This invention relates to a pouch used in consumer packaging useful for packaging flowable materials, (for example, liquids such as milk) . The pouch is made from certain film structures comprising at least one homogeneously branched substantially linear ethylene interpolymer.

U.S. Patent Nos. 4,503,102 and 4,521,437 disclose the preparation of a polyethylene film for use in the manufacture of a disposable pouch for packaging of liquids such as milk. U.S. Patent No. 4,503,102 discloses pouches made from a blend of a linear ethylene ^" copolymer copolymerized from ethylene and an alpha-olefin at the C4-C10 range and an ethylene-vinyl acetate polymer copolymerized from ethylene and vinyl acetate. The linear polyethylene copolymer has a density of from 0.916 to 0.930 grams/cubic centimeter (g/cm ³ ) and a melt index of from 0.3 to 2.0 grams/10 minutes (g/10 min) . The ethylene-vinyl acetate polymer has a weight ratio of ethylene to vinyl acetate from 2.2:1 to 24:1 and a melt index of from 0.2 to 10 g/10 min. The blend disclosed in U.S. Patent No. 4,503,102 has a weight ratio of linear low density polyethylene to ethylene-vinyl acetate polymer of from 1.2:1 to 4:1. U.S. Patent No. 4,503,102 also discloses laminates having as a sealant film the aforementioned blend.

U.S. Patent No. 4,521,437 describes pouches made from a sealant film which is from 50 to 100 parts of a linear copolymer of ethylene and octene-1 having a density of from 0.916 to 0.930 g/cm ³ and a melt index of 0.3 to 2.0 g/10 min and from 0 to 50 parts by weight of at least one polymer selected from the group consisting of a linear copolymer of ethylene and a alpha-olefin having a density of from 0.916 to 0.930 g/cm ³ and a melt index of from 0.3 to 2.0 g/10 min, a high-pressure polyethylene having a density of from 0.916 to 0.924 g/cπr and a melt index of from 1 to 10 g/10 min and blends thereof. The sealant film disclosed in the U.S. Patent No. 4,521,437 is selected on the basis of providing (a) pouches with an M-test value substantially smaller, at the same film thickness, than that obtained for pouches made with film of a blend of 85 parts of a linear ethylene/butene-1 copolymer having a density of about 0.919 g/cm ³ and a melt index of about 0.75 g/10 min and 15 parts

of a high pressure polyethylene having a density of about 0.918 g/cm ³ and a melt index of 8.5 g/10 min, or (b) an M(2)-test value of less than about 12 percent, for pouches having a volume of from greater than 1.3 to 5 liters, or (c) an M(1.3)-test value of less than about 5 percent for pouches having a volume of from 0.1 to 1.3 liters. The M, M(2) and (1.3)-tests are defined pouch drop tests in U.S. Patent No. 4,521,437. The pouches may also be made from composite films in which the sealant film forms at least the inner layer.

The polyethylene pouches known in the prior art have some deficiencies. The problems associated with the prior art known films relate to the sealing properties and performance properties of the film for preparing pouches. In particular, prior art films made into pouches have a high incident of "leakers", that is, seal defects such as pinholes which develop at or near the seal in which flowable material, for example milk, escapes from the pouch. Although the seal and performance properties of the prior art films have been satisfactory, there is still a need in the industry for better seal and performance properties in films for manufacture of hermetically sealed pouches containing flowable materials. More particularly, there is a need for improved sealing properties of the film such as hot tack and heat seal initiation temperature in order to improve the processability of the film and to improve pouches made from the films.

For example, the line speed of known packaging equipment used for manufacturing pouches such as form, fill and seal machines, is currently limited by the sealing properties of the film used in the machines. Prior art polyethylene films have high hot tack seal initiation temperatures and a narrow sealing range. Therefore, the rate at which a form, fill and seal machine can produce pouches is limited. If the heat seal temperature range where one could obtain strong seals is broadened, then the speed of a form, fill and seal machine can be increased and, thus, the rate at which pouches can be produced can be increased. Until the present invention, many have attempted to broaden the heat seal temperature range of pouch film without success.

It is desired to provide a polyethylene film structure for a pouch container having a broad heat sealing range with performance properties as good or better than the known prior art pouch films.

It is also desired to provide a film structure for a pouch container having a heat seal layer such that the film structure has a broader sealing range for pouch conversion and has acceptable physical properties in the finished product. It is further desired to provide a pouch made from the aforementioned film structures such that the pouch has a reduced failure rate.

We have now discovered that new homogeneously branched substantially linear ethylene/α—olefin interpolymers offer significant advantages in film structures of pouches. The novel homogeneously branched substantially linear ethylene/α-olefin interpolymers, when used as a seal layer, have good heat sealability at temperatures lower than those necessary for heterogeneously branched linear ethylene/α-olefin interpolymers and are also easily processed on conventional film and heat seal equipment. Pouches made from film structures comprising the homogeneously branched substantially linear ethylene/α—olefin interpolymers, when used as a seal layer or as a core layer, also have surprisingly good bursting performance.

One aspect of the present invention is directed to a pouch made from a film structure in tubular form and having transversely heat sealed ends, the film structure having at least one film layer comprising:

(I) from 10 to 100 percent by weight of at least one layer comprising at least one homogeneously branched substantially linear ethylene/α-olefin interpolymer characterized as having: (a) a melt flow ratio, I ₁₀ /l2, ≥ 5.63, and

(b) a molecular weight distribution, M _w /M _n , defined by the equation: M _w /M _n < (I^Q/^) *" 4.63; and

(II) from 0 to 90 percent by weight of at least one polymer selected from the group consisting of a heterogeneously branched linear ethylene/C3~Ci8 α-olefin copolymer, a high-pressure low density polyethylene, and an ethylene-vinyl acetate copolymer.

One embodiment of the present invention is a pouch made from a two-layer (that is, A/B) coextruded film containing an outer layer of a heterogeneously branched linear low density polyethylene and an inner seal layer of the aforementioned homogeneously branched substantially linear ethylene interpolymer.

Another embodiment of the present invention is a pouch made from a three-layer (that is, A/B/A or A/B/C) coextruded film containing an outer layer and a core layer comprising heterogeneously branched linear low density polyethylene (either the same or different heterogeneously branched linear low density polyethylenes) or a high pressure low density polyethylene and an inner seal layer comprising the aforementioned homogeneously branched substantially linear ethylene interpolymer-

Another aspect of the present invention is a process for preparing the aforementioned pouch. Film structures for the pouches of the present invention have a better seal at lower sealing temperatures and shorter dwell times than currently obtainable with commercially available film. Use of the films for making pouches of the present invention in form, fill and seal machines leads to machine speeds higher than currently obtainable with the use of commercially available film.

Figure 1 shows a perspective view of a pouch package of the present invention.

Figure 2 shows a perspective view of another pouch package of the present invention.

Figure 3 shows a partial, enlarged cross-sectional view of the film structure of a pouch of the present invention.

Figure 4 shows another partial, enlarged cross-sectional view of another embodiment of the film structure of a pouch of the present invention.

Figure 5 shows yet another partial, enlarged cross-sectional view of another embodiment of the film structure of a pouch of the present invention.

Figure 6 is a graphical illustration of film hot tack strength versus temperature for resin 7 and comparative resin 1.

Figure 7 is a graphical illustration of film hot tack strength versus temperature for resin 6 and comparative resin 2.

Figure 8 is a graphical illustration of film hot tack strength versus temperature for resin 5 and comparative resin 3.

Figure 9 is a graphical illustration of film hot tack strength versus sealing time for resins 5-7 and comparative resins 1-3 and comparative film 8.

Figure 10 is a graphical illustration of film heat seal strength versus temperature for resin 7 and comparative resin 1.

Figure 11 is a graphical illustration of film heat seal strength versus temperature for resin 6 and comparative resin 2.

Figure 12 is a graphical illustration of film heat seal strength versus temperature for resin 5 and comparative resin 3.

