See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/363405412

How to extract the maximum information from dynamic mechanical analysis

(DMA) tests?

Method · September 2022

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.22775.91049

CITATIONS READS

0 29

1 author:

Gyorgy Banhegyi
Medicontur Medical Engineering Ltd.
77 PUBLICATIONS   1,450 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Consulting in polymer science View project

Special Issue "Frontier Research: Waste Management for Sustainable Development" (Impact Factor 3.889) View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Gyorgy Banhegyi on 09 September 2022.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

How to extract the maximum information from dynamic mechanical analysis (DMA) tests?
György Bánhegyi

Medicontur Medical Engineering Ltd.

Herceghalmi út 1, Zsámbék, 2072, HUNGARY

Abstract

A simple method of determining the limiting moduli and the shape factors of the Havriliak-Negami relaxation
function, as well as the estimation of the activation energy from single frequency DMA curves is described.

Introduction

The principles [1] and even the practice [2,3] of dynamic mechanical analysis have been well known for a long
time. In this short research note we wish to discuss experience gained with lightly crosslinked polymer networks
exhibiting glass transition around room temperature. We performed isothermal frequency sweep
measurements in the shear mode, in a wide temperature range at several temperatures and, using the time-
temperature superposition principle (TTS) obtained the master curve. The analysis of the Cole-Cole diagram
shows that the system is dominated by a single transition with traces of a second, low temperature transition
which, however, can be neglected in the first approximation. From the temperature dependence of the shift
factor the activation energy of the process was determined, which turned out not to be constant in the tested
temperature range.

Hereafter a single frequency temperature sweep was performed again in the shear mode, on the same sample,
but in a wider temperature range. A relatively simple, easily programmable method was developed, based on
the temperature dependent Cole-Cole diagram, to determine the main parameters (the relaxed and non-relaxed
moduli, and the two shape parameters) of the Havriliak-Negami function [4] that can be fitted to the to the
experimental data. Using these data, the activation energy can also be estimated even from a DMA curve
measured at a single frequency. The advantage of the latter approach is that it is more time-consuming than the
frequency sweep tests taken at several temperatures. For routine comparison of various compositions DMA is
enough, amended with the limiting moduli, shape factors, the glass transition temperature and the activation
energy at the glass transition temperature. If we are interested in further details (as, e.g., the dependence of the
activation energy on temperature) we can perform the more time-consuming frequency sweep tests at several
temperatures.

Theoretical background

The dynamic shear modulus of a polymer exhibiting a single transition in the simplest can be described by a
single-relaxation time (Debye) equation [2]:
𝐺𝑈 −𝐺𝑅
𝐺 ∗ (𝜔) = 𝐺 ′ + 𝑖𝐺" = 𝐺𝑈 − (1)
1+𝑖𝜔𝜏

where 𝐺′ is the real part (storage modulus) 𝐺" is the imaginary part (loss modulus), 𝐺𝑈 is the unrelaxed (glassy)
modulus 𝐺𝑅 is the relaxed (rubbery) modulus. The real and imaginary parts can be readily separated:
𝐺𝑈 −𝐺𝑅
𝐺 ′ = 𝐺𝑈 − (2)
1+𝜔2 𝜏2

(𝐺𝑈 −𝐺𝑅 )𝜔𝜏

𝐺" = (3)
1+𝜔2 𝜏2

Plotted against 𝑙𝑜𝑔𝜔, 𝐺 ′ shows a stepwise decrease, 𝐺" a maximum. At the frequency, where 𝐺" shows
maximum,
𝐺𝑈 +𝐺𝑅
𝐺′ = (4)
2

and

1
 𝐺𝑈 −𝐺𝑅
𝐺" = (5)
2

Plotting 𝐺" against 𝐺 ′ (the so-called Cole-Cole plot) a half circle is obtained, which starts at 𝐺 ′ = 𝐺𝑅 (low
frequency side) and ends at 𝐺 ′ = 𝐺𝑈 (high frequency side).

This ideal case is almost never realized in polymeric systems. The relaxation becomes distorted, which can be
described, among others, by the so-called Havriliak-Negami equation [4]:
𝐺 −𝐺
𝐺 ∗ (𝜔) = 𝐺 ′ + 𝑖𝐺" = 𝐺𝑈 − [1+(𝑖𝜔𝜏)
𝑈 𝑅
𝛼 ]𝛽 (6)

where 𝛼 describes the symmetric distortion (which affects both the low and high frequency sides of the Cole-
Cole curve), 𝛽 the asymmetric distortion (which affects the high frequency side). 𝛼 and 𝛽 are small positive
numbers or 0. If both shape parameters are 0, Equation (6) reduces to Equation (1). If and 𝛼 > 0 the center of
the Cole-Cole half circle shrinks below the abscissa, otherwise it remains undistorted, if 𝛽 > 0 the high frequency
side of the Cole-Cole curve becomes skewed at the high frequency side.

If separating the real and imaginary parts of equation (6), and the expressions are normalized by the 𝐺𝑈 and 𝐺𝑅
values, the following equations are obtained (see [5], derived for dielectric relaxation, but can be easily adapted
to mechanical relaxation):
𝐺 ′ −𝐺𝑈 cos(𝛽𝜃)
= 𝛽⁄ (7)
𝐺𝑅 −𝐺𝑈 𝛼𝜋 2
[1+2𝑥 𝛼 cos( )+𝑥 2𝛼 ]
2

and
𝐺" sin(𝛽𝜃)
= 𝛽⁄ (8)
(𝐺𝑈 −𝐺𝑅 ) 𝛼𝜋 2
[1+2𝑥 𝛼 cos( )+𝑥 2𝛼 ]
2

Where
𝛼𝜋
𝑥 𝛼 sin⁡( 2 )
𝜃 = 𝑡𝑎𝑛−1 𝛼𝜋 (9)
1+𝑥 𝛼 cos⁡( )
2

and

𝑥 = 𝜔𝜏 (10)

The right-hand sides of equations (7) and (8) depend only on the shape parameters. The Cole-Cole plot of the
reduced relaxation function starts from 0 and ends at 1 on the ordinate, and the high frequency (glassy) side is
at the left and the low frequency (rubbery) side is at the right. It can be shown that the angle of the left (L) and
right (R) tangents drawn to this normalized Cole-Cole curve can be given as follows:

𝜑𝐿 = 𝛼𝛽𝜋/2 (11)

𝜑𝑅 = 𝛼𝜋/2 (12)

Thus, by extrapolating the two sides of the experimental Cole-Cole plots (similar to equations (2) and (3)) to 𝐺" =
0 we can get 𝐺𝑈 and 𝐺𝑅 and using these limiting moduli the normalization of the experimental curves can be
performed (leading to the experimental counterparts of equations (7) and (8)), and, from the slopes of the
tangents the form factors can be determined too.

All this is very nice, but the experimental frequency window (where isothermal measurements can be performed)
is relatively narrow (e.g., in commercial rheometers the upper frequency limit is around 100 Hz, the lowest
depends on our patience and on the stability of the test system, in principle down to 10-6 Hz, but in practice it is
0.1 to 100 Hz, 3 orders of magnitude). Taking into account that the half-width of the 𝐺" curve vs. 𝑙𝑜𝑔𝜔 is more
than 2 orders of magnitude, it is not possible to cover the transition range at a single temperature. Therefore,
usually isothermal measurements are taken in the experimental window and the curve fragments are shifted
horizontally along the 𝑙𝑜𝑔𝜔 axis to get the master curve. The logarithm of the shift factors, 𝑎 𝑇,𝑇0 , where T is the

2
actual, T0 is the reference temperature is plotted against 1/𝑇, the activation energy can be obtained from the
slope of the curve, which is equal to 𝐸𝑎 /𝑅, where 𝐸𝑎 is the activation energy, 𝑅⁡is the absolute gas constant:
𝜏(𝑇) 𝐸𝑎 1 1
𝑎(𝑇, 𝑇0 ) = ln ( )= ( − ) (13)
𝜏(𝑇0 ) 𝑅 𝑇 𝑇0

using equation (10) and a fix frequency 𝑥 can be swept by changing 1/𝑇 in a wide range in a wide range – which
is much easier than to sweep 𝜔 in a very wide range. Exactly this is done in the DMA test.

In the neighborhood of the glass transition often another kind of dependence can be observed, which can be
well described by the so-called Vogel-Fulcher-Tammann equation (see e.g. [6]):
𝜏(𝑇) 𝐵 𝐵
𝑎(𝑇, 𝑇0 ) = ln ( )= − (14)
𝜏(𝑇0 ) 𝑇−𝑇∞ 𝑇0 −𝑇∞

where 𝐵⁡and 𝑇∞ are characteristic constants, describing the deviation from the Arrhenius behavior, but without
definite physical meaning. This formula is valid only above 𝑇∞ (sometimes related to the dilatometric 𝑇𝑔 , or to a
limiting temperature, where the molecular motion is completely frozen below 𝑇𝑔 and even physical aging [7] is
not possible). The 𝐵 parameter cannot be interpreted as 𝐸𝑎 /𝑅, as an activation energy. Above 𝑇∞ equation yields
a gradually diminishing apparent activation energy, if interpreted within the Arrhenius formalism.

If we plot 𝐺"(𝑇) vs. 𝐺′(𝑇), (the temperature dependent Cole-Cole plot), we can determine 𝐺𝑅 and 𝐺𝑈 ⁡by linear
extrapolation in the high and low-temperature regions respectively, and, by inserting these values into equations
(7) and (8) we can draw the Cole-Cole plot of the reduced variables. This latter depends only on the shape
parameters of the relaxation function and from the tangents at the low and high temperature ranges we can
determine 𝛼 and 𝛽 using equations (11) and (12). Of course, this argumentation remains valid only if the 𝐺𝑅 , 𝐺𝑈 ,
𝛼 and 𝛽 parameters are independent of the temperature. It can be tested if using equations (7)-(13) we try to
simulate the experimental 𝐺′(𝑇) and 𝐺"(𝑇) curves. As the limiting moduli and the shape parameters are already
known, only two parameters remain to be fitted, 𝐸𝑎 and 𝑇0 . For 𝑇0 we can choose the 𝑇𝑔 value estimated by the
DMA program, so only 𝐸𝑎 needs to be found. As we will see, we have to select from various 𝑇𝑔 values offered by
the program: a.) the 𝐺"(𝑇) maximum temperature, b.) the 𝑡𝑎𝑛𝛿(𝑇) maximum temperature or c.) the inflection
temperature of the 𝑑𝑙𝑜𝑔(𝐺 ′ (𝑇))/𝑑𝑇 curve. Needless to say, they are not equal, as the 𝑇𝑔 value depends not
only on the measuring frequency but also on the definition of the transition temperature. Sometimes DMA curves
taken at multiple frequencies are used to determine the activation energy by plotting the reciprocal of the 𝐺"(𝑇)
or 𝑡𝑎𝑛𝛿(𝑇) maximum temperatures (1/𝑇𝑚𝑎𝑥 ) vs. log(ν) where ν is the measuring frequency. It can be more
easily done for dielectric permittivity tests, where the frequency scale is broader and it is easier to make multiple
frequency test under frequency scan. In DMA not more than 3 frequencies are used in multiple frequency DMA
tests, which is not enough for reliable activation energy determination.

Experimental example

The test sample is a crosslinked copolymer network having a glass transition temperature measured by
differential scanning calorimetry around 5 °C (i.e., it is soft at room temperature). The composition is not
disclosed for confidentiality reasons but, as the goal of this research note is to demonstrate a method, not to
relate the fitted data to the structure, it is not important. 8 mm diameter discs were cut from 1 mm thick sheets
and used for the shear modulus tests. The shear tests were performed on an Anton Paar MCR 302e rheometer.
First frequency sweep tests were performed in the angular frequency range from 0.1 1/sec to 100 1/sec between
5 °C and 50 °C in 5 °C steps (10 temperature data, 17 logarithmically equidistant points in the angular frequency
range). The linear viscoelastic limit in this temperature range varied from 0.02% to 1%, the actual deformation
was always selected to remain within the linearity limit. Afterward a DMA curve was measured between 60 °C
and -20°C at a cooling rate of -1°C/min and at an angular frequency of 10 Hz (corresponding to 62.8 1/sec on the
angular frequency scale). It should be noted that the DMA curves were measured in about 80 minutes, while the
measurement of the 10 isotherms took at least twice as much time – not speaking about the more tedious
evaluation procedure.

3
Evaluation of the isothermal frequency scans

Figures 1 and 2 show the isothermal 𝐺′(𝜔) and 𝐺"(𝜔) curves plotted in the double logarithmic mode.

G' isotherms
1.00E+09

1.00E+08
G'(5) [Pa]
G'(10)[Pa]
G'(15) [Pa]
G'(20) [Pa]
G'(Pa)

1.00E+07
G'(25) [Pa]
G'(30) [Pa]
G'(35) [Pa]
G'(40) [Pa]
1.00E+06
G'(45) [Pa]
G'(50) [Pa]

1.00E+05
-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
log (angular frequency) (1/sec)

Figure 1. The real parts of the complex shear modulus measured in the frequency scan mode at various
temperatures

G" isotherms
1.00E+09

1.00E+08

G"(5) [Pa]
1.00E+07 G"(10)[Pa]
G"(15) [Pa]
G"(Pa)

G"(20) [Pa]
1.00E+06
G"(25) [Pa]
G"(30) [Pa]

1.00E+05 G"(35)[Pa]
G"(40) [Pa]
G"(45) [Pa]
1.00E+04 G"(50) [Pa]

1.00E+03
-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
log (angular frequency) (1/s)

Figure 2. The imaginary parts of the complex shear modulus measured in the frequency scan mode measured at
various temperatures

Taking the 20 °C isotherm as central reference point, it is possible to prepare a master curve from both curve
sets for 𝐺 ′ (𝜔) and 𝐺"(𝜔) shown in Figures 3 and 4.

4
 G' master curve (20 oC ref)
1.00E+09

1.00E+08
G'(Pa)

1.00E+07

1.00E+06

1.00E+05
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5
log (radial frequency) (1/s)

Figure 3. The master curve of the real parts of the complex shear moduli shown in Figure 1, the reference
temperature is 20 °C.

G" master curve (20 oC ref)

1.00E+08

1.00E+07

1.00E+06
G"(Pa)

1.00E+05

1.00E+04

1.00E+03
-4.00 -3.00 -2.00 -1.00 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00
log (angular frequency) (1/s)

Figure 4. The master curve of the imaginary parts of the complex shear moduli shown in Figure 2, the reference
temperature is 20 °C.

The frequency range now covers 9 orders of magnitude. The double logarithmic representation conveniently
masks the fact, shown in the Cole-Cole plot of the 𝐺 ′ (𝜔) and 𝐺"(𝜔) curves measured at various temperatures
(see Figure 5) that the system is not completely (but approximately) thermorheologically simple, i.e., not all
curves overlap in the full range.

5
 Cole-Cole diagram
1.00E+08

9.00E+07

8.00E+07

7.00E+07 G"(5) [Pa]

G"(10)[Pa]
6.00E+07
G"(15) [Pa]
G" (Pa)

5.00E+07 G"(20) [Pa]

G"(25) [Pa]
4.00E+07
G"(30) [Pa]

3.00E+07 G"(40) [Pa]

G"(45) [Pa]
2.00E+07 G"(50) [Pa]

1.00E+07

1.00E+03
0.00E+00 1.00E+08 2.00E+08 3.00E+08 4.00E+08
G' (Pa)

Figure 5. The Cole-Cole diagram of the complex shear modulus curves measured at different temperatures,
shown in Figures 1 and 2

It can be clearly seen in Figure 5 that the high frequency parts of the Cole-Cole curves do not converge to the
same values.

If plotting the shift factors vs. 1/𝑇 (see Figure 6), it can be clearly seen that the plot is curved, rather than linear,
and can be well described by a parabolic curve.

log shift factor vs. 1/T

3.50
y = 1.140E+07x2 - 6.449E+04x + 8.739E+01
R² = 9.994E-01
2.50

1.50
log shif factor

0.50

-0.50

-1.50

-2.50

-3.50
0.003 0.0031 0.0032 0.0033 0.0034 0.0035 0.0036 0.0037
1/T (1/K)

Figure 6. Arrhenius plot of the shift factors used to create the master curves shown in Figures 3 and 4

It means that the activation energy in the given temperature range can be described by a nearly linear function
vs. the absolute temperature (see Figure 7).

6
 Activation energy vs. Temperature
350

300

250
Ea (kJ/mol)

200

150

100
5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.00 40.00 45.00 50.00
Temperature (oC)

Figure 7. Temperature dependence of the apparent activation energy of the shift factor obtained from the
Arrhenius plot shown in Figure 6

Of course, this dependence should not be extrapolated to very high temperatures, as it would lead to negative
activation energy, which is physically impossible, but it is in reasonable agreement with the observations in the
temperature range studied.

Alternatively, the temperature dependence of the shift factor can be fitted by Equation (14), by finding a 𝑇∞
value, where the log shift factor gives a linear plot vs. 1/(𝑇 − 𝑇∞ ). The result is shown in Figure 8.

Vogel-Fulcher-Tammann representation of the shift factor with T∞=228 K

4.00

3.00 y = 633.31x - 9.7611

R² = 0.9998

2.00

1.00
log shift factor

0.00
0.01 0.012 0.014 0.016 0.018 0.02

-1.00

-2.00

-3.00

-4.00
1/(T-T∞) (1/K)

Figure 8. The Vogel-Fulcher-Tammann representation of the shift factors shown in Figure 6

It can be used only above 𝑇∞ =-45 °C and fits quite well the experimental data.

7
Evaluation of the DMA scan

The temperature dependence of the 𝐺′(𝑇) and 𝐺"(𝑇) curves is shown in Figure 9.

G' and G" (10 Hz) Tg 20.1 oC

1000

100
G' and G" (MPa)

10

0.1
-20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
temperature (deg C)

G' [MPa] G" [MPa]

Figure 9. The temperature dependence of the real and imaginary parts of the complex shear modulus measured
at 10 Hz and -1 °C/min cooling rate

The glass transition temperature determined from the 𝑑𝑙𝑜𝑔(𝐺 ′ (𝑇))/𝑑𝑇 curve is 20.1 °C. If we draw the Cole-
Cole plot from the temperature dependent data (see Figure 10), we can see that a much wider portion of the
relaxation process is covered than by the isothermal curves presented in Figure 5, so it is easier to estimate the
limiting moduli in both the rubbery and glassy states.

Cole-Cole plot
120

100

80
G" (MPa)

60

40

20

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
G' (MPa)

Figure 10. The Cole-Cole plot of the temperature dependent real and imaginary parts of the complex moduli
presented in Figure 9

Two things are clear from Figure 10. One is that the equilibrium glass modulus is still not reached at -20 °C, but
the extrapolation is possible. It can also be seen that at the low temperature side of the Cole-Cole plot there is a

8
deviation from the linear, which indicates the presence of another, lower temperature relaxation process below
the glass transition. This is not unusual (so-called secondary relaxation) but, fortunately this low temperature
transition seems to be well separated from the glass transition to allow the independent evaluation of the glass
transition process.

The extrapolation at the rubber and glass sides respectively and the determined G R and GU values are shown in
Figures 11 and 12.

Cole Cole extrapolation at the rubber side (GR=0.607 MPa)

7

y = 1.9206x - 1.1659
6
R² = 0.9983

4
G" (MPa)

0
0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
G' (MPa)

Figure 11. The extrapolation of the rubber-side of the Cole-Cole diagram shown in Figure 10 and the
determination of the rubbery modulus (GR=0.607 MPa)

Cole Cole extrapolation at the glass side (GU=833.6 MPa)

50

45

40

35
G" (MPa)

30 y = -0.1491x + 124.29
R² = 0.9206

25

20

15
520 540 560 580 600 620 640 660 680 700 720
G'(MPa)

Figure 12. The extrapolation of the glass-side of the Cole-Cole diagram shown in Figure 10 and the determination
of the glass modulus (GR=833.6 MPa)

The linearity (R2 value) of the rubber side is better, but the extrapolation at the glass side is also possible.

9
Using the determined GR and GU values it is possible to calculate the real and imaginary parts of Equations (7)
and (8) using only experimental values. The Cole plot of these reduced variables is shown in Figure 13.

Cole-Cole normalized
0.14

0.12

0.1
Reduce imaginary [1]

0.08

0.06

0.04

0.02

0
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Reduced real [1]

Figure 13. The Cole-Cole plot of the reduced relaxation function

The slopes of the reduced Cole-Cole plot can be determined at both sides and using equations (11) and (12) we
can determine that 𝛼=0.67 and 𝛽=0.24.

And now we can check the validity of our assumptions of the temperature independence of the 𝐺𝑅 , 𝐺𝑈 , 𝛼, 𝛽
parameters. First, we tried to compare the experimental temperature dependent reduced variables with the
calculated ones using the Arrhenius approximation trying to insert various constant (temperature independent)
activation energies. We did not get good fit, however, if we used 20 °C (suggested as 𝑇𝑔 by the program) as
reference temperature in Equation (13). The probable reason is that the 𝑇𝑔 value obtained from the
𝑑𝑙𝑜𝑔(𝐺 ′ (𝑇))/𝑑𝑇 curve tends to overestimate the mid-point of the glass transition process. Using 15 °C in
Equation (13) and selecting 𝐸𝑎 =268 kJ/mol for the activation energy an acceptable agreement was obtained
around the main transition, although there is a deviation in the low temperature region, attributed to the onset
of the secondary relaxation process below 𝑇𝑔 (see Figure 14). The activation energy value corresponds well with
the apparent activation energy calculated for 15 °C in Figure 7, obtained from the quadratic fit of the shift factors.

10
 Experimental and simulated reduced variables of (G*-GU)/(GR-GU)
Arrhenius equation
0 0
-1
-0.5
-2

log(Im(G*-GU)/(GR-GU))
log(Re(G*-GU)/(GR-GU))

-3
-1
-4
-5 -1.5
-6
-2
-7
-8
-2.5
-9
-10 -3
-20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Temperature (oC)

ln Im (exp) Ln Im (calc) Ln Re(exp) Ln Re(calc)

Figure 14. Comparison of the experimentally determined and calculated reduced variables vs. temperature using
𝐺𝑅 = 0.607 MPa, 𝐺𝑈 =833.6 MPa, 𝛼=0.67, 𝛽=0.24, 𝑇0 =15 °C as reference temperature and 𝐸𝑎 =268 kJ/mol in
Equation (13)

We also tried the Vogel-Fulcher-Tammann equation (Equation (14)) using the parameters determined in Figure
8, and also obtained acceptable agreement (see Figure 15).

Experimental and simulated reduced variables of (G*-GU)/(GR-GU)

Vogel-Fulcher-Tammann equation
0 0

-1
-1
-2
log(Im(G*-GU)/(GR-GU))
log(Re(G*-GU)/(GR-GU))

-3 -2

-4
-3
-5

-6 -4

-7
-5
-8

-9 -6
-20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Temperature (oC)

ln Im (exp) Ln Im (calc) Ln Re(exp) Ln Re(calc)

Figure 15. Comparison of the experimentally determined and calculated reduced variables vs. temperature
using 𝐺𝑅 = 0.607 MPa, 𝐺𝑈 =833.6 MPa, 𝛼=0.67, 𝛽=0.24, 𝑇0 =15 °C as reference temperature, 𝐵=1458 (K),
𝑇∞ =228 K (-45 °C) and 𝑇0 =15 °C in Equation (14)

In fact, the agreement is even better that in the case of the Arrhenius equation assuming temperature
independent activation energy. The deviation between the experimental and fitted values can be used to
subtract the fitted curves from the experimental ones to separate the glass transition process from the sub-𝑇𝑔
relaxation.

11
 Conclusion

All calculations described above are easily programmable in the form of Excel spreadsheets using the complex
algebraic functions of Excel, so the described method facilitates the evaluation of DMA curves, to get the limiting
moduli and relaxation function shape factors for the glass transition in polymer systems where the glass
transition is reasonably separated from the rest of the relaxation transitions. The activation energy can also be
reasonably estimated from a single DMA curve by trial and error in the neighborhood of the transition
temperature using the Arrhenius approximation, or the main parameters of the Vogel-Fulcher-Tammann
equation can be estimated. The reference temperature of both equations should be selected at somewhat lower
temperature than the 𝑇𝑔 suggested by the rheometer program using the inflection of the log⁡(𝐺 ′ (𝑇)) curve. 𝑇∞
of the Vogel-Fulcher-Tammann equation should be chosen about 50-70 °C below the 𝑇𝑔 suggested by the
rheometer program. This approach gives acceptable results for finding structure-property relations in the case
of larger series of polymer or copolymer compounds without the need to perform the tedious master curve
determination using the time-temperature superposition principle.

References

[1] Ferry J.D. (1980): Viscoelastic Properties of Polymers, 3rd ed., Wiley, New York

[2] McCrum N.G., Read B.E., Williams G. (1967): Anelastic and dielectric effects in polymeric solids, Wiley, New
York

[3] Menard K.P., Menard N. (2020): Dynamic Mechanical Analysis, CRC Press, Boca Raton

[4] Havriliak S.; Negami S. (1967), Polymer, 8, 161

[5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Havriliak%E2%80%93Negami_relaxation

[6] Donth E.-J. (1981): Glasübergang, Akademie-Verlag, Berlin

[7] Struik L.C.E. (1980): Physical Aging in Amorphous Polymers and Other Materials, Elsevier Science, Amsterdam

12

View publication stats