LABORATORY REPORT

FOOD PACKAGING AND STORAGE TECHNOLOGY

PLASTIC PACKAGING

Written by:
Priscilla Destiana
Stevannie Christie
Cely Hoesada
Bella Natasha
Ferix Jonathan

(03420120026)
(03420120060)
(03420120066)
(03420120076)
(03420120082)

FOOD TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT

FACULTY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
UNIVERSITAS PELITA HARAPAN
KARAWACI
2015

CHAPTER I
RESULT AND DISCUSSION

1.1 Polypropylene (PP)

Polypropylene (PP) is the first notable plastic type, which has high
molecular weight as the result of modification and development from the utilization
of the olefin propylene or propene from the alkene class. It is basically defined as a
thermoplastic material that is produced by polymerizing propylene molecules,
which are the monomer units, into very long polymer molecule or chains.
Structurally, PP is a linear hydrocarbon polymer containing little or no saturation.
Generally, polypropylene has excellent and desirable physical, mechanical, and
thermal properties when used in room-temperature applications. It is relatively stiff
and has a high melting point, low density, and relatively good resistance to impact.
Compared to ethylene, it has higher density and boiling point due to its greater mass.
Polypropylene (PP) is basically classified into 2 main categories,
homopolymer and copolymer. Homocopolymer is polypropylene containing only
propylene monomer in the semicrystalline solid form. It is made by polymerising
propylene in the presence of a stereospecific catalyst. Homopolymers are more rigid
and have better resistance to high temperatures than copolymers but their impact
strength at temperatures below zero is limited. For copolymer, it is further divided
into random copolymer and impact copolymer. Random copolymer contains
ethylene as a comonomer in the PP chains at levels in about the 18% range, while
impact copolymer has the commixed random copolymer phase that has an ethylene
content of 4565%. Due to many classifications of polypropylene, the properties of
polypropylene actually vary in a relatively simple manner by altering the chain
regularity (tacticity) content and distribution, the average chain lengths, the
incorporation of a comonomer such as ethylene into the polymer chains, and the
incorporation of an impact modifier into the resin formulation.

Table 1.1. Polypropylene mechanical characteristics (unmodified/homopolymer) based on literature

Parameter
Polypropylene quality
Young modulus
1500 MPa
Tensile strength
33 MPa
Strain at max
10%
Strain at break
350% (>50%)
Thickness
Source: Brydson (1999) and Tripathi (2003)
Table 1.2. Polypropylene (PP) mechanical characteristics based on observation
Parameter
Polypropylene quality
Young modulus
899.02 MPa
Tensile strength
23.77 MPa
Strain at max
11.54%
Strain at break
644.30%
Thickness
0.11 milimeter

Mechanical properties of plastic polymer product are important to be

observed beside the thermal properties and rheological properties. Several
parameters in mechanical properties are Young modulus, tensile strength,
percentage strain at maximum (strain yield), and percentage strain at break (strain
break).
These parameters actually represent the stiffness of the plastic material and
mostly used to predict the properties of molded articles. For application in food
industry, these parameters are prior to be taken into account to suit its intended use
for the specific product where packaging function as the container and barrier for
the food (Brydson, 1999; Karian, 2003; Tripathi, 2002).
Comparing Table 1.1 and Table 1.2, it can be inferred that the Young
modulus and tensile strength values of PP observed are lower than in the literature,
while the percentage of strain at maximum and at break are higher than the values
stated in the literature. These differences between the values obtained by
observation compared to the literatures may be due to the many variations exist in
polypropylene nowadays where different company producing it may have different
standards and formulations, including the amount and the type of monomer used as
co-monomer for making PP random and impact copolymer, instead of homopolymer. It is known that the addition of ethylene will result in improved toughness
of PP but at the expense of much reduced rigidity, an inevitable consequence, since
the crystallinity is reduced by the inclusion of the second monomer. Furthermore,
for the percentage of strain at break, this parameter standard is highly varies

between one product to the other, but commonly it is assumed to be higher than
50% (Brydson, 1999; Tripathi, 2002).
For application as food packaging, polypropylene actually possesses good
water vapor barrier and fat resistance properties which are demanded. However,
normal polypropylene films have limited food packaging applications such as its
application for bread. It is due to their low cold temperature resistance. Therefore,
copolymer mixtures with ethylene are used to improve cold resistance and heat
sealability as well as material strength and the most important one, the seal strength.
This could be one reason of the developing modification for polypropylene to
contain other monomers beside propene that also includes the intenton for
improving mechanical properties so that the usage of PP will be more suitable as
food packaging (Birley et al., 1988; Brydson, 1999). Therefore, the polypropylene
plastic used as sample in the experiment may be the modified PP, instead the normal
unmodified one or homopolymer which is intended either to be suitable for food
packaging or to reduce the cost (not necessarily intended to increase the quality for
application to pack foods).

