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: