1 / 21

Anna C. Balazs Jae Youn Lee Gavin A. Buxton Olga Kuksenok Kevin Good Valeriy V. Ginzburg*

Multi-scale Modeling of Polymeric Mixtures. Anna C. Balazs Jae Youn Lee Gavin A. Buxton Olga Kuksenok Kevin Good Valeriy V. Ginzburg* Chemical Engineering Department University of Pittsburgh Pittsburgh, PA *Dow Chemical Company Midlland, MI. Use Multi-scale Modeling to Examine:.

jason
Download Presentation

Anna C. Balazs Jae Youn Lee Gavin A. Buxton Olga Kuksenok Kevin Good Valeriy V. Ginzburg*

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Multi-scale Modeling of Polymeric Mixtures Anna C. Balazs Jae Youn Lee Gavin A. Buxton Olga Kuksenok Kevin Good Valeriy V. Ginzburg* Chemical Engineering Department University of Pittsburgh Pittsburgh, PA *Dow Chemical Company Midlland, MI

  2. Use Multi-scale Modeling to Examine: • Reactive A/B/C ternary mixture • A and B form C at the A/B interface • Critical step in many polymerization processes • Challenges in modeling system: • Incorporate reaction • Include hydrodynamics • Capture structural evolutional and domain growth • Predict macroscopic properties of mixture • Results yield guidelines for controlling morphology and properties

  3. B A C System • A and B are immiscible • Fluids undergo phase separation • C forms at A/B interface • Alters phase-separation • Examples: • Interfacial polymerization • Reactive compatibilization • Two order parameters model: here is density • Challenges: • Modeling hydrodynamic interactions • Predicting morphology & formation of C

  4. A C B Free Energy for Ternary Mixture: FL • Free energy F = FL + FNL • Coefficients for FL yield 3 minima • Three phase coexistence

  5. Free Energy : Non-local part, FNL • Free energy F= FL + FNL • Reduction of A/B interfacial tension by C: • No formation of C in absence of chemical reactions ( ) • Cost of forming C interface: . • For (no reactions & no C) • Standard phase-separating binary fluid in two-phase coexistence region

  6. Evolution Equations* • Order parameters evolution: • Cahn –Hilliard equations • Mw(A) = Mw(B); Mw(C) = 2* Mw(A) • Navier-Stokes equation *C. Tong, H. Zhang, Y.Yang, J.Phys.Chem B, 2002

  7. Lattice-Boltzmann Method • D2Q9 scheme • 3 distribution functions • Macroscopic variables: • Constrains & Conservation Laws • Governing equations in continuum limit are: • Cahn –Hilliard equations • Navier-Stokes equation

  8. Single Interface: • System behavior vs , • Higher leads to wider C layer • Choose parameters to have narrow interface • Need other parameters and additional non-local terms to model wide interfaces. • Steady-state distributions:

  9. Diffusive Limit: No Effects of Hydro • Initial state: • 256 x 256 sites • High visc. • No reaction • Domain growth • Turn on reaction when R =4 • W/reactions: steady-states • Reactions arrest domain growth

  10. Viscous Limit: Effect of Hydrodynamics • No reaction • Domain growth • Evolution w/reactions: , • Domain growth slows down but does not stop • Velocities due to • Advect interfaces and prevent equilibrium between reaction & diffusion

  11. Compare Morphologies Diffusive regime: Steady-state Viscous regime: Early time Viscous regime: Late times

  12. Domain Growth vs. Reaction Rate Ratio, • R(t) vs. time for different g • Diffusive limit: • Freezing of R due to interfacial reactions • Viscous limit: • Growth of R slows down, especially at early times • R smaller for greater g

  13. 1 2 Viscous Limit: Evolution of Average Interface Coverage, IC . • Ic = (L2 / LAB ) = R • ICsaturates quickly; value similar in diffusive and viscous limits • Domain growth freezes in diffusive limit • IC= const for different R in viscous regimes

  14. Viscous Limit: Evolution of • Avg. Amount of C: • At early times, is the similar in both cases until ICsaturates • At late times, is smaller in viscous regime than in diffusive • Velocity advects interfaces • larger for greater g

  15. (c) (b) Dependence on Reaction Rates: Diffusive Regime, • Reaction rates: a) ( ) b) ( ) c) ( ) • Steady-state : • The higher the reaction rates, the faster the interface saturates • The lower the saturated value of R

  16. Dependence on Reaction Rates: Viscous Regime, • No saturation of R • R(t) smaller for higher reaction rates

  17. Dependence on Reaction Rates, • & Interface Coverage, IC • Value of depends on values of reaction rates • Higher reaction rates yield greater • Sat. of IC faster for higher reaction rates • Values similar for different cases

  18. Morphology Mechanical Properties • Output from morphology study is input to Lattice Spring Model (LSM) • LSM: 3D network of springs • Consider springs between nearest and next-nearest neighbors • Model obeys elasticity theory • Different domains incorporated via local variations in spring constants • Apply deformation at boundaries • Calculate local elastic fields

  19. Determine Mechanical Properties • Use output from LB as input to LSM • Morphology • Strain Stress

  20. Symmetric Ternary Fluid; • Local in 3 phase coexistence; • Cost of A/C and B/C interfaces ( ) • Viscous limit,

  21. Conclusions • Developed model for reactive ternary mixture with hydrodynamics • Lattice Boltzmann model • Compared viscous and diffusive regimes • Freezing of domain growth in diffusive limit and slowing down in viscous limit • R(t) depends on g and specific values of reaction rates • Future work: “Symmetric” ternary fluids • A & B & C domain formation • Determine mechanical properties

More Related