Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
C. Optimum G
/
values for
permanent PSA labels were determined to be around 20 kPa at room
temperature.
Pressure-sensitive adhesives were dened using viscoelastic application
windows relating the storage modulus G at room temperature to the loss tan
o peak of the adhesive. In water-based adhesives the viscoelastic relationship
is not as simple, that is, it was determined that for the most commonly used
polymers in water-based dispersions these relationships may not apply. In
hot-melt and solvent-based PSAs a close and predictable relationship exists
between the loss tan o peak, dened as the dynamic T
g
, and the T
g
as
measured by dierential scanning calorimetry (DSC). For water-based
adhesives the relationship varies depending upon the polymer type used.
The loss tan o peak temperature of an acrylic can dier from the T
g
(DSC)
by as much as 30
C [25].
Hamed and Hsieh [26] showed that for a given total bonded area, test
specimens containing noncontact regions of suciently small scale can
exhibit a higher peeling force than those in which the noncontact ones are
large. For an elastomer there is a critical aw size below which adhesive
strength will remain unchanged. Rubbery materials with higher elasticity
have a smaller critical aw size. Thus the modulus inuences the tack.
Rubbery materials with a more elastic response exhibit tack properties that
are more sensitive to interfacial aws, compared to those that respond more
by viscous ow. When failure occurs by viscous ow, the tack is relatively
insensitive to interfacial aws, but when the strain rate is suciently high, so
that the elastomer responds elastically, stresses may be concentrated at the
edges of interfacial aws causing a reduction of the strength.
Tack Dependence on Experimental Parameters. Viscosity and elastic
moduli of PSAs are not intrinsic material characteristics (i.e., they depend
on the experimental parameters used, such as the temperature and time, and
the strain rate). Thus, a similar dependence of the tack on time, temperature,
and the strain rate has to be taken into account. This dependence is
illustrated by the quite dierent values of the tack obtained using dierent
experimental techniques (rolling ball, quick stick, or loop tack) which are
characterized by dierent time and strain rates, and by the sensitivity of the
adhesive properties to environmental conditions (see Chap. 10). Dierent
Rheology of Pressure-Sensitive Adhesives 13
tack methods are adequate for dierent PSPs [27]. With the probe tack test
the load is regulated, as in the lamination of protective lms. Polyken tack is
less strongly aected by the resin softening point (it is applied under load!)
during tackifying. Loop tack simulates the actual application conditions of
labels, which are blown onto a surface by using air pressure. Rolling ball
tack is more complex, it is friction related.
Tack Dependence on Temperature. Most general-purpose adhesives
are formulated to have tack at room temperature. If the adherent tempera-
ture is lower than room temperature, a higher degree of adhesive cold ow is
required to provide proper wet-out. In reality it is very dicult to apply PSA
labels at low temperature conditions. Deep freeze label (or tape) adhesives
must be specially formulated, with a low viscosity at low temperatures [28].
This behavior is due to the limited ow of the adhesive at lower tem-
peratures, a phenomenon governed by the strong temperature dependence
of the viscosity and of the elastic modulus. Deep freeze labels should
display the same viscoelastic properties at 40
C as at 20
C [29]. It is
recommended that such adhesives have a lower storage modulus value than
common labels (10
4
Pa). As shown by Hamed and Hsieh [26] tack is a
function of test temperature and strain rate, and the experimental data may
be shifted from a master curve. However, the tack behavior as a function of
the temperature and strain rate is more complex than that of the cohesion.
Tack Dependence on Strain Rate. It was shown earlier that tack
depends on the bonding and debonding process, on debonding (separation)
work, and thus tack also depends on the strain rate. This phenomenon may
be observed by testing the tack using methods measuring the debonding
resistance (force), like loop tack or Polyken tack. Tack varies as the
separation speed of the Polyken test is changed [4]. The dependence of the
tack value on the increasing speed was conrmed by Hamed and Hsieh [26]
too. They observed a nonlinear, discontinuous increase of the tack with the
measurement speed. Tack values rise to a rst maximum and then, after a
period of slight decrease, rise continuously with the measurement speed.
Data obtained from Polyken tack measurements show a correlation between
tack and loss tan o peak values [4]. Tack dependence on the debonding rate
was also conrmed by McElrath [21]. He demonstrated that loss modulus
values depend on the applied frequency, and dierent tack test methods
(loop, quick stick, and probe tack) exhibit maxima at dierent frequencies.
Influence of Viscoelastic Properties on the Peel of PSAs
Peel and peel strength are measured by separating an adhesive applied to a
substrate at some angle with respect to the substrate, usually at an angle
14 Chapter 2
of 90
or 180
2,
p
) (
L,h
p
) (
C
o
W
p
) (2.13)
where W/C
o
o
o
2
is a characteristic length of the local bonding process and
[C
1
/C
o
]
1/m
is the characteristic relaxation time of the material. Eq. (2.12)
implies that the healing is very sensitive to the cohesive stress. Because of
this materials that have identical creep behavior and work of adhesion can
have very dierent healing times. The healing also depends on the height of
the asperities through the parameter o. This parameter has the following
interpretation: if the viscoelastic polymer is replaced with an elastomer with
modulus 1/C
o
then the two surfaces will jump in contact with each other
with no externally applied load and the contact area will continue to
increase until the surfaces are in full contact if o was larger than some
critical value. This critical value is typically of order 1. The formulation of
this work implicitly assumed that o is below the critical value. For typical
values of h, L, and W, the elastic modulus which would cause the surfaces to
16 Chapter 2
jump in contact and a self-heal is of order 0.1 MPa. Therefore this work is
more relevant for viscoelastic adhesives or uncrosslinked rubbers of higher
modulus.
The time dependence of the bonding step is illustrated by the inuence
of the dwell time on the peel values. As discussed in Chap. 10, application
pressure and temperature inuence the peel and its build-up too. Therefore,
as proposed in [37] for special PSPs static and dynamic dwell time should
be tested.
Like the pressure used during application, the contact time (i.e., the
interval between bonding and debonding) takes into account the relatively
low mobility (ow rate) of PSAs. A higher pressure or a longer dwell time
should help adhesive ow and increase the peel resistance. It is known from
PSA characterization, that for the FTM-4 high speed release test the
samples are placed between two metal plates under a pressure of 6.87 kPa to
ensure good contact. In a similar manner for PSPs with very low tack and
instantaneous peel (e.g., protective lms) bonding depends on the applied
pressure and temperature also. A special class of such products (warm
laminating lms) is used at increased laminating temperature and pressure
[38]. Foam-like transfer tapes are also used under pressure to increase initial
bond strength [39]. As discussed in [40] time-dependent peel control is one of
the main requirements for PSA. Generally, until equilibrium is reached, the
peel resistance increases with increasing contact pressure and time [26,41]
(Table 2.1; Fig. 2.2).
As can be seen from Fig. 2.2, the peel force increases with the dwell
time of the adhesive, that is, the viscous and elastic deformation of the
adhesive need a period of time (depending on the viscosity and experimental
conditions). As will be discussed later, the time dependence of the bonding
imposes the use of normalized dwell times for peel measurement purposes.
Generally the peel/dwell time dependence is not linear [42], but partially
crosslinked silicone rubber exhibits peel values which increase linearly with
Table 2.1 Peel Adhesion as a Function of Increasing Dwell Times
Peel Adhesion (N/25 mm)
Dwell Time (week) Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3
0 0.32 0.12 0.09
1 0.44 0.24 0.21
2 0.47 0.30 0.30
3 0.55 0.35 0.35
4 0.60 0.40 0.47
Rheology of Pressure-Sensitive Adhesives 17
the dwell time [43]. The adhesion build-up over time for the main types
of PSPs (e.g., permanent, repositionable, and removable adhesives) was
discussed in detail in [44]. It has been demonstrated that peel build-up
depends on the adherend surface quality [37]. The build-up of the peel force
in time has a special importance in the design of removable adhesives.
The dependence of the separation energy on the contact time was also
demonstrated by Zosel [3]. The memory eect in the adhesion of
rubber to rigid substrates is well known [45]. After readhering the adhesive,
the peel force is lower. After initial peeling of the adhesive, it regains its
original peeling resistance only after a period of time (or much faster with
the help of some solvent). The memory as a function of the dwell time
is associated with some rearrangements of the molecular structure of
the rubber at the interface. In a special case (e.g., diaper closure tapes) the
removable adhesive allows reliable closure and refastening. In this case the
time dependence of the ow/deformation of the adhesive and its inuence
on the peel may be observed during the debonding process. Such tapes have
to exhibit a maximum peel force at a peel rate between 10 and 400 cm/min
Figure 2.2 Dependence of the peel values on the dwell time. Peel from
polyethylene as a function of the coating weight for dierent dwell time values.
Dwell time of 1) 20 min; 2) 0 min.
18 Chapter 2
and a log peel rate between 1.0 and 2.6 cm/min [46]. Another inuence of the
dwell time may be observed, when examining the inuence of the storage
and aging on the peel adhesion value. In general there is a build-up of the
peel resistance with time.
It should be emphasized that stress transfer during debonding occurs
by means of the solid components of the laminate. Therefore strain rate
depends upon the carrier and substrate. The denaturation of the peel values
by carrier deformation (i.e., strain rate) is discussed in detail in [47].
Influence of the Peeling Rate. At low peel rates the viscous ow, and
the deformation of the adhesive layer are dominant for the peel resistance.
Therefore the peel resistance increases with increasing peeling rate. At high
peeling rates the elastic character of the adhesive dominates, thus in this
region the peel resistance no longer depends on the peeling rate. Of practical
importance is the very pronounced dependence of the peel force on the
peeling rate (Fig. 2.3); the peel force increases with the peel rate [48]. This
behavior requires the use of normalized peeling rates for the measurement of
the peel adhesion force.
Figure 2.3 Dependence of the peel force on the peeling rate. 1 through 8 are
dierent tackied water-based acrylic formulations; the peel adhesion from glass was
measured.
Rheology of Pressure-Sensitive Adhesives 19
The dependence of the peel on the peeling rate may also be observed
for very low peel forces (peeling from release liner) [49]. McElrath [21]
showed that (as theoretically supposed) the loss modulus depends on the
frequency, as does peel adhesion, and displays a maximum for a given
frequency value. Removable adhesives having a plateau region in the
storage modulus/frequency plot, exhibit a peel force independent of the peel
rate [6]. Kendall et al. [25] studied the dependence of the peel on the T
g
; they
also stated that the peel maxima change with the testing rate. Higher test
rates or lower ambient temperatures produce maxima at lower resin levels,
lower resin softening points, or lower elastomer T
g
. The peel of dierent
water-based PSAs displays large dierences after storage at 100
C. As
shown in [25] adhesive break (in the adhesive layer) appears above a certain
peeling rate (2.5 mm/min), or below a certain temperature (25
C) only.
It may be possible to remove a label from a paper substrate if it is
peeled o very slowly, but the same label will certainly tear if it is peeled
o quickly. Since the peel force is related to the storage modulus of the
adhesive, high-tack removable adhesives should possess a low storage
modulus which does not vary much with frequency (rate of peel). At any
given temperature peel adhesion is observed to increase as the peel rate is
increased [2]. At low strain rates the peel forces are much lower. Under these
conditions, the viscous components of the polymer dissipate signicant
amounts of energy and, as a result, resistance to peel forces is low. At higher
strain rates the molecules have less time to disentangle and to slide past
one another. This behavior results in more stored energy, and peel forces
intensify accordingly. One can conclude that at least theoretically, each
adhesive may be considered as a low peel adhesion adhesive (see Chap. 6)
provided a very low peel rate is applied.
Temperature Dependence of the Peel. As is known, a maximum peel
strength implies a certain modulus value and viscosity. Both modulus and
viscosity depend on the temperature. With the increase of the temperature
the viscosity of PSAs decreases. Therefore the increase of the temperature
improves the tack and instantaneous peel, and exerts a negative inuence on
the cohesion. Such an inuence is illustrated in the end-use of several PSPs.
It was shown for ethylene acrylic acid copolymers that peel adhesion
depends on the temperature [30]. The peel of an untackied PSA at 0
C is
about 210% lower than the peel value at 23
peel
adhesion). Repositionable PSPs are a special class of removable pressure-
sensitive products (labels and tapes) that stick to various surfaces but
remove cleanly and can be reapplied. The nal adhesion builds up over a few
hours. Adhesives included in the nonpermanent category are used in the
manufacture of removable tapes and labels, protective laminates, and other
less durable products [64].
For nonpermanent, so-called removable adhesives, the ow properties
and cohesion of the adhesive as well as the anchorage of the adhesive to the
face stock are critical. In an ideal case, if the bond to the substrate is
nonpermanent, then a clean release from that substrate is encountered and
the adhesive remains on the face material. Another requirement for good
removable adhesives is the low peel level with a permanent character (i.e., no
build-up of the peel in time is acceptable). A clean release from the substrate
and no build-up of the peel with time are the minimal requirements for
removable PSAs. On the basis of the adhesive characteristics it is possible to
formulate the rheological criteria necessary for removable and permanent
adhesives.
Criteria for Removability. For certain applications PSPs are required
that display a low peel force and give a clean, deposit-free separation from
the substrate. The criteria for removability were discussed in detail in [44].
Generally a special balance between tack, peel adhesion, cohesion, and
anchorage is required in order to ensure removability. Removability requires
a breakable bond at the adhesive/substrate interface. Bond breaking is an
energetic phenomenon. For removability the whole debonding energy should
Rheology of Pressure-Sensitive Adhesives 27
be absorbed by the adhesive itself in such a manner that no failure occurs in
the adhesive mass. In this case the energy is used only for the viscous ow and
elastic motion of the macromolecules. The major danger is that if the viscous
ow is too pronounced, bonds will fail in the adhesive mass. (It should be
mentioned that for special removable protective lms the regulation
absorbtion of the debonding energy is achieved using a deformable carrier
material [65].) Some low tack, crosslinkable dispersions are good removable
PSAs. Their good elasticity yields low cold ow and low build-up of the peel
during storage [66]. On the other hand, a certain degree of cold ow is needed
in order to obtain removability. Adding 220% plasticizer during the
polymerization of acrylics leads to a removable adhesive but the plasticizer
may migrate out after storage [67]. Furthermore cohesive strength is
necessary to avoid stringing. It must be stated that the adhesion depends
on both the rheological features and chemical anity. It was shown [68] for
certain PSAs that the apparent separation energy was approximately the
same when pulled away from either a glass or a Teon surface. The adhesion
of these adhesives must be attributed largely to their rheological features
rather than to selective wettability.
How to Achieve Removability? A special adhesion/cohesion and/or
plasticity/elasticity balance is required in order to achieve removability.
Flow properties allow rearrangement, relaxation, and transformation of the
debonding energy into viscous ow, therefore softening of the adhesive is
a prerequisite for removability. It is well known from the eld of caseine-
based adhesives [69] that polyethylene glycols added to caseine and dextrine
glues control the humidity absorption, and thus the tear of gummed papers
at low environmental humidity, and avoid blocking at high humidity,
thereby acting as plasticizers (at a loading rate of 12%).
Flow properties are correlated to creep which, in turn, is a function of
molecular weight and plasticizer loading. Higher molecular weights and low
plasticizer levels reduce the tendency to creep. For removable PSAs the
molecular weight should be limited. Permanent adhesives need no uidity
during debonding, as they must display debonding resistance when subject
to high stress rates and large forces. They need to display a modulus and
viscosity increase as a function of the stress rate. On the other hand,
removable adhesives need easy debonding and viscous ow. The applied
stress must be able to cause movement within the bulk of the material.
Theoretically the applied stress for debonding can be minimized by using
stress-resistant polymers, llers, and primers; stress-resistant polymers are
those which develop a controlled crosslink density or are soft internally.
Primers are somewhat exible and generally promote good anchorage to the
face stock. Thus, they can absorb expansion or impact stresses without
28 Chapter 2
adhesive failure. Generally, as discussed in [44], removability can be achieved
by regulating the chemical composition of the adhesive, and the structure and
geometry of the adhesive, and the carrier properties and by means of the
manufacturing technology. The main methods used to change the chemical
composition (and macromolecular characteristics) of the adhesive compo-
nents, e.g., tackifying, softening, and hardening (crosslinking, lling, etc.)
inuence the removability too. Formulation windows with boxes shifted to
the left and up (i.e., for lower frequencies) are harder [70].
Influence of the Viscosity/Modulus on Removability. As shown
earlier, hardening of the adhesive increases its modulus (i.e., decreases its
ability to creep and its ability to wet the surface), and thus decreases the tack
(i.e., peel adhesion after very short dwell times) as well as the peel resistance.
It can therefore be assumed that hard adhesives display low peel adhesion
(i.e., are removable). According to [6] there are two basic types of removable
adhesives, namely PSAs which wet the surface poorly and PSAs which
adhere easily but are easily removed. The rst type of PSAs is highly elastic
and has low tack. Its removability depends on the adhesive not establishing
a good contact with the surface. Sometimes the poor contact is built-in
mechanically. These PSAs might have inclusions that prevent the adhesive
from achieving full contact with the surface, as the adhesive contains
physical particles that do not deform completely and therefore limit the
contact area between adhesive and substrate. These PSAs possess a high
modulus. Thus, hardening of the polymer (modulus increase) is a possibility
to obtain removable adhesives.
As discussed in [71] the build-up of ordered multiphase structures
can modify the chain mobility. Such structures include llers, crosslinks,
crystallites, and molecular associations. Fillers modify the T
g
also. Really
such hardening of the adhesive using a composite structure works like other
methods for the control of the contact surface (e.g., pattern-like contact
points, pattern-like nonadhesive points, decrease of the coating weight etc.).
It should be mentioned that in lled hard adhesive formulations the
absorbtion of the debonding energy is improved too [72]. As illustrated in
[73] the degree of lling (e.g., lling, lling and foaming) strongly inuences
the adhesive characteristics and adhesion build-up. The rheology of such
reinforced systems and its inuence on the adhesive and end-use properties
were discussed in detail in [74]. The most important llers used in PSAs and
their functions are listed in [40]. According to [75] current removable
adhesive formulations include high molecular weight polymers that reduce
ow on the surface and prevent adhesion build-up.
The second type of removable PSAs displays high tack and is
characterized by a low modulus. In order to soften the adhesive such
Rheology of Pressure-Sensitive Adhesives 29
formulations use plasticizers or other low molecular weight viscous com-
ponents (paranic oil, polyisobutylene etc.). The presence of 8% plasticizer
may improve the elongation by 3000% [66]. The softening eect is
illustrated by the lowering of the minimum lm-forming temperature
(MFT) (e.g., 6% plasticizer decreases the MFT from 23
C to 0
C), or the
decrease of the tensile yield strength (e.g., 6% plasticizer decreases the
tensile yield strength from 13.0 to 1.0 N/mm
2
). The elongation of PVAc
PSAs (normally 610% at break) was signicantly increased by adding
plasticizers to up to 1001000% [76]. Dierences in plasticity may be due to
the molecular weight of the plasticizer or dierent interactions between
chain segments and plasticizers. Long-chain plasticizers exert a strong
plasticizing eect. Generally plasticizers decrease the modulus value and
inuence the frequency dependence of the loss tan o [4]. For nonplasticized
adhesives loss tan o is low at low frequencies. For plasticized adhesives loss
tan o shows a maximum at lower frequencies, and peel and quick stick also
exhibit maxima at lower frequencies.
Plasticizers may be incorporated in peelable PSAs to soften the
adhesive and thus improve peelability. However, some plasticizers can exert
a tackifying eect on adhesive polymers and this may limit the amount used.
Typical plasticizers include phthalate esters and polyalkylene ether
derivatives or phenols, the principal requirement being compatibility with
the main adhesive polymer and the tackier so as to avoid or minimize
migration of the plasticizer. It is possible to add quite large quantities of
plasticizer, even up to 50% by weight on the solid adhesive; however,
usually 1020% by weight are added [6]. Other plasticizers which can be
employed, include the well-known extruder oils (aromatic, paranic, or
naphthenic) as well as a wide variety of liquid polymers. Satas [6] showed
that the addition of a plasticizing oil which is compatible with the mid-block
of a styrene-isoprene-styrene (SIS) block copolymer results in an adhesive
with lower peel force. Such plasticizers are used for HMPSAs.
In some cases softening and hardening of the adhesive are used
together. Mechano-chemical destruction of the macromolecules of natural
rubber (mastication) followed by postcrosslinking leads to PSAs used for
removable protective lms. Such crosslinked natural rubber formulations
are softer than certain common noncrosslinked acrylic recipes [77]. Internal
crosslinking by special comonomers and the simultaneous use of plasticizers
have also been suggested [78].
Influence of Viscoelasticity on Applied Labels
After some time labels show a higher peel resistance than freshly applied
ones (i.e., the peel resistance increases with the dwell time). This build-up of
30 Chapter 2
the peel resistance is due to the ow and contact build-up of the adhesive.
Therefore, one should pay attention when evaluating the peel force, that is,
peel should always be measured after a well-dened (normalized) dwell time.
1.5 Factors Influencing Viscoelastic Properties of PSAs
The material characteristics, chemical composition/structure, and environ-
mental and experimental conditions inuence the viscoelastic properties
of PSAs. The inuence of the material characteristics on the viscoelastic
properties of the PSAs will be discussed rst. Numerous empirical
correlations between the molecular structure, molecular weight, molecular
weight distribution (MWD), branching, and rheology are generally valid for
chemically quite dierent polymers [79].
Influence of Material Characteristics on Viscoelastic
Properties of PSAs
The molecular character of the base polymer, its chemical composition, and
structure inuence its viscoelastic properties. The inuence of the molecular
weight on the viscoelastic properties of the PSAs will be examined rst.
Viscosity and the elastic modulus are the most important parameters
characterizing the viscoelastic behavior of PSAs. Both parameters depend
on the molecular weight of the base polymer.
