Investigation of the ageing effects on phenol-urea-formaldehyde binder and alkanol amine-acid anhydride binder coated mineral fibres

Zafar, Ashar; Schjødt-Thomsen, Jan; Sodhi, Rana N.S.; Goacher, Robyn E.; Kubber, D. de

doi:10.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2012.09.007

Cited by 17 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…3 show dominating contributions by signals from sodium (m/z ¼ 23), potassium (m/z ¼ 39) and various contributions from hydrocarbons (m/z ¼ 41/43/55/57/ 67/69/79/81/95/97/109) in the coating in accordance with the results found previously. 17 The aromatic contributions of the PUF binder that were found by Zafar et al 17 at masses of m/z ¼ 77/91/128/152/165/178/ 189 in pure PUF binder samples and that originated from the phenol groups in the binder, were also present on the samples investigated here, although the intensity was very low in the range of 3% of the total surface signal (data not shown).…”

Section: Tof-simssupporting

confidence: 54%

“…3 show dominating contributions by signals from sodium ( m / z = 23), potassium ( m / z = 39) and various contributions from hydrocarbons ( m / z = 41/43/55/57/67/69/79/81/95/97/109) in the coating in accordance with the results found previously. 17 These fragments are related mostly to the oil and indicate that petroleum destillates (aka “white oil”) was used in the manufacturing of all samples.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Which fraction of stone wool fibre surface remains uncoated by binder? A detailed analysis by time-of-flight secondary ion mass spectrometry and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Tof-simssupporting

confidence: 54%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Which fraction of stone wool fibre surface remains uncoated by binder? A detailed analysis by time-of-flight secondary ion mass spectrometry and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…PUF binder was mixed to obtain 15% solid content binder using PUF prefab from the ROCKWOOL International A/S Doense factory (10 g, about 46% solid content) by adding concentrated ammonia solution (0.8 ml), ammonium sulphate (0.1 g) and ultradeionised water (20 ml, Milli-Q, MQ, specific resistivity of 18.2 MΩ•cm at 25 °C) in accordance with the recipe used at the factory. The composition of the PUF prefab was similar to that described in Zafar et al, 2013 40 .…”

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 80%

Impact of curing time on ageing and degradation of phenol-urea-formaldehyde binder

Okhrimenko

Thomsen

Ceccato

et al. 2018

Polymer Degradation and Stability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Supplementary Figure S5 shows maps obtained via SIMS for L (Wax) for peaks at 23 u (Na + , counterion in surfactant headgroup), 165 u (Na 3 SO + 4 , surfactant), 181 u (K 3 SO + 2 , potassium sulfate fragment), and 197 u (K 3 SO + 3 , potassium sulfate fragment), which are attributed to surfactant (SDS) and initiator (KPS) coverage (Zafar et al, 2013), originating from the Latex component. There is evidence to suggest that the surfactant/initiator coverage is patchy in this scanned region, given the heterogeneous nature of the maps.…”

Section: Chemical Composition Of Coating Surfaces Via Sims Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Environmental Effects on the Coefficient of Friction and Tack Adhesion of Formulated Waterborne Coatings

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Waterborne coatings emit a low amount of harmful volatile organic compounds (VOCs) into the atmosphere compared to solvent-cast coatings. A typical waterborne formulation for agricultural applications consists of colloidal thermoplastic particles (latex) as the binder, a thickener to raise the viscosity, inorganic filler particles with a water-soluble dispersant, and a colloidal wax to modify surface properties. The formulations typically contain hygroscopic species that are potentially subject to softening by environmental moisture. The hardness, tack adhesion, and coefficient of friction of formulated coatings determines their suitability in applications. However, the relationship of these properties to the components in a coating formulation has not been adequately explored. Furthermore, the relationship between hygroscopic components and properties is an added complication. Here, we have characterized the hardness and tack adhesion of model formulated coatings using a single micro-indentation cycle with a conical indenter under controlled temperatures (above and below the glass transition temperature of a latex binder) and relative humidities. In parallel, we measured the coefficient of kinetic friction, μk, for the same coatings using a bespoke testing rig under controlled environmental conditions. Across a range of temperatures, RH and compositions, we find an inverse correlation between the coating hardness and μk. Any correlation of μk with the roughness of the coatings, which varies with the composition, is less clear. Formulations that contain wax additives have a higher μk at a low RH of 10%, in comparison to formulations without wax. For the wax formulations, μk decreases when the RH is raised, whereas in non-wax formulations, μk increases with increasing RH. Wax-containing coatings are hydrophilic (with a lower water contact angle), however the wax has a lower water permeability. A lubricating layer of water can explain the lower observed μk in these formulations. The addition of wax is also found to planarize the coating surface, which leads to higher tack adhesion in dry coatings in comparison to coatings without wax. Greater adhesive contact in these coatings can explain their higher friction. Our systematic research will aid the design of seed coating formulations to achieve their optimum properties under a wide range of environmental conditions.

show abstract

Investigation of the ageing effects on phenol-urea-formaldehyde binder and alkanol amine-acid anhydride binder coated mineral fibres

Cited by 17 publications

References 12 publications

Which fraction of stone wool fibre surface remains uncoated by binder? A detailed analysis by time-of-flight secondary ion mass spectrometry and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy

Which fraction of stone wool fibre surface remains uncoated by binder? A detailed analysis by time-of-flight secondary ion mass spectrometry and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy

Impact of curing time on ageing and degradation of phenol-urea-formaldehyde binder

Environmental Effects on the Coefficient of Friction and Tack Adhesion of Formulated Waterborne Coatings

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About