrated covalent bond of polystyrene molecules to surface atoms of these particles. This bond keeps the coating on the surface of the particles when particle-reinforced PMMA specimens are molded.

4.2.2. Analysis of the Agglomerates

The size of agglomerates and their number were determined by optical microscopy followed by statistical analysis of micrographs in ImageJ software. Micrographs were taken in a few sections along the specimen. Changing focal points allowed taking a few through-thickness micrographs. Only those agglomerates that were located in focal points and had distinct outline were recorded using Adobe Illustrator software. Statistical analysis of the images was performed in ImageJ software and agglomerates size distribution histograms were plotted. Micromed microscope with FMA050 Touptek Photonics adapter with 40× g magnification made it possible to measure approx. 1 ± 0.1 micron agglomerates.

4.2.3. A Method for Measurement of Optical Properties

This paper compares agglomerates analysis results (concentration and average size) with optical performance of the specimens (transmittance and opacity). Optical performance was measured using turbidimetric photometer, described in [26]. BL-L101URC LEDs with the wavelength of 660 nm provided the source of light. These LEDs were powered by 1522 Hz impulse voltage with 15–20 mA current stabilization. Output voltage from measuring and reference photodiodes was amplified and registered by dual-trace digital storage oscilloscope with an 8-bit ADC and 100 kHz sampling rate, and each 10,000 readings were recorded in a file.