Dependence of the Viscosity of PSAs on the Molecular Weight. The
viscosity of macromolecular compounds is a function of the molecular
weight. Their zero viscosity j
0
depends on the weight average molecular
weight according to a correlation of the form [80,81]:
j
0
= f (M
W
)
o
(2.24)
where o =3.4.
Zosel [16] demonstrated the strong inuence of the molecular weight
of acrylic PSAs on their viscosity and on their tack. The increase of the
molecular weight in the range of 10
3
10
7
produces an increase of the
viscosity from 10
2
to 10
10
Pas. Zosel also showed the existence of a
maximum in the tack/molecular weight graph for polyisobutylene. The
pronounced increase of the viscosity with the molecular weight limits the
usable molecular weight range for hot-melt PSAs, limiting (unfortunately)
their cohesion as well. (According to [82] for such adhesives 80 Pas is the
preferred maximum viscosity value for high speed coating.) It is well known
to skilled formulators that block copolymers have lower viscosities than
natural rubbers. (Their viscosity depends on sequence distribution and
Rheology of Pressure-Sensitive Adhesives 31
branching too). The solution viscosity of the high polymers also increases
with their molecular weight. Thus a viscosity-imposed balance between
processing and end-use properties, that is, a solid content/molecular weight
balance for solvent-based PSAs is always a limiting factor, keeping in mind
that the solid content of common solvent-based PSAs does not exceed
3040%. On the other hand the additives in an adhesive formulation, their
nature, and their concentration also inuence the viscosity of the blend.
Practical examples are given by plasticizers and tackiers. Micromolecular
tackiers (plasticizers) may be considered as diluting agents. Thus the
viscosity of the polymer solution obeys an exponential law, depending on
the polymer concentration C, namely
j =
Z
(C)
[
(2.25)
At rst rubber resin formulations were used for PSAs. To achieve
viscoelastic behavior, the elastic component (rubber) had to be mixed
(formulated) with a viscous component. Either macromolecular or
micromolecular compounds can be used as viscous components. The best
known are resins and plasticizers; both are suggested as tackiers.
Generally, low molecular weight resins and relatively high molecular
weight solvents are used as tackiers. Common HMPSA formulations
incorporate a high level of plasticizer, usually naphthenic oil or liquid resin.
The level of the tackier resin inuences the resulting viscosity. As an
example, Zosel [16] demonstrated that the zero viscosity of tackied PSAs
decreases up to 80% resin loading level, resulting in better ow properties.
The diluting eect of the tackier resin depends on its own viscosity too.
Generally, soft (liquid) resins impart aggressive grab and quick stick, while
hard resins help retain good cohesive strength and creep resistance. Thus
resins with a softening point below about 50
o
]
T
T
o
,[o
2
o
]
T
o
T (2.35)
36 Chapter 2
From Eq. (2.33) it follows that the temperature dependence is
connected mainly to the translational friction coecient per monomeric
unit
o
although the mean square end-to-end distance per monomeric unit a
2
may vary signicantly with temperature for most polymers. The shift factor
is related to the dynamic viscosity j
/
according to:
o
T
= (j
/
T
o
,
o
),(j
/
o
T,) (2.36)
where , is the density of the polymer. Intermolecular polymeric motion
inuences the polymer ow, and this motion is a function of time and
temperature. From the mechanics of uids or solids, it is known that
mechanical properties decrease as temperature increases (i.e., the molecular
motion is enhanced). In a similar manner there is an opportunity for
molecular motion if the rate of the applied force is lowered. Thus high
temperature and low forces act similarly on the molecular motion and on
phenomena related to it (e.g., viscosity).
Dependence of the Viscosity on the Shear Rate. Pressure-sensitive
adhesives are viscoelastic materials, that is, their mechanical properties are
temperature and time dependent. The material characterization requires the
measurement of a material function such as viscosity or modulus as a
function of temperature and time. As can be seen from Fig. 2.4, the viscosity
is a function of the shear rate.
At low shear rates, there is a short interval where the viscosity does not
depend on the shear rate (this is the so-called zero-viscosity). At higher shear
rates, there is a linear or nonlinear decrease of the viscosity as a function
of the shear rate (Newtonian or non-Newtonian systems). The decrease of
the viscosity with the increase of the shear rate is given by the elastic
component of the adhesive [96]. The existence of a shear rate-dependent
viscosity domain implies that static methods for testing the cohesive strength
of PSAs cannot yield real information about their behavior at high stress
rates (peel, cutting). This statement can be conrmed through the denition
of the adhesion failure energy (separation energy W), upon debonding
through peel or loop tack [97]:
W =
Z
F v dt (2.37)
where v is the debonding (separation) rate and F the applied force. The
exponent value for a Newtonian liquid that has a shear rate-independent
viscosity is n =1 [see Eq. (2.4)]. Changes in the polymer structure may be
associated with changes in the viscosity-shear rate dependence. Detailed
Rheology of Pressure-Sensitive Adhesives 37
studies of elastomers showed mastication increased n from 0.25 to 0.5 [98].
Mastication in a mixer yields less change of the polymer elasticity than
mastication on a roll mill. Consequently rubber-based PSA formulations
manufactured without a priori calendering or roll mixing exhibit a higher
viscosity and a very broad range of viscosity values (see Fig. 2.5) as a
function of the solid content.
The viscosity of PSAs inuences the contact build-up of the liquid
adhesive. For easy bonding low viscosity values are required. In order to
obtain a high debonding resistance (high peel and shear) high viscosity
values are needed. Thus one can wonder what low and high viscosity values
mean? What should be chosen, the low or the high viscosity version of the
adhesive? Generally, with common formulations the elastic component of
the polymer predominates. That is, high peel and high shear as exhibited by
high viscosity polymers are used, and bonding (ow) of the adhesive is
obtained by the use of longer dwell times. For those highly viscous polymers
the value of the viscosity is given indirectly as cohesion (shear). On the other
hand, removable PSAs are more plastic and possess a lower viscosity,
Figure 2.4 Dependence of the viscosity on the shear rate. Decrease of the
Brookeld viscosity for dierent (1 through 3) water-based acrylic PSAs as a
function of the stirring rate.
38 Chapter 2
causing stringing in many cases. Viscosities higher than 10
5
Pas are required
in order to avoid this phenomenon. Generally, viscosities of PSAs vary
between 10
4
and 10
5
[55].
Dependence of the Modulus on the Stress Rate. Like the viscosity the
modulus of the PSAs also depends on the stress rate. As an example, Zosel
[16] measured the modulus of tackied PSAs as a function of the resin
concentration, at a rate above 10
2
sec, and demonstrated the existence of a
maximum at a resin concentration of 50%. On the other hand Dahlquist,
working at faster rates (t -10
2
sec) showed the existence of a maximum at
60% resin concentration [23].
Influence of the Elasticity/Plasticity Balance on the Properties of
PSAs. If the elastic components are predominant in the rheology of the
polymer, more of the bond rupture energy is stored, resulting in higher peel
and tack properties [2]. Some of the energy supplied by the application of
stress to a material is stored energy, in contrast to that which is dissipated in
overcoming viscous drag. The two recognized means of storing mechanical
energy are inertia (kinetic) and elasticity (potential) of which the latter
commands the most attention as the determining factor which allows us
to distinguish permanent adhesives from removable ones. If the time scale
of the measurement is short enough, any liquid will respond elastically to
prevent relaxation of the applied stress (e.g., high speed peel).
Figure 2.5 Range of solution viscosity values. Tackied, unmilled rubber/resin
PSA: solution Brookeld viscosity as a function of the solid content.
Rheology of Pressure-Sensitive Adhesives 39
2 RHEOLOGY OF PSA SOLUTIONS AND
DISPERSIONS
In order to be coated onto the face stock material the adhesive must be in
the liquid state. This state may be achieved by melting (hot-melt PSAs),
dissolving (solvent-based adhesives), or dispersing (adhesive dispersions) the
PSAs. Dissolving and dispersing the adhesive produce diluted adhesive
systems, where ow properties are due to the carrier liquid. The rheology of
diluted PSAs also depends on the carrier liquid. Generally, there are aqueous
and solvent-based adhesive solutions, and aqueous or solvent-based
adhesive dispersions. The most important are the organic solvent solutions
of adhesives (solvent-based adhesives) and the water-based dispersions of
adhesives (water-based adhesives). In fact most solvent-based adhesives like
rubber resin adhesives, contain some dispersed material, and most of the
dispersion-based aqueous adhesives contain some dissolved substances
(e.g., thickeners, protective colloids, tackiers, etc.).
The rheology of PSAs in the liquid state (molten or diluted) is very
important for the coating process. As stated in [99] the main processing
parameter by coating is the viscosity of the adhesive. In this case one needs
to be concerned with coating rheology. Wetting out, coating rheology,
coating speed, and versatility are the most important ow parameters
inuencing the convertability (coatability) of the adhesive. All of these
parameters depend on the physical state of the adhesive, either as a diluted
liquid system, yielding an adhesive layer by evaporation of the carrier liquid
(water or solvent), or as a 100% solid system, giving a solid adhesive layer
by a physical (hot-melt) or chemical [ultraviolet (UV)- or electron beam
(EB)-cured] process. Therefore the coatability and the coating rheology of
diluted and undiluted systems will be discussed separately.
The molten state of hot-melt PSAs diers from the coated, solid state
by the value of their viscosity only. Therefore, it may be assumed that the
rheological properties of hot-melt PSAs during converting do not dier
from those of solid PSAs. Hot-melt ow is not an isothermal process; it
is more sensitive to thermal transfer and temperature than the room
temperature cold ow of the solid, coated adhesive layer. However, it is
designed to possess an adequate uidity at a given temperature (i.e., an
optimized viscosity). Because of the relatively high viscosity of the uid hot-
melt PSA and the short period of the liquid state, phenomena encountered
by diluted PSA systems (e.g., wetting out, migration, mechanical stability,
and volatility of low molecular weight components) appear less important.
Diusion problems for hot-melt PSAs are due not to the carrier liquid (and
do not occur during the coating) but mainly to the low molecular weight
polymers. Hence there is no need to discuss the coating rheology of hot-melt
40 Chapter 2
PSAs separately. Unfortunately, the nature and concentration of the carrier
liquid in a diluted PSA play a decisive role in their rheology. Thus it appears
necessary to discuss the rheological features of those systems. Because of
the basic dierences between solution adhesives and polymer dispersions,
considerable dierences in rheology exist and it is necessary to discuss the
coating rheology of both these diluted PSA systems separately.
2.1 Rheology of PSA Solutions
The rheological behavior of polymer solutions is a result of solute/solvent
concentration; it depends on the properties of the dissolved PSAs and of the
solvent system. The inuence of the dissolved polymers and their chemical
composition and macromolecular characteristics will determine their
interaction with the solvent. On the other hand, like the rheology of the
solid polymer, the ow characteristics of the polymer solution also depend
on time and temperature. Coating rheology includes the ow properties of
the wet and dried adhesive, leading to a wettable, stable, running time-
independent liquid layer, with a smooth surface after drying under the
applied shear forces. Coating rheology of solvent-based PSAs is the
rheology of a true solution, thus mainly viscosity driven and more simple
than that of water-based systems. Such viscosity depends on the nature and
concentration of the formulation components [100]. Typical viscosity values
of acrylic solvent-based PSAs are situated in the range of 1700
25,000 mPas. The rst step of the coating process is the wet-out of the
solid surface by the owing adhesive. Generally, wetting out is a function of
surface tension, viscosity, and density of the adhesive layer. For coating
of solvent-based formulations a surface tension higher than 38 mN/m is
required. For coating of aqueous formulations the surface tension must be
higher than 46 mN/m [101]. It should be kept in mind that solvent-based
adhesives are usually highly viscous systems (more than 10,000
15,000 mPas) with low surface tension solvents as liquid carrier, and
being (at least partially) directly coated on high surface energy webs. Thus,
the wet-out of solvent-based PSAs is less dicult and less critical than that
of water-based ones. Surface tension depends on polymer and solvent
nature, viscosity, and density. Synthetic raw materials for solvent-based
adhesives are homogeneous, whereas natural raw materials are not. In
general rubber/resin adhesives display a broader variation of the solution
properties than acrylic-based ones. On the other hand solution polymeriza-
tion allows better chemical control, thus some macromolecular properties
of solvent-based polymers are superior to those of water-based ones (e.g.,
MWD, sequence distribution, stereoregularity, gel content, etc.). The use of
special solvents or solvent mixtures constitutes an additional possibility for
Rheology of Pressure-Sensitive Adhesives 41
surface tension control of solvent-based adhesives. Generally solvents used
for solvent-based PSAs have a low surface tension (2530 mN/m), much
lower than that of water (72 mN/m) or even of aqueous dispersions (usually
3542 mN/m). The surface tension of solvent-based PSAs causes less
concern than that of aqueous dispersions. Viscosity control of solvent-
based PSAs can also be realized by the use of llers.
Special Features of the Rheology of PSA Solutions
Polymer solutions are multicomponent systems, where the rheological
properties of the components and their mutual interactions may play an
important role. The rheology of the basic polymer and of the solvent-system
interface is a function of the nature and concentration of the components. In
some cases the procedure for dissolving the basic polymers, respectively for
eliminating the carrier solvent, also inuences the nal adhesive properties.
These aspects will be examined in more detail in Chap. 9. In this section the
most important features of the rheology of polymer solutions are
summarized. The ow properties of PSA solutions are important for their
coating behavior.
The coating rheology of the polymer solutions may be dierent from
that of the polymer without the solvent carrier, due to the multicomponent
(system) character, and to the quite dierent manufacturing and end-use
conditions (stress rate and temperature) for PSA solutions.
Polymer-Dependent Characteristics. Polymer solutions are visco-
elastic, with a non-Newtonian character, their behavior being determined by
the nature and concentration of the components. Theoretically the most
important rheological characteristics of PSA solutions will be described by a
correlation depending on the macromolecular and chemical characteristics
of the polymer (solute) and the chemical nature and concentration of the
solvents used. The time/temperature dependence of the viscosity is also
pronounced. Solvent-based adhesives are mostly solutions of rubber/resin
blends or acrylic copolymers. Their viscosity depends on the chemical
composition and molecular weight of the base polymers. Mechano-chemical
degradation of the base polymer, e.g., mastication of natural rubber,
reduces the molecular weight and its dispersion. As discussed in [102] the
ratio of the viscosities of adhesive compositions based on unmilled or milled
rubber is about 510. For rubber/resin-based PSAs viscosity control is
limited to the change of the MW/gel content ratio. Because of the high
dispersion of these values, the use of an additional 1015% of solvent in
these formulations is common practice. Resins tend to reduce viscosity and
increase solids content [103]. The molecular weight of solvent-based
adhesives is lower than that of water-based dispersions. However, these
42 Chapter 2
relatively low molecular weights are high enough to yield high viscosities. As
shown earlier viscosity directly inuences the wetting out. The wet-out is a
function of surface tension, viscosity, and density. Surface tension depends
on the solvents used, and on the density of both polymer and solvent.
Solvent-Dependent Characteristics. Generally polymer solubility
depends on solute/solvent interactions, thus the viscosity of PSA solutions
depends on the nature and concentration of the solvents used. The viscosity
of solvent-based PSAs depends on the molecular weight, chemical nature,
and solids content of the formulation. With suitable molecular weight values
and a solids content of 2025%, solvent-based PSAs display viscosities of
more than 10,000 mPas. High solids solvent-based acrylic PSAs have a
solids content higher than 60% and a Brookeld viscosity of 15,000 mPas
(at 25
C) at 65% solids [104]. Gravure cylinders can be used for high solids
(5080%) highly viscous solutions having a viscosity of more than 50 Pas
and for low viscosities of 1215 mPas too [105]. It should be kept in mind
that solvent-based PSAs dier from the water-based PSAs not only by their
higher viscosity but also through the easier viscosity control. Problems may
appear for crosslinked systems (for instance for crosslinkable, solvent-based
acrylates) where diluting may aect the stability of the adhesive [106]. As
discussed in detail in [99] for such systems viscosity is pot life related. As is
known from practice, it is possible to formulate solvent-based PSAs
according to their viscosity (for doctoring ease) or to their solids content
(for high drying speeds).
Rubber/resin PSAs mainly use hydrocarbon-based solvents, thus the
choice of the solvent as an aid cannot play an important role in the control of
their viscosity. Currently binary or ternary solvent mixtures allow better
viscosity control. On the other hand, the rheology of the solvent-based PSAs is
sensitive towards drying speed (i.e., the rate of the diusion of the solvents).
Technology-Dependent Characteristics. The rheology of the polymer
solutions may depend on the manufacturing and coating technology.
Solvent-based PSAs are made by dissolving the basic polymer. Because
of the sensitivity of the macromolecular compounds towards mechano-
chemical destruction, the dissolving technology will inuence the spread of
the viscosity values. On the other hand the same PSA solution may give
coatings of dierent quality, according to the geometry (shear) of the
metering device [99]. As stated in [99] the main parameters of the wet lm
quality for solvent-based adhesives are the surface tension, solids content,
viscosity, solvent characteristics, and temperature. The quality of the dry
coating depends on the evaporation rate of the solvent, which is a function
of the coating thickness, solids content, solvent characteristics, and drying
Rheology of Pressure-Sensitive Adhesives 43
conditions. Another feature is given by the sensitivity of the coated adhesive
layer towards drying speed (rate of diusion of the solvents used). Mainly
for rubber/resin adhesives based on hydrocarbon solvents, supercially
stripped, textured surfaces may be obtained if the solvent boils during
drying and the uidity of the dry layer is lost.
Adherend-Dependent Characteristics. Liquid components of solvent-
based PSAs may interact (physically or chemically) with the contact surface
of the adherent, resulting in better adhesion.
Time/Temperature Dependence of the Viscosity of PSA Solutions
A shear-induced viscosity decrease of polymer solutions is governed by
molecular orientation and disentangling. For Newtonian liquids at low shear
rates it is possible to restore the polymer network in the solution through
relaxation. High shear implies the decrease of the network points. Therefore,
the shear modulus G is given, as a function of the network points v
c
,
G = v
c
RT (2.38)
The dependence of the viscosity on the shear is a general phenomenon
also valid for polymer (adhesive) dispersions. It should be mentioned,
however, that in a manner dierent from adhesive dispersions, the
mechanical stability of the system for polymer solutions is viscosity (or
solids content) independent.
2.2 Rheology of PSA Dispersions
The coatability of liquid adhesives is a function of wetting out, coating
versatility, coating rheology, and coating speed. On the other hand the
coating rheology inuences the wet-out and the coating versatility, and
depends on the coating speed. The wetting out of water-based systems
constitutes a dicult problem because of the high surface tension of the
carrier liquid (water). Solvent/solute interactions in real solutions give rise
to the increase in viscosity. Water-based dispersions generally possess a
lower viscosity while ready-to-use PSA dispersions possess water-like low
viscosities. Their low density and the transfer coating technique used
also contribute to the coating diculties. In a dierent manner from
solvent-based PSAs, improvement of the wet-out by the use of surface active
agents causes irreversible changes in the adhesive properties. Thus an
adequate coating rheology appears important.
Water-based dispersions have a limited shelf life and thus the coating
rheology also depends on the age of the dispersion. This is a function of the
44 Chapter 2
dispersed polymer particles (macromolecular and dispersion characteristics)
and of the carrier liquid as well. Only small changes in the composition
of the carrier liquid are allowed. It may be assumed that the two main
parameters inuencing the coating rheology of the polymer solutions
(polymer and solvent nature) have a reduced importance for water-based
PSA dispersions. More important seem to be the dispersion nature and the
inhomogeneous character of the liquid, dispersed adhesive.
The ow of a dispersion depends on the concentration and
characteristics of the dispersed solid particles (particle size and particle
size distribution). The correlation between solids content and viscosity
includes the particle size and particle size distribution. On the other hand,
the inhomogeneous, anisotropic character of the adhesive layer persists after
the coating (wetting out and drying) of the liquid layer. The nal water
content of the dried, coated adhesive (residual humidity) depends on the
humidity of the environment (i.e., it reaches an equilibrium value). The dried
dispersion-based PSAs will never have the rheology of the bulk adhesive (the
adhesive from the polymer particles) but remain in an intermediate state
between the rheology of the dispersed system and that of the base polymers.
Furthermore the wetting additives left in the adhesive layer also
contribute to the composite character of the PSA layer. Therefore it can be
assumed that the rheology of the water-based PSA layer is that of a com-
posite material (i.e., polymer particles surrounded by a layer of additives).
From experimental practice it is known that the rheology of water-based
PSAs is shear sensitive (i.e., dynamic wetting needs a certain level of coating
speed and a certain level of shear on the metering/coating device). The most
important rheological parameter of a water-based PSA dispersion is its
viscosity. The viscosity inuences the coatability, the lm-forming char-
acteristics, and the properties of the adhesive layer thus formed.
Viscosity of PSA Dispersions
In order to be transfer coated onto the face stock (or release liner) the
adhesive dispersion must wet-out the solid surface. Furthermore, the coated
adhesive has to permit the withdrawal of the carrier liquid (water), and the
coalescence of the solid, dispersed particles (lm forming). The wet-out of
the adhesive and the lm building process are strongly inuenced by the
viscosity of water-based PSAs. On the other hand, the coating technology
(coating machines and coating speed) is viscosity dependent too. Coating
devices are very sensitive towards viscosity, thus the coating versatility (i.e.,
the ability of an adhesive to be used on dierent coating machines) depends
on the viscosity. The coating speed contributes to the wet-out process.
Excessive speed may produce foam or adhesive build-up on the machine.
Rheology of Pressure-Sensitive Adhesives 45
Both phenomena are a function of the viscosity of the adhesive. The
adhesives ow on the metering device (i.e., the viscosity) also inuences the
coating weight of the PSAs. Because of the lower level of interactions
between the solute and solvent, generally the viscosity of the dispersions is
lower than that of true solutions.
