Reactive extrusion of glycerylated starch and starch–polyester graft copolymers

Hablot, Elodie; Dewasthale, Sudhanwa; Zhao, Yanjie; Yang, Zhitao; Shi, Xiangke; Graiver, Daniel; Narayan, Ramáni

doi:10.1016/j.eurpolymj.2012.12.005

Cited by 80 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…So far a number of research have focused on the PBAT/TPS composites (Brandelero, Grossmann, & Yamashita, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2015.01.058 0144-8617/© 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 2011 ;Brandelero, Grossmann, & Yamashita, 2012;Brandelero, Yamashita, & Grossmann, 2010;Garcia et al, 2014;Hablot et al, 2013;Mohanty & Nayak, 2010;Nayak, 2010;Olivato, Grossmann, Yamashita, Eiras, & Pessan, 2012;Olivato, Grossmann, Bilck, Yamashita, & 2012;Olivato et al, 2011;Olivato et al, 2013;Raquez, Dubois, & Narayan, 2005;Raquez, Nabar, Narayan, & Dubois, 2008;Silva et al, 2013;Stagner & Narayan, 2011). However, the incompatibility between the hydrophilic starch and the hydrophobic biodegradable polyester PBAT resulted in the poor mechanical properties of PBAT/TPS composites, such as tensile strength, compressibility, resilience, and flexibility.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…Maleated TPS (MTPS) (Hablot et al, 2013;Raquez et al, 2008;Stagner et al, 2012), maleated PBAT (Mohanty & Nayak, 2010;Raquez et al, 2005), soybean oil (Brandelero et al, 2012), adipic acid (Silva et al, 2013), tartaric acid , maleic anhydride and citric acid Olivato, Grossmann, & Bilck, 2012;Olivato et al, 2011) are the typical compatibilizers used in PBAT/TPS blends. It seems that the anhydride group of maleic anhydride, the epoxy group of GMA, the carboxyl group of acrylic acid and citric acid are efficient in the improvement of the mechanical properties of PBAT/TPS blends.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Morphology and mechanical properties of poly(butylene adipate-co-terephthalate)/potato starch blends in the presence of synthesized reactive compatibilizer or modified poly(butylene adipate-co-terephthalate)

Wei

Wang

Xiao

et al. 2015

Carbohydrate Polymers

118

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Morphology and mechanical properties of poly(butylene adipate-co-terephthalate)/potato starch blends in the presence of synthesized reactive compatibilizer or modified poly(butylene adipate-co-terephthalate)

Wei

Wang

Xiao

et al. 2015

Carbohydrate Polymers

118

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Figure 8a shows a broad band at *1,765 cm -1 (stretching C=O of carboxylic acids) and a shoulder at *1,735 cm -1 (stretching C=O of ester), observed in TPS MSG . This is attributed to chemical groups grafted by the maleation process, as reported elsewhere [1,16,30,31]. In addition, bands at 1,687 and 1,587 cm -1 were present in TPS MSG but not in TPS SG .…”

Section: Msg and Sg Systemsmentioning

confidence: 64%

“…Starch plasticized with SG and starch-zein blends yielded compact structures with low porosity values after foaming. Starch-based bioplastics have been widely studied in the past to find alternatives to petroleum based polymers [1][2][3].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Strategies to Produce Thermoplastic Starch–Zein Blends: Effect on Compatibilization

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Different strategies to produce thermoplastic materials using starch and zein were studied, aiming to investigate their effect on the compatibility of starch and zein. Research strategies comprised the use of two different plasticizers for starch, two different compatibilizing agents, and two blending procedures. The plasticizers were mixtures of sorbitol and glycerol (SG) or urea and formamide (UF). UF and maleated starch (MS) were used as compatibilizing agents. The blending procedures included: (1) thermoextruding starch and zein as premixed powder materials (TP [Mix]) and (2) coextruding the biopolymers previously thermoplasticized with suitable plasticizers. As observed by the tensile tests, scanning electronic microscopy, and dynamic mechanical analysis, segregation of phases occurred at different extents in all the starch-zein blends. Materials made with MS through the TP [Mix] procedure presented the most severe phases segregation, while the materials made with UF showed higher compatibility between starch and zein. Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR) suggests that increased zein content leads to a lower molecular order, which was ascribed to diminished molecular entanglement. Thermogravimetric analysis and FTIR analysis showed that the chemical interaction between starch and zein occurred more extensively in slabs made with UF than those made with MS. In addition, foamability was evaluated for the selected materials using supercritical CO 2 . Neat thermoplasticized starch plasticized with UF and themoplasticized zein with polyethylene-glycol 400 showed good suitability to be foamed, producing foams with porosities above 85 %. Starch plasticized with SG and starch-zein blends yielded compact structures with low porosity values after foaming. Keywords Starch Á Zein Á Compatibilization Á Thermoplastic extrusion Á Foaming Abbreviations UF Urea and formamide mixture at 2:1 (wt:wt) ratio SG Sorbitol and glycerol mixture at 1.4:1 (wt:wt) ratio MS Maleated starch MSG Mixture of native/maleated starch (50:50) and SG as plasticizer TPS UF Native starch thermoplasticized with UF TPS SG Native starch thermoplasticized with SG TPS MSG Thermoplasticized MSG TPZ Zein thermoplasticized with PEG400 Mix[TP] Mixing thermoplasticized biopolymers through thermoextrusion TP[Mix] Thermoplasticizing powder compositions of biopolymers and plasticizers

show abstract

“…As a consequence, biopolymers generally are not applied without modification. In their feature article, Imre and Pukánszky [27] give an overview of the various physical (plasticizing, blending [28], composite preparation) and chemical (copolymerization [29], grafting [30]) modification approaches, focusing on structure (the typical morphology of bi-component polymer blends can be observed on Fig. 2), interfacial interactions, macroscopic properties and compatibilization in biopolymer-based blends.…”

Section: Biopolymers and Their Modificationmentioning

confidence: 99%