5. Conclusions

The assessed concentration and average size of aluminum oxide submicron particles agglomerates in polymethyl methacrylate confirmed that modification of the submicron particles provides a possibility to reduce the number of agglomerates in polymer composites. Only large-scale agglomerates (exceeding 1 micron) were analyzed, so optical microscopy could be used to obtain the images of agglomerates in optically transparent PMMA specimens and statistical analysis of these images could be performed. Unlike uncoated aluminum oxide particles, when coated aluminum oxide particles are used, agglomerates concentration in polymer composites decreases approx. 10 times. Moreover, when particles concentration in the specimens increases, the ratio of agglomerates concentration in the specimens reinforced with the original particles and in the specimens with coated particles increases as well. It is demonstrated that modification of submicron particles by polymer coating reduces the number of agglomerates in a polymer composite. The paper highlights that parameters of the agglomerates depend on the frequency of inelastic collisions of distributed particles in a polymer melt during composite specimens molding. At the same time, when concentration increases, the average distance between particles distributed in a polymer melt decreases, and that leads to an increase in the frequency of inelastic collisions. On the other hand, an increase in particles concentration contributes to an increase in melt viscosity that reduces particle mobility and therefore leads to a decrease in the frequency of inelastic collisions between the reinforcement particles. Moreover, an increase in adhesion between the submicron particles and matrix polymer promotes an increase in drag of these particles in the melt that additionally decreases the frequency of inelastic collisions between the particles and leads to a lesser agglomeration of such particles. Optical performance of the specimens, such as transmittance and opacity, may be used to assess agglomerate fraction in polymer composite specimens with optically transparent polymer matrix. When the concentration exceeds 0.2%, transmittance values for the specimens reinforced with coated particles are greater than the ones for the specimens reinforced with the original particles. When the concentration is below 0.2%, the size of agglomerates in the specimens reinforced with coated particles is approx. twice as large as in the specimens reinforced with the original particles. A suggested method for determining the parameters of submicron particles agglomerates in optically transparent polymers (polymethyl methacrylate, polycarbonate) may be applied for various particles and surface modification techniques.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, V.K. and M.D.; methodology, V.K., M.D. and S.K.; validation, M.D.; formal analysis, V.K. and M.D.; investigation, E.B. and S.D.; data curation, E.B. and A.S.; writing—original draft preparation, E.B. and A.S.; writing—review and editing, M.D., E.B. and V.K.; visualization, M.D.; supervision, O.M.; project administration, M.D.; funding acquisition, O.M. and M.D. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was supported by Russian Science Foundation Grant No 23-29-00160.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study did not require ethical approval.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Tarasov, A.E.; Badamshina, E.R.; Anokhin, D.V.; Razorenov, S.V.; Vakorina, G.S. The effect of small additions of carbon nanotubes on the mechanical properties of epoxy polymers under static and dynamic loads. Tech. Phys. 2018, 63, 32–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Aderikha, V.N.; Shapovalov, V.A.; Pleskachevskiy, Y.M. Strength characteristics, structure and wear resistance of PTFE-commercial carbon composites. J. Frict. Wear 2008, 29, 120–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Sheinerman, A.G.; Krasnitskii, S.A. Modeling of the influence of graphene agglomeration on the mechanical properties of ceramic composites with graphene. Tech. Phys. Lett. 2021, 47, 873–876. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Hill, D.; Barron, A.R.; Shirin, A. Comparison of hydrophobicity and durability of functionalized aluminium oxide nanoparticle coatings with magnetite nanoparticles–links between morphology and wettability. J. Colloid Interf. Sci. 2019, 555, 323–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Berezhnoj, Y.M.; Lipkin, V.M.; Skorikov, A.V.; Derlugyan, P.D.; Shishka, V.G.; Danyushina, G.A.; Lipkin, S.M. Effect of ultrafine copper powders, stabilized by water soluble polymers on composite materials properties. Injenerniy Vestn. Dona 2015, 3. [Google Scholar]