Wet-Out of Water-Based Adhesives
As stated in [99], of the technological properties of dispersed adhesive systems,
wetting ability is the most critical performance characteristic for their
coating. As will be shown later, the wet-out is a function of the quality of
the face stock and/or release liner. Water-based PSAs are coated mainly by
transfer, that is, coated onto the release liner and subsequently transferred
onto the face stock. The surface quality of the release liner is a function of
the siliconizing technology (condensation/addition; solventless/solvent-
based/water-based silicones). The fast curing rate at low temperatures (ca.
5 sec at 110
or 180
and 180
peel tests.
Rheology of Pressure-Sensitive Adhesives 61
Figure 2.12 Dependence of 180
peel measurement.
62 Chapter 2
For peel testing at 80
(E
f
,E
a
) h
2
a
h
f
4
q
(2.54)
A more detailed description of the inuence of the face stock elasticity
(stiness) on the peel is given in Chap. 6. Stress transfer to the adhesive and
from the adhesive is inuenced by its plasticity. The experimental data from
Fig. 2.14 illustrate this behavior.
Both phenomenaface stock stiness and elasticity (resistance to
elongation)were studied by Gent and Kaang [68]. When adhesive labels
(or tapes) are pulled away from a rigid substrate, the force required depends
upon both the strength of adhesion and the resistance of the label to
stretching [68]. The pull-o force F may be correlated with the work of
detachment G
a
and the eective tensile modulus E of the tape and its
Figure 2.14 The inuence of the elasticity/plasticity of the face stock on the peel.
A paper label material (A) is being peeled through a 180
peel
test were an order of magnitude greater than the SLBT, probably due to the
plastic deformation of the peel arm. A measure of the fracture toughness
of an adhesive bond is the applied or apparent strain energy release G. The
expressions used to calculate G are typically derived using linear elastic
fracture mechanics (LEFM), that is by assuming that the adherent and
adhesive are loaded within the elastic range, except locally at the crack tip,
64 Chapter 2
where plastic deformation occurs. In practice adhesives behave viscoelas-
tically or elastic-plastically, and under high stress yielding may occur. For
thin lms the eects of plastic deformation and yielding may be signicant
given their small load bearing capacity, associated with the small thickness,
and the relatively strong adhesion [134].
Energy transfer from the face stock to the adhesive depends on the
anchorage of the adhesive layer and on the existence of an energy absorbent
layer on the face stock materials. Both are surface dependent characteristics,
thus the surface of the face stock material will inuence the peel of PSAs
(especially for removable and nonpolar adherent applications). Indirectly the
anchorage of the PSAs and the existence of dierent adhesive layers on the
surface or in the face stock material depend on the migration of the adhesive
or adhesive components in the face stock material. This phenomenon
depends on the surface and bulk properties of the face stock material.
Influence of the Substrate. The nature of the substrate inuences the
peel adhesion, and thus the removability of the PSA label. Certain PSAs may
be classied (depending upon the substrate) as removable or permanent
adhesives. The most important parameters of the substrate that inuence the
removability of the PSA label are its exibility, its elasticity/plasticity
balance, and the anchorage of the adhesive onto the face stock. The peel does
not depend on the deformability of the adhesive, but on the exibility of the
face stock and substrate [130].
The deformability of the adherents inuences the stress distribution in
the bond [56]. If the adherents are not deformable, the adhesive would be
stressed uniformly. If the solid components of the joint are deformable the
stress distribution varies along the joint. Mathematically this phenomenon
may be described by a factor n, where n is the ratio between maximal and
mean stress (o
max
, o):
n = o
max
,o =
,2
p
coth
,2
p
(2.57)
where is given by the following correlation:
= (G l
2
),(Eab) (2.58)
where a is the thickness of the adherent, b is the thickness of the adhesive, G
is the modulus of the adhesive, E is the modulus of the adherent, and l is the
overlap length. The inuence of the deformability of the adherents on the
stress distribution by peeling has also been demonstrated [135]. The adhesive
is under tension at the interface and under compression just behind it. The
tensile strength is a function of the stiness of the combined adherents and
Rheology of Pressure-Sensitive Adhesives 65
adhesive, as well as of the thickness of the system. The compressive load
appears greatest at 180
peel under the same circumstances, and the peel force is the lowest when
measured between two exible adherents.
Face Stock Material and Shear Strength. There are no experimental
data available about the inuence of the bulk properties of the face stock
material on the shear resistance. Dierences in shear strength of PSAs coated
on dierent face stock materials are due to the surface of these materials.
Influence of the Face Stock on the Converting Properties of the
Pressure-Sensitive Laminate
The most important converting properties of pressure-sensitive labels are the
printability and the cuttability. The rheology of the adhesive strongly inu-
ences the cuttability of the label. Next the dependence of the cuttability on
the bulk properties of the face stock material will be analyzed, and in
particular the inuence of the rheological characteristics of the face stock
material. During the die-cutting operation, the mechanical strength of
the face stock and release liner materials inuences the distribution of
the stresses from the cutting edge to the adhesive layer. Generally, this
mechanical resistance is a function of the mechanical properties of the bulk
material, and of the dimensions of the face stock and release liner:
R
c
= f (K
1
K
2
) (2.59)
where R
c
is the mechanical resistance of the face stock material, K
1
denotes
material characteristics and K
2
material dimensions. In some cases (sheet
material) a certain number of superposed laminate sheets are cut during the
same operation; thus the distribution of the force may be inuenced by
laminate slip (Fig. 2.15). Therefore the laminate strength will depend on the
motion of the laminate layers (face stock and release liner respectively), with
respect to one another (i.e., on the surface characteristics of the laminate:
face stock, release liner) K
3
:
R
c
= f (K
1
K
2
K
3
) (2.60)
where K
3
is a surface-dependent factor inuencing the laminate slip. As can
be seen from Fig. 2.16, the motion and cold ow of the adhesive will be a
function of stress magnitude and distribution, but smearing of the cutting
knife and of the cut (side, front) surface also depends on the porosity of this
surface.
66 Chapter 2
Figure 2.16 Flow and smearing of the adhesive during cutting. (A) through (E) are
the dierent steps during the cutting operation.
Figure 2.15 The motion of the laminate layers during cutting.
Rheology of Pressure-Sensitive Adhesives 67
Thus the cutting behavior and the cuttability C of the laminate will
depend on the mechanical properties of the bulk material (face stock, release
liner) K
1
, on the surface properties of these materials K
3
, and on the
dimensions (inuencing the real value of the forces and the cut area) of the
solid components of the laminate K
2
:
C = f (K
1
K
2
K
3
) (2.61)
In order to identify the most important mechanical properties of the
bulk material which may inuence the cuttability, the nature of the forces
and deformation during cutting have to be examined. Dierent kinds of
stresses are present in a material, as demonstrated by creasing and folding
paper board (Fig. 2.17) [136,137].
One can conclude that the same stresses (i.e., tensile, compression, and
shear) are working when cutting a pressure-sensitive laminate. In fact
creasing the face stock constitutes the rst operation during cutting.
Material characteristics related to tensile, compression, or shear resistance
of the face stock material will inuence the cuttability. The distribution of
the stresses, the uniformity of the force acting on the laminate, and the
compression stress character of the rst cutting step are determined by the
rigidity of the face material (Fig. 2.18).
Figure 2.17 Stress distribution during creasing (cutting) of the face stock (label)
material. 1) Tensile, 2) compression, 3) shear stresses.
68 Chapter 2
The rigidity (stiness) of the material is a function of its modulus. An
incompressible liquid PSA may support a compressive stress well. In the rst
step of the cutting operation the force is acting perpendicularly on the whole
laminate. The situation changes only through the concentration of the local
stresses, and because of the weakness of the solid material, giving rise to the
exure of the face and shearing of the adhesive. Hence the stiness of the
solid laminate components inuences the stress distribution and the creep
resistance of the adhesive. The value of the modulus of elasticity E of the
face stock material (or/and release liner) inuences the cuttability of the
material. Thus:
C = f (E) (2.62)
On the other hand, assuming that the cutting edge (knife) is acting on
a partially supported material, exure of the material occurs rst (i.e., the
exural modulus of the material inuences the cuttability). In a rst
approximation the cuttability C depends on the tensile, compression,
exural, and shear moduli (E
l
, E
c
, E
f
, E
sh
) of the material and the value of
these moduli may or may not dier from one another, as a function of the
Figure 2.18 Stress distribution during cutting as a function of the nature (rigidity)
of the solid components of the laminate.
Rheology of Pressure-Sensitive Adhesives 69
materials used (e.g., paper, plastic, or metal) and of the practical conditions:
C = f (E
i
) (2.63)
Cuttability also depends on the material dimensions. It should be
mentioned that the stress distribution dependence on the thickness of the
face stock material may vary according to the nature of the applied stress. It
may be stated that the cuttability improves with material thickness, that is:
C = f (E
i
, h)
o
(2.64)
where h is the material thickness and o is the exponent taking into account the
improvement of the cuttability by the increased cut surface for a voluminous
(thick) laminate component. For hygroscopic materials like paper, bulk
properties may depend on the environmental humidity. Because of the ber-
like structure of the material, the surface texture may also change as a
function of the humidity. Surface texture inuences the smoothness (friction)
of the surface and the smoothness inuences the cuttability. The surface
friction of papers increases with increasing air humidity [138]. On the other
hand, because of the hygroscopic nature of the face paper, there is a con-
tinuous transfer of water between the adhesive and face material, inuencing
the composite character of the adhesive and its rheology (water-based
adhesives). A more detailed analysis of the parameters inuencing the cut-
tability will be presented in Chap. 7. Here the inuence of the bulk properties
of the face stock material on the distribution of the stresses acting on the
laminate, and of the rheology of PSAs on the laminate will be discussed.
Influence of Surface Properties of the Carrier Material
Coatability is characterized by wetting out and anchorage of the coated
adhesive on the carrier material. Both are inuenced by surface polarity
and porosity. Figure 2.11 showed that the surface properties of the face
stock material inuence the adhesive and converting properties of the
pressure-sensitive laminate, either directly or indirectly. The direct inuence
is based on the anchorage phenomenon at the surface of the face stock.
Indirect inuences are reected by the porosity related adhesive penetration
in the face stock and the changes in the coating weight caused by
penetration. Special problems are encountered with nonpolar plastics where
no chemical anity exists between the polar PSA and the nonpolar,
nonporous carrier surface. For textured ber-like porous surfaces adhesive
migration and breakthroughs may improve anchorage but denaturate the
top surface of the face stock and at the same time change the coating weight.
Fillers or surface-active agents built into the carrier material of protective
lms or tapes can act as release enhancing agents, but they disturb the
70 Chapter 2
adhesive contact. Fillers can modify the relaxation spectra of the polymers
[139]. On the other hand for special PSPs (e.g., self-adhesive lms) migration
of an adhesive component from the plastic carrier (e.g., polybutylene) due to
its incompatibility ensures the adhesive properties of the product [140].
Influence of Face Stock on Migration. It is dicult to store labelstock
for any length of time, due to possible bleeding and/or oozing problems. A
lot of problems exist with high gloss label material bleedthrough. Adhesive
bleedthrough often interferes with the printing. Migration (penetration or
bleeding) is due to the diusion of the adhesive into and through the face
stock material. This phenomenon depends on the properties of the adhesive
and of the face stock material, on the coating technology, and on the
processing (storage, converting) conditions:
Migration = f (adhesive, face stock, coating technology, processing)
(2.65)
Migration of the adhesive in the face stock material or of the additives from
the face stock material in the adhesive produces changes in the composition
of both materials and in their mechanical/rheological properties.
In many health care and other applications it is desirable to have a
PSA lm coated onto a porous web. Hot-melt PSAs oer a relatively easy
route to coating PSAs onto fabric and nonwoven webs with a minimum of
adhesive penetration into the web. The penetration of the adhesive in the
porous web can be avoided with a release liner used as an intermediate web
surface (transfer coating) for some processes, but during storage of the
product diusion in the porous web may occur. Evidently, migration
(penetration) of the adhesive into the face stock depends on the adhesives
nature, but also on the face stock porosity. The dimensions of the pores
strongly inuence the penetration. It was demonstrated that pore diameters
of 0.010.05 mm allow good penetration [141]. Theoretically, penetration
under pressure and capillary penetration in paper are dierent phenomena
[142]. Penetration through pressure P
p
would depend on the pressure p, the
radius of the pores r, and the viscosity j:
P
p
= f ( p, r, j) (2.66)
Capillary penetration P
c
(mainly water penetration) depends on the
humidity of the paper H and its pH value:
P
c
= f (H, pH) (2.67)
Rheology of Pressure-Sensitive Adhesives 71
Porosity inuences positively the anchorage of the adhesive through
migration. Where pores, crevices, and capillaries are accessible in the surface
of the adherent the adhesive will penetrate to some extent, and so increase
adhesion. The capillary rise h is a function of the porosity [143]:
h = k ,
LV
cos ,R (2.68)
where R is the equivalent radius of the capillary, k is a constant, and is the
density of the liquid; h reaches a maximum when:
,
LV
=
1
2
(,
c
1,b) (2.69)
where ,
c
is the surface tension of the liquid. One can conclude that the
dimensions (radius) of the pores, the wettability of the material (surface
tension), the humidity of the paper, and the pH of the paper are major factors
inuencing the migration. This is also conrmed by the following correlation
dL,dt = (, cos r),(4j L) (2.70)
where dL/dt denotes the penetration rate, j is the viscosity of the liquid, r is
the capillary radius, , is the surface tension of the liquid, is the wetting
angle of the capillary wall, and L is the penetration length. Generally, the
penetration rate of the adhesive in the face stock depends on the capillary
radius (i.e., on the paper density) [144].
Influence of Face Stock Porosity on Coating Weight. It is well known in
the eld of cold-seal adhesives that blocking is a function of the adhesive
coating weight and of the face material. For a porous web (paper) a coating
weight of about 6 g/m
2
is recommended; nonporous face stock (lm or
aluminum) needs no more than 3 g/m
2
. Similarly the dry coating weight (the
weight of the adhesive applied per unit surface area) can vary substantially
depending upon the porosity and irregularity of the face and of the substrate
surface to which the face material is to be adhered. For instance higher PSA
loadings are preferred for adhering porous, irregular ceramic tiles to porous
surfaces, while lower adhesive loadings are required to manufacture tapes,
lms, and other articles from relatively nonporous, smooth surface materials
such as synthetic polymer lms and sheets. When the adhesive is applied to
nonporous polymeric or metallic face materials, intended for adhesion to
nonporous polymeric or metallic surfaces, adhesive coating weights of about
770 g of dry adhesive per m
2
of treated surface are generally adequate. A
good adhesion for tapes manufactured from continuous polymeric materials
can usually be achieved with dry adhesive coating weights of about 1530 g
72 Chapter 2
of adhesive per m
2
, while coating weights of about 3070 g/m
2
of adhesive
are usually employed for the manufacture of paper-backed tapes, such as
masking tapes. In order to avoid a decrease of the coating weight due to the
porosity of the face stock material or to prevent plasticizer migration, it is
also possible to apply a barrier coating to the paper [145].
Influence of the Face Stock on the Adhesive Choice. Face stock
sensitivity towards PSAs requires an adequate choice of the adhesive system.
Shrinkage of soft PVC face stock requires the use of shrinkage resistant
adhesive systems [146]. To this end crosslinked acrylics are generally emplo-
yed. On the other hand, plasticizers in the vinyl lm can have a pronounced
eect on the adhesive properties during the aging process [147]; plasticizer
resistant adhesives have to be selected. These examples show that the face
stock nature and its sensitivity towards certain adhesives may inuence the
choice of the adhesive and thus the rheology of the adhesive layer.
Influence of the Face Stock on the Coating Technology. In the rst
instance the mechanical and chemical characteristics of the face stock
materials determine the choice of the coating technology, the coating
process (direct coating/transfer coating), use of cold/hot adhesives (solvent-
based/hot-melt) or chemically aggressive or inert adhesive systems (solvent-
based/water-based), and coating machines (metering device, drying system,
web transport system, etc.). The inuence of the face stock material on the
choice of the coating technology is illustrated in Fig. 2.19.
As can be seen in Fig. 2.19 the web is usually supported when making
paper-based laminates via transfer coating, using a gravure roll as a metering
device, and solvent-based, water-based, or hot-melt PSAs. For lm coating a
Meyer bar and/or gravure roll is suggested, usually using water-based PSAs.
Bonding (or anchorage) supposes the coating of a substrate (or face
stock) material with the liquid adhesive, that is the spreading and wet-out of
the adhesive on the surface of the solid material. After wetting the surface
the adhesive penetrates into the cavities of the solid material and physical
and chemical contact points are formed. Both phenomena, bonding and
debonding, depend on the quality of the surface.
Wetting Out as a Function of the Face Stock Surface. Earlier the
impor-tance of the wetting out, and the parameters inuencing it were
discussed, considering in particular the liquid component (adhesive). Next the
characteristics of the solid components inuencing the wet-out are examined.
It was shown earlier that the bulk properties of the face stock materials on the
one side, and the surface properties on the other side are determinant for the
properties of the pressure-sensitive laminate. The surface quality inuences
the wetting out of the adhesive. Wetting the solid surface by the adhesive is an
Rheology of Pressure-Sensitive Adhesives 73
initial necessary condition for the anchorage of this adhesive to the solid
surface (e.g., face stock material) [54], and is a function of the surface tension
of the solid and liquid. Liquids, and for that matter solids, at the boundary
between two phases (liquid/paper or liquid/solid) possess properties which
are dierent from those within the mass of the liquid itself. This dierence
results from an imbalance between the attractive faces of the surface layer of
molecules and the molecules contained within the liquid (or solid) [148]. The
molecules on the surface layer compensate for charge imbalance by pulling
themselves close together, thus creating the phenomenon of surface tension.
In the most extreme case when the surface tension of the adhesive diers
greatly fromthe initial surface tension of the lmor paper (face stock or liner)
sh eyes and cratering will result (when the face stock surface tension is less
than the adhesive surface tension).
To obtain optimal wet-out the surface tension of the adhesive must be
equal to or less than the critical surface tension of the face stock or liner
(a contact angle of 0
or 180
C [4].
Adhesive coatings have to be softer than lacquer coatings or printing inks
(their T
g
is lower also), but their T
g
depends on the substrate in a similar
manner. Contact adhesives display a T
g
range of 10 to 0
C. These
adhesives need uidity only for lm and bond forming. They must not
display uidity in the bonded state. Pressure-sensitive adhesives have to be
liquid at room temperature and within the bond, thus they should have a T
g
of about 15 to 5
C) is a combination
of the low T
g
of the rubberless than 20
C [11].
1.2 Factors Influencing T
g
The T
g
is a function of chain mobility and exibility. Chain mobility
depends on internal interactions, the internal forces between polymer chains
Table 3.1 Glass Transition Temperature for Different Adhesive Types
Adhesive Type T
g
(
C) References
Press (contact) adhesives 5 to 15 5
Low energy curing adhesives 40 to 30 5
Hot-melt adhesives 5 to 100 5
Wet adhesives 40 to 15 5
Acrylic PSA 20 5
Acrylic PSA 40 6
Rubber/resin PSA 55 2
Vinyl acetate-acrylic PSA 35 to 5 7
Electron beam-cured PSA 25 8, 9
Solvent-based PSA for protective lms 20 10
PSA generally 15 to 5 11
3070
C below the
use temperature
12
92 Chapter 3
Table 3.2 Glass Transition Temperature Values for Base Materials for PSA Labels
Polymer T
g
(
C) References Applications
Polybutadiene 85 13 Rubber/resin PSA
Polyethylhexylacrylate 70 11, 13, 14 Acrylic PSA
62 15
Polyisobutene 60 16 PSA, sealants
Polyisoprene, low 72 17 PSA
molecular weight 65
Natural rubber 64 18 PSA
56
Poly(styrene-butadiene) 59 19, 20
carboxylated 54
Poly(styrene-butadiene) 55 21, 22
50
Poly(ethylene-butylene) 53 23 UV light curable PSA
Poly(ethylhexylacrylate-
acrylic acid)
49 24 PSA
SBR latex 17 (tan o) 46% ST 25 WB PSA
18 44% ST 25
46 25% ST 3
Poly-n-triethylacrylate 54 13 Acrylic PSA
46 15
Poly(ethylene-vinyl
acetate-acrylate)
40 26 PSA
Polyvinylchloride, 40 18 Face stock
plasticized 0
Poly(ethylene-vinyl
acetate-dioctyl
maleinate)
35 25 PSA
25
Poly (SIS) 28 25 EB curable HM on
Kraton D-1320X
basis
Poly(propene-butene) 16 27 Semi-pressure-
sensitive adhesive
Poly(propene-octene) 25 28, 29 PSA
Polyethylacrylate 22 13 Acrylic PSA
14 15
Polypropylene
amorphous
11 30 Face stock
14 27 Semi-pressure-
sensitive
Poly(ethylene-
vinylacetate)
10 18 PSA, face stock
15
(continues)
Physical Basis for the Viscoelastic Behavior of PSAs 93
Table 3.2 Continued
Polymer T
g
(
C) References Applications
Polymethylacrylate 10 16 Acrylic PSA
16 15
Polyvinylacetate 29 13
Poly(hydroxyethyl
methacrylate)
55 31 Radiation curable PSA
Polyvinylchloride 75105 16 Face stock
85 32
Polyacrylnitryl 100 16 Acrylic PSA
Polystyrene 100, 110 13 Hot-melt, face stock
Polymethylmethacrylate 105 16, 33 Acrylic PSA
Polyacrylic acid 106 13 Acrylic PSA
Polymethacrylic acid 185 13 Acrylic PSA, thickener
Table 3.4 Changes in the T
g
Due to Tackification
Aqueous Dispersions
Components
PSA Tackier resin dispersion
Concentration, parts (w/w) T
g
(
C)
100 0 54.7
85 15 53.7
70 30 38.7
55 45 26.4
60 40 17.1
60 40 22.8
50 50 27.8
Table 3.3 Glass Transition Temperature and Ring and
Ball Softening Temperature for some Tackifier Resins
Resin type T
g
(
C)
R&B softening
temperature (
C)
Regalrez 1065 17 65
Regalrez 1078 23 76
Regalrez 1094 33 94
Regalrez 1033 7 33
Escorez 9241 5
94 Chapter 3
and segments. Intermolecular forces are a function of the nature and
dimension of the polymer chains (i.e., of chemical composition, structure,
and molecular weight). Equations can be derived that express the
dependence of the second order transition temperature on molecular
weight, plasticization, degree of crosslinking and copolymerization. Such
equations may be reduced in form to equations derivable from the free
volume theory. From the nding that the maximum in debonding force
corresponds to the minimum value of the C
p
T
g
product for PSA
polymers, the conclusion was derived that this product (dened as a measure
of heat that has to be expended to provide the polymer transition from
the glassy to the viscoelastic state, and to impart translational mobility to
the polymeric segments, constituted from contributions of free volume and
the energy of cohesion) can be used as a predictive criterion of adhesive
behavior for various polymers [3436]. This argues in favor of the interplay
of free volume against cohesive energy in polymers as a general determinant
of pressure-sensitive adhesion. The T
g
depends mainly on the chemical
composition and structure of the adhesive and the molecular weight of the
base polymer. The chemical composition and structure of the polymers may
be inuenced by synthesis and formulation. As a general principle one can
say that reduction of the intermolecular forces improves chain mobility and
therefore lowers the T
g
.
Dependence of T
g
on Molecular Weight
Concerning the composition dependence of the T
g
of compatible polymer
blends, the parameters of an extended Gordon-Taylor equation are not only
polymer specic, but also molecular weight dependent [37]. Chain mobility
decreases with increasing molecular weight. The Fox-Flory equation relates
T
g
to the number average molecular weight M
n
[38]:
T
g
= T
o
g
C M
1
n
(3.3)
where C denotes a constant. This dependence is not a linear function; the T
g
dependence on molecular weight is more pronounced in the low molecular
range. On the other hand PSA formulations are mainly mixtures of high
molecular base elastomers and lower molecular additives. In some cases
the base elastomer itself behaves like a mixture of two macromolecular
compounds with dierent MW, due to a special sequence distribution.
Therefore, it is more appropriate to discuss the dependence of the T
g
on
the molecular weight for the base elastomer and the lower molecular
formulating additives separately.
Physical Basis for the Viscoelastic Behavior of PSAs 95
Molecular Weight of the Base Elastomers. Because of the signicant
inuence of the molecular weight on the T
g
a relatively low degree of
polymerization (DP) is recommended for polymers used as adhesives (e.g.,
for polyvinyl acetate, the degree of polymerization amounts to several
thousands); for PSAs the molecular weight should be lower. The polymer
molecular weight has a signicant eect on the balance of pressure-
sensitive adhesive properties [3]. As discussed in [39] shear is roughly
proportional to molecular weight up to relatively high molecular weights
at which the shear resistance drops o dramatically in some polymers.
Tack is typically high at very low molecular weights and decreases
gradually as the molecular weight is increased. Peel adhesion typically
exhibits a discontinuous behavior, increasing with molecular weight up to
moderate molecular weight levels and then gradually decreasing as the
molecular weight further increases. For polyisobutene a maximum of the
peel resistance has been found in a narrow range of molecular weights [40];
the molecular weight for PSA base polymers is situated in the range of
10002000. As shown earlier [41] typically the molecular weight of solvent-
based PSA polymers is limited to about 100,000, with a solids content
ranging between 12 and 25%. At this molecular weight level the cohesive
strength remains marginal and crosslinking appears necessary for better
performance. High molecular weight polymers oer high shear and good
thermal stability. An acrylic acid copolymer with a molecular weight of
70,00080,000 is proposed for better wet adhesion properties [42].
Polyisoprene used for PSAs has a molecular weight of 4 10
3
5 10
6
.
The T
g
of low molecular weight polyisoprenes diers from that of natural
rubber (Table 3.2). Whereas the molecular weight of solvent-based acrylics
is about 100,000, water-based ones may have molecular weight values as
high as 1,000,000 [5].
It is relatively simple to obtain low or standard molecular weight
values for linear, uncrosslinked polymers. It is more dicult to limit the
value of molecular weight for partially crosslinked natural or synthetic
rubbers used as PSAs. In this case the molecular weight is described by
the assembly of linear and crosslinked polymer chains. As an example, for
PSAs based on carboxylated styrene-butadiene (CSBR) latexes, the weight
percentage of the polymer having a molecular weight of about 300,000 or
more is employed as a relative measure of the eective molecular weight [5].
In such styrene-butadiene copolymers higher gel content is an indication for
higher molecular weight. Above 30% gel, tack and peel resistance decrease
rapidly. The degree of crosslinking, i.e., the length of the mobile chain
sequences may inuence macroscopic viscoelasticity. The mechanical
properties of crosslinked polymer networks are determined by crosslinking
density, the molecular weight between junctions (M
c
), and the T
g
. The
96 Chapter 3
elastic properties of the polymeric network depend on the length of the
polymeric bridges.
At suciently low frequency of deformation, linear chains begin to
disentangle by the so-called reptation process and the elastomer ows.
Thus, entanglement molecular weight M
e
aects the mechanical and
rheological properties of the polymer. The time constant for reptation for
linear molecules is proportional to MW to the third power at constant
temperature. The acrylics are inherently (elastic and) tacky due to their high
entanglement molecular weight (M
e
), without the need of adding tackier
[43,44]. A physical model correlating polymer viscoelastic behavior to PSA
performance has been developed [45] to explain the relationship between T
g
,
M
e
, and PSA performance
In a similar manner the minimum length of the soft sequences in
thermoplastic elastomers (and polymer blends) inuences the properties
of the elastomer [46]. In such cases, both the global molecular weight
and the molecular weight of the elastomer (or plastomer) chain
sequences inuence the glass transition temperature. As will be discussed
later, the dimensions of the polymer sequences aect compatibility also,
and thus delimit the regulating possibilities of the T
g
. In conclusion, the
molecular weight, the molecular weight between entanglements (M
e
), the
molecular weight of the crosslinking bridges (M
c
), and the molecular
weight of the polymer sequences (M
s
) aect the T
g
(and the modulus) of
the polymers.
Molecular Weight of Tackifier Resins. The tackier must have a
lower molecular weight than the base polymer, but a higher T
g
than the
base polymer, and it must be compatible. Tackier addition can cause an
increase in entanglement molecular weight. For instance for an acrylic
polymer M
e
increased by tackifying from 30 to 93 kg/mol. For this polymer
the weight average molecular weight (M
w
) of the linear polymer was 68 k,
and the average molecular weight between crosslinks (M
c
) was 52 k [43].
Tackifying resins used in common adhesive formulations possess a
molecular weight ranging from 300 to 3000 where the T
g
strongly depends
on the molecular weight [4749] (see Chap. 8, Section 2.3 too). The resins
molecular weight controls the location and sharpness of the loss/storage
peak (tan o) in tackied styrene block copolymers (SBCs). It is admitted
that by tackication (for a given softening point and concentration of
the resin) the higher the increase of tan o the better the compatibility.
According to [50] acid resins exhibit a narrow molecular weight
distribution, ester resins have a broader MWD and somewhat lower T
g
(46
C).
Physical Basis for the Viscoelastic Behavior of PSAs 97
Dependence of T
g
on Chemical Composition and Structure
The bonding/debonding characteristics of PSAs depend on their uidity,
that is, on the internal mobility of the polymer chains. Internal mobility is a
function of the internal forces acting on a sterical (volume and structure) or
polarity basis. Thus, in a rst instance, polymer mobility may be regulated
by changing the polymer (chain) composition through the choice of sterical/
polarity characteristics of the monomers. These changes are reected by the
value of the T
g
. First the dependence of the T
g
on the chemical composition
will be reviewed.
Flexible Main Chain. The proper choice of the base monomers and/
or those acting via polar forces permits adjustment of the T
g
. A detailed
discussion of the interdependence of the base monomers will be given in
Chap. 5. The inuence of the base monomers on the T
g
will be discussed
rst, going from general problems (polymers) to special ones (PSA).
Theoretically, the unpolar, low-volume chain of polyethylene (PE) should
display a high mobility, and thus a low T
g
. In fact PE has a medium to low
T
g
(30
C [52]. The T
g
of
polyvinylacetate (PVAc) dispersions usually amounts to 30
C. Polydibutyl-
maleinate dispersions have a T
g
of 5 to 10
C, and poly(vinylacetate-
ethylene) dispersions have a T
g
range of 10 to 5
C. The principal
monomers used in emulsion polymerization can be divided into two main
groups: those producing hard polymers such as vinyl acetate, styrene, and
vinyl chloride, and those capable of softening hard polymers or producing
soft polymers such as ethylene or butyl acrylate [54]. Generally soft polymer
compositions must be hardened by polar monomers (see Chap. 5) which
may interact physically or chemically, such as acrylic acid, glycidyl
methacrylate, N-vinyl-pyrrolidone, methacrylamide, acrylonitrile, and
methacrylic acid [56]. Because of the very low T
g
of ethyl hexyl acrylate,
which is a principal monomer for PSAs, it is recommended to copolymerize
with acrylonitrile (e.g., Acronal 80D, 81D), styrene, vinyl acetate, or methyl
methacrylate in order to increase the cohesion (i.e., the T
g
).
The level of the stiening (hard) monomers should be kept as low as
possible. As an example, the usual styrene content of CSBR latexes varies
between about 40 and 70%; with the T
g
the values range from about 30
C
Physical Basis for the Viscoelastic Behavior of PSAs 99
to room temperature [11]. Generally, the concentration of the most
commonly used carboxylic acids lies between 3 and 6%. It should be
mentioned that the inclusion of voluminous side groups may be carried out
by homopolymerization also (e.g., in the polymerization of butadiene the
concentration of 1,2-butadiene units inuences the T
g
). On increasing the
1,2-butadiene content, the T
g
increases also because of the hindrance of
the internal rotation and lowering of the chain exibility. The inuence of
the length of the side groups of the monomer on the T
g
was studied in a
detailed manner by Zosel [57] for common acrylic esters used as raw
materials for PSAs. A strong dependence between side chain length and the
T
g
of the PSAs was demonstrated, namely, the T
g
decreases with increasing
side chain length. Olen-based monomers with neo structure (e.g., vinyl
neodecanoate and vinyl neododecanoate) H
2
C=CH-O-CO-C(R
1
)(R
3
)-R
2
in
which R
1
R
2
R
3
average 810 carbons, possess a particularly branched
structure and (compared to acrylic polymers) the homopolymers of these
monomers exhibit unusually high entanglement molecular weight (M
e
) at
comparable T
g
[58].
Polar Monomers. Polar monomers are copolymerized with the base
elastomer in order to improve the mechanical properties (cohesion) of the
adhesives. Their inclusion increases the T
g
. This may be explained by
increasing dipole interaction, or enhanced hydrogen bonding. Next the
inuence of the small scale parameters of the polymer structure, mainly
the microstructure, the morphology, and the linear/crosslinked character
of the polymer will be reviewed.
Influence of the Microstructure. Many variations can be made in the
build-up of a thermoplastic rubber e.g., molecular weight, styrene content,
the number of blocks in the chain (i.e., two, three, or multiblocks), and
furthermore in their conguration (e.g., a linear polymer, or one that is
branched or radial). Varying the structural parameters has a direct inuence
on their physical properties, hardness, and viscosity. As is known the
electron beam-crosslinkable SIS rubber has a branched molecular structure.
Ethylene copolymers are directly synthesized in high pressure equipment,
and the comonomer is randomly distributed along the polymer chain [59].
For copolymers containing large amounts of softening comonomer, the
PE segments are short and the melting point and amount of crystallinity
are depressed, reducing the heat resistance.
Graft or block copolymers are ideal as adhesives because their two-
phase structure provides a broad operating range. They can be designed as
structures containing microphases and separated into a tough, rubbery,
low-T
g
phase and a hard reinforcing phase (either a glass or a crystalline
material). In some cases (e.g., release coatings) a reduced segmental mobility
100 Chapter 3
is required. It has been shown that the methylsilicate functioning as a high
release agent (HRA) to modify the viscoelastic properties of polydimethyl-
siloxanes (PDMS) eectively reduces the segmental mobility of the exible
PDMS backbone [60].
Sequence Distribution and Length. Within the block copolymers used
for hot-melt PSAs there are amorphous polymer segments with T
g
higher
than room temperature (RT), and other, amorphous polymer segments with
T
g
_RT [61]. The T
g
of the thermoplastic component (polystyrene)
inuences the stiness of the whole polymer. Its value may be changed,
thereby modifying the length of the sequence. The T
g
of polystyrene is a
function of its molecular weight up to a value of about 20,000, after which
the T
g
remains constant at 100
C [33].
Another peak around 100
C,
the styrene one at 100
C.
Influence of Crosslinking. Steric hindrance by crystallization or
crosslinking reduces chain mobility and thus increases the T
g
. Relaxation
in the glass transition region involves cooperative motion of molecular
segments. An approach pioneered by Adam and Gibbs involves the concept
of cooperativity where the congurational entropy at a given temperature
is lower than that expected for independent relaxation of the primitive
molecular segments. Cooperativity is a theoretical concept that describes the
scale over which intramolecular forces are being propagated in a relaxation
event and the strength of coordinated motions among polymer chains
needed for the relaxation to occur.
Fracture toughness characterizes the glassy state. The role of the
network density on glass transition for vinyl ester polymers was studied
by [70]. For vinyl ester polymers the narrow range in molecular weights
between crosslinks, did not make apparent any correlation between the
fracture toughness and molecular weight between crosslinks (M
c
). No
correlation was found between fracture toughness and the domain size at T
g
.
In the case of crosslinking the eect on T
g
depends on the crosslink
density. The crosslink density is a function of the crosslinking method too.
For instance the modulus of polybutadiene networks crosslinked chemically
or by radiation diers [71]. Common electron beam-curing polymers are
not recommended for PSAs because of the high crosslinking density, which
imparts hardness and a tack-free character. For PSAs it is recommended
to have a T
g
lower than 20
C.
Generally, the high temperature performance of hot-melt adhesives is
limited by the T
g
of the endblocks of the base polymers. Better temperature
resistance may be achieved by crosslinking the polymers [72].
1.3 Adjustment of T
g
For practical use adhesives must be uids (i.e., they must be applied at a
temperature above the T
g
). An end-use temperature higher than the T
g
can
be achieved by melting the adhesive (e.g., hot-melt PSAs) or by changing
(at least temporarily) its T
g
. Fluidity may be achieved by other ways, such
as using a volatile plasticizer like a solvent (solvent-based adhesives), or
a dispersing agent (water-based dispersions). These methods permit the
application of the adhesive, but a continuous adhesive layer is formed above
the T
g
only. Thus adjusting the T
g
appears to be required.
The composition of the adhesive is determined by polymer synthesis
or most frequently through formulation. Polymer synthesis regulates
intermolecular forces by the nature and polarity of the chain building
monomer units. Polymer formulation regulates intermolecular interactions
by changing the internal structure of the adhesive polymer.
Polymer Synthesis
Earlier a short description of the parameters inuencing the T
g
was given.
The macromolecular and chemical characteristics of polymers (molecular
weight, chemical composition, structure) can be adjusted through the
polymer synthesis, by the choice of the raw materials and of the
polymerization technology. In the case of solvent-based adhesives and
hot-melt PSAs, the nal composition of the adhesive layer is that of the
bulk material (i.e., the polymer does not contain important amounts of
other nonpolymeric additives).
In the case of water-based dispersions, the nal adhesive composition
may dier from that of the bulk adhesive, by the additives used, and/or the
water included in the adhesive composition. Thus there are dierences
between the T
g
of the synthesized, uncoated (bulk) polymer and the T
g
of
the applied adhesive. Water-based adhesives are almost always formulated
oering the advantage of T
g
adjustment by both procedures (changing the
composition of the bulk or of the dispersed adhesive). As a function of the
level of formulating agents, the T
g
diers more or less from that of the base
polymer. On the other hand, it was shown that for natural rubber latices,
104 Chapter 3
the T
g
of natural rubber latex is eectively indistinguishable from that of
the dry rubber separated from the same latex [73].
Adjusting the T
g
by Formulating
In polymer synthesis dierent copolymerization techniques of various
monomers giving dierent chain exibility and intermolecular forces (i.e., a
dierent macromolecular order) lead to adequate, low-T
g
PSAs. Another
possibility to change the macromolecular order is the change of the
intermolecular forces by the change of the packing density through the
use of macromolecular or micromolecular diluting agents such as tackiers
or plasticizers.
Use of Plasticizers. Plasticizers change the degree of order of the
molecules, also changing their entropy and enthalpy. The use of plasticizers
for current thermoplastic materials (e.g., polyvinyl chloride, or PVC) is well
known. Using high amounts of plasticizer, it is possible to drastically reduce
the T
g
as an example the addition of 40% plasticizer to PVC decreases its
T
g
to 40
C [83]. It should be
mentioned that dierent addition rules may give dierent results. The T
g
for
hot-melt PSAs calculated according to the Fox equation or by the mixing
rule may yield dierent results [83]. On the other hand it was indicated
that many miscible blend systems exhibit phase separation upon heating,
caused by the existence of a lower critical solution temperature [84]. This
incompatibility caused by heating may inuence the tack and peel adhesion
of stored PSAs or the uidity of PSAs during cutting.
Compatibility is a function of the molecular weight and this statement
is very important for the tackication process of PSAs. Generally, higher
softening point resins are less miscible with the base polymer, and any resin
added after a certain saturation level is reached, does not contribute to
raising the T
g
of the system. Instead a second phase consisting of pure resin
or a resin-rich blend is formed. The existence of this incompatible phase
becomes noticeable by the appearance of a second glass transition point.
The structure of the low molecular weight resin is very important to
its compatibility with elastomers, and consequently to its eect on the
viscoelastic properties and performance as PSAs. A completely aromatic
106 Chapter 3
resin such as polystyrene exhibits poor compatibility with natural rubber,
but is compatible with styrene-butadiene rubber (SBR). A cyclo-aliphatic
resin such as poly(vinylcyclohexane) is compatible with natural rubber and
is incompatible with styrene-butadiene rubber. An alkyl-aromatic resin,
such as poly-t-butyl styrene is incompatible with both elastomers.
Use of Blends of Viscoelastomers. The most used method for
suppliers to regulate the T
g
of adhesive raw materials is the mixing of
viscoelastomers having dierent glass transition temperatures. As discussed
in [85] the most common solvent-based acrylates for protective lms have a
T
g
of 20
C can be
used as a cohesion improving agent for PSA formulations. Polyisobutene
is manufactured from oily to hard products with a molecular weight of
1000200,000. Mixtures of polyisobutene with high and low molecular
weight should be used to regulate the adhesion-cohesion. As discussed in
detail in [87] the so-called formulation by mixing of high polymers includes
also the use of plastomers.
1.4 Correlation Between the Main Adhesive, End-Use, and
Converting Properties of PSAs and T
g
As discussed earlier, the T
g
characterizes the rheological behavior of the
polymers and of the adhesive formulation, thus it inuences the end-use
and converting properties also.
Adhesive Properties and T
g
Room and elevated temperature cohesive strength, adhesion to various
substrates, exibility, etc., are all related to the lm-forming ability of the
adhesive (i.e., to its T
g
) [88]. The viscoelastic properties of the polymer lm
determine its adhesion-cohesion balance (i.e., its adhesive and end-use
properties). The value of the glass transition temperature determines the
main adhesive properties. An adequate choice of the T
g
allows optimization
of the adhesive and end-use properties for a specic application area.
Generally, low T
g
values ensure very high tack, whereas medium ones give
an optimum peel combined with an acceptable cohesion. The holding power
has been shown to be controlled by zero shear viscosity which is related to
M
w
, M
e
, and T
g
by the following equation [58]:
log j
o
= 3.4 log M
w
2.4 log M
e
A,(T T
g
70) B (3.6)
Physical Basis for the Viscoelastic Behavior of PSAs 107
where A and B are constants. This equation shows that while j
o
is reduced
by M
e
, it is also increased by the T
g
of the polymer (since it is more rigid).
For polymers exhibiting higher M
e
and glass transition temperature, we can
expect that PSA peel, tack, and holding power can all be improved. The T
g
appears particularly useful when comparing the exibility of several latexes,
that is, the latex grade with the lower T
g
can be expected to impart a softer
bond at a given temperature and to remain exible at lower temperatures
(see Chap. 8. on the choice of latexes for general/deep freeze labeling).
But care should be exercised when comparing latexes belonging to
dierent polymer groups, as the nature of the polymer can also inuence
the exibility. On the other hand a more complex situation arises by the
synthesis of the new core shell latexes where particle structure is important.
Here it is possible to identify the composite structure of the latex by
determining the T
g
and the MFT. The optical examination of the cross-
section may show a random distribution of the soft and hard polymer
phases, but unusual T
g
values indicate the special structure. It must be
stressed that T
g
values of adhesive latexes are necessary but not sucient
to characterize these polymers. Particle characteristics (morphology) are
also important.
Furthermore the T
g
is not an absolute measure of an adhesives
suitability for use, but it is a good predictor. Once a material reaches
temperatures below its T
g
, the viscous component of its viscoelastic
character is eliminated [89]. Therefore it can be explained why silicone-
based PSAs suer no delamination at 75
C, like acrylics do at 25
C.
The T
g
range of silicone-based PSAs is situated at 100 to 125
C, while
organic PSAs possess a T
g
range of 40 to 25
C.
The eect of the T
g
on the peel adhesion at constant molecular
weight was studied by Kendall et al. [3]. They stated that the peel adhesion
increases with increasing T
g
(at constant tackier resin level) and passes
through a maximum. This maximum occurs at a T
g
of about 55
C. In
some instances maximum peel strengths are apparent at constant T
g
and
increasing resin level. Schrijvers [40] found that peel and tack increase
with increasing T
g
.
Converting Properties and T
g
Converting and laminating properties of the adhesive refer to its ability to be
coated in order to form a continuous lm on the face material. The uidity
required to coat the adhesive may be achieved using dierent procedures.
Through the use of higher temperatures (hot-melt PSAs) or dispersing
agents the viscosity of the adhesive can be reduced to a convenient level.
Practically, the dispersed (or dissolved) adhesive will form a continuous lm
108 Chapter 3
after drying, if its particles are soft enough to be deformed, to exhibit
coalescence only.
Coalescence is only possible above the T
g
. Near this temperature the
coalescence is theoretically possible, but the viscosity of the polymer remains
too high to achieve full coalescence. The coalescence depends on the
viscosity of the bulk polymer in the polymer particles [90]:
= 3, t( j d)
1
(3.7)
where is the contact angle of the particles (Fig. 3.1), g is the surface tension
of the dispersion, j is the viscosity of the bulk polymer in the particles, d is
the particle diameter, and t denotes time.
Pressure-sensitive adhesives are very low-T
g
polymers in a continuous
uid state with low viscosity. Thus PSA coalescence above the T
g
is given at
all temperatures. Therefore for these materials the denition of a minimum
lm-forming temperature has no sense nor importance. For adhesives other
than PSAs the negative inuence of the surface active agents (decrease of
the surface tension, see above formula) and the much higher viscosity in the
vicinity of the T
g
leads to a higher MFT value than the T
g
. Thus between the
glass transition temperature of these adhesives and their MFT, discrepancies
exist [91], that is:
T
g
,= MFT (3.8)
Figure 3.1 Coalescence of polymer particles.
Physical Basis for the Viscoelastic Behavior of PSAs 109
These discrepancies are due not only to the dispersion nature of the
adhesive, but also to the test methods used for measuring the MFT;
the MFT depends on particle size also. Excellent lm-forming properties are
obtained with small particle size dispersions. On the other hand, the particle
size dependence of the MFT, makes it sensitive towards the face stock
porosity. The MFT measured on porous surfaces (real conditions) is higher
than the standard value measured on aluminum [92].
End-Use Properties and T
g
It is well known that dierent adherents require dierent adhesives (i.e.,
harder or softer formulations). Adhesives for vinyl substrates have a T
g
value of 10
C.
Bond forming at high temperatures is possible for adhesives with a T
g
range of 5 to 100
C.
2 ROLE OF THE MODULUS IN CHARACTERIZING PSAs
The T
g
is an important characteristic of PSAs, allowing the selection of raw
materials for PSA applications. Its value denes the tack of PSAs; a low T
g
is a prerequisite for tacky materials. On the other hand the T
g
alone does
not permit us to obtain a real image of the adhesive performance. As an
example, Zosel [57] showed that poly(ethyl hexyl acrylate) (PEHA) and
polyisobutylene (PIB) have about the same T
g
values (64 and 60
C,
respectively), but PIB is less tacky because its modulus is 20300 times
higher than that of the PEHA. On the other hand hydroxyethylmethacrylate
(with a T
g
of 55
C is between 1 E0.5
and 2 E0.4 Pa [104]. The loss modulus G
//
is associated with energy
dissipation; the greater the value related to G
/
, the more exible the PSAs. Tan
o is the balance of the viscous/elastic behavior; in practice it can be correlated
to the cohesive strength of the adhesive; for hot-melt tan o =1 is a limiting
112 Chapter 3
value. Above this value the hot-melt PSA can ow without induced
deformation; below this value the hot-melt PSA has inherent cohesion.
2.1 Factors Influencing the Modulus
Generally the modulus is a material characteristic, but for materials in a
composite structure it may depend on the structure and component
characteristics of the composite. An example is that the elastic modulus of
epoxy coatings is higher than that of the uncoated material [92].
Material Characteristics
For common plastics the modulus is not a constant as it depends on the
molecular weight distribution (MWD) and on the manufacturing process
[48]. This is generally valid for adhesives and PSAs in particular. Here the
modulus is a function of the molecular weight and its distribution, the
chemical composition, and the structure. It should be noted that in certain
cases, when evaluating adhesive characteristics, the creep compliance (1/E),
not the modulus, and its dependence on the polymer need to be considered
(see Chap. 2, Section 2). As an example, special PSAs (e.g., skin adhesives)
use grafted polymers; the number and composition of the attached
polymeric moieties on the polymer, and the inherent viscosity (molecular
weight) of the polymer are manipulated to provide an adhesive composition
with a creep compliance value greater than 1.2 10
5
Pa
1
[6].
Modulus and Molecular Weight. Molecular weight is a parameter
inuencing the most important practical properties such as tensile strength,
elongation, modulus, T
g
, viscosity, green strength, wettability, pot life,
chemical resistance, and processability of the adhesives. For instance, it
has been shown for PIB, that tack and adhesive fracture energy decrease
monotonically for MW>45 kg/mol [105,106]. Schlademan and Bryson [107]
examined the eect of MW and aromatic content of the resin, for tackied
formulations. As stated, the number average molecular weight showed a
strong correlation with shear adhesion values. On the other hand, the
molecular weight eect on the molten viscosity was small. It was dicult to
determine whether the eect is primarily due to a direct viscosity (modulus)
inuence, an indirect compatibility (entropy) inuence, or both.
There is a plateau of the modulus corresponding to rubbery/elastic
behavior of the material as a function of the temperature. The existence of
this plateau and its position (T
g
) depend on the molecular weight. If the
molecular weight and the molecular weight between entanglements of the
polymer do not attain a critical value, no rubbery, elastic plateau appears.
Physical Basis for the Viscoelastic Behavior of PSAs 113
That means that for low molecular weight polymers a pressure-sensitive
bonding may appear, but pressure-sensitive debonding properties do not
exist.
Generally PSAs are polymer blends, thus the inuence of the
molecular weight on the modulus must be taken into account from the
point of view of the mutual solubility compatibility (see Section 1.3
and Chap. 8, Section 2.3).
Considering the tackied elastomer as a polymer solution in the resin,
and the polymer solution as ideal (zero excluded volume eect), the plateau
modulus (G
/
n
) decreases as a function of the volume fraction of the polymer
(V
p
), the density of the blend (,), and the molecular weight between the
entanglements (M
e
) according to the following equation:
G
/
n
= (,RT,M
e
) V
2
p
(3.14)
where R is the universal gas constant. The gas constant appears in the
correlation due to the hypothesis that the ideal rubber behaves like an ideal
gaseous conformation network. The role of the M
e
for the T
g
was discussed
earlier. M
e
can be calculated from the plateau modulus. For instance, as
found by [108], in the rubbery plateau region, the storage moduli G
/
(o, T) of
all poly-n-butylacrylate polymers (having dierent molecular weight) were
constant at about G
/
n
-0.15 MPa, thus the average molecular weight
between entanglements was -22 kg/mol. In principle the failure of the bril
may occur by: disentanglement of the polymer chain, fracture of the
polymer chain, or debonding of the bril from the adherend. In the rst
process the maximum strain of the bril c
max
is controlled by the product
t
d
dc/dt where t
d
is the terminal relaxation time of the polymer (t oM
3
and
decreases with increasing temperature), and dc/dt is the local strain rate
(dc/dt oV
deb
) [108]. This means that both the bril stress o
bril
and c
max
increase continuously as V
deb
M
3
increases because disentanglement becomes
more dicult. If the failure mechanism is not disentanglement but a
debonding process, the critical stress o sustainable by the bril-adherend
interface is the rupture criterion. One expects o
r
to be constant in this regime;
c
max
decreases with V
deb
M
3
since c
max
oo
r
/V
deb
M
3
. An entanglement model
can be used to estimate the critical molecular weight using the characteristic
ratio of the polymer, the number of bonds per monomer, and the monomer
molecular weight.
A classical example of the modulus dependence on molecular weight
is given by rubber/resin formulations. Here nonmilled rubber from dried
natural latex shows a larger plateau modulus and a higher elastic modulus
(G
/
) than milled natural rubber. Milled rubber possesses a lower molecular
114 Chapter 3
weight because of the mechano-thermal degradation of the elastomer. For a
CSBR latex, the increase of the molecular weight is accompanied by an
extension of the plateau region of the dynamic modulus in the master curve
towards higher temperatures [62]. Although the modulus increases with
increasing molecular weight, its adjustment by the molecular weight remains
limited. It was shown [2] that the maximum of the modulus is situated at
about 5001000 atoms in the main polymer chain. Longer molecules do not
give higher strength because their various segments act independently of
each other. On the other hand, an excessive increase of the MW is not
recommended because of the poor wetting out (low ow) and decrease of
the ability of the adhesive to desorb energy (adhesive break). It was shown
earlier that T
g
related parameters (chain mobility) limit the molecular weight
as well.
Another parameter is the molecular weight distribution, which may be
characterized by dynamical rheology (i.e., the rheology is very sensitive
towards MWD) [109]. This sensitivity is also valid for PSAs; in this case the
MWD inuences the loss tan o peak. McElrath [110] demonstrated that the
molecular weight (and its distribution) of a tackier inuences the peak of
the loss modulus and its location as a function of the frequency. For
tackied formulations the loss tan o peak is sharper for those resins with a
narrow MWD. It is very broad and diuse for the broad MWD obtained by
blending two resin fractions [33]. In a diagram representing tan o peaks for a
resin-rich phase (on a log scale) the broad peak (large MWD, resin mixtures)
does not equal zero. At zero, the loss modulus equals the storage modulus.
Above zero there is more energy loss than storage. On the other hand, for
tack it is important to dissipate energy during the debonding step in order to
achieve high tack. Energy dissipation is higher for a broad MWD (i.e., for
resin mixtures); this consideration is very important for the choice of the
tackier resins. Commercial acrylic adhesives like PEHA have a very broad
spectrum of relaxation times. In such products low MW fractions provide
the fast relaxation times necessary to achieve a large real contact area within
a short contact time (typically 1 s). As shown in [108] in the case of
monodisperse poly-n-butylacrylates these low MW fractions are absent, and
the contact area depends mostly on the elastic properties of the polymer at
bonding frequencies. One can conclude that cavitation by debonding of
PSAs is indeed governed by the viscoelastic properties of the adhesive and
the low molecular fractions in PSAs are important for the formation
of the contact. Experimental results have shown that a large spectrum of
relaxation times is a necessary condition for the performance of PSAs.
If short relaxation times are absent (i.e., no low MW fraction) the contact
with the substrate is not achieved within short contact times, while if long
relaxation times are absent, a brillar and adhesive fracture cannot be
Physical Basis for the Viscoelastic Behavior of PSAs 115
achieved. It is to be noted that the role of the relaxation times is taken into
account in the modied form of the Kaelble equation (for the peel) which
can be presented in the form [111]:
P = b l [(a N t D),12RT]o
2
f
(3.15)
where o
f
is the critical tensile stress of polymer at bril failure, D is the self-
diusion coecient of the polymer segment, b is the width and l the
thickness of the adhesive layer, a is the size of the diusing polymer segment,
N is the Avogadro number, and t is a segmental relaxation time.
The inuence of the molecular weight and MWD on the modulus
should be taken into account for rubber blends too. For instance, it was
shown [112] that mastication (used for natural rubber) will have a relatively
small eect on long chain molecules and on high molecular weight elements.
If they survive mastication to some extent, then their relative contribution
to the elasticity will increase. Therefore in mixtures with fractions having
dierent molecular weights, the inuence of the high molecular weight
factors is more pronounced. For tackied blends the molecular weight of the
resin is also signicant for the compatibility. In this case an optimum of
the viscoelastic properties is linked to molecular weight below 1000 with a
narrow MWD. The dependence of the modulus on the mutual solubility was
conrmed by Kendall, Foley, and Chu [3]. However, in certain cases the use
of low modulus polymers is dependent on coating technology. Low viscosity
requirements imply low molecular elastomers as raw materials for hot-melt
PSAs; therefore the toughness of hot-melt PSAs is also low [113].
Opportunities to adjust the molecular weight of the base polymers for
adhesives allow the adjustment of the modulus as well. Theoretically the
molecular weight may be modied by increasing the polymerization degree
for the linear polymer, or by crosslinking. It was shown earlier that
increasing the polymerization degree is limited because of the decrease of
the ow properties (for processing and end-use purposes). Thus an ade-
quate adjustment of the molecular weight should be achieved through
crosslinking.
Chemical Composition. The modulus is a function of the chemical
composition; polymers based on dierent monomers possess dierent
modulus values. For instance, of block copolymers with dierent rubbery
blocks (but similar block molecular weights and about 30% styrene), the
SEBS had the highest modulus [114]. On the other hand minor
compositional aspects such as sequence distribution also inuence the
modulus (see later).
116 Chapter 3
Zosel [57] tested the dependence of the modulus of acrylates on the
side chain length. Polymethyl-, polyethyl-, n-butyl-, i-butyl-, and ethyl hexyl
acrylate were studied in order to estimate the inuence of the chain length
(branching) on the T
g
and E. Shorter side chains in acrylates impart higher
modulus values, the E=f (temperature) plot being moved to the right
(higher T
g
values) with a higher plateau. In vinylacetate-butylacrylate
copolymers the maximum of the curves (peel force-peel rate) corresponds
to the change in mode of failure from cohesive (at lower peel rates and a
VAc content -50%) to adhesive (at higher debonding rates and a higher
VAc concentration) as a result of stiening by vinylacetate [115].
According to the theory of rubber elasticity the shear modulus G
A
depends on the number of crosslinks V
c
.
G
A
= V
c
R T (3.16)
where R and T are the universal gas constant and the temperature,
respectively. For tackied PSAs the addition of resin, the dilution of
crosslinks, and the destruction of the elastomeric network decrease the
modulus, but the modulus increases again at higher resin loadings. The
inuence of the crosslinking through molecular weight increase and
natural aging was discussed earlier. Here another special eect of the
crosslinking on the modulus, due to the lack of interaction between gel
and tackier, will be examined. Rubber shows a highly reversible
deformability combined with a low modulus (the modulus of unlled
rubber is 10
3
lower than that of plastics). Additionally rubber exhibits a
technologically important property, namely the ability to undergo self-
reinforcement [116] through formation of strain-induced crystalline
structures; this imparts excellent tensile properties to rubber. Self-
reinforcement by crystallization is a well-known possibility to improve
the properties (modulus) of rubber-like synthetic polymers used as raw
materials for hot-melt PSAs. In this case soft polyethylene butylene (PEB)
segments (matrix) are reinforced by polystyrene segments at the end of the
chain; this gives physical crosslinking [117]. Chemical crosslinking is
characteristic for CSBR latexes, as they consist of a mixture of polymer
species with linear chains, branched chains, and a crosslinked network.
Many natural rubber solvent-based adhesive formulations also contain a
crosslinking agent. The eect of crosslinking may be illustrated by the
increase of G
/
(elastic modulus). The adhesive with more crosslinking
possesses a higher modulus and higher shear holding power.
Classical rubber elasticity theory predicts that the plateau modulus G
/
n
for a diluted polymer is proportional to the square of the volume fraction of
Physical Basis for the Viscoelastic Behavior of PSAs 117
the polymer. Scaling law interpretations by De Gennes [118] suggests that
G
/
n
should be proportional to the 2.25 power of the polymer volume fraction
[see correlations (3.16) and (3.18) also]. Plots of SBR blends indicate higher
values of 2.452.65 for the exponent. A possible explanation is that the SBR
contains gels (see Chap. 5) which do not participate in the dilution by the
resin. Therefore the resin concentration in the amorphous phase is higher
than expected, resulting in an apparent higher power for the polymer
volume fraction, and as a practical consequence for SBR tackication in a
higher tack. The inuence of the tackier concentration on the modulus was
studied in [39]. It was shown that the minimum G
/
value (at 25
C) occurs
at about 4060% resin loading for rubber/resin systems. For a detailed
examination of the modulus dependence on tackiers, the reader is referred
to Chap. 8.
Dependence of Modulus on Sequence Distribution. The sequence
distribution exerts a strong inuence on the modulus of block copolymers
used as raw materials for hot-melt adhesives. By changing the sequence
length, volume, and polarity, it is possible to modify the modulus, as well as
the adhesion/cohesion balance of the polymers; here polar styrene blocks
reinforce these polymers [117]. It should be mentioned that a similar
hardening eect of certain monomers was observed in some statistical
copolymers as well [119]. For partially hydrolyzed ethylene vinyl acetate
(EVAc) copolymers the dependence of the modulus on the distribution of
the hydroxy groups was shown [120].
Theoretically SBCs have a lower modulus value (10
6
Pa) in
comparison to unvulcanized rubber (10
7
Pa). Therefore, in principle,
their tackication seems to be easier. Really, because of the segmented
construction of such elastomers, their tackication (as the increase of the
tack) concerns the diene sequences only, i.e., only the half of the
molecule can be tackied. However, the most important practical use of
sequence regulation occurs in the synthesis of thermoplastic rubbers used
as raw materials for hot-melt PSAs. These materials are comparatively
low molecular weight polybutadiene and polyisoprene rubbers, inter-
twined with short polystyrene chains. When they are cooled from the
melt the (incompatible) polystyrene end blocks separate out and gather
to form small hard domains of polystyrene. Since the polystyrene blocks
are covalently bonded to the rubber, phase separation is restricted; this
forces the copolymer into a special microphase morphology [121] (see
Chap. 5). Special sequence distribution allows increasing of the
molecular weight without the loss of the tack. Thus segmented EVAc
copolymers with very high molecular weight are adequate raw materials
for hot-melt PSAs [122].
118 Chapter 3
Softer, more tacky adhesives are obtained with polymers with a low
polystyrene content such as Cariex TR 1107 [123]. Some applications,
however, require a high shear resistance (i.e., a higher polystyrene content).
For lower viscosity hot-melt PSAs, which are easier to process at lower
temperatures, SIS block copolymers with high melt ow rates containing a
relatively high proportion of diblocks were developed. These low modulus
polymers also promote better die-cuttability of PSAs used in label stock
applications. It can be expected that in the future SIS polymers will be
designed with even more variations in the diblock/triblock ratio, which will
enable the manufacture of still softer hot-melt PSAs with a more aggressive
tack. The higher modulus polystyrene-polybutadiene-polystyrene (SBS)
block copolymers are mainly used in nontacky adhesives. For tacky hot-
melt PSAs with better shear, low MW, low viscosity SBS grades with a high
polystyrene content are used [2].
The size and morphology of the polystyrene domain in styrene
block copolymers inuence the cohesive strength of the system. However,
if one increases the polystyrene domain by increasing the polystyrene
content of the copolymer the storage plateau modulus increases, thus
making the polymer considerably more dicult to tackify [124]. On the
other hand it is well known that in tape applications the diblocks act as
an elastically ineective diluent in the formulated adhesive. A high
diblock content limits the cohesive strength of the base polymer of the
adhesive system. The tensile strength and the modulus decrease as the
diblock content increases. The diblock has a molecular weight which is
half that of the triblock. Increasing the SI content is equivalent to
replacing one triblock with two diblocks. This loss of connectivity causes
a loss of elastic strands. The measured o
max
in probe tests decreases
as the amount of diblock increases. In [65] the shear properties of
styrenic block copolymers were measured in the linear viscoelastic regime
(small strain) on a parallel plate rheometer. As demonstrated, dierences
due to the change of the SI content occur at 5 10
3
to 5 10
1
rad/sec,
where an increase in the SI content leads to a decrease in the elastic
modulus G
/
, and to an increase in the loss modulus G
//
. In this range
the blends are more dissipative if there is more SI. Tensile tests show
that decreasing the SI content or increasing the crosshead velocity leads
to a higher stress for all extensions and to a more pronounced strain
hardening. For label stock adhesives the presence of diblocks is currently
considered desirable for obtaining the die-cutting and skeleton waste
stripping performance. The optimum level of required diblock depends
upon the type and speed of the converting machine, the label stock face
material used, together with the other components in the adhesive
formulation.
Physical Basis for the Viscoelastic Behavior of PSAs 119
Modulus and T
g
The tensile strength and elastic modulus decrease above T
g
[125]. This
general observation has a special implication for polymer blends. For
certain polymer blends a phase separation temperature exists, the value of
which depends on the T
g
. A dierent dynamic mechanical response is
observed below and above this phase separation temperature (T
c
). For
temperatures below T
c
a thermorheologically simple behavior is observed
and the time/temperature (frequency/temperature) superposition principle
can be applied [126]. For these temperatures master curves are obtained
according to:
G
red
(T
o
, o) = G(T, o) T
o
o
T
1
g
(3.17)
where G
red
is the modulus (G
/
(x)
or G
//
(x)
) reduced to the reference temperature
T
o
. For polymer blends where no strong interactions occur between the
polymers (i.e., one of the components acts as a low molecular weight
solvent) the plateau modulus G
o
n2
is given by the following equation:
G
o
n2
= G
o
n2 (=1)
2.25
A
(3.18)
where
A
is the polymer volume fraction. For phase-separated mixtures (and
chemically crosslinked systems) an o
1/2
power law was observed (usually
G
/
o
2
and G
//
o).
Filler Effect on the Modulus. The use of llers with elastomers yields
increased stiness, modulus, and rupture energy [127]. In the presence of
reinforcing llers the elasticity modulus of elastomers at small and moderate
deformation increases in the rst approximation according to the Guth-
Smallwood equation:
E = E
o
(1 2.5
2
) (3.19)
where E
o
is the modulus of elasticity of the unlled elastomers and is
the volume fraction of the ller. This eect of the ller is due to a
hydrodynamic viscosity increase, an increased stiness, and a lower T
g
of
part of the rubber phase at the interface with the ller, given by surface
interaction. A covalent bonding of network segment to ller surface, and a
tightening of the short chains between aggregates must also be considered.
For lled elastomers the mechanical work of deformation (the change of
entropy and internal energy) should include the parameter . The ller
particles, which may be as small as 1.5 10
5
mm (about 30 polymer chain
120 Chapter 3
diameters), may also interface with the motion of the polymer molecules
[128]. Generally the modulus increases by increasing the concentration and
activity of the llers [129]. Fillers increase the modulus proportional to
their concentration [130]. The relative modulus increase was calculated as
a function of the concentration. These correlations are calculated for llers
acting as chemically inert substances. Proactive llers (such as metallic
oxides or salts) may interact with the base polymer, actually crosslinking
it. This addition of some oxide to carboxylated compounds dramatically
reduces the pressure-sensitive nature of the adhesive [131]. On the other
hand, tackier resins act partially as llers. Exhibiting a surface free energy
close to that of the elastomer, the ller is perfectly wetted by the organic
matrix and, as a consequence, good dispersions (i.e., lower viscosities) are
obtained [127].
In the case of PSAs llers can have a negative eect on the tack, but
they are sometimes added to provide additional functionality. As
demonstrated in [132], a ller volume fraction of 0.5 substantially stiens
the adhesive, while also reducing the overall deformation. An approximate
characteristic value of the energy release can be obtained assuming that
the nonlinear eects arise from the presence of a plastic displacement
in addition to the elastic displacement (by tack) corresponding to linear
elasticity. The overall adhesion energy is much larger than (
est
(energy
release rate), indicating that most of the energy is dissipated by bulk
deformation of the adhesive, with a relatively small fraction available
for crack propagation. Filler particles reduce the energy release rate
required for crack propagation, but have a more complicated eect on
the deformability of the adhesive, and on the resultant work of adhesion.
The overall extension of the adhesive initially increased with increasing
ller concentration, but was reduced substantially at the highest
concentration.
Crystalline polymers are two-phase systems also consisting of both
crystalline and amorphous regions. They can be considered as networks in
which crystallites are the solid ller and act as multifunctional crosslinks.
Such structures exist in paper, they may arise by strain-induced crystal-
lization in special elastomers, or in plastomers used as carrier materials,
as discussed in detail in Chap. 2, describing the rheology of the carrier
material [133].
As is known, multiphase rubbery polymers can be considered as elastic
networks or lled systems. The stress-strain behavior of such polymers
can be adequately modeled by the Mooney-Rivlin equation as an elastic
network (considering the trapped entanglements as nite crosslink
junctions) or using the Guth-Gold equation relating the stress level
(modulus) to the hydrodynamic eects of the styrene blocks, considered
Physical Basis for the Viscoelastic Behavior of PSAs 121
as a ller. In this case the plateau modulus is given by the equation [see
correlation (3.18) also]:
G
o
n
= (,,M
e
) RT(1 2.5 14.1
2
) (3.20)
According to [134] after drying an emulsion-based PSA the adhesive
behaves as a lled polymer melt. Even though emulsion particles are
internally crosslinked to get the appropriate viscoelastic behavior, the
particles only interact via entangled dangling ends at the interface between
particles.
Crosslinking Effect on the Modulus. To increase the peel energy it is
common to add a slight degree of crosslinking. By manipulating the gel/sol
ratio a higher performance adhesive can be designed. On the other hand,
crosslinking is generally inuenced by the initial molecular weight of the
polymer. Depending on the network mesh size, additive molecules (e.g.,
tackier) are either trapped (low M
c
) or not trapped (high M
c
) in the
network. Such segregation is important for the modulation of the adhesive
properties. Most polymers have a built-in crosslinking, in other cases
postsynthesis crosslinking is carried out. For instance, research has shown
that emulsion polymerization of acrylates carried out to complete
conversion, produces signicant amounts of microgels inside the particles
due to chain transfer to the polymer via hydrogen abstraction [135]. As
stated by Van Holde and Williams [136] high gel content could compensate
for low molecular weight. This was not true of the peel behavior. As
observed, adhesion failure was favored by high molecular weight, high gel
content, and high peel rate. Cohesive failure leaving tacky adhesive on the
substrate was favored by low molecular weight, low gel content, and low
peel speed. When the molecular weight was low, but the gel content was
high, a thin residue on the adherend was observed. The creep compliance
both at short times and at long times is governed by a combination of the
initial molecular weight and the gel content. The compliance decreases and
the viscosity increases as the molecular weight increases or the gel content
increases. The eect of gel content becomes less important at the high
molecular weights. The molecular weight of the soluble portion of partially
crosslinked adhesives is always dominated by the initial MW, even at high
gel content. Creep resistance can be achieved either through molecular
weight increases or gel content increases and to a certain extent one can
compensate for low initial molecular weight with greater crosslinking as far
as creep resistance is concerned.
122 Chapter 3
Dependence of the Modulus on the Tackifier Resins. It was shown
earlier that the use of tackier resins lowers the plateau modulus of adhesive
blends. This eect depends on the nature and concentration of the tackier.
The dependence of the modulus on the tackier concentration was shown
by Sherrif et al. [63] and Kamagata and Kosaka [137]. Zosel [57]
demonstrated that the modulus reaches a minimum for 50% resin in the
mixture (natural rubber/glycerine ester of colophonium). Ullmann and
Sweet [138] investigated silicone PSAs. As stated, a minimum concentration
of resin is required to tackify the polymer so that it exhibits PSA properties,
however too much resin will result in poor tack, and loss of adhesion. As the
level of the resin was increased, the storage modulus G
/
increased in the
entire frequency range. Good adhesion for tapes is achieved when G
/
is low
at low frequency rates, i.e., 0.1 rad/sec, and a relatively high slope exists for
G
/
as the frequency is increased [139]. Increasing the modulus G
/
results in
adhesives with higher adhesion and lower tack. Adhesives with lower creep
compliance (higher G
/
) will have better cohesive strength (creep resistance).
However, if the modulus is too high, the adhesive may not rapidly wet
the substrate.
As discussed earlier the molecular weight and MWD of the tackier
resin strongly inuence the modulus of the mixture. According to the ller
theory, the modulus of a diluted polymer (e.g., thermoplastic rubber in resin
and oil) is given by:
G
o
n
=
2
2
(,,M
e
) RT(1 2.5 14.1
2
) (3.21)
where is the fraction of the polymer in the polydiene phase and
2
is the
fraction of the polystyrene block in the entire composition [see Eq. (3.20)
also].
The modulus depends on the plasticizer too. Low molecular weight
fractions can play the role of the plasticizer also. As stated in [140] the
fraction of the polymer that has the molecular weight less than twice the
entanglement molecular weight (M
e
) will act as a plasticizer.
Dependence of the Modulus on Other Factors
The modulus of adhesive joints depends on the adhesives thickness [141]. In
fact increasing the thickness of the adhesive layer decreases its modulus.
This behavior may be explained by the special multilayer structure of the
adhesive and the inuence of the surface of the solid state components.
The modulus of the laminate varies close to the interface with the adhesive.
The width of this zone depends on the adhesive; for certain adhesives it
varies between 0.040.2 mm [142].
Physical Basis for the Viscoelastic Behavior of PSAs 123
It must be noted that the investigations on the inuence of the
modulus on the joint resistance, the dependence of the modulus, and
adhesive joint resistance on the adhesive layer thickness were mostly carried
out for thick-wall sandwiches and adhesives other than PSAs. However, it
should be noted that the thickness (coating weight) of the adhesive would
also exert a special inuence on the adhesive resistance for PSA laminates.
Increasing the coating weight increases the thickness of the mobile middle
adhesive layer only (i.e., the cold ow of the adhesive). According to the
paradox of Grith [143] a ber-like material possesses a much higher
strength than the same material in another form. The paradox of tensioning
or stressed length inuences the eect of the thickness of the adhesive and of
the primer also. Another parameter inuencing the modulus of plastics is
their degree of orientation [104]. Actually there are no data available about
a similar modulus dependence for PSAs. One should note the dependence
of the modulus on the composite structure of the laminate or laminate
components. Special attention must be paid to the inuence of humidity on
the modulus of the paper.
The modulus of the paper depends on its chemical composition,
temperature, physical structure, and moisture content. When analyzing the
elastic properties of paper, it is necessary to take into account the fact that
paper is composed of both crystalline and amorphous cellulose [141], the
latter undergoing softening as the moisture content increases. The eect of
moisture on the modulus of cellulosic materials is also aected by
temperature. A moisture/temperature equivalence exists, that is, for lower
moisture contents the softening eect occurs at higher temperatures. The
decrease in relative modulus with increasing moisture content is dierent for
papers of dierent crystallinity. Theoretically the modulus is a function of
the number of hydrogen bonds (n) absorbing the applied strain:
E = k n
1,3
(3.22)
where k is the average value of the force constant and E is the elastic
modulus of the paper. The decrease of the eective number of the hydrogen
bonds results from moisture absorption, resulting in the decrease of E.
2.2 Adjustment of the Modulus
On the basis of the interdependence between modulus and adhesion-
cohesion balance of PSAs there is a need to adjust the modulus value. As
discussed earlier, the modulus is a polymer characteristic and depends on
its chemical and macromolecular properties; thus the modulus should be
124 Chapter 3
modied by changing these properties. In a similar manner to the T
g
it is
possible to change the modulus of the adhesives during the polymer
synthesis or through formulation.
Synthesis
The choice of the monomers and the control of the sequence distribution
and polymer structure allow an adequate regulation of the modulus. As an
example, the T
g
and modulus of the acrylic latexes can be adjusted by
polymerizing monomeric acrylates at dierent rates [3]. On the other hand
the choice of the adequate rubbery sequence for block copolymers for hot-
melt PSAs allows the modication of the polymer stiness. Jacob [144]
pointed out that although more economical, there are only a few cases
where the use of SBS block copolymers for hot-melt PSAs applications
appears appropriate. This may be explained by the high modulus of these
compounds compared to SIS, and by the higher stiness and limited
tackifying ability (compatibility).
Formulation
On the basis of a few adhesive groups/polymers, a large number of PSAs are
compounded according to the very dierent requirements concerning the
adhesion/cohesion balance. This is possible through the use of formulation.
Formulation refers to the design of the adhesive properties through
compounding. Designing of the adhesive properties involves mainly
tackication (i.e., the increase of tack and peel) or, in a few cases, the
improvement of the shear and cohesion (see Chaps. 6 and 8).
Tackication imparts better ow properties and molecular mobility.
This is achieved by the use of diluting agents, either micromolecular
(plasticizer) or macromolecular (tackifying resins). Thermoplastic rubbers
are unique in the way they bring together both rubber and plastic [145].
They comprise two inherently incompatible, but chemically connected
segments which attempt to separate at service temperatures; this results
in their having a morphological structure in which thermoplastic end
blocks such as polystyrene form domains holding together a rubbery
network (e.g., polybutadiene; see earlier). Materials with ne basic
morphologies can thus be produced.
In addition to these opportunities provided by changing the basic
polymer structure, further modication of the material properties is possible
during compounding. For example, by using low molecular weight
compounding ingredients which demonstrate preferential compatibility
with, or solvency for one or the other of the two phases in the base
polymer, it is possible to change the eective ratio of the thermoplastic to
Physical Basis for the Viscoelastic Behavior of PSAs 125
rubber phase. More specically it is often possible to move from a
nonresilient morphology to a soft material by increasing the volume of the
rubbery phase through the addition of a suitable oil, or by decreasing the
amount of the polystyrene compatible aromatic resin in an SBS copolymer/
oil/resin hot-melt adhesive formulation. The plasticizing agents typically
decrease both the dynamic viscosity and the elastic modulus of the adhesive
matrix.
Crosslinking
Crosslinking yields a higher modulus and higher shear resistance. A
noncrosslinked soft acrylic polymer has a storage modulus of about 10
3
Pa,
and this value may be increased to 10
4
Pa by irradiation [146]. In the range
of the crosslinked adhesives those with the highest modulus are the most
crosslinked and have the highest shear and holding power [147].
Theoretically, on the basis of crosslinking data it should be possible to
calculate the shear modulus of the polymer. Practically, in a few cases it
is possible with the aid of crosslinking data to predict the gel point and
the shear modulus for polyurethanes [148].
The theoretical basis for the dependence of the modulus on the
crosslinking is given by the dependence of the modulus on the polymer
chain network, and on the number of crosslinked sites [119]. For small
deformations (according to Fox and Flory [38], deformation means
transition from a real network to a phantom network) there is a correlation
between the modulus and the number of crosslinked points (entanglement):
G = 2C
1
2C
2
= (v
CH
v
C
T
e
)kT(r
2
),r
2
o
)) (3.23)
where G is the modulus, 2C
1
is a function of crosslinking density, v
e
is the
number of network points in the uncrosslinked polymer (polymer-specic
content), and T
e
is the trapping factor (i.e., the number of rigid network
points); it is a function of molecular weight distribution and chemical
crosslinking density. r
2
) is the mean square end-to-end distance of a
network in the undistorted state and r
2
o
) is the mean square end-to-end
distance of the corresponding free chains. Ideally, the chain length of the
crosslinking agents also inuences the modulus [149]; longer-chain cross-
linking agents allow more elongation.
2.3 Modulus Values
The value of the modulus at a temperature above T
g
characterizes the
viscoelastic behavior of PSAs raw materials. The location of the rubbery
126 Chapter 3
plateau is very important. In order to obtain suitable adhesive properties
at temperatures above T
g
(room temperature or less), a low-E plateau is
needed. The dependence of the modulus on the temperature and stress rate
is well known. Thus it becomes very dicult to compare dierent polymers
on the basis of single E data only. However, these values provide a rst
indication of the possible application eld of the polymers. Pressure-
sensitive adhesives are soft and mobile under certain conditions. Even the
most crosslinked PSAs do not match any property of a thermoset plastic
as the value of their modulus is low, and hence their lms are not meant
to be used without a face material. However, in the last decade carrierless
pressure-sensitive products were developed also. Such products are
described in detail in [150]. First PVC and butyl rubber were used for
carrierless products. Their plasticizing allows a substantial decrease of the
modulus and its regulation. Later special acrylic adhesives were developed.
They are used mostly as mounting and sealing tapes. Their modulus is
increased by lling (with continuous or discrete llers) and crosslinking.
Therefore, for such products, an adequate peel value can be obtained
with high coating weight only. Table 3.5 summarizes some modulus values
for polymers used for PSAs or related materials.
A maximum tack implies a modulus of 1 10
5
to 2 10
4
Pa [151]. For
a good wet-out a modulus of about 3 10
5
Pa is required [152]. For dierent
kinds of stresses dierent modulus values must be taken into account.
Generally cold ow is characterized by the creep modulus E
c
:
E
c
(t) = o,c
(t)
(3.24)
where o is the stress (constant in time) and e
(t)
is the time dependent strain:
E = f (T, stress) (3.25)
Generally for small deformations (c -0.8%) the stress dependence of the
deformation may be eliminated. Pressure-sensitive adhesives are subject to
higher deformation levels, thus the stress dependence of the strain cannot be
ignored and the value of the creep modulus is not a constant. On the other
hand, for high deformation rates (e.g., peel or cutting) the dynamic modulus
must be considered:
E
/
= 2G
/
(1 v) (3.26)
Physical Basis for the Viscoelastic Behavior of PSAs 127
where v is Poissons ratio. As discussed earlier (Chap. 2, Section 1.2),
Dahlquist [93] has taken the 1/E value (creep compliance) as an index for
PSAs, showing that for general PSAs this value should exceed 1 l0
6
Pa
1
but a maximum tack requires a lower modulus (i.e., a higher creep
compliance) [93,94]. The creep compliance for PSAs for medical and
surgical applications should be about 1.2 10
5
Pa
1
, preferably
1.3 10
5
Pa
1
[13]; the higher the creep compliance, the bigger the adhesive
residue left on the substrate. The fundamentals of creep compliance as they
relate to polymeric materials and in particular to viscoelastic polymers are
covered in [110].
Table 3.5 Modulus Values for Materials Used for PSA Laminates
Material Modulus Value (N/mm
2
)
Nature Characteristics MD Mean TD Ref.
Butadiene-styrene
copolymer
Bulk 711 153
copolymer, block, radial 5
copolymer, block, linear 25
Cellulose acetate Film 2445 154
Ethylene-vinylacetate Bulk, grafted 280 122
copolymer Bulk, 5070% VA 2001600
130700 155
Isoprene-styrene 28
copolymer, block, linear
Natural rubber Bulk 0.9 153
Paper 29203700 156
Polycarbonate Film 21002400 116
Polyethylene LD, lm 200500 116
HD, lm 7001400 116
MD, lm 2835
Polyethyleneterephthalate Film, oriented 50130 155
Polypropylene BOPP, lm 1400 2200 157
BOPP, lm 2400 4000 157
BOPP, lm 1500 2500 157
BOPP, lm 2000 2500 157
BOPP, lm 1200 2100 158
Polystyrene Film 32003250 116
Polyvinylchloride Hard, unplasticized,
lm
4000 159
Plasticized, lm 67 61
Rubber Unlled 15 116
128 Chapter 3
3 CONTACT PHYSICS
As stated in Chap. 1, Section 1 the adhesive properties of PSAs require a
viscoelastic non-Newtonian ow behavior. The rheology of such materials
is characterized by the time and temperature dependent modulus, and its
components. In application practice such behavior is manifested by the
time, stress, and temperature dependent bonding (e.g., dwell time) and
debonding (e.g., adhesive or cohesive break of the joint as a function of
the stress rate) of the adhesive. To understand the nature of this special
bonding/debonding process, contact physics and mechanics were applied
for its study. The scope of such investigations is to correlate the end-use
adhesive characteristics (e.g., peel strength, tack, and shear resistance) with
the data obtained by rheological and mechanical measurements and
calculations (see Chap. 6 also). Classical mechanics oers well-known test
and calculation methods which can be extrapolated. Thus, simplifying the
problems of pressure-sensitive adhesive bonding and debonding to those of
fracture mechanics on the one hand, and correlating the properties of the
stressed nite polymer elements with the their macromolecular build-up on
the other hand, it is possible (at least theoretically) to explain the practical
behavior of PSAs.
The viscoelastic contact problem can be divided in two phases:
advancing contact or the bonding phase, and receding contact or the
debonding phase. In the bonding phase the contact radius increases with
increasing time, whereas during receding contact, the contact radius
decreases with increasing time. Contact problems were studied rst for the
most simple case of elastic materials; later the results of such investigations
were extrapolated for viscoelastic materials.
3.1 Contact Mechanics for Elastic Materials
The study of the bonding phase for elastic materials started some time ago.
For such materials the lack of creep allows the examination of the bonding/
debonding as a reversible process where stress and strain occur simulta-
neously. Derjaguin was the rst to consider the eect of elastic contact
deformation on adhesion by assuming that the particle acts as a Hertzian
indenter. The driving force for elastic contact is the work of adhesion.
Maugis and Pollock [160] generalized the adhesion model to include plastic
deformation and predicted that the contact area was determined by the
hardness H of the deformed material.
F F
a
= a
2
H (3.27)
Physical Basis for the Viscoelastic Behavior of PSAs 129
where F is the external force and F
a
is the adhesion force between particle
and surface. The adhesion energy for the contact mechanics data is obtained
using the following equation:
G = {(a
3
K),(R P)]
2
,6a
3
K (3.28)
given by Maugis [161].
The adhesion to elastomeric substrates generally can be described
quite well by the Johnson-Kendall-Roberts (JKR) theory [162,163].
According to the JKR theory [161,164] the contact radius a between
contacting spherically symmetric bodies under an applied load is given by:
a
3
= (R,K){P 3WR [6WRP (3WR)
2
]
1,2
] (3.29)
where W is the work of adhesion, P is the applied (contact) load, and R
i
, E
i
,
and v
i
are the radius of curvature, modulus, and Poissons ratio of the ith
cylinder (lenses or sphere) respectively.
1,K =
3
4
(1 v
2
1
),E
1
((1 v
2
2
),E
2
) (3.30)
In the above correlations the modulus of elasticity is the material charac-
teristic which is determinant for the deformation of the items in contact.
G = (a
3
K,R p),6a
3
K (3.31)
The eective adhesion energy ( can be calculated using Eq. (3.31), when the
crack propagates at the interface and gross displacements are purely elastic
[165]. This parameter is similar to the fracture mechanics concept of strain
energy release rate. A desirable feature of a contact mechanical experiment
is the very low crack propagation speed. Another feature is its capability to
reveal both thermodynamic and kinetic information through loading and
unloading cycles.
3.2 Contact Mechanics for Viscoelastic Materials
For viscoelastic materials, from the energetical point of view, contact build-
up and debonding are not fully reversible. The deformation energy is
(partially) dissipated by viscous ow. Such ow depends on the time,
therefore there is a delay between the stress and the strain. In practice,
contacting needs a (dwell) time. Creep appears during bonding/debonding.
130 Chapter 3
Ideally the time dependence of the viscous ow may be a linear
function. Generally it is not. On the other hand (in practice) bonding and
debonding occur at dierent stress rates, i.e., the time-temperature
dependent material characteristics dier also. Debonding is strongly aected
by the hydrodynamics of liquids and fracture mechanics, manifested
through microscopical deformation of the material under ow (cavitation
and brillation, see later), which depend on the experimental conditions too.
Bonding seems to be more easily described by rheological parameters. The
contact mechanics problem for a viscoelastic material including the eects
of adhesion has not been solved.
The basis of viscoelastic adhesion to solid surfaces has been lain by
Creton and Leibler [166]. The viscoelastic nature is accounted for by using a
time dependent modulus E(t) of the adhesive. Hui et al. [167] extended the
model to a rough surface in which the surface topology is modeled by a
Gaussian distribution of spherical asperities. In both cases for wetting,
elastic rather than viscous ow dominated. Elmendorp et al. [134] postulate,
that for PSAs the actual wetting mechanism for slow processes is viscous
wetting rather than viscoelastic deformation.