Figure 13 is a graphical illustration of film heat seal strength versus sealing time for resins 5-7 and comparative resins 1-3 and comparative film 8.

Figure 14 is a graphical illustration of vertical form-fill- seal film heat seal strength versus temperature for resin 7 and comparative resin 1.

Figure 15 is a graphical illustration of vertical form-fill- seal film heat seal strength versus temperature for resin 6 and comparative resin 2.

Figure 16 is a graphical illustration of vertical form-fill- seal film heat seal strength versus temperature for resin 5 and comparative resin 3.

Firgure 17 is a graphical illustration of maximum film hot tack strength versus resin density for resins 5-7 and comparative resins 1-3.

The pouch of the present invention, for example as shown in

Figures 1 and 2, for packaging flowable materials is manufactured from a monolayer film structure of a polymeric seal layer which is a homogeneously branched substantially linear ethylene/α-olefin interpolymer (referred to hereinafter as "SLEP"). The SLEP of the present invention is generally an interpolymer of ethylene with at least one α-olefin having from 3 to 20 carbon atoms. The term "interpolymer" is uεed herein to indicate a copolymer, or a terpolymer, or the like. That is, at least one other comonomer is polymerized with ethylene to make the interpolymer. For example, a SLEP terpolymer comprising ethylene/1-octene/l-hexene may be employed in the film structure as the polymeric seal layer.

Copolymers of ethylene and a C3-C20 tt-olefin are especially preferred, for example, the SLEP may be selected from ethylene/propene, ethylene/1-butene, ethylene/1-pentene, ethylene/4-methyl-l-pentene, ethylene/1-hexene, ethylene/1-heptene, ethylene/1-octene and ethylene/1-decene copolymers, preferably ethylene/1-octene copolymer.

The term "substantially linear" means that the interpolymer backbone is substituted with 0.01 long chain branches/1000 carbons to 3 long chain branches/1000 carbons, more preferably from 0.01 long chain branches/1000 carbons to 1 long chain branches/1000 carbons, and especially from 0.05 long chain branches/1000 carbons to 1 long chain branches/1000 carbons.

Long chain branching is defined herein as a chain length of at least about 6 carbons, above which the length cannot be distinguished using -*- ³ C nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy. The length of the long chain branch can vary, but can be about as long as the length of the polymer back-bone itself.

Long chain branching is determined by using 1 ³ C nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy and is quantified using the method of Randall (Rev. Macromol . Chem. Phvs.. C29 (2&3), p. 285-297), the disclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference.

The substantially linear ethylene/α-olefin copolymers and interpolymers of the present invention are herein defined as in USP 5,278,236 and in USP 5,278,272. The substantially linear, ethylene/α-olefin copolymers and interpolymers useful for forming the compositions described herein are homogeneously branched (that is, the comonomer is randomly distributed within a given interpolymer molecule and wherein substantially all of the interpolymer molecules have the same ethylene/comonomer ratio within that interpolymer) .

The SCBDI (Short Chain Branch Distribution Index) or CDBI (Composition Distribution Branch Index) is defined as the weight percent of the polymer molecules having a comonomer content within 50 percent of the median total molar comonomer content. The CDBI of a polymer is readily calculated from data obtained from techniques known in the art, such as, for example, temperature rising elution fractionation (abbreviated herein as "TREF") as described, for example, in Wild et al, Journal of Polymer Science. Polv. Phvs . Ed■ . Vol. 20, p. 441 (1982), or in U.S. Patent 4,798,081, both disclosures of which are incorporated herein by reference. The SCBDI or CDBI for the substantially linear ethylene/α-olefin interpolymers and copolymers used in the present invention is preferably greater than 30 percent, especially greater than 50 percent. The substantially linear ethylene/α-olefin interpolymers and copolymers used in this invention essentially lack a measurable "high density" fraction as measured by the TREF technique. The "high density" fraction includes linear homopolymer polyethylene. The "high density" polymer fraction can be described as a polymer fraction with a degree of branching less than or equal to 2 methyls/1000 carbons. The terms "essentially lacks a measurable high density fraction" means that the substantially linear interpolymers and copolymers do not contain a polymer fraction with a degree of branching less than or equal to 2 methyls/1000 carbons. The novel homogeneously branched SLEP are easily distinguished from homogeneously branched linear ethylene/α-olefin interpolymers. The term "linear ethylene/α-olefin interpolymer" means that the interpolymer does not have long chain branching. That is, the linear ethylene/α-olefin interpolymer has an absence of long chain branching, as for example the homogeneously branched linear low density polyethylene polymers made using uniform branching distribution polymerization processes (for example, as

described in USP 3,645,992 (Elston) ) . For both the linear and substantially linear interpolymers, however, the term "homogeneously branched" means that the comonomer is randomly distributed within a given interpolymer molecule and wherein substantially all of the interpolymer molecules have the same ethylene/comonomer ratio within that interpolymer. The term "linear ethylene/α-olefin interpolymer" does not refer to high pressure branched (free-radical polymerized) polyethylene which is known to those skilled in the art to have numerous long chain branches. The homogeneously branched substantially linear ethylene/α-olefin copolymers and interpolymers also have a single melting point, as opposed to traditional Ziegler polymerized (heterogeneously branched) polymers having two or more melting points, as determined using differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) over a temperature range of from -20°C to 150°C. In addition, the novel homogeneously branched substantially linear ethylene/α-olefin copolymers and interpolymers have melting points which correlate with the density of the copolymer or interpolymer, that is, as the density decreases, the peak melting point of the polymer decreases in a directly linear fashion. Heterogeneously branched ethylene polymers have peak melting points which do not vary substantially with the density of the polymer, primarily due to the presence of a high density polymer fraction which melts at about 122°C (the melting point of homopolymer linear polyethylene) .

The density of the homogeneously branched substantially linear ethylene/α—olefin interpolymers or copolymers (as measured in accordance with ASTM D-792) for use in the present invention is generally less than 0.94 g/cm ³ and preferably from 0.85 g/cm ³ to 0.94 g/cm ³ .

Generally, the homogeneously branched substantially linear ethylene/α—olefin polymer is used alone in the seal layer of the film or film structure. However, the homogeneously branched substantially linear ethylene/α-olefin polymer can be blended with other polymers for use aε the heat seal layer. Generally, the amount of the homogeneously branched substantially linear ethylene/α-olefin polymer is from 10 percent to 100 percent, by weight of the film structure.

The molecular weight of the homogeneously branched substantially linear ethylene/α—olefin interpolymers and copolymers for use in the present invention is conveniently indicated using a melt index

measurement according to ASTM D-1238, Condition 190'C/2.16 kg (formerly known as "Condition (E) " and also known as 12)- Melt index is inversely proportional to the molecular weight of the polymer. Thus, the higher the molecular weight, the lower the melt index, although the relationship is not linear. The melt index for the homogeneouεly branched substantially linear ethylene/α-olefin interpolymers and copolymers useful herein is generally 10 grams/10 minutes (g/10 min) or less, preferably from 0.01 g/10 min to 10 g/10 min.

Another measurement useful in characterizing the molecular weight of the homogeneouεly branched substantially linear ethylene/α-olefin interpolymers and copolymers is conveniently indicated using a melt index measurement according to ASTM D-1238, Condition 190'C/10 kg (formerly known as "Condition (N) " and also known as Iio) • The ratio of these two melt index terms is the melt flow ratio and is designated as I10 I2 • ^For the homogeneously branched substantially linear ethylene/α-olefin interpolymers and copolymers used in this invention, the ^I lθ/ ^I 2 ratio indicates the degree of long chain branching, that is, the higher the I10 I2 ratio, the more long chain branching in the polymer. Generally, the I10 I2 ratio of the homogeneously branched substantially linear ethylene/α-olefin interpolymers and copolymers is at least 5.63, preferably at least 7, especially at least 8 or above. Generally, the ^I lθ/ ^I 2 ratio can be as high as 30, preferably no higher than 20.

The molecular weight distribution (M _w /M _n ) of the homogeneously branched substantially linear ethylene/α-olefin interpolymers and copolymers is analyzed by gel permeation chromatography (GPC) on a Waters 150C high temperature chromatographic unit equipped with three mixed porosity columns (Polymer Laboratories 10 ³ , 10 ⁴ , 10 ⁵ , and 10 ⁶ ) , operating at a system temperature of 140°C. The solvent is 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene, from which 0.3 percent by weight solutions of the samples are prepared for injection. The flow rate is 1.0 milliliters/minute and the injection size is 200 microliters.

The molecular weight determination is deduced by using narrow molecular weight distribution polystyrene standards (from Polymer Laboratories) in conjunction with their elution volumes. The equivalent polyethylene molecular weights are determined by using appropriate Mark-

Houwink coefficients for polyethylene and polystyrene (as described by Williams and Word in Journal of Polymer Science. Polymer Letters, Vol. 6, (621) 1968, incorporated herein by reference) to derive the following equation:

Mpolyethylene = a * (Mp ₀ iy _Ξ tyrene ⁾ •

In this equation, a = 0.4316 and b = 1.0. Weight average molecular weight, M _w , is calculated in the usual manner according to the following formula: M _w = ∑ ^→ W * Mi, where wi and Mj are the weight fraction and molecular weight, respectively, of the i*-" fraction eluting from the GPC column.

For the homogeneously branched substantially linear ethylene/α-olefin interpolymers and copolymers, the M _w /M _n is preferably from 1.5 to 2.5, especially 2.

Additives, known to those skilled in the art, such as antioxidants (for example, hindered phenolics (for example, Irganox® 1010 or Irganox® 1076 made by Ciba Geigy Corp.), phosphites (for example, Irgafos® 168 made by Ciba Geigy Corp.)), cling additives (for example, polyisobutylene (PIB)), Standostab PEPQ™ supplied by Sandoz, anti-block additives, slip additives, UV stabilizers, pigments, processing aids can also be added to the polymers from which the pouches of the present invention are made.

The "rheological processing index" (PI) is the apparent viscosity (in kpoise) of a polymer measured by a gas extrusion rheometer (GER) . The gas extrusion rheometer is described by M. Shida, R.N. Shroff and L.V. Cancio in Polvmer Engineering Science, Vol. 17, no. 11, p. 770 (1977), and in "Rheometers for Molten Plastics" by John Dealy, published by Van Nostrand Reinhold Co. (1982) on page 97-99. All GER experiments are performed at a temperature of 190°C, at nitrogen pressures between 5250 to 500 psig (36.3 to 3.55 MPA) using a 0.0296 inch (0.752 mm) diameter, 20:1 L/D die with an entrance angle of 180°. For the homogeneouεly branched ethylene polymerε described herein, the PI is the apparent viscosity (in kpoise) of a material measured by GER at an

apparent shear stress of 2-15 x 10" dyne/cm ² . The novel substantially linear ethylene/α-olefin interpolymers and copolymers described herein preferably have a PI in the range of 0.01 kpoise to 50 kpoise, more preferably about 15 kpoise or less. The novel substantially linear ethylene/α—olefin polymers described herein for use in the pouches have a PI less than or equal to about 70 percent of the PI of a linear ethylene/α-olefin polymer at about the same or substantially the same 12 and M /M _n and the same comonomer(s) .

An apparent shear stress vs. apparent shear rate plot is used to identify the melt fracture phenomena. According to Ramamurthy in

Journal of Rheology. 30(2), 337-357, 1986, above a certain critical flow rate, the observed extrudate irregularities may be broadly classified into two main types: surface melt fracture and gross melt fracture. Surface melt fracture occurs under apparently steady flow conditions and rangeε in detail from loss of specular gloss to the more severe form of "sharkskin" . Gross melt fracture occurs at unsteady flow conditions and ranges in detail from regular (alternating rough and smooth, helical, etc.) to random distortions.

Ramamurthy (Journal of Rheology) and Moynihan, Baird and Ramanathan in Journal of Non-Newtonian Fluid Mechanics. 36, 255-263

(1990), both disclose that the onset of sharkskin (that is, melt fracture) for linear low density polyethylene (LLDPE) occurs at an apparent shear stress of 1-1.4 x 10° dyne/cm , which was observed to be coincident with the change in slope of the flow curve. Ramamurthy also discloεes that the onset of surface melt fracture or of gross melt fracture for high pressure low density polyethylene (HP-LDPE) occurs at an apparent shear stress of about 0.13 MPa (1.3 x 10 ⁶ dynes/cm ² ) .

Kalika and Denn in Journal of Rheology. 31, 815-834 (1987) confirmed the surface defects or sharkskin phenomena for LLDPE, but the results of their work determined a critical shear stresε of 2.3 x 10^ dyne/cm ² , significantly higher than that found by Ramamurthy and Moynihan et al.

In this disclosure, the onset of surface melt fracture (OSMF) is characterized at the beginning of losing extrudate glosε at which the surface roughness of extrudate can only be detected by 40X magnification. Surprisingly, the critical shear rate at onset of surface

melt fracture for the substantially linear ethylene/α-olefin interpolymers and copolymers is at least 50 percent greater than the critical shear rate at the onset of surface melt fracture of a linear ethylene/α-olefin interpolymer or copolymer (either a heterogeneouεly branched polymer (for example, LLDPE) or a homogeneouεly branched polymer (for example, that described in USP 3,645,992 (Elston) ) having about the same or substantially the same I2 and M _w /M _n and the same comonomer(ε) .

The critical shear rate and critical shear stress at onset of surface melt fracture (OSMF) and onset of gross melt fracture (OGMF) will be used herein based on the changes of εurface roughneεε and configurationε of the extrudates extruded by a GER. In contrast to both LLDPE and high pressure LDPE, the critical shear stresε at onset of gross melt fracture for the substantially linear ethylene/α-olefin interpolymers and copolymers, especially those having a density greater than about 0.9 g/cm ³ , is greater than about 4 x 10 ⁶ dynes/cm ² .

The filmε and film structures disclosed herein can be monolayer or multilayer film structures, with the proviso that the homogeneously branched substantially linear ethylene/α-olefin copolymers and interpolymers be used as at least one layer, preferably the seal layer. The thickness of the seal layer may be from at least about 0.1 mil (2.5 microns) and greater, preferably from 0.2 mil (5 microns) to 10 mil (254 microns) and more preferably from 0.4 mil (10 microns) to 5 mil (127 microns) . A surprising feature of the pouch's film structure of the present invention is the film's broad heat sealing range, especially in view of the substantially linear ethylene polymer's narrow melting point range (measured using differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) ) . Generally, the heat sealing range of the film structure can be from 50°C to 160°C and preferably from 75°C to 130°C. It has been found that the seal layer of the present invention has a broader heat seal range than prior art polyethylene film made from heterogeneously branched ethylene polymers, even at the approximately the same density. A broad heat sealing range is important to allow for more flexibility in the heat sealing process used for making pouches from the film structure.

Generally, the melting point range of the substantially linear ethylene

polymer used to make the film structure having the heat seal ranges specified above can be from 50°C to 130°C and preferably from 55°C to 115°C.

Another unexpected feature of the pouch's film structure of the present invention is the film's heat seal strength at low temperatures. Generally, the film structure of the present invention achieves a hot tack strength of at least about 1 N/inch (39.4 N/m) at a seal bar temperature of about 110°C and at lesε than about 0.3 εecondε using the DTC Hot Tack Strength Method defined hereinbelow or achieves a heat seal strength of at least 1 lbf/inch (175 N/m) at a seal bar temperature of about 110°C and at less than 0.4 seconds using the DTC Heat Seal Strength Method defined hereinbelow. The film structure of the present invention also has a hot tack or heat seal initiation temperature of less than about 110°C at a force of at least about 1 N/inch (39.4 N/m) . It has been found that a seal made with the seal layer of the present invention has a higher strength at lower sealing temperatures than seals with a prior art polyethylene having higher densities. A high heat seal strength at low temperatures is important to allow conventional packaging equipment such as a vertical form, fill and seal machine to run at faster rates and to produce pouches with fewer leakers.

It is believed that the use of at least one substantially linear ethylene polymer in a seal layer of a film structure for pouches of the present invention (1) provides a pouch that can be fabricated at a fast rate through a form, fill and seal machine and (2) provides a pouch package having few leakers, particularly when the pouch of the present invention is compared to pouches made with linear low density polyethylene, ultra linear low density polyethylene, high pressure low density polyethylene, or a combination thereof.

In one embodiment of the present invention, a pouch is made from a film structure in tubular form and having transversely heat sealed ends. The film structure has at least one film layer comprising:

(I) from 10 to 100 percent by weight of at leaεt one layer comprising at least one homogeneously branched substantially linear ethylene/α—olefin interpolymer characterized as having:

(a) a melt flow ratio, I^Q/12' - 5.63, and

(b) a molecular weight distribution, M _w /M _n , defined by the equation: M _w /M _n < (I^g/^) " 4.63; and

(II) from 0 to 90 percent by weight of at least one polymer selected from the group consiεting of a heterogeneously branched linear ethylene/C3-Ci8 α-olefin copolymer, a high-pressure low density polyethylene, and an ethylene-vinyl acetate copolymer.

The heterogeneously branched linear ethylene/C3-Ci8 α-olefin copolymer of (II) is generally a linear low density polyethylene (such as that made using Ziegler catalysis) . The linear low density polyethylene is often further divided into subsets labeled as very low density polyethylene (VLDPE) or ultra low density polyethylene (ULDPE) . VLDPE and ULDPE are interchangeable terms herein and are generally used in thiε manner by those skilled in the art. Generally, the density of the linear low density polyethylene of (II) ranges from 0.87 g/cm ³ to 0.94 g/cm ³ , preferably from 0.87 g/cm ³ to 0.915 g/cm ³ . Preferably, the heterogeneously branched linear low density ethylene/C3-Ciβ a-olefin copolymer of (II) has a melt index from 0.1 to 10 g/10 minutes.

Preferably, the high-pressure low density polyethylene of (II) has a density from 0.916 to 0.93 g/cm ³ and a melt index from 0.1 to 10 g/10 minutes.

Preferably, the ethylene-vinyl acetate copolymer of (II) has a weight ratio of ethylene to vinyl acetate from 2.2:1 to 24:1 and a melt index from 0.2 to 10 g/10 minutes. Another embodiment of the present invention includeε a pouch made from a blend of:

(a) from 10 to 100 percent by weight of at least one homogeneously branched substantially linear ethylene copolymer interpolymerized from ethylene and at least one alpha-olefin in the range of C3-C20 and having a density of less than 0.915 g/cm ³ and a melt index of less than 10.0 g/10 minutes, and

(b) from 0 to 90 percent by weight of at least one polymer selected from the group consisting of a heterogeneously branched linear ethylene/C3-Cχ8 α-olefin copolymer, a high-pressure low-density polyethylene and an ethylene-vinyl acetate (EVA) copolymer.

The heterogeneously branched linear ethylene/C3~Cχ8 α-olefin copolymer of (II) generally is a linear low density polyethylene (such as that made using Ziegler catalysis) . The linear low desnity polyethylene includes very low density polyethylene (VLDPE) and ultra low density polyethylene (ULDPE), as described previously. Generally, the density of the linear low density polyethylene of (II) ranges from 0.87 g/cm ³ to 0.94 g/cm ³ , preferably from 0.87 g/cm ³ to 0.915 g/cm ³ . Preferably, the heterogeneously branched linear low density ethylene/C3~Ci8 α-olefin copolymer of (II) has a melt index from 0.1 to 10 g/10 minuteε. Preferably, the high-pressure low density polyethylene of (b) has a density from 0.916 to 0.93 g/cm ³ and a melt index from 0.1 to 10 g/10 minutes.

Preferably, the ethylene-vinyl acetate copolymer of (b) has a weight ratio of ethylene to vinyl acetate from 2.2:1 to 24:1 and a melt index from 0.2 to 10 g/10 minutes.

With reference to Figures 3 to 5, the film structure of the pouch of the present invention also includes a multilayer or composite film structure 30, preferably containing the above-described polymeric seal layer being the inner layer of the pouch. As will be understood by those skilled in the art, the multilayer film structure for the pouch of the present invention may contain various combination of film layers as long as the seal layer forms part of the ultimate film structure. The multilayer film structure for the pouch of the present invention may be a coextruded film, a coated film or a laminated film. The film structure also includes the seal layer in combination with a barrier film such as polyester, nylon, ethylene-vinyl

TM alcohol copolymer (EVOH) , polyvinylidene dichloride (PVDC) such as Saran

(Trademark of The Dow Chemical Company) and metallized filmε. The end use for the pouch tends to dictate, in a large degree, the selection of the other material or materials used in combination with the seal layer film.

The pouches described herein will refer to seal layers used at least on the inside of the pouch.

One embodiment of the film structure 30 for the pouch of the present invention, shown in Figure 3, comprises a homogeneously branched substantially linear ethylene polymer seal layer 31 and at least one polymeric outer layer 32. The polymeric outer layer 32 is preferably a

polyethylene film layer, more preferably a heterogeneously branched linear polyethylene referred to hereinafter as "linear low density polyethylene" ("LLDPE") and/or "ultra linear low density polyethylene" ,( "ULDPE") and/o "very low density polyethylene ("VLDPE") . An example of a commercially available LLDPE is DOWLEX® 2045 (Trademark of and commercially available from The Dow Chemical Company) . An example of a commercially available ULDPE is ATTANE® 4201 (Trademark of and commercially available from The Dow Chemical Company) .

The LLDPE (including both the VLDPE and ULDPE) useful herein are heterogeneously branched linear copolymers of ethylene and a minor amount of an alpha-olefin having from 3 to 18 carbon atoms, preferably from 4 to 10 carbon atoms (for example, 1-butene, 4-methyl-l-pentene, 1- hexene, 1-octene, and 1-decene) and most preferably 8 carbon atoms (for example, 1-octene) . Generally, the heterogeneously branched LLDPE are made using Ziegler catalysiε (for example, using the method described in U.S. Patent No. 4,076,698 (Anderson et al.)) .

The LLDPE for the outer layer 32 generally has a density greater than 0.87 g/cm ³ , more preferably from 0.9 to 0.93 g/cm ³ ; generally has a melt index (I2) from 0.1 to 10 g/10 min, preferably from 0.5 to 2 g/10 min; and generally has an I10 I2 ratio from 5 to 20, preferably from 7 to 20.

For the heterogeneously branched LLDPE (including both VLDPE and UDLPE) , the I10 I2 ratio tends to increase as the molecular weight (M /M _n ) of the LLDPE increases, in surprising contradistinction to the novel homogeneously branched substantially linear ethylene/α-olefin interpolymers and copolymers discussed herein.

The thicknesε of the outer layer 32 may be any thickneεε so long as the seal layer 31 has a minimum thickness of 0.1 mil (2.5 microns) . Another embodiment of the film structure 30 for the pouch of the present invention, shown in Figure 4, comprises the polymeric layer 32 sandwiched between two polymeric seal layers 31.

Still another embodiment of the film structure 30 for the pouch of the present invention, shown in Figure 5, comprises at least one polymeric core layer 33 between at least one polymeric outer layer 32 and at least one polymeric seal layer 31. The polymeric layer 33 may be the

same LLDPE film layer as the outer layer 32 or preferably a different LLDPE, and more preferably an LLDPE that has a higher density than the outer layer 32. The thickness of the core layer 33 may he any thickness so long as the seal layer 31 has a minimum thickness of 0.1 mil (2.5 microns) .