  6. Pykhtin, A.A.; Simonov-Emelyanov, I.D. Effect of nano and ultradispersed silica particles (SiO2) on the impact strength of epoxy polymers. Tr. VIAM 2019, 6, 3–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Pakdel, A.; Bando, Y.; Golberg, D. Plasma-Assisted Interface Engineering of Boron Nitride Nanostructure Films. ACS Nano 2014, 8, 10631–10639. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Vengatesan, M.R.; Mittal, V. Surface Modification of Nanoparticle and Natural Fiber Fillers; Mittal, V., Ed.; Wiley: Weinheim, Germany; VCH Verlag GmbH: Weinheim, Germany; Co. KGaA: Weinheim, Germany, 2015; ISBN 978-3-527-67026-0. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Danilaev, M.P.; Drobyshev, S.V.; Klabukov, M.A.; Kuklin, V.A.; Mironova, D.A. Formation of a polymer shell of a given thickness on surfaces of submicronic particles. Nanobiotechnol. Rep. 2021, 16, 162–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Akhmadeev, A.A.; Bogoslov, E.A.; Danilaev, M.P.; Klabukov, M.A.; Kuklin, V.A. Influence of the thickness of a polymer shell applied to surfaces of submicron filler particles on the properties of polymer compositions. Mech. Compos. Mater. 2020, 56, 241–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Buyanov, I.A. Development of technology to introduce carbon nanotubes into a polyester-binder composition. Polym. Sci. Ser. D 2013, 6, 160–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Revo, S.L.; Avramenko, T.G.; Melnichenko, M.M.; Ivanenko, K.O. Mechanical characteristics of nanocomposite materials based on polytrifluorochloroethylene. Mol. Cryst. Liq. Cryst. 2022, 748, 82–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Dal Lago, E.; Cagnin, E.; Boaretti, C.; Roso, M.; Lorenzetti, A.; Modesti, M. Influence of different carbon-based fillers on electrical and mechanical properties of a PC/ABS blend. Polymers 2019, 12, 29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  14. Sanya, O.T.; Oji, B.; Owoeye, S.S.; Egbochie, E.J. Influence of particle size and particle loading on mechanical properties of silicon carbide–reinforced epoxy composites. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2019, 103, 4787–4794. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Melo, P.M.A.; Macêdo, O.B.; Barbosa, G.P.; Ueki, M.M.; Silva, L.B. High-density polyethylene/mollusk shell-waste composites: Effects of particle size and coupling agent on morphology, mechanical and thermal properties. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2019, 8, 1915–1925. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Senthil Muthu Kumar, T.; Senthilkumar, K.; Chandrasekar, M.; Subramaniam, S.; Mavinkere Rangappa, S.; Siengchin, S.; Rajini, N. Influence of fillers on the thermal and mechanical properties of biocomposites: An overview. In Biofibers and Biopolymers for Biocomposites; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2020; pp. 111–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Rani, G.E.; Murugeswari, R.; Siengchin, S.; Rajini, N.; Kumar, M.A. Quantitative assessment of particle dispersion in polymeric composites and its effect on mechanical properties. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2022, 19, 1836–1845. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Samal, S. Effect of shape and size of filler particle on the aggregation and sedimentation behavior of the polymer composite. Powder Technol. 2020, 366, 43–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Tyson, B.M.; Al-Rub, R.K.A.; Yazdanbakhsh, A.; Grasley, Z. A quantitative method for analyzing the dispersion and agglomeration of nano-particles in composite materials. Compos. Part B-Eng. 2011, 42, 1395–1403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Kuo, S.L.; Chen, Y.C.; Ger, M.D.; Hwu, W.H. Nano-particles dispersion effect on Ni/Al2O3 composite coatings. Mater. Chem. Phys. 2004, 86, 5–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Lelischev, Y.G.; Val’tsifer, V.A.; Strel’nikov, V.N.; Astaf’eva, S.A.; Vasil’ev, O.G. A study of microstructural formations of ultrafine particles in liquid oligomer composites. Khimicheskaya Promyshlennost’ Segodnya 2009, 3, 33–39. [Google Scholar]
  22. Mukabenova, B.E.; Nikolaev, N.E.; Chekhlova, T.K. Influence of agglomerate formation on spectral properties of composite media. In Proceedings of the LVI All-Russia Conference on Problems in Dynamics, Particle Physics, Plasma Physics and Optoelectronics, RUDN University, Moscow, Russia, 18–22 May 2020; pp. 192–196. [Google Scholar]
  23. Lavrent’ev, M.M.; Romanov, V.G.; Shishatskiy, S.P. Ill-Posed Problems in Mathematical Physics and Analysis; Nauka Publishing House: Moscow, Russia, 1980. [Google Scholar]
  24. Sakhabutdinov, A.Z.; Hussein, S.M.R.H.; Ibragimova, A.R.; Kuklin, V.; Danilaev, M.P.; Zaharova, L.Y. Polystyrene Molecular Weight Determination of Submicron Particles Shell. Karbala Int. J. Mod. Sci. 2021, 7, 234–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Orlikovsky, N.A.; Rau, E.I. Image contrast in the backscattered electron mode in scanning electron microscopy and microtomography. Bull. Russ. Acad. Sci. 2011, 75, 1234–1239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Danilaev, M.P.; Karandashov, S.A.; Kuklin, A.Z.; Hussein, S.M.R.H. Turbidimetric photometer for studying the sedimentation of nanosized objects. Nauchnoe Priborostr. 2021, 31, 35–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Amankulov, Y.; Agabekova, D. Dielectric properties of the polymers filled with ferrite particles. Evraziyskoe Nauchnoe Ob’edinenie 2018, 46, 52–57. [Google Scholar]