1.2 Polyethylene (PE)

Polyethylene (PE), commonly used as plastic packaging, is having chemical
formula (C2H4)nH2 that consist of similar organic compounds mixture that differ in
terms of value n. Polyethylene is thermoplastic polymer consists of long
hydrocarbon chains. It is made by combining single carbon atoms together to create
long chains of carbon atoms. As thermoplastic, PE have weak forces that attract the
macromolecules together. The melting point and glass transition may or may not be
observable depends on the crystallinity and molecular weight. Plastics with high
amounts of crystalline arrangements are harder and stronger but more brittle.
Density of polyethylene is 0.91-0.96 g/cm3. The melting point temperature depends
on the variety of polyethylene. Medium and high density polyethylene, the melting
point range from 120 to 180oC and 105 to 115oC for low density polyethylene
(Piringer and Baner, 2008).

Figure 2.1 General structure of polyethylene

Uses polyethylene plastic packaging are for film packaging, bags, industrial
application, container, food packaging, wire and cable applications, laminates, and
many more. The advantage is for food contact acceptability, have good process
ability, have copolymer, antioxidant, high ESCR (stress crack resist), good impact
resistance, good toughness, good stiffness, while the disadvantages are high thermal
expansion, poor weathering resistance, subject to stress cracking, difficult to bond,
flammable, poor temperature capability, low strength or stiffness (Lokensgard,
2008).
Polyethylene classified into several different categories based on the density
and branching. The mechanical properties of polyethylene depend significantly on
variables such as the extent and type of branching, the crystal structure and the
molecular weight. Classification of polyethylene are Ultra High Molecular Weight
Polyethylene (UHMWPE), Ultra Low Molecular Weight Polyethylene (ULMWPE
or PE-WAX), High Molecular Weight Polyethylene (HMWPE), High Density
Polyethylene (HDPE), High Density Cross Linked Polyethylene (HDXLPE), Cross
Linked Polyethylene (PEX or XLPE), Medium Density Polyethylene (MDPE),
Linear Low Density Polyethylene (LLDPE), Low Density Polyethylene (LDPE),
Very Low Density Polyethylene (VLDPE), and Chlorinated Polyethylene (CPE).
Based on the sold volumes, the most important polyethylene grades are HDPE,
LLDPE and LDPE. The degree of branching and crystallinity in PE produce
variations in behavior and properties, and the differences shown in Table 1.3.
Table 1.3. Differences between types of polyethylene
Density
Distort
Type
(Specific
Temperature (oC)
Gravity)
LDPE
0.91 - 0.92
40 50
MDPE
0.93 - 0.94
60 - 70
HDPE
0.94 - 0.96
70 - 90
UHMWPE
>HDPE
>HDPE

Tensile
Strength
(N/mm2)
170
275 450
Over 625
>HDPE

Abrasion
Resistance
Soft

Excellent

The lower the density of PE, it has good toughness (ability to deform
without breaking) and excellent elongation (ability to stretch) with LDPE stretching
up to 6 times from the original length before breaking. It makes PE useful for
molding and extruding in shapes. PE is clear and goes white and translucent as the
amount of crystallinity increases. Tensile modulus/Youngs modulus of
polyethylene (HDPE) is 0.8 x 109 N/m2, GPa, ultimate tensile strength is 15 x 10 6
N/m2, Mpa, and elongation 500% while LDPE Youngs modulus is 0.11 - 0.45 Gpa
and 16,000 - 65,000 psi (Berins, 1991).
Table 1.4. Result of polyethylene properties
Group 3
Modulus Young (N/mm2)
206.75
Tensile strength (N/mm2)
17.845
Percentage strain at max (%)
910.23
Percentage strain at break (%)
986
Thickness (mm)
0.1

Group 4
326.67
16.534
758.55
781.11
0.1

Group 5
238.85
17.932
887.47
937.85
0.1

Group 6
245.78
20.559
994.47
1048.9
0.08

The result of polyethylene properties shown on Table 2.4 using all the same
speed (60) and the thickness 0.1 mm, except group 6 which is 0.08 mm. Modulus
Young for the sample of polyethylene varies between 206.75 - 326.67 N/mm2,
which is different from the theory due to unknown type of polyethylene and
different company has different formula to make the polyethylene plastics, thus
resulted in different mechanical and physical properties. Tensile strength of
polyethylene is also not in line with the theory from Berlin (1991). From the
experiment, tensile strength varies between 16.534 - 20.559 N/mm2 which far lower
than the theory. Berins (1991) also stated that the elongation or percentage strain at
max for polyethylene is 500% while the experiment showed that the percentage
strain at max varies between 758.55 - 994.47%. It is higher than the theory that
might be happened due to different thickness, type, and composition of
polyethylene itself.

1.3 Saran
Table 1.5. Properties of saran packaging
Parameter
Saran quality
Tensile strength
15.079 N/mm2
Modulus Young
31.960 N/mm2
Percentage strain at maximum
33.01%
Percentage strain at break
-

Saran resin and film, also known as Saran polyvinylidene chloride (PVDC)
have been known and used as wrapping materials for more than 50 years. Saran
works by polymerizing vinylidine chloride with other monomers, such as acrylic
esters and unsaturated carboxyl groups, therefore forming long chains of vinylidene
chloride. This copolymerization leads to a film with tightly bound molecules,
making only very little gas or water may get through. This characteristics result to
the use of Saran as demanding barrier packaging application to minimize the
permeation of oxygen, water vapor, acids, bases, solvent, also odor, which can
protect the food, consumer, and industrial product from further deterioration.
Saran was accidentally discovered by Ralph Wiley in 1933 and further used
as food packaging after World War 2. PVDC was cleared for use as food contact
surface as a base polymer, in food package gaskets, in direct contact with dry foods,
and also for paperboard coating in contact with fatty and aqueous foods. Almost
85% of PVDC is used as a thin layer between cellophane, paper and plastic
packaging, thus improving the barrier performance. Beside food use, Saran can also
be used for molding and melt adhesive bonding. In combination with polyolefins,
polystyrene and other polymers, saran can be coextruded into multilayer sheets,
films, and tubes.
According to Renards (2005), multilayer film or sheet were widely used
since it has an outstanding barrier performances, also resistance to in-use condition
such as humidity and flexes cracking, also specific physical properties given by the
skin polymers. It may possibly increase the shelf life of product as well as reducing
processing steps compared to usual laminated composite products.
Table 1.6. Physical properties of Saran wrap
Parameter
Source 1
Source 2
Tensile strength (Mpa)
25-110
90-103
Modulus young (Mpa)
300-550
482-512
Percentage strain at max (%)
15-40
20-40
Percentage strain at break
Source: Davletshina and Chremisinoff (2004); Goodfellow (2013)

Table 1.6 shows the physical properties of Saran wrap based on two sources.
The Saran wrap sample has the thickness of 0.02 mm and the speed undergone was
60. Tensile strength indicates the maximum stress withstands while being stretched
or pulled before failing. According to the theory, Saran wrap can endure up to 550
MPa of stress before getting broken. But the sample used only can withstand around

15.079 MPa. Young Modulus is the elastic modulus used for deformation, which
take place when a force, which is parallel to the axis of the object is applied to one
side while the opposite face is held fixed by another equal force. The experiment
result was also not corresponding to the theory. This might be resulted by the
impurity of Saran wrap in the sample, since nowadays, the pure Saran wrap is rarely
found (Demczyk et al., 2002).
The percentage strain at maximum of Saran wrap based on theory is known
to be around 15-40%. The result of the experiment was supported by the theory.
The experiment Saran wrap has percentage of strain at maximum at 33.01%.
Percentage strain at break was not recorded by the equipment. This might happen
due to the low thickness of the sample, only 0.02 mm.

1.4 Water Vapor Transmission Rate

Table 1.7. Rate of Water Vapor Transmission on Several Plastics
Treatment
WVTR (gr/h.m2)
Group 1 (Wet; PP)
0.8319
Group 2 (Dry; PP)
0.9594
Group 3 (Wet; PE)
0.3614
Group 4 (Dry; PE)
1.0476
Group 5 (Wet; PE)
0.118
Group 6 (Dry; PE)
0.782
Group 7 (Wet; Saran Wrap)
0.2272
Group 8 (Dry; Saran Wrap)
1.4323

Table 1.7 shows the water vapor transmission rate from polypropylene,
polyethylene and saran wrap plastics, which treated in wet and dry condition.
Judging by the condition environment, plastics put in a wet condition (group 1, 3,
5, 7) has a lower water vapor transmission rate than plastics put in a dry condition
(group 2, 4, 6, 8). The results prove that environment which surrounds the plastics
is affecting water vapor transmission rate. In wet condition, higher percentage of
humidity present. Means higher amount of water particle in atmosphere, this wet
condition makes the water vapor stay still inside and does not diffuse out to the
atmosphere because the humidity is relatively the same. On the other side, dry
condition has a distinct humidity difference. Silica gel put in dessicator maintain
the atmosphere dryness by absorbing water, this condition would trigger water to
permeate out in order to reach equilibrium humidity thus higher water vapor
transmission rate achieved.
7

Data obtained from the experiment reveals that the highest water vapor
transmission was achieved by group 8 with sample of Saran wrap (PVDC) in a dry
environment using silica gel. As many as 1.4323 gr/h.m2 of water vapor transmitted
during 3 days time. Whilst the least water vapor transmitted shown by group 5 with
polyethylene as sample in a wet condition (surrounded by water), lowest rate of
0.118 gr/h.m2
Difference in plastic characteristics plays an important role in water vapor
transmission rate. According to Maier and Calafut (2008), the lowest to highest
water vapor transmission rate was had by saran wrap/PVDC (0.1 gr/day.m2),
followed by high-density polyethylene (0.2 gr/day.m2), propylene (0.3 gr/day.m2),
and low-density polyethylene (0.5 gr/day.m2). This theory by Maier and Calafut
(2008) is on the contrary to the experiment result. As shown in table 1.1, saran wrap
in dry condition is the poorest water barrier with highest WVTR of 0.118 gr/h.m2.
In saran wrap or polyvinylidene chloride, this kind of plastics should be more
impermeable to a wider variety of gases and liquids than other polymers. This is a
consequence of the combination of high density and high crystallinity in the
polymer. An increase in either density or crystallinity tends to reduce permeability.
Also, the high crystallinity of PVDC indicates that no significant amount of
branching can present thus reducing permeability as well.
Water barrier properties of plastics also depend on low solubility and
diffusion coefficients. Polymers of plastics vary in crystallinity and polarity.
Crystallinity is associated with the diffusion parameter, while polarity is associated
with the solubility coefficient. The polarity is usually determined by the kind of
functional group attached to the main polymer. Non-polar materials are usually a
better barrier against water and other polar molecules but poor barriers for nonpolar molecules such as organic flavors. On the other hand, polar polymers are not
a good barrier against water but they are better barriers against non-polar organic
compounds (Romero, 2002).
Referring to Table 1.7, polyethylene as sample from group 4 in dry
condition gives the second highest WVTR rate. While another sample of
polyethylene from group 6 in dry conditions gives the lowest WVTR rate.
Comparing on the polyethylene plastic itself, polyethylene generally divided into

two, high-density polyethylene (HDPE) and low-density polyethylene (LDPE). The

main difference between these two types lies in its molecular arrangement. HDPE
consists primarily of unbranched molecules. A high degree of crystallinity can be
achieved resulting in resins that have a high density and enable the mobilization of
water molecule. Thus is a good water barrier that indicated by low transmission rate
of water vapor. On the contrary, LDPE is primarily consisting of substantial
concentrations of branches that hinder the crystallization process, resulting in
relatively low densities. The numerous branches characteristics of low-density
polyethylene molecules inhibit their ability to crystallize, reducing resin density
relative to high-density polyethylene (Peacock, 2000). Due to its high level of
branching, mobilization of water is highly possible. LDPE is a poor water barrier
indicated by the high rate of water vapor transmission rate. After all of this
comparison, polyethylene sample from group 4 has higher WVTR (1.0476
gr/hr.m2) than group 6 (0.782 gr/h.m2). So, judging by its WVTR, it is possible to
say that polyethylene from group 4 is LDPE plastic, while group 6 is HDPE.
Polypropylene in dry condition shows the second highest WVTR for 0.9594
gr/hr.

. Based on experiments result, polypropylene is categorized as good

water barrier. The result is supported by theory from Maier and Calafut (2008),
Polypropylene is a semi-crystalline polymer with varying degrees of crystallization
and different types of crystal structures. Semi-crystalline polymers have high
strength, stiffness, density and sharp melting points. Other properties of
polypropylene is that it has higher branch network than HDPE but less than LDPE.
For those properties, polypropylene is considered as a good water barrier.

1.5 Comparison among Plastics

There were 3 (three) types of plastic which tested; they are polypropylene
(PP), polyethylene (PE), and saran. Thickness of plastic, modulus Young, tensile
strength, percentage of strain at max and strain at break, and water vapor
transmission rate are compared among three types of plastic.
Saran has the thinnest plastic (0.02 mm), while PE and PP has 0.10 mm and
0.11 mm thickness respectively. However, saran has the lowest tensile strength,
modulus Young, and strain value compared to PE and PP. It means that saran plastic

has the weakest plastic strength and elongation compared to two others. PE and PP
has different strong point against other. PP has the strongest plastic strength
compared to other plastics, it means that PP is the hardest plastic to be changed
from its original shape. In contrast, PE has the highest strain value compared to
others, it means that PE is the plastic with the longest elongation between the other
plastics.
In water vapor transmission rate as shown in Table 1.7, PE has the lowest
rate of transmission whether in dry and wet method. PP in second rank, while saran
in third rank. It means that PE has the lowest water permeability which causing the
water cannot easily pass its polymer network; meanwhile saran has the highest
water permeability.

10

CHAPTER II
CONCLUSION

Polypropylene has the highest tensile strength and modulus Young value,
thus it is the strongest plastic among other plastics. Polyethylene has the highest
strain value, thus it has the longest elongation among other plastics. It also has the
lowest water vapor transmission rate; lowest water permeability. Saran has the
thinnest thickness, but the weakest plastic among other plastic. It also has highest
water vapor transmission rate; highest water permeability.

11

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Berins, M. Plastic Engineering Handbook of The Society of The Plastics Industry.

New York: Springer Science & Business Media, 1991.
Birley, A. W., R. J. Heath, and M. J. Scott, eds. Plastics Materials: Properties and
Applications, 2nd ed. New York: Springer, 1988.
Brydson, J. A. Plastics Materials, 7th ed. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann, 1999.
Davletshina, Tatyana A. and Nicholas P. Cheremisinoff. Fire and Explosion Hazars
Handbook of Industrial Chemical. USA: PD Library.
Demczyk, B. G. et al. Direct Mechanical Measurement of The Tensile Strength
and Modulus of Multiwalled Carbon Nanotubes. Materials Science and
Engineering A334 (2002): 173-178.
Goodfellow. Polyvinylidenechloride (PVDC) Properties and Applications.
Supplier Data, 2013.
Karian, Harutun G. Handbook of Polypropylene and Polypropylene Composites:
Revised and Extended, 2nd ed. New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc., 2003.
Lokensgard, Erik. Industrial Plastics: Theory and Application. Boston: Cengage
Learning, 2008.
Maier, Clive and Calafut, Theresa. Polypropylene: The Definitive Users Guide and
Databook. Spain: Taylor & Francis. 2008.
Peacock, Andrew. Handbook Of Polyethylene: Structures: Properties and
Applications. USA: CRC Press.
Piringer, Otto G. and Albert Lawrence Baner. Plastic Packaging: Interactions with
Food and Pharmaceuticals 2nd edition. New Jersey: Wiley, 2008.
Romero, Anna. Evaluation of The Change on Water Vapor Transmission Rate of
Different Propylene Films In Contact With D-Limoneme and The Effect
Such Changes Have On The Shelflife Of Confectionary Products. Thesis.
Rochester Institute of Technology. 2002.
Tripathi, Devesh. Practical Guide to Polypropylene. Shropshire: Rapra
Technology Limited, 2002.