Yet another embodiment (not shown) of the film structure for the pouch of the present invention can be a structure including a seal layer 31 and another polyethylene film layer referred to hereinafter as "high pressure low-density polyethylene" ("LDPE") . The LDPE layer generally has a density from 0.916 to 0.930 g/cm ³ and has a melt index from 0.1 to 10 g/10 min. The thickness of the LDPE layer may be any thickness so long as the seal layer 31 has a minimum thickness of 0.1 mil (2.5 microns) .

Still another embodiment (not shown) of the film structure for the pouch of the present invention can be a structure including a seal layer 31 and a layer of EVA copolymer having a weight ratio of ethylene to vinyl acetate from 2.2:1 to 24:1 and a melt index of from 0.2 to 20 g/10 min. The thickness of the EVA layer may be any thickness so long as the seal layer 31 has a minimum thicknesε of 0.1 mil (2.5 microns) . The thickness of the film structure used for making the pouch of the present invention is from 0.5 mil (12.7 microns) to 10 mils (254 microns), preferably from 1 mil (25.4 microns) to 5 mils (127 microns) .

As can be seen from the different embodiments of the present invention shown in Figures 3-5, the film structure for the pouches of the present invention has design flexibility. Different LLDPEs (for example, VLDPE and ULDPE) can be used in the outer and core layers to optimize specific film properties such as film stiffness. Thus, the film can be optimized for specific applications such as for a vertical form, film and seal machine. The polyethylene film εtructure uεed to make a pouch of the present invention is made by either the blown tube extrusion method or the cast extrusion method, methods well known in the art. The blown tube extrusion method is described, for example, in Modern Plasticε Mid-October 1989 Encyclopedia Issue, Volume 66, Number 11, pages 264 to 266. The cast extrusion method is described, for example, in Modern Plastics Mid-October 1989 Encyclopedia Issue, Volume 66, Number 11, pages 256 to 257.

Embodiments of the pouches of the present invention, shown in Figures 1 and 2, are hermetically sealed containers filled with "flowable materials". By "flowable materials" it is meant materials which are flowable under gravity or which may be pumped, but the term "flowable materials" doeε not include gaεeous materials. The flowable materials include noncarbonated liquids (for example, milk, water, fruit juice, wine) and carbonated liquidε (for example, εoda, beer, water); emulsions (for example, ice cream mix, soft margerine) ; pastes (for example, meat pastes, peanut butter); preserves (for example, jams, pie fillings, marmalade); jellies; doughs; ground meat (for example, sausage meat); powders (for example, gelatin powders, detergents); granular solids (for example, nuts, sugar, cerial) ; and like materials. The pouch of the present invention is particularly uεeful for packaging liquidε (for example, milk) . The flowable material may alεo include oleaginous liquidε (for example, cooking oil or motor oil) .

Once the film structure for the pouch of the present invention is made, the film structure is cut to the desired width for use in conventional pouch-forming machines. The embodiments of the pouch of the present invention shown in Figures 1 and 2 are made in so-called form, fill and seal machines well known in the art. With regard to Figure 1, there is shown a pouch 10 being a tubular member 11 having a longitudinal lap seal 12 and transverse seals 13 such that, a "pillow-shaped" pouch is formed when the pouch is filled with flowable material. With regard to Figure 2, there is shown a pouch 20 being a tubular member 21 having a peripheral fin seal 22 along three sides of the tubular member 11, that is, the top seal 22a and the longitudinal side seals 22b and 22c, and having a bottom substantially concave or "bowl-shaped" member 23 sealed to the bottom portion of the tubular seal 21 such that when viewed in crosε-section, longitudually, substantially a semi-circular or "bowed-shaped" bottom portion is formed when the pouch is filled with flowable material . The pouch shown in Figure 2 is the so-called "Enviro-Pak" pouch known in the art.

The pouch manufactured according to the present invention is preferably the pouch shown in Figure 1 made on so-called vertical form, fill and seal (VFFS) machines well known in the art. Examples of

commercially available VFFS machines include those manufactured by Hayssen or Prepac. A VFFS machine is described in the following reference: F. C. Lewis, "Form-Fill-Seal," Packaging Encyclopedia, page 18Q, 1980.

In a VFFS packaging process, a sheet of the plastic film structure described herein is fed into a VFFS machine where the sheet is formed into a continuous tube in a tube-forming section. The tubular member is formed by sealing the longitudinal edges of the film together -- either by lapping the plastic film and sealing the film using an inside/outside seal or by fin sealing the plastic film using an inside/inside seal. Next, a sealing bar seals the tube transversely at one end being the bottom of the "pouch", and then the fill material, for example milk, is added to the "pouch." The sealing bar then seals the top end of the pouch and either burns through the plastic film or cuts the film, thus, separating the formed completed pouch from the tube. The process of making a pouch with a VFFS machine is generally described in U.S. Patent Nos. 4,503,102 and 4,521,437.

The capacity of the pouches of the present invention may vary. Generally, the poucheε may contain from 5 milliliters to 10 liters, preferably from 10 milliliters to 8 liters, and more preferably from 1 liter to 5 liters of flowable material.

The use of the homogeneously branched substantially linear ethylene/α-olefin interpolymer seal layer of the present invention in a two or three-layer coextruded film product will provide a film structure that can be used for making pouches at a faster rate in the VFFS and such pouches produced will contain fewer leakers.

The pouches of the present invention can also be printed by using techniques known in the art, for example, use of corona treatment before printing.

The pouches of the present invention have excellent performance results when tested by the 5 Foot (1.52 m) Drop Test—a test which is defined herein. Under the 5 Foot (1.52 m) Drop Test, the pouches preferably have a percent failure of less than 40 percent and more preferably less than 20 percent, and especially less than 10 percent.

Use of the pouch for packaging consumer liquids such as milk has its advantages over containers used in the past: the glass bottle, paper carton, and high density polyethylene jug. The previously used

containers consumed large amounts of natural resources in their manufacture, required a significant amount of space in landfill, used a large amount of storage space and used more energy in temperature control of the product (due to the heat transfer propertieε of the container) . The pouches of the preεent invention made of thin film, used for liquid packaging, offers many advantages over the containers used in the past. The pouches: (1) consume less natural resources, (2) require less space in a landfill, (3) can be recycled, (4) can be processed easily, (5) require less storage space, (6) uεe less energy for storage (heat transfer properties of package), (7) can be safely incinerated and (8) can be reuεed (for example, the empty poucheε can be used for other applications εuch aε freezer bags, sandwich bags, and general purpose storage bags) .

Experimental :

Coextruded blown film samples having an A/B/A structure were made using layer ratios of: A=15 percent (by weight of the total structure) and B= 70 percent (by weight of the total structure) . Layer B was an ethylene/1-octene LLDPE having a melt index (I2) of about 1 g/10 minute and a density of about 0.92 g/cm ³ and did not contain additives.

In the examples, resins 1-3 were all heterogeneously branched ethylene/1- octene copolymers and resins 4-7 were all homogeneously branched substantially linear ethylene/1-octene copolymer . Table 1 εummarizeε physical propertieε of the reεins used to make A/B/A coextruded blown film samples described in the examples and comparative examples:

Table 1

*Comparative example NA = Not applicable Resins 1, 2, 5, 6, and 7 were dry blended to contain 4,000 ppm Siθ2 and 1,200 ppm Erucamide. Resin 3 was dry blended to contain 6,000 ppm Siθ2 and 1,200 ppm Erucamide. Resin 4 was dry blended to contain 14,000 ppm Siθ2 and 1,200 ppm Erucamide. Resin 8 was a monolayer milk pouch film designated "SM3" made by and available from DuPont Canada and was believed to be a blend of about 8 percent (by weight) of a low density polyethylene having a density of about 0.92 g/cm ³ and about 92 percent (by weight) of a heterogeneously branched linear low denisty polyethylene. The SM3 film had a final film density reported by DuPont as 0.918 g/cm ³ .

Film samples were produced on an Egan three layer extruder system. Extruder A had a 2.5 inch (6.35 cm) diameter (Barr2 type) screw equipped with a Maddox mixer, L/D of 24:1, 60 HP drive. Extruder B had a 2.5 inch (6.35 cm) diameter (DSB II type) screw equipped with a Maddox mixer, L/D of 24:1, 75 HP drive. Extruder C had a 2 inch (5.08 cm) diameter (Modified MHD (Johnson) type) screw equipped with a Maddox mixer, L/D of 24:1, 20 HP drive. The blown film line was also equipped with an 8 inch (20.32 cm) 3-layer coextruding die body, a Gloucester Tower, a Sano collapsing frame, a Sano bubble sizing cage, and a Sano bubble enclosure.

Each of the film samples was made at 3 mil target thickness using a blow-up ratio (BUR) of 2.5:1.

Each film was tested according to the following test methods: Puncture : Puncture was measured by using an Instron Tensile

Tester with an integrator, a specimen holder, and a puncturing device. The Instron was set to obtain a crosεhead speed of 10 incheε/ inute (25.4 cm/minute) and a chart εpeed (if used) of 10 inches/minute (25.4 cm/minute) . Load range of 50 percent of the load cell capacity (100 lb. (45.36 kg) load for these tests) was used. The puncturing device was installed to the Instron εuch that the clamping unit waε attached to the lower mount and the ball waε attached to the upper mount on the crosshead. Five film specimenε were used (each 6 inches (15.24 cm) square) . The specimen was clamped in the film holder and the film holder was secured to the mounting bracket. The crosshead travel was set and continued until the specimen breaks. Puncture resistance was defined as the energy to puncture divided by the volume of the film under test. Puncture resistance (PR) was calculated as follows:

PR = E/((12) (T) (A))

where PR = puncture resistance (ft-lbs/in ³ ) , E = energy (inch-lbs) = area under the load displacement curve,

12 = inches/foot, T = film thickness (inches) , and A = area of the film sample in the clamp = 12.56 in ² (81 cm ² );

Dart Impact: ASTM D1709, method A;

Elmendorf Tear: ASTM D1922;

Tensile Properties: ASTM D882 using an Instron tensile tester (cross-head speed of 500 mm/min, full scale load of 5 kg, threshold of 1 percent of full scale load, break criterion of 80 percent, 2 inch (5.08 cm) gauge length and 1 inch (2.54 cm) sample width) ;

Coefficient of Friction: ASTM D1894. Coefficient of friction range is important in order for the film to properly move over the forming collars in a vertical-form-fill and seal machine (for example, a Hayssen

form-fill-seal machine) : if the coefficient of friction is too low, the film may be too slippery for the pull belts to grip the film and if the coefficient of friction is too high, the film may be too .tacky for the machine to pull the film over the forming collar; typical targets for the Hayssen form-fill-seal machine are:

(i) inside/outside coefficient of friction from 0.10 - 0.30 and (ii) outside/outside coefficient of friction from 0.10 - 040;

1 Percent and 2 Percent Secant Modulus: ASTM D882. Film stiffness is important, especially for "free-standing" pouches like that shown in Figure 2. The 1 percent and 2 percent secant modulus tests provide an indication of the stiffnesε of the film;

Heat Seal Strength: This test measures the force required to separate a seal after the seal has been allowed to cool. Seals were made using the DTC Hot Tack Tester but only the heat seal portion of the unit was used. Conditions used were:

Specimen width: 24.4 mm

Sealing time: 0.5 seconds Sealing pressure: 0.27 N/mm/mm

No. samples/time: 5

Temperature increments: 5°C.

Seal strength was determined using an Instron Tensile Tester Model No. 1122. The film sampleε were exposed to relative humidity of 50 percent and a temperature of 23°C for 24-48 hours prior to testing. Instron test conditions were as follows:

Direction of pull: 90° to seal

Crosshead speed: 500 mm/minute

Full scale load (FSL) : 5 kg Threshold: 1 percent of FSL

Break Criterion: 80 percent

Gauge length: 2.0 inches (5.08 cm) and

Sample width: 1.0 inch (2.54 cm);

Heat Seal Strength Versus Sealing Time: Films were sealed using a DTC Hot Tack Tester model no. 52D. Conditions used were as follows:

Specimen width: 24.4 mm Sealing time: varied

Sealing pressure: 0.27 N/mm/mm

No. sampleε/time: 5

Sealing temperature range: 0.1 εeconds - 1.0 seconds

Temperature: 105°C. The seal strength was determined using an Inεtron Tensile

Tester Model No. 1122 using the conditions described in the Heat seal Strength test.

Hot Tack Performance: The hot tack teεt meaεureε the force required to εeparate a heat εeal before the seal has had a chance to cool . This test simulates filling a pouch with material just after the seal was made. The hot tack strength is typically the limiting factor in increasing line speeds of a pouch manufacturing and filling operation. In this test, the films were tested using a DTC Hot Tack Tester Model No. 52D. Conditions used were: Specimen width: 24.4 mm Sealing Time: 0.5 seconds Sealing Preεsure: 0.27 N/mm/mm Delay Time: 0.5 seconds Peel Speed: 150 mm/sec

Number of εamples/temperature: 5 Temperature Increments: 5°C Temperature Range: 70°C - 130°C

Hot tack failure of the seals generally occurε in three stages: no seal; seals which pull apart (peeling) ; and film failure (where the molten film pulls apart with no apparent effect on the seal) . Film failure region begins where the hot tack strength reaches a maximum level. In each case, film failure occurs just in front of the seal. A force of 1 N/inch (0.4 N/cm) was arbitrarily selected to determine the seal initiation temperature.

Water Filled Pouch Perfromance: Pouches were manufactured using a Haysεen Ultima VFFS unit and contained 2L of water. The following conditions were used on the Hayssen: Model No. : RCMBΘ-PRA M.A. No. U19644

Mass of water = 2,000 grams

Bag size = 7 inches (17.8 cm) by 12.5 inches (31.8 cm) Film width = 15.25 inches (38.7 cm) Registration Rollε: on from 5° to 135° Pull Belts: on from 10° to 140°

Knife: on from 146° to 265° Jaw close: from 136° to 275° Platen: on from 136° to 265° Stager: off Auxiliary: on from 137° to 355°

Quali-seal: on from 140° to 265° Start Delay: 50 ms Bag eject: on End air seal: 200 mε Empty bagε/minute: 60

Filled bags/minute: 15 Seal bar pressure: 150 psi (1034 kPa) Type of side seal: lap, and Seam seal temperature: 260°F (127°C) . A Pro/Fill 3000 liquid filler was attached to the VFFS. The settings on the Pro/Fill 3000 were: P.S. = 35, volume = 0903, and C.O.A. = 70;

(i) End Heat Seal Strength: Water filled pouches were made using sealing bar temperatures starting at 280°F (138°C) . Five pouches were made at this temperature, then the sealing bar temperature was reduced in 5°F (2.8°C) increments until the pouches no longer held water. Five pouches were obtained from each temperature, the water drained, and the empty pouch tested for εeal εtrength using an Instron Tensile Tester Model No. 1122 using the conditions described in the Heat seal Strength test.

At the seal bar temperature where the pouch no longer holds water, the force of the water being pumped into the pouch was believed to be too great for the hot, semi-molten seal. Aε a reεult,. the εeal εeparated and it appeared that the pouch experienced hot tack failure at this temperature;

(ii) 5 Foot (1.52 m) Drop Test: The seal bar temperature waε εet to 250°F (121°C)and 100 pouches were made from each film structure. The pouches were dropped from a height of 5 feet (1.52 m) such that the pouch landed on the platen seal.

Tables 2, 2A and 3-9 summarize physical property data for the A/B/A film structures made using the resinε described in Table 1. In the Tables, "MD" means machine direction and "CD" means cross/transverse direction.

Table 2

Resin 2 _** 3** 4 5 6 7 8**

Avg. gauge (mils) 3.09 3.03 3.04 2.29 3.18 3.08 - 3.10 3.17

1 percent secant 31,928 28,504 27,873 21,154 25,291 28,422 29,251 NM* modulus, psi (MD) (220) (197) (192) (146) (174) (196) (202)

(MPa)

1 percent secant 39,638 30,334 31,274 24,781 28,022 30,696 35,169 NM* modulus, psi (CD) (273) (209) (216) (171) (193) (212) (242)

(MPa)

2 percent secant 28,509 24,218 23,951 17,622 21,845 24,738 26,094 22,800 modulus, psi (MD) (197) (167) (165) (122) (151) (171) (180) (157)

(MPa)

2 percent secant 33,730 26,087 26,783 19,322 24,009 26,754 30,130 25,449 modulus, psi (CD) (233) (180) (185) (133) (166) (184) (208) (175)

(MPa)

Elmendorf tear, g/mil 534 530 524 283 480 586 510 239 (kg/mm) (MD) (21) (20.8) (20.6) (11.1) (18.9) (23) (20) (9.4)

Elmendorf tear, g/mil 654 644 638 527 685 640 632 394 (kg/mm) (CD) (25.7) (25.4) (25.1) (20.7) (27) (25.2) (24.9) (15.5)

Dart Impact (g) 596 751 889 >1000 897 841 681 465

Puncture, ft-lbs/in ³ 26.0 25.8 26.5 52.0 27.8 27.7 24.2 13.8 07cm ³ ) (2.15) (2.13) (2.19) (4.3) (2.3) (2.29) (2) (1.14)

Tensile yield, psi 1580 1334 1308 1145 1278 1368 1500 1558 (MPa) (10.9) (9.2) (9) (7.9) (8.8) (9.4) (10.3) (10.7) (MD)

Tensile yield, psi 1732 1417 1395 1050 1342 1452 1614 1524

(MPa) (11.9) (9.8) (9.6) (7.2) (9.3) (10) (11.1) (10.5)

(CD)

*NM = Not measured Comparative Example Only

Table 2A

Resin ^• t * * 2 _** 3** 4 5 6 7 8**

Ultimate tensile, psi 5511 5338 5369 5086 6386 5653- 5794 5639

(MPa) (38) (36.8) (37) (35.1) (44) (39) (39.9) (38.9)

(MD)

Ultimate tensile, psi 5768 4873 5145 4293 6065 5310 5697 6173

(MPa) (39.8) (33.6) (35.4) (29.6) (41.8) (36.6) (39.3) (42.6)

(CD)

Elongation (percent) 685 668 667 593 702 662 687 761

(MD)

Elongation (percent) 748 701 719 719 716 688 729 682

(CD)

Toughness, ft-lbs/in ³ 1364 1224 1228 1017 1448 1304 1439 1562

(J/cm ³ ) (113) (101) (102) (84) (120) (108) (119) (129)

(MD)

Toughness, ft-lbs/in ³ 1549 1222 1293 1043 1399 1298 1507 1569 α/cm ³ ) (128) (101) (107) (86) (116) (107) (125) (130)

(CD)

*NM=Notmeasured **Comparative Example Only

The data in Tables 2 and 2A show that films made using both the heterogeneously branched ethylene/α-olefin copolymers and those made using the novel homogeneously branched substantially linear ethylene/α-olefin interpolymer had higher puncture resistance than the commercially available SM3 film.

Similarly, the data also show that films made using both the heterogeneously branched ethylene/α-olefin copolymers and those made using the novel homogeneously branched substantially linear ethylene/α-olefin interpolymer had higher dart impact strength than the commercially available SM3 film. Furthermore, filmε made uεing the homogeneously branched substantially linear ethylene/α-olefin interpolymer had higher dart impact strength than either the SM3 film or film made using heterogeneously branched ethylene/α-olefin copolymer .

Elmendorf tear also was higher for films made from both the heterogeneously branched ethylene/α-olefin copolymers and those made using the novel homogeneously branched substantially linear ethylene/α-olefin interpolymer, as compared with the commercially available SM3 film.

Table 3

Resin 1 * * 2* _* 3** 4 5 6 7 8**

Coefficient of friction Inside/inside

Static 0.20 0.25 0.18 1.53 0.24 0.18 0.20 0.14

Kinetic 0.18 0.23 0.16 1.35 0.20 0.16 0.18 0.1D

Coefficient of friction Outside/outside

Static 0.20 0.25 0.23 0.90 0.26 0.14 0.18 0.12

Kinetic 0.17 0.24 0.22 1.03 0.23 0.13 0.16 0.10

**Comparative Example Only The data in Table 3 shows that all of the films tested, except for that made using Resin 4, had a COF between 0.1 and 0.3.

Table 4

Hot Tack Strength, N/inch (N/cm)

Temperature Resin Resin Resin Resin Resin Resin Resin Resin °C (°F) 2** 3** 4 5 6 ^' 7 8**

55 (131) NA NA NA 0.16 NA NA NA NA (0.06)

65 (149) NA 0.10 NA 0.66 NA NA NA NA (0.04) (0.26)

70 (158) NA 0.10 0.10 2.83 0.10 NA NA NA (0.04) (0.04) (1.11) (0.04)

75 (167) NA 0.10 0.90 5.11 0.48 NA NA NA (0.04) (0.4) (2.01) (0.19)

80 (176) NA 0.30 1.30 5.04 1.21 0.10 NA NA (0.1) (0.51) (1.98) (0.48) (0.04)

85 (185) NA 0.49 2.10 3.14 2.46 0.20 NA NA (0.19) (0.83) (1.24) (0.97) (0.08)

90 (194) NA 1.46 2.60 3.80 4.29 0.70 0.10 NA (0.57) (1.02) (1.5) (1.69) (0.28) (0.04)

95 (203) 0 2.19 2.60 3.40 6.41 1.90 0.40 0 (0.86) (1.02) (1.34) (2.52) (0.75) (0.16)

100 (212) 0.40 2.78 3.10 3.21 6.95 4.30 0.90 0.30 (0.16) (1.09) (1.22) (1.26) (2.74) (1.69) (0.35) (0.12)

105 (221) 1.40 3.13 3.10 2.58 6.30 5.40 2.60 1.10 (0.55) (1.23) (1.22) (1.02) (2.48) (2.13) (1.02) (0.43)

110 (230) 2.90 3.06 3.00 2.39 5.80 5.70 4.20 2.10 (1.14) (1.20) (1.18) (0.94) (2.28) (2.24) (1.65) (0.83)

115 (239) 3.20 2.62 2.90 2.21 5.00 5.00 4.20 3.40 (1.26) (1.03) (1.14) (0.87) (1.97) (1.97) (1.65) (1.34)

120 (248) 3.30 2.41 3.00 1.64 4.20 4.20 4.00 3.60 (1.3) (0.95) (1.18) (0.65) (1.65) (1.65) (1.57) (1.42)

125 (257) 3.00 2.22 2.60 1.73 3.60 3.60 3.30 3.60 (1.18) (0.87) (1.02) (0.68) (1.42) (1.42) (1.3) (1.42)

130 (266) NM 2.10 NM 1.36 2.90 NM NM 3.50 (0.83) (0.54) (1.14) (1.38)

"Comparative Example Only NA = Not Applicable; NM = Not Measured

The data in Table 4 showε that filmε made using the novel homogeneously branched substantially linear ethylene/α-olefin interpolymer had higher hot tack strength than film made from heterogeneously branched ethylene/α-olefin copolymers and higher hot tack strength than commercially available SM3 film.

Figure 6 is a graphical illustration of film hot tack strength versus temperature for resin 7 and comparative resin 1.

Figure 7 graphically illustrates film hot tack strength versus temperature for resin 6 and comparative resin 2. Figure 8 is a graphical illustration of film hot tack strength versus temperature for resin 5 and comparative reεin 3.

Figure 9 iε a graphical illuεtration of film hot tack strength versus sealing time for resins 5-7 and comparative resins 1-3 and comparative film 8. Firgure 17 is a graphical illuεtration of maximum film hot tack strength versus resin density for resinε 5-7 and comparative reεinε 1-3.

Table 5

Heat Seal Strength, lbs/ii ^* ιch (g/cm)

Temperature Resin Resin Resin Resin Resin Resin Resin Resin °C (°F) 1 * * 2** 3** 4 5 6 7 8**

55 (131) NA NA NA 0 NA NA NA NA

60 (140) NA NA NA 1.20 NA NA NA NA (214)

65 (149) NA NA NA 2.35 NA NA NA NA (419)

70 (158) NA NA NA 1.87 NA NA NA NA (334)

75 (167) NA NA 0 1.68 0 NA NA NA (300)

80 (176) NA 0.09 0.06 2.51 0.54 NA NA NA (16) (11) (448) (96)

85 (185) NA 0.21 0.14 2.67 2.38 NA NA NA (38) (25) (477) (425)

90 (194) NA 0.10 1.30 2.86 3.90 0 NA NA (18) (232) (510) (697)

95 (203) NA 0.61 3.01 2.49 4.18 1.66 NA NA (109) (538) (445) (747) (296)

100 (212) NA 1.02 3.87 2.78 5.34 4.60 0 0 (182) (691) (497) (954) (822)

105 (221) 0.04 4.05 3.90 3.02 5.80 5.03 2.98 0.20 (7) (723) (697) (539) (1036) (898) (532) (36)

110 (230) 4.26 4.11 3.97 3.41 6.00 6.16 4.97 2.20 (761) (734) (709) (609) (1072) (1100) (888) (393)

115 (239) 4.95 4.34 4.27 3.61 5.50 6.06 5.86 5.10 (884) (775) (763) (645) (982) (1082) (1047) (911)

120 (248) 5.16 4.72 4.65 3.60 5.55 6.24 5.80 7.60 (922) (843) (830) (643) (991) (1114) (1036) (1357)

125 (257) 6.48 5.00 4.80 3.78 5.76 5.50 6.43 8.80 (1157) (893) (857) (675) (1029) (982) (1148) (1572)

130 (266) 6.61 4.20 4.19 3.84 6.10 5.50 5.90 7.50 (1181) (750) (748) (686) (1089) (982) (1054) (1340)

Comparative Example Only NA = Not Applicable

The data in Table 5 shows that filmε made using the novel homogeneously branched subεtantially linear ethylene/α-olefin interpolymer had higher heat εeal εtrength than film made from heterogeneously branched ethylene/α-olefin copolymers and lower heat seal initiation temperatures than both the commercially available SM3 film and film made using heterogeneously branched ethylene/α-olefin copolymerε.

Figure 10 is a graphical illustration of film heat seal strength versuε temperature for reεin 7 and comparative resin 1.

Figure 11 is a graphical illustration of film heat εeal εtrength versuε temperature for resin 6 and comparative resin 2.

Figure 12 is a graphical illustration of film heat εeal strength versus temperature for resin 5 and comparative reεin 3.

Figure 13 iε a graphical illustration of film heat seal strength versus sealing time for resins 5-7 and comparative resins 1-3 and comparative film 8.

Table 6 Hot Tack* Strength, N/inch (N/cm) v. Sealing Time, sec

Seal Resin 1** Resin 2** Resin 3** Resin 5 Resin 6 Resin 7 Resin 8**

Time, sec Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot Hot tack, tack, tack, tack, tack, tack, tack,

N/in N/in N/in N/in N/in N/in N/in

(N/cm) (N/cm) (N/cm) (N/cm) (N/cm) (N/cm) (N/cm)

0.1 0 2.10 2.30 5.82 2.50 0.32 0

(0.83) (0.91) (2.29) (0.98) (0.13)

0.2 0.27 2.72 2.98 6.01 4.10 1.44 0.30

(0.11) (1.07) (1.17) (2.37) (1.61) (0.57) (0.12)

0.3 0.47 2.91 3.05 6.13 5.06 1.80 0.75

(0.19) (1.15) (1.20) (2.41) (1.99) (0.71) (0.3)

0.5 1.40 3.13 3.10 6.30 5.40 2.60 1.50

(0.55) (1.23) (1.22) (2.48) (2.13) (1.02) (0.59)

0.7 1.31 3.10 3.11 6.40 5.76 2.87 1.65

(0.52) (1.22) (1.22) (2.52) (2.27) (1.13) (0.65)

1.0 1.40 3.25 3.24 6.16 5.59 3.24 1.80

(0.55) (1.28) (1.28) (2.43) (2.20) (1.28) (0.71)

*Seal bar temperatures at 105°C **Comparative Example Only

The data in Table 6 shows that f ilms made using the novel homogeneously branched substantially linear ethylene/α-olef in interpolymer had higher hot tack strength at low hot tack sealing times than f ilm made from heterogeneously branched ethylene/α-olef in copolymers and commercially available SM3 film .

Table 7

Heat Seal* Strength, lbs/inc h (g/cm) '. Sealing time, sec

Seal Resin 1** Resin 2** Resin 3** Resin 5 Resin 6 Resin 7 Resin 8**

Time Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat Heat

(sec) seal, seal, seal, seal, seal, seal, seal, lbs /in lbs/in lbs/in lbs/in lbs/in lbs /in lbs /in

(g/cm) (g/cm) (g/cm) (g/cm) (g/cm) (g/cm) (g/cm)

0.1 0 3.70 3.90 4.66 4.08 0.05 0

(661) (697) (832) (729) (9)

0.2 0.17 4.43 4.09 5.13 4.40 0.21 0.10

(30) (791) (730) (916) (786) (38) (18)

0.3 0.18 4.28 4.20 5.52 4.46 3.80 0.20

(32) (764) (750) (986) (797) (679) (36)

0.5 0.40 4.12 4.10 5.70 5.10 4.20 0.35

(71) (736) (732) (1018) (911) (750) (63)

0.7 0.31 4.27 4.18 5.60 5.20 4.49 0.40

(55) (763) (747) (1000) (929) (802) (71)

1.0 0.40 4.34 4.25 5.73 5.25 4.30 0.42

(71) (775) (759) (1023) (938) (768) (75)

*Sealbar temperatures at 105°C **Comparative Example Only

The data in Table 7 shows that films made using the novel homogeneously branched substantially linear ethylene/α-olefin interpolymer had higher heat seal strength at low heat sealing times than film made from heterogeneously branched ethylene/α-olefin copolymerε and commercially available SM3 film.

Table 8 Hayssen Heat Seal Strength of 2 L Water Filled Pouches, lbf/inch

*Comparative Example Only

The data in Table 8 shows that f i lms made using the novel homogeneously branched subεtantially linear ethylene/α-olef in interpolymer had broader sealing ranges and higher Haysεen heat εeal strengths than

film made from heterogeneously branched ethylene/α-olefin copolymers having similar densitieε.

Figure 14 is a graphical illustration of vertical form-fill- seal film heat seal strength versus temperature for resin 7 and comparative resin 1.

Figure 15 is a graphical illustration of vertical form-fill- seal film heat seal strength versus temperature for resin 6 and comparative resin 2.

Figure 16 is a graphical illustration of vertical form-fill- seal film heat seal strength versus temperature for resin 5 and comparative reεin 3.

Table 9 summarizes data for the five foot drop test

Table 9

Comparative Example Only

Although reεin 7 and comparative reεin 1 have εimilar denεity, pouches made from resin 7 had a much lower percent failure than pouches made from comparative resin 1.

Similarly, resin 6 and comparative resin 2 have similar density, but pouches made from resin 6 had a lower percent failure than poucheε made from comparative resin 2. Pouches made using resin 5 also had lower percent failure than do pouches made using comparative resin 3, even though the resins have similar density.