  28. Serenko, O.A.; Goncharuk, G.P.; Knunyants, M.I.; Kryuchkov, A.N. Flow of highly filled thermoplastic-dispersed elastic filler compositions. Polym. Sci. Ser. A 1998, 40, 746–750. [Google Scholar]
  29. Vaia, R.A.; Jandt, K.D.; Kramer, E.J.; Giannelis, E.P. Kinetics of polymer melt intercalation. Macromolecules 1995, 28, 8080–8085. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Losev, S.A.; Umanskii, S.Y.; Yakubov, I.T. Physics and Chemistry in Gas Dynamics. Computer-Assisted Guide in 3 Volumes; Tcherniy, G.G., Losev, S.A., Eds.; Moscow University Publishing House: Moscow, Russia, 1995. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Semchikov, Y.D. High Molecular Compounds; Lobachevsky University Publishing House: Nizhniy Novgorod, Russia; Akademiya Publishing Center: Nizhniy Novgorod, Russia, 2003. [Google Scholar]
  32. Bohren, C.F.; Huffman, D.R. Absorption and Scattering of Light by Small Particles; Mir Publishing House: Moscow, Russia, 1986. [Google Scholar]
  33. Lock, J.A.; Laven, P. Understanding light scattering by a coated sphere. Part 2: Time domain analysis. J. Opt. Soc. Am. 2012, 29, 1498–1507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Besperstov, I.V.; Frolov, I.I.; Pas’ko, A.A. A study of carbon nanotubes dispersion. In Proceedings of the IX International Academic and Research Contest, Vladivostok, Russia, 28–31 October 2016; Gulyaev, G.Y., Ed.; Nauka and Prosveschenie International Center for Cooperation in Research: Penza, Russia, 2017; pp. 55–59. [Google Scholar]
Ijms 24 02515 g001 550
Figure 1. (a) Agglomerates concentration N vs. mass concentration of submicron reinforcement particles in the polymer composite; (b) Scaled average diameter of particles D0/Dmax vs mass concentration of submicron reinforcement particles in the polymer composite.
Figure 1. (a) Agglomerates concentration N vs. mass concentration of submicron reinforcement particles in the polymer composite; (b) Scaled average diameter of particles D0/Dmax vs mass concentration of submicron reinforcement particles in the polymer composite.
Ijms 24 02515 g001
Ijms 24 02515 g002a 550Ijms 24 02515 g002b 550
Figure 2. SEM-images of Al2O3-reinforced composite specimens: (a) the original particles, (b,c) coated particles.
Figure 2. SEM-images of Al2O3-reinforced composite specimens: (a) the original particles, (b,c) coated particles.
Ijms 24 02515 g002aIjms 24 02515 g002b
Ijms 24 02515 g003 550
Figure 3. A typical micrograph of an optical image of specimen 2.2.
Figure 3. A typical micrograph of an optical image of specimen 2.2.
Ijms 24 02515 g003
Ijms 24 02515 g004 550
Figure 4. Agglomerates size distribution histogram for specimen 2.2.
Figure 4. Agglomerates size distribution histogram for specimen 2.2.
Ijms 24 02515 g004
Ijms 24 02515 g005 550
Figure 5. Optical performance of the polymer composite: (a) opacity vs. particles concentration; (b) transmittance vs particles concentration.
Figure 5. Optical performance of the polymer composite: (a) opacity vs. particles concentration; (b) transmittance vs particles concentration.
Ijms 24 02515 g005
Ijms 24 02515 g006 550
Figure 6. Microphotographs of aluminum oxide particles: (a) the original particles; (b) coated particles.
Figure 6. Microphotographs of aluminum oxide particles: (a) the original particles; (b) coated particles.
Ijms 24 02515 g006
Table
Table 1. Classification of the specimens.
Table 1. Classification of the specimens.
Specimen TypePolystyrene Coating?Mass Concentration of
Particles in the Specimen, %
Specimen 0No0
Specimen 1.1No1
Specimen 1.2No0.5
Specimen 1.3No0.25
Specimen 1.4No0.01
Specimen 2.1Yes1
Specimen 2.2Yes0.5
Specimen 2.3Yes0.25
Specimen 2.4Yes0.01
Five specimens of each type were manufactured to improve the reliability of experimental data.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Kuklin, V.; Karandashov, S.; Bobina, E.; Drobyshev, S.; Smirnova, A.; Morozov, O.; Danilaev, M. Analysis of Aluminum Oxides Submicron Particle Agglomeration in Polymethyl Methacrylate Composites. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 2515. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms24032515

AMA Style

Kuklin V, Karandashov S, Bobina E, Drobyshev S, Smirnova A, Morozov O, Danilaev M. Analysis of Aluminum Oxides Submicron Particle Agglomeration in Polymethyl Methacrylate Composites. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2023; 24(3):2515. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms24032515

Chicago/Turabian Style

Kuklin, Vladimir, Sergey Karandashov, Elena Bobina, Sergey Drobyshev, Anna Smirnova, Oleg Morozov, and Maxim Danilaev. 2023. "Analysis of Aluminum Oxides Submicron Particle Agglomeration in Polymethyl Methacrylate Composites" International Journal of Molecular Sciences 24, no. 3: 2515. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms24032515

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop