Tensile properties of LDPE/electrical cable

waste blends prepared by melt extrusion

process
E.A. Franco-Urquiza*1, N. Camacho1 and M.Ll. Maspoch2
1
National Council of Science and Technology CONACyT, Center for Engineering and Industrial Development. Playa Pie
de la Cuesta 702, Desarrollo San Pablo, Queretaro, Mexico. 76125. 2Centre Català del Plàstic, Universitat Politècnica de
Catalunya. Edifici Vapor Universitari de Terrassa, Colom 114, 08222 Terrassa, Barcelona, Spain

Propiedades de resistencia a la tracción de las mezclas de residuos de LDPE/cables eléctricos,

preparadas mediante el proceso de extrusión por fusión

Propietats de resistència a la tracció de mescles de residus de LDPE/cables elèctrics, preparats

per mitja del procés de extrusió per fusió

RECEIVED: 19 JULY 2016; RECEIVED: 22 OCTOBER 2016; ACCEPTED: 16 NOVEMBER 2016

SUMMARY conductor. El LDPE reciclado se recubría usando el

método de separación gravimétrico. Se obtenían fila-
In this study low density poly-ethylene (LDPE)/ mentos extruidos heterogéneos debido a la presencia
electrical cable waste blends were prepared using a de partículas residuales no fundidas que causaban la
single-screw extruder at pilot plant level. The cable interrupción del proceso de extrusión. Para mejorar la
waste was mainly composed of LDPE, synthetic rub- mezcla y homogeneidad de los filamentos extruidos,
bers, flexible poly-vinyl chloride (PVC) and traces of se recogían residuos de LDPE usando tamices o cri-
conductive metal. Recycled LDPE was recovered by bas con una abertura de malla de 1.68 y 0.59 mm. Las
using the gravimetric separation approach. Heteroge- propiedades mecánicas de las mezclas se relaciona-
neous extruded filaments were obtained because of ban con el contenido residual y el procesamiento del
the presence of not-melted waste particles that caused LDPE. En general, los parámetros mecánicos corres-
the interruption of the extrusion process. In order to pondientes a los filamentos extruidos heterogéneos
improve the mixing and the homogeneity of the ex- eran bastante inferiores a los del LDPE debido a que
truded filaments, LDPE waste was collected using las partículas residuales grandes y no fundidas causa-
nest sieves with opening mesh of 1.68 and 0.59 mm. ban el fallo prematuro del material. Las mezclas que
The mechanical properties of the blends were related contenían partículas residuales de LDPE tamizadas
to the LDPE waste content and processing. In gener- mostraban valores superiores en rigidez y ductilidad
al, the mechanical parameters corresponding to the con respecto al resto de las mezclas.
heterogeneous extruded filaments were notoriously
lower than the LDPE because of large and not-melt- Palabras clave: Reciclado; propiedades mecánicas;
ed waste particles caused the premature failure of the procesamiento.
material. The blends containing sieved LDPE waste
particles showed higher values in stiffness and ductil-
ity with respect to the rest of the blends. RESUM
Keywords: Recycling; mechanical properties; En aquest estudi, les mescles de residus de polietilè
processing. de baixa densitat (LDPE)/cable elèctric s’han preparat
fent servir un extrusor de rosca única a nivell de plan-
ta pilot. Els residus de cables estaven composts bàsi-
RESUMEN cament per LDPE, goma sintètica, clorur de polivinil
flexible (PVC) i traces de metall conductor. El LDPE
En este estudio, las mezclas de residuos de polieti- reciclat es recobria fent servir el mètode de separació
leno de baja densidad (LDPE)/cable eléctrico se han gravimètric. La obtenció de filaments extruïts hetero-
preparado usando un extrusor de rosca única a ni-
vel de planta piloto. Los residuos de cables estaban
compuestos básicamente de LDPE, goma sintética, *Correspondig author: [email protected]
cloruro de polivinilo flexible (PVC) y trazas de metal

APRIL - JUNE 2017 | 147

genis era deguda a la presencia de partícules residuals er than virgin polymers because of the mechanical
no foses que provocaven la interrupció del procés de properties of the recyclates are not spectacular, since
extrusió. Per millorar la mescla i homogeneïtat dels polymers can suffer degradation from heat, mechan-
filaments extruïts es recollien residus de LDPE mit- ical stress, oxidation or ultraviolet radiation during
jançant tamisos o garbells amb una obertura de malla their lifetime and reprocessing8,14,15.
de 1.68 i 0.59 mm. Les propietats mecàniques de les The aim of this work is to evaluate the influence of
mescles es relacionaven amb el contingut residual i the plastic cable waste concentrations on the tensile
el processament de LDPE. En general, els paràmetres properties of the LDPE blends, which were obtained by
mecànics corresponents als filaments extruïts hetero- means of the melt extrusion process. The results sec-
genis eren bastant inferiors als de LDPE degut a que tion of this manuscript is divided in three parts related
les partícules residuals grans i no foses provocaven la to the mechanical performance: the first one analyses
fallada prematura del material. Les mescles que con- the effect of the residual waste content; the second part
tenien partícules residuals de LDPE tamisades mos- evaluates the influence of a second reprocessing of ex-
traven valors superiors en rigidesa i ductilitat respecte trusion and the third part studies and compares the
la resta de mescles. mechanical parameters by using sieved waste particles.

Paraules clau: Reciclat; propietats mecàniques;

processament. MATERIALS

In this work LDPE Lupolen 1800H from Lyondell-

INTRODUCTION Basell with a density of 0.919 g/cm3 and a melt flow
index (MFI) (190°C/2.16 kg) of 1.5 g/10 min was used.
It is well known that urbanisation, industrialisation The LDPE has a tensile modulus and yield strength
and population growth affect the plastic generation. of 200 and 9 MPa respectively, with an elongation at
The global plastics production has grown continuously break higher than 50%.
for more than 50 years. Thus, the worldwide produc- The electrical cable waste was supplied by a certi-
tion in 2014 rose to 311 million tonnes, meaning a 3.9% fied company for the waste management of electri-
increase compared to 2013, and approximately 28% cal cables located in Catalonia, Spain. According to
respect to 20041. China (26%), Europe (20%) and the this company, the composition by weight of the cable
North American Free Trade Agreement NAFTA (19%) waste provided should be: 60% PVC (1.4 g/cm3), 30%
are top of the rankings for global plastics production1. LDPE (0.92 g/cm3), 9% synthetic rubber (1.2 g/cm3)
Plastic materials are used in an expanding range of and 1% metal fraction.
products with diverse uses in packaging, construction,
medicine, electronics, automotive, appliances and con-
sumer products2. According to the Association of Plastics EXPERIMENTAL
Manufacturers in Europe 1, the Building & Construction
segment represents the 20.1% of the total plastic demand Metal-free cable plastic waste
and, within this segment, the 18% is demanded for man- The metal fraction contained into the cable plas-
ufacturing electrical cables, which makes it of interest tic waste was removed before the extrusion process,
and potentially attractive to the plastic recycling sector. which resulted in a tremendous effort and patient
Electrical cables are constituted of a core conductor since the very small metallic wires were separated
material like copper or aluminium, and an insulation manually from the cable waste.
material composed of PVC, LDPE and elastomers. In
the past, the market for wire recycling from electrical LDPE recovery
cable waste was entirely based on the high commer- Once the metal fraction was removed, PVC and
cial value of the conducting metal, while plastic mate- LDPE were separated each other by using the gravi-
rials were often neglected. Currently, the potential to metric separation technique, which is relatively easy,
increase the recycling of plastics from electrical cable economical and simple to do. First of all, the met-
waste is really high because of significant environ- al-free cable waste was placed in a beaker with water,
mental impacts and economic savings3. which was used as the suspending medium because
It is well studied that the plastic materials can be re- of its density (r = 1 g/cm3). The floating portion was
covered by using several methods like chemical recy- considered as the residual LDPE waste and labelled as
cling, energy recovery and mechanical recycling4–13. R in this work. The non-floating portion was discard-
However, the later method is widely used since it is ed because it was assumed to be composed of PVC
relatively easy, economical and possible to scale to and synthetic rubbers.
industrial processes. It refers to operations that aim
at recovering plastic waste via mechanical processes Melt-extrusion process
like the melt extrusion process, which is a continuous Blends of virgin LDPE and R (LDPE/R) were mixed
process that includes mixing, cooling, pelletizing and, in a pilot-scale extrusion line using a single-screw ex-
depending on the final product, forming. truder (IQAP-LAP) with a screw diameter of 30 mm
In general, the recycled materials are typically used and an L/D ratio of 25. The screw rotation speed was
in applications with mechanical requirements low- set at 30 rpm and the processing temperatures were

148 | AFINIDAD LXXIV, 578

between 100ºC in the feed section and 160ºC in the Mechanical properties: one-step of extrusion
extrusion die. At the end of the extruder, the extrud- process
ed filament was cooled in a water bath and pelletized For the first part of this work, three LDPE/R blends
in a granulating cutting machine (Figure 1). were prepared after mixing virgin LDPE with 7.5, 15 and
25 wt.% of R (LDPE/7.5R1, LDPE/15R1 and LDPE/25R1)
in a single-screw extruder. The code R1 indicates the
blends were extruded once, as presented in Table 1.
The materials were not difficult to mix with differ-
ent concentrations of R because the control panel
sensors of the extruder did not show variations in the
values of internal pressure, maintaining the pressure
in approximately 8 MPa for all the blends. However,
the major drawback was presented at the outside of
Figure 1. Schematic representation of the single-screw the extruder, where the extruded filament constantly
extrusion process line used to prepare the LDPE/electrical broke, causing the extrusion line to stop. The previous
cables waste blends. was attributed to the presence of immiscible particles
that caused heterogeneities into the extruded filament
It is worth noticing that both virgin LDPE and R and promoted its breaking during the collecting at
were dried previous to the extrusion process in an the outside of the extruder. The heterogeneities were
oven with forced air circulation (JP Selecta) at 80°C physically evident and shorter extruded filaments
for 24 h. (Figure 2a) were collected as the R content increased.

Specimens and mechanical properties Table 1. Mechanical properties of the virgin LDPE, LDPE/
ASTM tensile test dog-bone specimens of virgin R1 and LDPE/R2 blends
LDPE and LDPE/R blends were obtained in an injec- Material E (MPa) sy(MPa) smax(MPa) sb(MPa) eb (%)
tion moulding machine (Mateu Solè METEOR 70/22) LDPE 145.20 8.65 ± 14.19 ± 13.92 ± 173.73
± 1.82 0.32 0.14 0.13 ± 14.93
with a clamping force of 22 tons. The injection tem-
78.60 ± 7.36 ± 11.96 ± 11.65 ± 142.65
perature profile of 185 to 160ºC from hopper to noz- LDPE/7.5R1 1.68 0.14 0.14 0.16 ± 8.52
zle was employed. The wall temperature of the mould
one-step of
extrusion

78.32 ± 7.25 ± 11.34 ± 11.12 ± 123.41

LDPE/15R1
was kept at 30°C. The material was injected into the 1.41 0.26 0.21 0.36 ± 12.31
mould at an injection speed of 45 mm3/s with a main- 78.96 ± 7.18 ± 10.69 ± 10.52 ± 114.85
LDPE/25R1
tenance pressure of 50 bar and a holding time of 11 s. 1.23 0.37 0.28 0.31 ± 16.35
The cooling cycle was kept constant at 45 s.
Two-steps of

Uniaxial tensile tests (ASTM D-638 standard) were

extrusion

69.53 ± 7.55 ± 12.04 ± 11.73 ± 124.75

LDPE/7.5R2
carried out in a universal testing machine (Galdabini 1.35 0.23 0.62 0.50 ± 5.70

Sun 2500) equipped with a 5 kN load cell. The tests LDPE/15R2 65.10 ±
1.60
7.31 ±
0.41
11.02 ±
0.33
10.75 ±
0.24
80.87 ±
6.60
were performed at a crosshead rate of 50 mm/min
and at room temperature (23 ± 2°C). Young’s modulus
(E), yield strength (σ y) and tensile at break (σb) were
obtained from the engineering stress versus strain
curves, and the elastic deformation (eb) was measured
using a video extensometer (Mintron OS-65D).
The broken surfaces were observed in a stereo mi-
croscope (Carton) and the optical images were cap-
tured using an adapted digital camera (ProgRes CT3).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

LDPE recovery
The metal fraction removed from the electrical cable
waste was approximately 0.8 wt.%, which is very close
to the value stated by the supplier. On the other hand,
by applying the gravimetric separation technique it
was found the cable waste contained 23 wt.% of LDPE,
represented by the floating portion (R), and 77 wt.% Figure 2 . Photographs of the extruded filaments at the
of PVC and synthetic rubbers represented by the outside of the extruder: a) LDPE/R1, b) LDPE/R2 and c)
non-floating portion. The results are not in concord- LDPE/R* blends
ance with the information provided by the supplier.
Nevertheless, the gravimetric separation method is Figure 3 shows the representative engineering stress –
highly useful and currently used for industrial pro- strain curves obtained during the tensile tests of LDPE
poses, which is the main address of this work. and LDPE/R1 blends.

APRIL - JUNE 2017 | 149

 elong
thegation at br
maximum Rreak. Both
content parameters
elong ats LDPE/25R1
gation and
(LDPE/7.5R1 tended
br to
o decrease
reak. Both grad
gs
parameters
a)
respectively) showed a reduction of Sb close to 16 and
elong
incre
25%gation
eases. at brreak.
Thus
respectively Both
s,compared
the bleparameters
nds
incre
to the with
eases. sThus
virgintended
the to
o decrease
s, minim
LDPE. the mum gradually
gwiththeth
blendsand
Simi-
larly, the ductility of the blends dropped down up to
incre
eases. Thuss,
approximately 33%the blends
respect to thewith
LDPE.the minim
mum and the max
(LDP
PE/7.5R1 an
nd LDPE/2
25R1
(LDP respecctively)
PE/7.5R1 an sho
owed
nd LDPE/2 a redu
25R1 uctio
respeccti
(LDP a)
PE/7.5R1 an
nd LDPE/2
25R1 respecctively) sho
owed a redu
uction of
25% respectivelly compare 25% d torespectivel
the virrgin
ly LDPE . Similarly,
compare the
d to the virrg
elonggation at brreak. Both parameterss elong tended to
gationo at
decrease
brreak. gradually
gBoth parameters
aas thes tended
R co ontent
to
o decrease gradually
g aas the
25% respectivelly compared to the virrgin LDPE. Similarly, the duc
droppped down up u to approxximately
dropp ped down33 %up
urespect to ximately
to approxthe LDPE E.33 %
increeases.
Figure Thus
3 . Stress s, the
– strain bleofnds
curves withLDPE
the virgin the
incre
andminim
eases.mumThus andthetheblemaxim
s, nds mum
with R co
the ontent
minimmum and the maximmum
LDPE/R1 blends.
droppped down upu to approxximately 33 % respect to the LDPE E.
(LDP PE/7.5R1 an nd LDPE/2 25R1 respecctively) sho a) a redu
owed uction25R1 a) to 16
of respec
b close 6 sho
and
(LDP PE/7.5R1 b)
an
nd LDPE/2 ctively) owed a redu
uction of b clos
All the curves exhibited an initial linear elastic region a)
followed by a diffuse yielding, which was attributed phys-
25%torespectivel
ically ly compare
a not well-defined d toonthe
necking thevirrgin
25%LDPE . Similarly,
respectivel
specimens the ductili
ly compare ity vir
d to the ofrgin
the LDPE
blends
b . Similarly, the ductiliity of
during the tensile tests. During the plastic deformation,
dropp
the ped–down
stress u to approx
up
strain curves showedximately 33 %
a continuous respect
dropp to theup
ped down
increase uLDPE E. ximately 33 % respect to the LDPE
to approx E.
in strain at low stress values (more evident for the blends)
followed by the failure of the specimen. Both the maxi-
a)
mum stress and the maximum strain were reduced a)with b) b)
the addition of R; hence, the area under the curve of the b)
virgin LDPE is clearly higher than the LDPE/R1 blends.
The representative broken specimens corresponding to
the virgin LDPE and the LDPE/R1 blends are shown in
Figure 4. For all specimens, large plastic elongation was not
developed and the necking or localized deformation was
not really noticeable. The diffuse necking was ascribed to
theb)
injection moulding conditions that induced changes b) in c)
c) c)
the microstructure of the LDPE in terms of crystallinity16.
Other traces of plastic deformation mechanisms like whit-
ening were not observed during the tensile tests.

c) c) d)
d) d)

d)

d) d)
Figure 4 . Photographs of the broken specimens after the
tensile test: a) virgin LDPE, b) LDPE/R1, c) LDPE/R2 and
d) LDPE/R* blends.

