Adhesion
Adhesion is closely related to wetting. The extent of adhesion is defined by measuring the
force per unit area that is needed to remove a layer of film from the substrate. After application
of paint material and wetting of the substrate, film forming takes place through evaporation
of solvents or dispersing agents and, in most cases, by crosslinking reactions. Both of these
processes can change the volume and density of the paint material. The impression is that wet-
ting is the generation of physical bonds between paint material and a substrate. For optimum
adhesion, it is important that these physical interactions be rendered permanent during film
forming (drying by evaporation, crosslinking, e.g. in a stoving process), even if the density
changes. It is also conceivable that the physical interactions of wetting are replaced by other
types of physical bonding.
A number of debates seek to define the specific nature of the physical interactions needed
for adhesion. Very appealing is the explanation that polar groups from the film matrix, e.g.
carbonyl groups, interact physically with electrophilic compounds of the substrate surface, e.g.
metal cations. Such physical interactions could approximate those of complex chemical bonds.
In keeping with this, it should then be possible for other polar groups, such as hydroxyl, ether,
carboxyl, amide, and urethane groups to form such physical bonds with suitable partner groups
on the substrate. The totality of all those physical bonds would be what we term adhesion.
Although this seems to be a plausible explanation, it fails to adequately describe all adhesion
effects. Special materials are needed for providing good adhesion to very non-polar surfaces.
A prime example here is polypropylene plastic parts. With one exception, no paint materials
(polymers) will adhere very well to unmodified and untreated polypropylene. The exception is
highly chlorinated polyolefines, which adhere excellently to unmodified polypropylene. This
cannot be explained away in terms of an interaction between non-polar molecules as there are
polymers which are even less polar than chlorinated polyolefines. It has been proposed that
the main reason for adhesion is that the molecular moieties are able to get close to each other.
It may be that van der Waals forces of attraction play the most important role in adhesion, and
that all the effects of polar groups and others are only part of the overall phenomenon. In this
regard, the influence of crosslinking on adhesion was studied. If a layer consists of a film matrix
with a high crosslinking density, adhesion of the following layer is poor. The model for describ-
ing this is that, during application, the paint material has to diffuse partly into the previous
layer in order to effect adhesion. Some swelling of the first layer may take place, but the layer of
high crosslinking density is unable to swell and is incapable of molecular interactions. In such
cases, it is possible to improve adhesion by incorporating very strong solvents into the second
paint material that are capable of swelling the first layer. It has also been established that excel-
lent adhesion to the first layer is obtained if the second coating layer is optimally crosslinked.
A model will now be proposed to explain this effect. As the source of adhesion is the physical
interaction between specific molecular groups on the second layer with the surface of the sub-
strate, the type of network behind those groups is important. If the crosslinking is relatively
dense, but the molecular network is not large, the number of adhesion groups per molecular
area is low. Such networks do not adhere very well and, in addition, they are relatively brittle.
The reason that the crosslinking density is high in the case of the smaller molecular flakes
described in Chapter 2.3.2. However, where molecular networks extend over large areas, those
Primer surfacers
82
parts of the network are connected by more adhesive groups, and so adhesion is optimal. The
larger network also benefits other properties (elasticity, resistance to solvents and chemicals).
A simplified version of the model presented here is shown in Figure 3.5.3.
Some authors have noted that the best intercoat adhesion is observed when there are covalent
bonds between the two layers. It is correct to presume that crosslinked molecular networks
contain residual functional groups and some uncrosslinked molecules whose molar masses are
lower than average. However, it is rather improbable that such residual functional groups or low-
molecular fractions will react chemically with partner groups in the other coating layer. There
are kinetics reasons preventing this. Even if some interfacial chemical bonds were to be formed,
they would not make any major contribution to intercoat adhesion as the forming of such bonds
is relatively improbable.
In this connection, it must be said that films swelled by solvents, water or chemicals generally
exhibit significantly less adhesion. It is believed that swollen films are much more sensitive to
mechanical impact than non-swollen films and that their molecular network is much easier to
destroy. This may also be the reason for adhesion loss (see the model described above). Adhesion
is tested by applying mechanical forces to the coating layer that may lead to deformation and
destruction. If swelling of the film matrix is an additional risk, the tests are expanded to include
the wet-adhesion test.
The intercoat adhesion of topcoat films on primer surfacers can be improved by selecting special
pigments. Very finely dispersed pigments or those with a platelet-particle structure lead to bet-
ter adhesion. These pigment types influence rheology, levelling and generate special surface
structures that can improve the adhesion of the next layer to be applied. It is also possible that
parts of such pigment particles project out of the film surface to act as an anchor for the next
layer. There are restrictions on the use of such pigments when they are added to the composi-
tion, because their effect and quantity must not impair levelling, filling power, topcoat holdout,
or gloss.
Precise physical tests for measuring film adhesion are difficult and expensive. For example, the
pull-off test, in which a two-layer combination in the form of a free piece of film is placed between
two punches which are pulled until the adhesion fails, is problematic. First, it is difficult to pre-
pare representative free film pieces. Second, the adhesive on the punches may influence the film
properties and it may exhibit poorer adhesion than the films. Therefore, more practicable methods
of measuring adhesion are chosen. The most popular is the cross-cut test in which several parallel
cuts are made in the paint at a distance of 1 or 2 mm apart, the distance depending on the layer
thickness, and then at right angles across them. The cuts form a series of small squares. The
cut part is carefully covered with adhesive tape, which is then pulled off rapidly. The measure of
adhesion is the amount of damage done to the squares in the cross-cut. The number of removed
film squares can be expressed as a percentage. The structure of the cut edges also provides
Figure 3.5.3: Model of adhesion as a reason of crosslinking
Automotive OEM coatings
83
information about the quality of adhesion. The test is fairly subjective, but nonetheless highly
compelling. It must be remembered that the result of the cross-cut is influenced not only by the
adhesion but also by flexibility of the film.
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |