| Abstract | In Part II of the work, the intermeshing twin‐screw extruder is briefly described and the theoretical procedures used to model its operation are summarized. Based on the microrheological considerations discussed in Part I, a predictive procedure of the morphology evolution during compounding of two immiscible polymers is proposed. In this first generation model, only the shear flow effects are considered. Furthermore, to avoid complications due to coalescence a low concentration of the dispersed phase was assumed. In the procedure, two drop breakup mechanisms are discussed. The first assumes that the drops do not break under flow while the second postulates that breakup occurs under flow. Two dispersion mechanisms are considered, the first postulating continuously increasing polydispersity of drop size and the second postulating that drop polydispersity is inversely proportional to deformation strain. The influence of the screw configuration and operating conditions on blend morphology evolution is studied. It is expected that the computed drop size distribution provides limiting values for the experimental data. Dependency of predicted morphology on operating conditions is also investigated. Increasing screw rotating speed (resulting in increasing energy consumption) and decreasing throughput (resulting in decreasing productivity) lead to prediction of finer drop size. In practice, therefore, a compromise would be required. The proposed procedure is limited to melt flow (excluding the die region) within the region of large capillary parameter values, k > 4kcrit |
|---|