According to the Table 1, the mechanical parame-

ters such as Young’s modulus, tensile strength and duc- Figu
ure 5. Picturres taken frrom the faillure surfacees of: a) virgin LDP
tility of the LDPE/R1 blends were significantly lower Figu
ure 5. Picturres takenFigu urethe
frrom 5. fail
lure
Picturressurface
takenesfrrom
of: a)thevirfail
ginlu
respect the virgin LDPE, which was an expected be- LDPE/R2 and d) d LDPE/R* blends.
haviour due to the presence of recycled material that
limits the performance of the LDPE. However, respect LDPE/R2 and d) d LDPE/R* LDP blends.
E/R2 and d)d LDPE/R* blends.
to the R content, both the stiffness and the strength of
the LDPE/R1 blends did not show significant variations 11
at higher contents of R. The most notorious differences
were found for the tensile and elongation at break. Both Figure 5. Pictures taken from the failure surfaces11
of: a)
Figuure 5.tended
parameters Picturres taken fr
to decrease rom the as
gradually fail Figu
lure
the ure 5.es
surface
R con- Picturres
of:virgin taken
a) vir fr
rom
gin b)
LDPE, LDPE, theb)fail
LDPE/R1, lure
c)LDPE/R surfaceesd)of:
R1,andc)
LDPE/R2 a) virgin LDPE, b) L
LDPE/R*
tent increases. Thus, the blends with the minimum and blends.
LDPE/R2 and d)
d LDPE/R* blends. LDPE/R2 and d)
d LDPE/R* blends.

150 | AFINIDAD LXXIV, 578

 In order to explain the tendencies observed, the fail- Figure 5c shows representative pictures of the failure
ure surfaces of the broken specimens were taken into surfaces from the broken LDPE/R2 specimens. As can
consideration. Figure 5 shows the failure surfaces of be seen, the second extrusion process does not seem to
the virgin LDPE and the LDPE/R1 blends. modify the size of the unmelted waste particles.
LDPE (Figure 5a) showed some traces of ductile tear- During the tensile tests, the LDPE/R2 specimens
ing on the broken surface typical of semi-crystalline showed fairly similar failure mechanisms than the
polymers. On the other hand, the broken surfaces of LDPE/R1 (Figure 4c); hence, the shape of the stress-
the LDPE/R1 blends revealed interesting features (Fig- strain curves was similar as well.
ure 5b). In the first instance, several not-melted waste The mechanical properties of the LDPE/R2 are listed
particles with diverse dimensions were easily to ob- in Table 1, and it is easy to appreciate that the Young’s
serve. The presence of not-melted particles is attributed modulus shows a dramatic reduction respect to the
to the heterogeneity of distinct materials with different virgin LDPE and LDPE/R1 blends, which was attrib-
densities that compose the electrical cable wastes. As uted to the thermo-mechanical degradation causing
expected, the higher content of R, the higher the num- chain scission 17,18.
ber of not-melted particles. Moreover, a considerable An unexpected result was obtained in the tensile
number of voids of different sizes were also observed stress of the LDPE/R2 blends, which does not exhibit
on the failure surfaces of the specimens. The voids were significant changes with respect to their correspond-
certainly a result to the decohesion of the unmelted ing LDPE/R1 blends. The previous could be attribut-
particles from the LDPE during the tensile test. ed to the not-melted and larger waste particles can be
composed of not only LDPE but also PVC and rubbers,
Mechanical properties: second-step of extru- where the recycled LDPE should be interacting with the
sion process virgin LDPE because of the affinity between each other,
It is well known that the single-screw extrusion is acting more like composite materials than blends.
not an efficient mixing process. However, it is relevant The elongation at break of the LDPE/R2 blends
to find some alternatives to obtain blends with higher decreases by increasing the content of R, showing
quality in mixing using single-screw extrusion. In this similar tendencies to that observed by the LDPE/R1
section, two additional blends were prepared by pro- blends. However, the most notorious changes on duc-
cessing for a second time the surplus LDPE/7.5R1 and tility were observed in the LDPE/15R2 by decreasing
LDPE/15R1 extrudates; hence, each extrudate was pel- close to 35% with respect to the LDPE/15R1 and up to
letized and reprocessed following the same processing 53% in reference to the virgin LDPE. The combination
parameters and conditioning explained in section 3.3. of thermal degradation and the presence of unmelted
The new blends were labelled as LDPE/7.5R2 and particles of diverse sizes led to the dramatic reduction
LDPE/15R2 (Table 1) and were prepared in order to in the ductility shown by the LDPE/R2 blends8by gel
clarify if more uniform extruded filaments are pos- permeation chromatography (GPC).
sible to obtain through a second extrusion process
and its influence on the mechanical properties of Mechanical properties: Effect of the sieved
the blends. Figure 6 shows the representative s vs e waste particles
curves for the LDPE and the LDPE/R2. It is possible In order to obtain homogeneous particle size distri-
to appreciate a considerable change in the shape of bution, portions of R were selected by using nest sieves
the tensile curves respect to the LDPE/R1. In first in- with opening mesh of 1.68 and 0.59 mm. R was put
stance, the strength at break is notorious higher with on the sieves and shaken by hand in order to select
a hardening-like behaviour. The most notorious is the smaller particles than 2 mm and eliminate dust. The
reduction on ductility that the LDPE/R2 present in collecting of residual particles that remained between
comparison with the LDPE/R1 blends. the sieves was labelled as R*. These homogeneous par-
The LDPE/R2 extrudates (Figure 2b) showed sim- ticles were dried at the same conditions indicated in
ilar heterogeneities than the LDPE/R1 blends at the the section 3.3 and mixed with virgin LDPE in the sin-
outside of the extruder. The heterogeneities were gle-extruder in order to prepare LDPE/R* blends with
more evident by increasing the content of R, promot- concentrations of 5, 7.5, 15, 25 and 35 wt. % of R*. The
ing the interruption of the extrusion line. parameters during the extrusion process and condi-
tioning were the same as presented in section 3.3.
During the extrusion process, large and homogene-
ous extruded filaments of LDPE/R* blends were pos-
sible to extrude without interruptions, even with the
blend having 35 wt.% of R*, which means the sieved
waste particles do not hinder the extrusion of the LD-
PE/R*, as presented in Figure 2c. In this manner, the
extruded filaments were water-cooled and pelletized
continuously through the extrusion line.
Figure 6 shows the engineering stress – strain
curves developed for the virgin LDPE and the LD-
Figure 6. Stress – strain curves of the virgin LDPE and PE/R* blends during the uniaxial tensile tests.
LDPE/R2 blends.

APRIL - JUNE 2017 | 151

 blend, very small and well-dispersed black points were
observed at higher magnifications. By increasing the
R* content, different features on the broken surfaces
like the less evident ductile tearing, the presence of
slightly larger particles and the development of sever-
al micro voids were observed.
When comparing the mechanical properties of the
LDPE/R* with the rest of the blends (Figure 7), it is
easy to appreciate that the stiffness of the sieved re-
sidual blends are close to the virgin LDPE, in contrast
Figure 6. Stress – strain curves of the virgin LDPE and to the LDPE/R1 and LDPE/R2 blends (Figure 7a). It
LDPE/R* blends. is important considering that R could be formed by
PVC, synthetic rubbers and LDPE. The portions of
The shape of the stress – strain curves of the LD- non-rigid PVC and rubbers contained into the larg-
PE/R* blends did not show relevant differences with er particles R should be promoting the reduction in
respect to the corresponding curves developed by the stiffness. In contrast, the sieved particles are relatively
LDPE/R1 blends. easy to separate by using the gravimetric separation
The LDPE/R* specimens showed a diffuse necking technique; hence R* seems containing basically just
during the tensile tests similar to the LDPE/R1 and recycled LDPE, with high affinity and ready to melt
LDPE/R2 blends, without any other traces of plastic with virgin LDPE, allowing better mixing and more
deformation mechanism, as compared in Figure 4d. homogeneity than the LDPE/R1 and LDPE/R2 blends,
As expected, higher contents of R* represented lower according to the observations performed in Figure 5.
areas under the stress – strain curves, that resulted in
lower mechanical performance of the sieved blends.
Table 2 summarises the mechanical properties of the
LDPE/R* blends obtained through the tensile curves.
Notoriously, the Young’s modulus was not so affected
by the addition of R*, since the reduction in stiffness of
the LDPE/R* was only up to 18% lower than the virgin
LDPE. This result contrasts to those obtained for the
LDPE/R1 and LDPE/R2 blends, and it could be asso- a)
ciated to the sieved particles are mainly composed of
recycled LDPE.

Table 2 . Mechanical properties of the virgin LDPE and

LDPE/R* blends
| Material E (MPa) sy(MPa) smax(MPa) sb (MPa) eb(%)
145.20 ± 8.65 ± 14.19 ± 13.92 ± 173.73
LDPE
1.82 0.32 0.14 0.13 ± 14.93
123.47 ± 7.72 ± 10.69 ± 10.37 ± 162.17
LDPE/5R* b)
1.85 0.63 0.18 0.21 ± 9.85
one-step of extrusion

121.50 ± 7.67 ± 10.23 ± 9.69 ± 158.72

LDPE/7.5R* 2.18 0.89 0.13 0.87 ± 13.56
122.12 ± 7.30 ± 9.92 ± 9.26 ± 132.92
LDPE/15R* 2.56 0.64 0.16 0.93 ± 6.27
120.22 ± 7.04 ± 9.15 ± 8.80 ± 125.29
LDPE/25R* 2.14 0.97 0.28 0.67 ± 7.26
120.18 ± 6.75 ± 8.65 ± 8.46 ± 92.26 ±
LDPE/35R* 1.89 0.83 0.35 0.48 4.96

Respect to the R* content into the LDPE/R* blends,

the Young’s modulus did not offer relevant variations. c)
However, the stress at yield as well as the tensile and
elongation at break decreased continuously by in- Figure 7. Mechanical properties of the virgin LDPE and
creasing R*. The reduction on ductility was more evi- the blends: a) Young’s modulus, b) tensile stress and c)
dent for the LDPE/35R* blend. strain.
The broken surfaces of the LDPE/R* blends are com-
pared in Figure 5d. The observations revealed that Figure 7b shows that the maximum stress of the LD-
relatively large particles were not appreciable in com- PE/R* was notoriously lower than the LDPE/R1 and
parison with the previous blends (Figures 5b and 5c), LDPE/R2 blends, which could be attributed to the larg-
even with the highest R* content (25 and 35 wt.%). er particles are acting as fillers because they contain not
On the other hand, comparing the broken surfaces of only different materials but also portions of recycled
the sieved blends in relation to the R* content, a duc- LDPE that favour their cohesion with the virgin LDPE.
tile tearing similar to the observed in the neat LDPE With respect to the plastic deformation of the blends
surface was revealed for the LDPE/5R* blend. For this (Figure 7c), it was expected the ductility decreases as

152 | AFINIDAD LXXIV, 578

the residual waste content increases. However, the dif- Achilias, D. S.; Roupakias, C.; Megalokonomos, P.;
ferences in ductility between the LDPE/R* respect to Lappas, A. Recycling techniques of polyolefins from
the LDPE/R1 and LDPE/R2 blends are clearly evident. plastic wastes. Glob. NEST J. 2008, 10 (1), 114–122.
The larger and heterogeneous not-well melted particles 4. Achilias, D. S.; Roupakias, C.; Megalokonomos, P.;
should be acting as defects into the LDPE/R1 blends, Lappas, a. a.; Antonakou, V. Chemical recycling
causing the failure of the specimens. Meanwhile, the of plastic wastes made from polyethylene (LDPE
second step of single-screw extrusion causes the degra- and HDPE) and polypropylene (PP). J. Hazard.
dation of the LDPE/R2 blends; hence the combination Mater. 2007, 149 (3), 536–542.
of polymer degradation and larger not-melted particles 5. Andrade, F. A.; Al-Qureshi, H. A.; Hotza, D.
promote the suddenly failure of the LDPE/R2 speci- Measuring the plasticity of clays: A review. Appl.
mens respect to LDPE/R1 and LDPE/R* blends. Clay Sci. 2011, 51 (1-2), 1–7.
6. Goto, M. Chemical recycling of plastics using
sub- and supercritical fluids. J. Supercrit. Fluids
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 2009, 47 (3), 500–507.
7. Gao, F. Handbook of plastics recycling; F La Man-
The authors thank the MICINN of Spain for the fi- tia, Ed.; John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., 2004; Vol. 53.
nancing of the MAT201340730-P project. 8. Jin, H.; Gonzalez-Gutierrez, J.; Oblak, P.; Zu-
pančič, B.; Emri, I. The effect of extensive me-
chanical recycling on the properties of low den-
CONCLUSIONS sity polyethylene. Polym. Degrad. Stab. 2012, 97
(11), 2262–2272.
Blends of LDPE/electrical cable waste particles were 9. Kalfoglou, N. K.; Chaffey, C. E. Effects of extru-
prepared by means of the melt-extrusion process in sion on the structure and properties of high-im-
order to evaluate and compare the mechanical perfor- pact polystyrene. Polym. Eng. Sci. 1979, 19 (8),
mance respect to the waste particles content. 552–557.
During the processing of the blends, it was observed 10. Liu, X.; Bertilsson, H. Recycling of ABS and ABS/
the addition of the waste particles promoted the in- PC Blends. J Appl Polym Sci 1999, 74, 510–515.
terruption of the extrusion line because of heteroge- 11. Merrington, A. Recycling of Plastics. In Applied
neities developed by the presence of larger and not- Plastics Engineering Handbook; Kutz, M., Ed.;
well melted waste particles. In contrast, sieved waste William Andrew Publishing, 2011; pp 177–192.
particles allowed the extrusion of homogeneous fila- 12. Sánchez, C.; Hortal, M.; Aliaga, C.; Devis, A.; Clo-
ments, irrespectively of the waste content, and avoid- quell-Ballester, V. A. Recyclability assessment of
ed the extrusion line to stop. nano-reinforced plastic packaging. Waste Man-
Larger waste particles are composed by portions of ag. 2014, 34 (12), 2647–2655.
non-rigid PVC, synthetic rubbers and recycled LDPE 13. Qin, L.; Ding, Y.-M.; Zhu, G.-C.; Yu, H.-C.; Yang,
that promoted the notorious reduction in stiffness of W.-M. Heat Flow Analysis and Efficiency Opti-
the blends. Nevertheless, the affinity of the recycled mization of Rotational Molding Equipment for
LDPE portion with the virgin LDPE favoured the co- Large Plastic Products. Int. Polym. Process. 2015,
hesion of the waste particles, which acted as fillers 30 (2), 194–201.
inside the virgin LDPE. The presence of the waste 14. Navarro, R.; Ferrándiz, S.; López, J.; Seguí, V. J.
material led to the reduction in ductility, and the re- The influence of polyethylene in the mechanical
processing, through a second-step of extrusion pro- recycling of polyethylene terephtalate. J. Mater.
cess, resulted in the degradation of the blends. Process. Technol. 2008, 195 (1-3), 110–116.
The collected sieved waste particles were composed 15. Shen, L. Plastic recycling; Elsevier, 2014.
of recycled LDPE and were well-mixed with the virgin 16. Leyva-Porras, C.; Esneider-Alcalá, M. A.; Tox-
LDPE. Stiffness of the blends was not so affected by qui-Terán, A.; Márquez-Lucero, A.; Agui-
the presence of the sieved particles and the reduction lar-Martínez, J. A. Effect of Molding Param-
on ductility of these blends was not dramatic as com- eters on Young’s Modulus of an Injection
pared with the rest of the blends analysed. Strength Molded Low-Density Polyethylene (LDPE). Ind.
was lower in the blends with sieved particles because Eng. Chem. Res. 2013, 52 (16), 5666–5671.
of the absence of larger particles with affinity portions 17. Martín-Alfonso, J. E.; Franco, J. M. Influence of
that reinforced virgin LDPE. polymer reprocessing cycles on the microstruc-
ture and rheological behavior of polypropylene/
mineral oil oleogels. Polym. Test. 2015, 45, 12–19.
REFERENCES 18. Kulshreshtha, A. K.; Vasile, C. Handbook of Pol-
ymer Blends and Composites, 3rd ed.; Anand K.
1. Manufacturers, A. of plastic. Plastics-The facts; Kulshreshtha, C. V., Ed.; Handbook of Polymer
Brussels, 2015. Blends and Composites; Rapra Technology, 2003.
2. Hopewell, J.; Dvorak, R.; Kosior, E. Plastics recy-
cling: challenges and opportunities.
3. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B. Biol. Sci. 2009,
364 (1526), 2115–2126.

APRIL - JUNE 2017 | 153