The most comprehensive theory for the bonding phase is due to
Schapery [168] and Hui et al. [169]. In this theory the rate of contact growth
is related to a reference stress intensity factor, which depends on the loading
history and material viscoelasticity. This theory was conrmed by numerical
simulations [170]. Unfortunately this theory cannot be applied to the
debonding phase, so a comprehensive theory for adhesion hysteresis is still
lacking. Viscoelasticity leads to lower adhesion energy from loading and
higher adhesion energy from unloading than the equilibrum value [171].
Johnson [172] proposed a theory for adhesion hysteresis. This theory
assumes that the rate of loading and unloading are suciently slow, so that
the bulk material is in its relaxed state. Barquins and Maugis [173] have
approached this problem from the viewpoint of fracture mechanics for the
special case that viscoelastic losses are localized at the crack tip. Viscoelastic
response is assumed to be proportional to the thermodynamic work of
adhesion, and creep was completely ignored. The theory of Ting [174] and
experimental results suggest creep eects can be signicant. Using the
Maxwell and Voigt/Kelvin model, the most striking feature of both models
is that the time of maximum contact radius t
peak
does not coincide with the
time of maximum load as it does for elastic materials. Instead maximum
radius always occurs after the maximum load. This delay occurs because the
material continues to respond by creep even during the unloading cycle.
The best sensitivity to creep is obtained if the loading cycle is as short as
possible and the unloading time comparable to the relaxation time. Using
FEM, Lin and Hui [170] showed that Johnsons solution works well for slow
Physical Basis for the Viscoelastic Behavior of PSAs 131
loading/unloading rates, but fails to capture adhesion hysteresis at moderate
or high rates of loading. In addition Johnsons theory cannot be used if the
material exhibits long time uid behavior. Such material behavior is often
used to t experimental data [175,176]. Lin and Hui [177] investigated
materials with creep compliance of the form:
C(t) = C
o
C
1
t
m
0 - m41 (3.32)
where t is time, C
1
is a material constant, and C
o
is the instantaneous
compliance. The special case of m=1 corresponds to a linear viscous
material. Using a cohesive zone theory, it was possible to simulate adhesion
hysteresis for two linear viscous spheres in contact. Johnson [172] has shown
that the relevant time scales for the two processes are usually very dierent.
It has been found [178], that the creep eect should dominate the viscoelastic
response of the most viscoelastic materials with eective moduli smaller
than about 10100 MPa and W (work of adhesion) -100 mJ/m
2
. As
discussed in Chap. 1, Section 2, according to Dahlquist, for PSAs the
compression modulus should not be much higher than 10
5
Pa (i.e., 0.1 MPa).
That means, that the creep eect dominates the viscoelastic bonding/
debonding behavior of common PSAs.
Although in some cases there is a direct connection between contact
mechanics and peel strength data (see Chap. 6), and the extrapolation of the
contact mechanics data (at low rate) matches the peel data (at high rate), the
above described theoretical approaches (in their actual status) cannot
describe the behavior of PSAs. Supplementary problems arise from the time
dependent character of the peel tests (e.g., adhesive or cohesive debonding),
and in many cases other approaches (than the very frequently used indenter-
based bonding-debonding) give better results, showing that the fundamental
hypothesis concerning the mechanics of the joint is not valid.
3.3 Micromechanical Considerations
As mentioned earlier, in the past few years the parameters of pressure
sensitivity were completed by criteria observed during the microscopic
examination of the adhesive joint. Such characteristics refer to the visible
(physical) modulus of the debonding of strained polymer joints, to the
hydrodynamics of material ow, and to the fracture mechanics. Rheologi-
cally they are related to the modulus of the material.
Adhesion between materials can be considered to be the result of two
contributing factors: the chemical work of adhesion (W
a
) which is related to
132 Chapter 3
the bonding across the interface, and the energy dissipation due to the
deformation of the two materials (), generally expressed by:
G
c
= W
a
(1 ) (3.33)
where G
c
is the strain energy release, a quantitative measure of the adhesion
[179]. The work of adhesion W is composed of contributions from a
thermodynamic component W
o
and a viscoelastic component W
o
[(R,T)]
[180,181]:
W = W
o
W
o
[(R, T)] (3.34)
The work of adhesion is the energy associated with either formation or
disruption of an interface under equilibrium conditions, which by denition,
allows no dissipation of energy. The work of interfacial fracture is the
energy of disruption of the interface between two solids. Since separation
of two solids cannot be done at equilibrium, some dissipation must occur.
The dissipation is of two kinds: a surface dissipation in the vicinity of the
interface due to the separation, and a second type of dissipation due to the
bulk deformation of the viscoelastic adhesive. The thermodynamic work
of adhesion represents the bond strength (or the intimate wetting of
an adhesive on a substrate), and results from chemical bonds, physical
interactions, acid-base interactions, or other adhesive mechanisms. The
work of adhesion also shows temperature and time dependence, thus
reecting the viscoelastic properties of the adhesive.
For energy dissipation a special role is played by the deformation,
microscopical ow (strain) behavior of the adhesive polymers. Cracks in soft
materials or at the interface between a soft and a sti material sometimes
blunt rather than propagate. Delamination of PSAs is accompanied by
cavitation in the PSA, and the formation of an extensive cohesive zone
behind the debond tip. The presence of such large scale bridging may
provide additional energy dissipation and increased resistance to delami-
nation. The transition from propagation to blunting leads to a substantial
improvement in the performance of pressure-sensitive adhesives. According
to [182] blunting in a soft elastic solid has essentially to do with large
deformations. Blunting is predicted when maximum cohesive stress and
Youngs modulus are of similar magnitude.
Taking the example of an indenter which is removed from the
adhesive (e.g., during probe tack, or loop tack), generally the micro-
scopical phenomena of ow related to debonding include cavitation
build-up, build-up of air ngers, and brillation (Fig. 3.2). As the probe
Physical Basis for the Viscoelastic Behavior of PSAs 133
withdraws, the lm must sustain a negative hydrostatic pressure and there
is a strong driving force to reduce the degree of connement of the lm.
This reduction of the connement occurs through the formation of
Samann-Taylor air ngers coming from the outside of the probe. These
air ngers cover rapidly the entire contact surface, coalesce, and no
adhesive remains attached to the probe [183]. In practice, cavitation and
brillation strongly depend on the geometry of the experimental devices.
When a at punch is pulled away from the adhesive layer, the contact
area remains constant until cavities form at the punch/adhesive interface.
These voids grow rapidly to an equilibrium size at which point the
loading energy is used to extend an array of brils. For at punches the
hydrostatic stress within the adhesive is large enough to lead to nucleation
and growth of voids. In most commercial PSAs this bril drawing
process is responsible for the high adhesion energies typically measured.
For spherical punches the most energetically favorable debonding mode
is crack propagation from the contact perimeter.
As the punch is pulled away from the adhesive, mechanical energy is
stored in the adhesive materials as it is deformed. The energy release rate
quanties the amount of energy which is recovered when an incremental
area of the adhesive detaches from the punch. Part of this energy is stored
as surface energy, in the new surface which is created, but most of it is
Figure 3.2 Debonding by cavitation and brillation.
134 Chapter 3
dissipated irreversibly within the adhesive in a region near the crack tip.
For a linearly elastic material the values of G are given by:
( = [(P
/
P)
2
,4a] dC,da (3.35)
where a is the contact radius, P is the applied load, P
/
is the load corre-
sponding to a given contact radius in the absence of adhesive interaction,
and C is the compliance of the adhesive layer. As the thickness of the
adhesive layer (h) decreases, its compliance decreases as well, as does its
derivative and the resultant driving force for crack propagation. For very
large values of a/h the compliance of the adhesive layer is inversely
proportional to the bulk modulus of the material.
Experimentally cavitation is observed for values of the average tensile
stress that are comparable to Youngs modulus of the elastic layer
(o
avg
/E=1). A critical value of ( referred to here as (
o
must be exceeded
in order for a nite crack velocity to be observed. The minimum possible
value of (
o
is the thermodynamic work of adhesion, which is typically of the
order of 0.05 J/m
2
for polymers.
It is to be noted, that such phenomena related to ow instability
possess a general character. They can be observed in the ow of other highly
viscous or viscoelastic uids also. For instance, the build-up of cavitations
is well known to specialists in the processing of molten plastic lms (blown
lms, bubble instability); brillation is also observed by stretching and
splitting of polymer lms (lm/lament transition) and from the spinning
of high polymers. In these technologies such phenomena appear if the
strain rate is higher than a critical value (see Chap. 4 also).
Over the last few years appreciable progress has been achieved in the
quantitative description of the micromechanics of PSA debonding [184,185].
These works consider the nucleation of cavities within the PSA polymer and
the extension of brils as the major factors leading to the dissipation of
applied energy [186]. For strong adhesives the peel edge propagates as a
process of cavitations and brillation [187]. Such failure has been observed in
tack tests [185,188,189] and also in a series of 180
C), while
the colloids for use in laminating adhesives have a T
g
value within a range
of 25 to 10
C.
Classical (non-pressure-sensitive) adhesive joints are designedandtested
according to the theory and calculation methods of common mechanics.
Such methods were used for PSAs also. For instance, Brockmann and Gei
[36] extrapolate the calculation methods used for common adhesive joints to
PSAs, admitting that joint failure occurs after a critical value of the creep.
For the evaluation of this critical load limit, creep measurements have been
carried out using single lapped shear joints. Three stadiums of creep were
observed. It starts with an elastic strain and decelerated creep. When the
acceleration becomes zero, i.e., at the beginning of constant creep velocity,
the deformation turns from viscoelastic-plastic to viscoelastic. The third
creep stadium is dened by a starting acceleration and ends with total failure
of the specimen.
REFERENCES
1. Adhes. Age, (3) 8 (1987).
2. H.G. Koch, Adhasion, (11) 312 (1976).
3. J. Guillet and V. Verney, Polymer J., (8) 773 (1984).
4. R.R. Lowman, FINAT News, (3) 24 (1987).
5. D.R. Saini and A.V. Shenoy, Plastics and Rubber Proc. Appl., (3) 178 (1983).
6. B. Poltersdorf and D. Schwambach, Kautschuk, Gummi, Kunststoffe, (5) 454
(1988).
7. H.J. Laake, Kautschuk, Gummi, Kunststoffe, (6) 506 (1989).
8. J.L. Jorgensen, L.D. Thomson, K. Rasmussen and K. Soendergard, Internat.
Polymer Process, (34) 122 (1988).
9. F. Kurihara and S. Kimura, Polymer J., 17, 863 (1985); in Kautschuk, Gummi,
Kunststoffe, (3) 256 (1985).
10. H.Y. Tang and J.E. Mark, Macromolecules, (17) 2616 (1984).
11. H. Kehler and W.M. Kulickje, Chem. Ing. Techn., (10) 802 (1986).
12. Kautschuk, Gummi, Kunststoffe, (9) 31 (1985).
13. S. Cartasegna, Kautschuk, Gummi, Kunststoffe, (12) 1188 (1986).
14. F. Grajewski, A. Limper and G. Schwarter, Kautschuk, Gummi, Kunststoffe,
(12) 1188 (1986).
15. G. Bolder and H. Meier, Kautschuk, Gummi, Kunststoffe, (8) 715 (1986).
16. Y. K. Kawasaki and N. Watanabe, Kautschuk, Gummi, Kunststoffe, (2) 119
(1987).
17. T. Gehman, Kautschuk, Gummi, Kunststoffe, (6) 493 (1989).
18. T.S. Ng, Kautschuk, Gummi, Kunststoffe, (9) 830 (1986).
Comparison of PSAs 159
19. J.N. Hay, Coaters Scientific Conference Communications, Surface Coating
Evaluation and Performance, 1988.
20. H.M. Laun, Kautschuk, Gummi, Kunststoffe, (6) 554 (1987).
21. G. Bolder and H. Meier, Kautschuk, Gummi, Kunststoffe, (3) 196 (1984).
22. A. Tripathi, G.H. McKinley, and P. Whittingstall, Using Filament Stretching
Rheometry to Predict Strand Formation and Processability of Pressure-
Sensitive Adhesives and Other Complex Fluids, Proceedings of the 23rd
Annual Meeting of the Adhesion Society, Myrtle Beach, SC, Febr., 2023
2000, p.119.
23. Cr.I. Simionescu, N. Asandei and I. Benedek, Rev. Roum. Chim., (7) 1081
(1971).
24. M.I. Kolte and P. Szabo, J. Rheol, 43 (3) 609 (1999).
25. I. Benedek, Development and Manufacture of Pressure-Sensitive Products,
Marcel Dekker, New York, 1999, Chapter 3.
26. I. Benedek, E. Frank and G. Nicolaus (Poli-Film Verwaltungs GmbH,
Wipperfu rth, Germany), DE 4433626 A1/21.09.1994.
27. I. Benedek, Development and Manufacture of Pressure-Sensitive Products,
Marcel Dekker, New York, 1999, Chapter 4.
28. J.B. Bonnet, M.J. Wang, E. Papirer and A. Vidal, Kautschuk, Gummi,
Kunststoffe, (6) 510 (1986).
29. L. Mullins, J. Rubber Res., (16) 275 (1947).
30. G. Hammed, Rubber Chem. Technol., (5) 576 (1981).
31. A. Griffith, in Coaters Scientific Conference Communications, Surface Coating
Evaluation and Performance (J.N. Hay, Ed.), 1988.
32. R. Dorpelkus, Allgemeine Papier-Rundschau, (16) 456 (1986).
33. A.A. Chalykh, A.E. Chalykh,V. Yu Stepanenko and M.M. Feldstein,
Viscoelastic Deformations and the Strength of PSA Joints Under Peeling,
Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Meeting of the Adhesion Society, Myrtle Beach,
SC, Febr., 2023, 2000, p. 252.
34. A.N. Gent, G.R. Hamed and W.J. Hung, Adhesion of Elastomers: Dwell
Time Effects and Adhesion to Fillers, Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Meeting
of the Adhesion Society, Myrtle Beach, SC, Febr., 2023, 2000, p. 6.
35. E.A. Theiling, Kunstharznachrichten, (1) 14 (1972).
36. W. Brockmann and P.L. Gei, J. Adhesion, 63, 253 (1997).
160 Chapter 4
5
Chemical Composition of PSAs
A typical PSA is derived from a lm-forming elastomeric material such as
natural rubber, styrene-butadiene, butyl, silicone, nitrile, and acrylic rubber.
The elastomer provides exibility, ease of tackication, and the desired
bond strength when compounded with compatible tackiers, pigments,
plasticizers, waxes, and oils. Special polymers were developed as raw
material for PSAs which work with or without tackiers. Natural rubber
represents 45% of the elastomeric raw materials; block copolymers and
water-based acrylics amount to 40%, and the remaining part is mainly
covered by solvent-based acrylics. Although new elastomers have been
identied as base materials for PSA applications, natural rubber is still the
most preferred polymer.
From a chemical point of view classical PSAs are elastomers that
exhibit viscoelastic properties due to their low T
g
(40 to 60
C) and
modulus. Their macromolecular basis is built on long-chain polymers, with
a certain degree of branching and with or without crosslinking. The balance
between plastic and elastomeric properties is governed by the polymer
nature and structure, and molecular weight. For classical rubber-based
PSAs, structure and molecular weight adjustment occurs via crosslinking or
mechano/chemical destruction of the network (e.g., mastication, tackica-
tion, plasticizing). Synthetic raw materials for PSAs can be tailored in order
to achieve the chemical characteristics required to obtain the desired
adhesive properties. A detailed study of the interdependence between the
chemical basis and physical structure of PSAs was carried out by Krecenski,
Johnson, and Temin [1]. As discussed earlier (Chap. 2) the rheology of
the pressure-sensitive product depends on its solid components and the
interaction between the liquid and solid components too. The chemical
composition of the whole pressure-sensitive constructionpolymer carrier
and macromolecular adhesivewas discussed in [2]. A detailed analysis of
the formulation of PSAs is given in [3].
161
Pressure-sensitive adhesives are amorphous, viscoelastic materials, and
their ow behavior is characterized by the viscosity and the modulus (see
Chap. 4). On the other hand a special structure and temperature dependence
of the internal phase transitions serves as the basis for the required rheology.
Since the viscosity, modulus, and glass transition temperature are dependent
on the chemical composition, changes in the composition and/or in the
macromolecular characteristics of the basic elastomers may inuence the
rheology of PSAs. From a theoretical point of view it is more accurate to
discuss the inuence of the compositional and macromolecular factors on
the properties of PSAs separately. However, it is not within the scope of this
book to present a detailed, purely theoretical approach to PSAs; therefore
the chemical basis (composition and macromolecular characteristics) will be
discussed together and, if relevant, related to adhesive practice.
1 RAW MATERIALS
Early PSAs were based on organic solvent solutions of natural rubber that
were tackied by some type of resinous material [1]. These so-called
rubber-resin (RR) adhesives are still widely used. With regard to their
chemical basis and application technology, PSAs may be classied into
dispersed systems and 100% solids. Dispersed systems may include solutions
and emulsions; 100% solids cover hot-melt adhesives and radiation-cured
materials (oligomers and prepolymers). The most important solutions are
solvent-based systems. They may include rubber/resin adhesives, acrylics
(thermoplastic and crosslinked), and silicones. Hot-melt PSAs are based
on (mainly styrene-diene) block copolymers and acrylics. The radiation
(electron beam and UV)-cured materials can be either acrylic- or rubber-
based. Finally emulsions (water-borne adhesives) comprise acrylics, natural
and synthetic rubber latexes, and ethylene vinyl acetate dispersions. The
original compositions were heterogeneous physical mixtures of one or
more elastomers (rubbers) with tackiers and/or plasticizers. The second
approach, essentially homogeneous polymers based mainly on acrylate
esters, was introduced in the mid-1950s. Both techniques were rened and
their usefulness extended as a result of extensive research and development
on new raw materials and crosslinking methods, and both are currently
available in water-borne and 100% solids form as well as in the original
solvent solution. Deciencies persist, however, especially as the use of
PSAs expanded into new, more demanding markets. Particular needs exist
for PSAs with good aging characteristics, with broader specic adhesion,
higher cohesion and heat resistance, adherend independent removability,
and reduced plasticizer-induced performance losses when used on exible
162 Chapter 5
polyvinyl chloride (PVC) face stock materials or special substrates. Some
alternative compositional approaches have shown considerable improve-
ment, especially for silicones, but these are too expensive for general use, as
are urethane-based PSAs.
1.1 Elastomers
A main characteristic of PSAs is bond forming (tack). There are three
fundamental criteria that must be met in order for an elastomer to exhibit
tack [4]. The polymeric chain must come into molecular contact with the
surface, thus the chains must interdiuse across the interface and become
entangled with one another. After bond formation the elastomer must
display high cohesive strength to resist easy separation upon application of a
force. This property distinguishes a tacky elastomer from a low molecular
weight liquid. This combination of partially contradictory characteristics will
be embodied by a viscous/elastic, rubber-like material. Therefore the most
important component of a PSA formulation is the elastomer. Elastomers are
high polymer materials. They are crosslinked and possess a steel-like elastic
behavior. Rubber-like elasticity is characterized by values of the compression
modulus which do not depend on the temperature and by pronounced
reversible deformability. Elastomers do not exhibit viscous ow. From the
theoretical point of view it is possible to transform an elastomer in a visco-
elastomer by blending it with viscous components. The main part of PSA
formulation is based on this principle. PSAs based on natural or synthetic
elastomers are tackied formulations, i.e., multicomponent systems.
A partially crosslinked elastomer (i.e., natural rubber) was used as a
starting material for PSA formulations. Rubber-like synthetic materials,
with a rubber-like (hydrocarbon-based) chemical composition were devel-
oped later and used with or without natural rubber. The development of
soft and elastic polymer coatings (usually acrylic-based) opened up new
directions in the synthesis of elastomers. Later, multicomponent copoly-
merization of nonpolar monomers was developed, which yielded a new
class of soft and elastic, thermoplastic elastomers. Such compounds with
a segregated structure work like a crosslinked elastomer. Heterocyclic
compounds exhibiting a special bond stability function as the elastomeric
backbone of the formulation (e.g., silicones). Thus there is a broad range of
elastomers available for PSA formulations.
Natural Rubber
Natural rubber was used almost exclusively as the base elastomer for PSAs
in the early stages of PSA manufacturing. Diene-based natural and synthetic
Chemical Composition of PSAs 163
rubbers always contain more or less reactive side groups, or branching, and
thus they always possess some crosslinked structure. However, their solid-
like and elastic behavior is not given (it is inuenced only) by such structure,
and they are (at least partially) soluble. Mechano-chemical destruction of
the base elastomer (by mastication or dissolution) allows the modication of
the molecular weight or molecular weight distribution. The good compat-
ibility of natural rubber with dierent tackiers or plasticizers allows
an easy adjustment of the adhesion/cohesion balance. In some cases more
cohesion is required; therefore blends of natural rubber with styrenic block
copolymers are preferred.
Natural rubber is a well-known component of traditional rubber/resin
systems, but its use (in latex form) in emulsion-based PSAs for permanent
label stock applications is less widely appreciated [5]. Natural rubber latex
can be used in SBR/tackier resin systems to modify the balance of adhesive
properties. High molecular weight natural latexes contribute to improved
shear resistance, while the lower molecular weight ones enhance the tack
(especially when natural latex is used at less than 10% of the polymer
content in the formulation). Furthermore it was claimed that when SBR and
natural rubber latexes are blended, a product with better aging character-
istics results. Here the SBR latex crosslinks and hardens under oxidative
aging, whereas the natural rubber latex undergoes chain scission and
softens, whence a balance is achieved [6].
Natural rubber latex-based PSAs oer an advantage over solvent-
based systems (e.g., milled smoked sheet) with regard to the molecular
weight dierence between the two. The high molecular weight portion of
natural rubber is insoluble in solvents, therefore it cannot be used in solvent-
based adhesives. Natural rubber must be milled to a Mooney viscosity of
53 or below to obtain complete solubility (at 30% solids) [7]. The natural
rubber from dried latex shows a wider plateau of the modulus and a higher
elastic modulus value at 100
C [17]. Low
temperature synthetic butadiene rubbers (GR-S) with 30% styrene are
soft and tacky; high temperature ones (with 4580% styrene) are harder
and less tacky [16]. The most important properties of SBR latexes used
for PSAs include their molecular weight, molecular weight distribution,
gel content, T
g
, and styrene content [18]. Styrene-butadiene rubbers with
23% styrene are proposed for solvent-based PSAs. In such adhesives the
styrene-butadiene rubber exhibits less cohesion and more tack than natural
rubber.
Styrene-butadiene rubber can be made with or without carboxylic
groups. Polar styrene-butadiene latices are manufactured by emulsion
polymerization of styrene, butadiene, and a small amount of a functional
monomer such as vinyl-carboxylic acid (e.g., acrylic, methacrylic, itaconic,
or fumaric acid) either alone or in combination [18]. The functional
monomers stabilize the product. They are usually present at a level of about
1.03.0%. When COOH groups are not present in the polymer chain, SBRs
are usually poststabilized with about 14% of surfactants; antioxidants and
pH-adjusting agents are also added [16]. The CSBR dispersions possess
small (typically 0.15 mm) particles with narrow particle size dispersion.
Butadiene can polymerize via two dierent modes of addition, namely the
1,2- or 1,4- conguration. Both congurations contain residual double
bonds capable of further polymer growth, either branched or crosslinked.
The resulting three-dimensional network structure improves the mechanical
properties apparently without aecting the T
g
.
The gel content may be adjusted through the ratio of styrene to buta-
diene and the molecular weight. Tack increases with increasing butadiene
content (5070%), but changes little at higher levels. When measuring peel
adhesion the failure mode is adhesive at lower butadiene levels and cohesive
at high butadiene levels.
166 Chapter 5
Shear strength is higher as the styrene content increases. Above 30%
gel content (70% butadiene content) the tack decreases rapidly. The usual
range of hot carboxylated SBR latexes runs from about 40% styrene to
70% styrene; the normal range for PSAs latexes generally lies below 45%
styrene.
For many systems the T
g
is xed at 55
C. In comparison
acrylics show a glass transition temperature of about 65
C to 40
C. Both
contribute to excellent performance at low temperatures; they also oer
good weatherability [29]. The performance properties of silicone PSAs can
be designed by changing the resin/gum ratio [30]. A comparison was made
between a typical dimethyl-based silicone and an acrylic-based organic PSA
[31]; the silicone PSAs display good tack, peel, and shear at temperatures as
low as 20
C.
Problems with silicone PSAs may arise concerning their shelf life and
the availability of adequate release liners. While silicone PSAs have existed
for over 15 years, there was no adequate release technology available for
them; their use was limited to industrial tapes. Several products on the
market utilize dimethyl silicone in combination with diphenyl silicone PSAs.
While diphenyl silicone PSAs have some advantages in specic applications,
dimethyl silicone PSAs represent the bulk of silicone PSAs because of
product cost. New release liner technology based on uorosilicones was
developed, providing a release surface for several types of silicone PSAs.
A low energy surface does not suce to oer release; this condition must
be satised, but other conditions that favor a trend towards a low release
energy are a contact angle greater than 30
C, preferably above 0
C.
Among such monomers are methyl acrylate, alkyl methacrylates (e.g.,
methyl methacrylate, ethyl methacrylate, and butyl methacrylate), styrenic
monomers (e.g., styrene and methyl styrene), and unsaturated carboxylic
acids (e.g., acrylic acid, methacrylic acid, itaconic acid, and fumaric acid).
The term soft monomer refers to a monomer which when homopolymerized
yields a homopolymer with a low T
g
(i.e., less than 25
C). Examples
are the alkyl acrylates (e.g., butyl acrylate, propyl acrylate, 2-ethyl hexyl
acrylate, iso-octyl acrylate, and isodecyl acrylate). Presently EHA and/or
butyl acrylate are preferred [66]. Soft monomers, like the diester of fumaric
acid (dibutyl fumarate) with 28 atoms in the ester group or alkyl acrylate
with 210 carbon atoms (e.g., EHA), should be incorporated at 5085% in
PSAs [67]. Hard monomers like alkyl methacrylate (e.g., MMA) with 26
carbon atoms and unsaturated carboxylic acid (e.g., acrylic acid) with 28
carbon atoms should be incorporated at 010% in PSAs. As an ideal for-
mulation for solvent-based and water-based PSAs, the following composition
was given [68]: 7090% soft monomers, 1030% hard monomers, and 36%
functional monomers.
Kuegler [69] discussed copolymerization of acrylic esters with a mini-
mum amount of fumarate diesters. Copolymers containing octyl acrylate,
ethyl acrylate, vinyl acetate, and maleic anhydride were patented by the
National Starch and Chemical Corporation some years ago. These PSAs
have a T
g
range of 45 to 65
C)
Resin type Trade name Drop R&B
Gum rosin 78
Wood rosin 81 73
Tall oil rosin 80
Polymerized rosin Poly-Pale 102 95
Hydrogenated rosin Staybelite 75 68
Pentaerythritol wood rosin Pentalyn A 111
Glycerine-hydrogenated rosin Staybelite Ester 10,
Dermulsene DEG 83
Pentaerythritol-hydrogenated rosin Pentalyn H 104
Glycerine-highly stabilized rosin Foral 85 82
Pentaerythritol-highly stabilized rosin Foral 105 104
Hydroabietyl phthalate Cellolyn 21 63
Olen Hydrolin 100135
Cycloaliphatic hydrogenated olen Permalyn 85135
Aliphatic petroleum hydrocarbon Piccopale/Piccotac 70122
Modied aromatic hydrocarbon Hercotac AD 85115
Dicyclopentadiene Piccodiene 73140
Mixed olen Statac, Super Statac, 75105
Wingtack
Alpha pinene Piccolite 10135
Beta pinene Croturez, Piccolites 10135
Terpene Zonarez, Nirez 100 10145
Alpha-methyl styrene-vinyl toluene Piccotex 75120
Alpha-methyl styrene Kristalex 25120
Styrene Piccolastic 5190
Terpene phenolic Piccofyn 100135
Dermulsene DT 75
Coumarone-indene Cumar 100
Chemical Composition of PSAs 189
coating of the ready to use PSA. In-line manufacture of the PSA consists of
simultaneous coating and curing or postpolymerization, i.e., it is an in situ
manufacture of the adhesive. In this case a special ready to coat mixture
of polymerizable or crosslinkable monomers, oligomers, or polymers (e.g.,
radiation cured hot-melts) is rst applied onto a carrier. Such a reaction
mixture is transformed after coating into a ready to use adhesive. The
postcoating synthesis of the PSA must be carried out by the converter. In
some cases the in-line transformation of the coated layer concerns only
the modication of an adhesive, in order to improve its performance (e.g.,
crosslinking of solvent-based acrylates used for protective lms, in order to
achieve removability). Therefore the raw materials used for in-line synthesis
include the whole range of components used for the manufacture of pressure-
sensitive adhesives (e.g., monomers, oligomers) and for their formulation
(e.g., elastomers, viscoelastomers, viscous components, and additives) and
other special components (e.g., initiators, crosslinking agents, etc.). Such
a formulation recipe depends on the chemical/physical technology used
for the adhesive manufacture. As discussed in [131] the full or partial
postmanufacture of the PSA is the result of the chemical development
induced by the trend toward solvent-free fabrication. Such formulations
with 100% solids include hot-melts and radiation-cured reaction mixtures.
Technological reasons and insucient progress in acrylic-based hot-melts
forced the development of oligomer- and macromer-based curable
formulations. The main procedures for in-line synthesis include crosslinking
and polymerization. They can be combined also. The polymeric raw
materials investigated for postpolymerization are PSAs, PSAs with
unbalanced adhesive properties, or nonadhesive oligomers. Monomers
(as main components or as additives) can be used also. It should be noted
that in-line synthesis (modication) of the adhesive supposes functionality.
Curable Raw Materials
Monomers, oligomers, and prepolymers can be polymerized, and constitute
together with polymers the range of curable raw materials.
As discussed earlier tack, peel, and shear resistance of PSAs depend
on the cohesive strength. However, enhancing the cohesive strength, greatly
decreases the chain mobility needed to form a bond and hence the measured
tack decreases. On the other hand, natural rubber can be processed to a
relatively low molecular weight but, upon straining, it crystallizes, and hence
resists separation. Induced strengthening mechanisms are favorable if a high
tack is desired. Thus for high tack, the elastomers used as PSA components
should have a low cohesion at low strain rates to facilitate bond formation,
but a high cohesive strength at high strains to resist bond breakage.
190 Chapter 5
The classical way to obtain a higher cohesive strength is to use
crosslinkable base materials. Thus a viscoelastomer can be transformed into
an elastomer. For instance viscoelastic polyisobutylene was transformed
into an elastomer by crosslinking. This approach was initiated by the
formulation of the old rubber/resin-based PSAs, where natural rubber with
an inherent gel content was used as the base elastomer. Later on chemically
crosslinked or crosslinkable synthetic rubbers containing reactive functional
groups (e.g., CSBR) were prepared. One other possibility was given by the
synthesis of sequenced, physically crosslinked block copolymers (i.e., SIS
and SBS). Acrylics are actually the most suitable PSAs raw materials on the
market, but also the most expensive ones. In this context ease of tackica-
tion of the HC rubber-based materials should be emphasized. First, chemical
crosslinking based on built-in reactivity was practiced. Later radiation
curing was developed. Next a short description of the most important
representatives of the chemically crosslinked viscoelastomers and elastomers
is presented. The advantages of crosslinking comprise increases of the cohesive
strength, the temperature, the chemical resistance, and the anchorage.
Chemical Crosslinking. The crosslinking of acrylic-based copolymers
(used for adhesives) has been discussed in many industrial papers [132].
Other crosslinked compounds (e.g., polyurethanes) also may be used as base
material for PSAs [133]. The ability of acrylic monomers to polymerize
with each other leads to many applications. These polymers can crosslink
with epoxy resins, amines, reactive resins, as well as alkyl urea derivatives
[134]. Although the suitable polymers can contain functional, crosslinking
monomers, such as N-methylol acrylamide, such monomers may release
formaldehyde upon curing or cause the loss of tack and adhesion. Thus the
preferred polymers contain less than about 1% of N-methylol acrylamide
monomer units. According to [65] in an acrylic emulsion 0.51.0 wt% IBMA
(isobutoxy methylacrylamide) was copolymerized to provide interlinking of
the microgels in the lm upon heating.
In some polymer systems the unsaturated carboxylic acid is the
eective ingredient for modifying polymer properties (e.g., cohesive
strength); these modications can be controlled through crosslinking with
a suitable agent such as chromium acetate. Multifunctional comonomers
containing ethylene units, such as dialkyl maleate, trialkyl cyanurate,
tetraethylene glycol dimethacrylate, etc., can be crosslinked by eliminating
the unsaturation. The crosslinking of polyvinyl acetate dispersions using
metal salts was discussed by Homanner [135]. Pressure-sensitive adhesive-
like networks were prepared using the following starting compositions: 90%
EHA and 10% 1,6-hexanediol diacrylate (HDDA); 80% EHA, 10% AA,
and 10% HDDA [73]. Such polymers possess a crosslink density similar to
Chemical Composition of PSAs 191
commercial acrylic PSA. The mechanism of crosslinking for solvent-based
acrylics was studied by Milker and Czech [136]. They used formulations
with hydroxyethyl acrylate and acrylic acid as reactive monomers, and
titanates and acetyl acetonates (Al, Co, Ti, Zn, Zr) as crosslinking agents.
Solvent-based acrylates containing 5% wt of hydroxyethylmethacrylate
(HEMA) were crosslinked with PUR [137]. As an example of crosslinking
for a solvent-based acrylic PSA the following procedure is described:
1. An organic solution of a PSA, a hindered phenol antioxidant, and
a tackifying rosin ester are blended.
2. An organic solution of N,N
/
-bis-l,2-propenylisoftalimide cross-
linker is added to the blend.
3. A thin layer of the adhesive solution is coated onto a sheet
backing.
4. The coated sheet is heated to remove the solvent and to cure the
polymer and crosslinker [138].
In another example an acrylic copolymer with N-methylol acrylamide as
the reactive comonomer was cured using ethyl acetoacetate diisopropoxy-
aluminum [139].
Crosslinking may be carried out using metal complexes, isocyanates,
amino resins, polyamide, polyamine, epichlorhydrine resins, and other
compounds [136]. Metal acetyl acetonates and orthotitanic acid esters are
used together with alcohols as stabilizing agents. Crosslinking can only
be obtained provided that the polymer chain is equipped with acid groups.
The hydroxyl group alone does not contribute to crosslinking; however, in
combination with COOH groups, an unexpected synergism reected in a
higher shearing strength follows. The application of isocyanates remains
limited in practice, since the pot life of PSAs being crosslinked with
polyisocyanates is rather short. The special feature of amino resins used as
a crosslinker is the low crosslinking speed at room temperature.
A new class of polyaziridine derivatives giving a low crosslinking
density has been developed. According to their chemical composition and to
the nature of built-in reactive sites, quite dierent crosslinking agents may
be used. For general use polyaziridines were proposed as crosslinking
agents [140]. An organic solvent solution of N,N
/
-bis-l,2-propenyl-
isoftalimide may be used as a crosslinker. A chrome stearic acid complex
(0.1 wt% of the dry adhesive) also was suggested [141]. Crosslinking
via aluminum acetate/acrylic acid reactions was suggested for ethylene/
maleinate copolymers [115]. Curing of silicone-based PSAs is done using
benzoyl peroxide.
The additive trialkyl cyanurate is recommended for the electron beam
crosslinking of polymers. This component allows a controlled adjustment of
192 Chapter 5
crosslinking density and improves mechanical characteristics. Macromole-
cular compounds like polystyryl ethyl methacrylate also may be used.
The chemical crosslinking of rubber derivatives was developed also.
Water-soluble polyamide-epichlorohydrine-type materials are eective as
crosslinking agents for CSBR latexes [142]. Although many SBR latexes
are self-crosslinking, special crosslinking agents can be used. When modifying
by crosslinking it is common to add a solution of some suitable zinc
compounds. A careful balance must, however, be considered as the addition
results in decreased tack. It should be noted that addition of zinc oxide to
carboxylated neoprene latex dramatically reduces the pressure-sensitive
character of the adhesive [143]. A crosslinkable PSA composition was
formulated on the basis of a butadiene acrylated rubber; it is crosslinked
with aluminum propoxide or sec-butoxide [144].
Radiation Curing. Generally polymerization by radiation is similar to
the conventional process of thermal (free radical) polymerization initiated
by peroxides or azo compounds. Dierent kinds of high energy beams (IR,
UV, or electron beams) may be used as a source of energy. The crosslinking
of UV light-curable PSA formulations can be initiated by laser beam, too
[145]. Similarities between UV- and EB-curing exist also, but each has its
special features. In the UV curable formulation free radicals are generated
from the photoinitiator, in the EB curable formulation the free radicals are
generated on the reactive functional sites upon exposure to an EB source.
The electron beam is a much higher energy source than UV light and
promotes a higher level of crosslinking, therefore UV light-curable
formulations cannot be used unchanged for EB curing. The EB-induced
polymerization supposes the reaction of a vinyl unsaturation with electrons
of a suitable energy level. Because of the lower energy of UV radiation
generally a photoinitiator is needed, but initiatorless UV light-curable
systems were developed also [146]. Such technologies cover various domains
of the converting. The use of electron beam-curing in the paint industry was
discussed in [147,148]; the development of silicone release manufacturing via
electron beam-curing was described by Pilar [149]. Electron beam-curing
may also be used for lacquers and laminating adhesives [150152].
Ultraviolet light-induced curing of laquers and printing inks was tested
industrially since 1973 [153,154]. Water-based electron beam-cured coating
systems were discussed by Loutz [155]. As discussed in detail in [156]
pressure-sensitive adhesives crosslinked by ultraviolet light or electron
beams have been available for 15 years or more, but their application has
not been a total success. Radiation-cured tapes were patented in 1954 [157].
Such tapes were manufactured rst with a solvent-based pressure-sensitive
adhesive composition, dried, and cured with an electron beam [158].
Chemical Composition of PSAs 193
Radiation curing of PVC carrier lms for tapes was introduced in the 1980s
[159]. Proposals and guidelines for the formulation of beam-curable PSAs
were given in [160]. The rst rubber-based adhesives were beam-cured. In
Europe a plant at Tesa-Werk Oenburg (Beiersdorf) for the curing of tapes
was started [161] where classical adhesives are being used. The methods and
possibilities of electron beam-curing for continuous webs were also discussed
by Holl [147]. A comparative study of the costs for electron beam and
water-based coating is given by Pagendarm [162]. Actually silicone release
curing by radiation and curing of printed coatings is a common technology.
As prognosticated by [163], in 2000 about 7080% of label printing
machines used UV light-induced curing. Hybrid systems for combined UV
light/electron beam or hot air/electron beam were introduced for oset
and exo printing [164]. Progress in UV curable acrylic hot-melt precursors
promises a larger use of this technology for PSAs.
Generally, formulated adhesives are cured after their coating, i.e., the
curability of the main elastomer or viscoelastomers is strongly inuenced by
the performances of the other formulating components. Ewing and Erickson
[36] studied the response of various resins and stabilizers to electron beam
radiation. Their results show that proper selection of the formulating
ingredients can minimize the required radiation dosage for the adhesive,
while maintaining the desired balance of tack, shear, and solvent resistance. A
detailed discussion of the formulation used in radiation curable PSAs is given
in Chap. 8. Next, a short description of the main components is given.
Polymerizable Precursors
As discussed earlier, crosslinking allows the (build-up or) postmodication
of the elastic network necessary to regulate the adhesive-cohesive balance
of the PSA. It supposes the existence of crosslinkable polymeric structures.
Thus segregated constructions are made. Another possibility to create such
composites is given by polymerization. This procedure uses monomers to
synthesize polymers (viscoelastomers) or polymeric and polymerizable (or
curable) compounds (macromers) which are built into an elastical network.
For this process the converter can choose to use either a classic
polymerization technology (i.e., thermal, free radical initiated polymeriza-
tion, polyaddition, or polycondensation) or a radiation-induced reaction. It
is evident, that in some cases this choice is limited by the chemical nature of
the (pre-) polymer. It is to be emphasized that in certain cases (i.e., acrylic
hot-melt development), postpolymerization of an oligomer is a necessity
because of the lack of suitable macromolecular compounds. According to
[165] the main possibilities to formulate radiation curable formulations
include the syrup approach (oligomer/monomer mixture), the reactive
194 Chapter 5
oligomer approach, and crosslinking of pressure-sensitive adhesives.
For monomer- and oligomer-based radiation curable formulations poly-
merization and postcrosslinking may occur simultaneously.
Monomers for In-line Synthesis. Generally, special monomers are
used together with polymeric compounds for in-line synthesis of the
adhesive. In principle the liquid monomers are applied to the carrier, which
is an endless belt, and the polymerization is completed thermally or in an
oven by UV light. Electron beam-cured formulations are composed of
oligomers, prepolymers (50100%), multifunctional monomers, and addi-
tives. The most important oligomers used are polyester acrylics, epoxy
acrylates, urethane acrylates, and polyether acrylates. Hexanediol diacry-
lates, trimethyl allylpropane triacrylates, tripropylene glycoltriacrylates, and
pentaerythritol tetra-acrylate are used as monomers (called reactive diluting
agents). The term reactive diluent generally refers to an unsaturated ethylene
monomer which is miscible with the principal oligomers, which reduces the
viscosity of the composition, and which reacts with the oligomer to form
a copolymer. In some cases the addition of the reactive diluent not only
reduces the viscosity of the uncured diluent composition but also increase
the elongation of the cured coating [166]. Ethyl acrylate, butyl acrylate,
glycidylmethyl acrylate, and acrylic acid may be used as monomers for
prepolymers [167]. In some cases vinyl lactone is built-in as a sensitive
comonomer [168]. The reactive diluents used to reduce the viscosity usually
have hydroxyl groups as active sites. An example is hydroxylated
caprolactam acrylate [169]. Copolymerizable photoinitiators have been
studied for the curing of functionalized acrylates also. Such monomers may
contain vinyl unsaturation, diol, or epoxide groups [170,171]. Benzocyclo-
butenone acrylamide monomer has been incorporated into polymers also.
Under UV radiation benzocyclobutenone (BCPO) readily reacts with
itself and also with an alcohol to produce an ester. Thus UV light-induced
crosslinking occurs without an initiator. Solvent-based adhesives with
polymers containing 2-hydroxyethylacrylate and BCPO were prepared by
solution polymerization and they were mixed 1/1, giving upon curing
enhanced adhesion. Postinduced covalent crosslinking is superior to ionic
reactions and proceeds without the need of any initiator [172].
Oligomers for In-Line Synthesis. Oligomers were developed for in
situ manufacture of pressure-sensitive adhesives. Such oligomers (5010%
of the recipe) can possess various chemical compositions (hydrocarbons-
or heteroatom-based) and dierent functionalities. Both operationsthe
preparation of the prepolymer and its postpolymerizationcan be eected
by classical (polymerization, polyaddition, or polycondensation) or
radiation-induced polymerization. Possible formulations for UV-cured
Chemical Composition of PSAs 195
PSAs include acrylic oligomers; unfortunately their shear resistance is too
low [173]. Liquid, saturated copolyesters with one terminal acrylic double
bond per 30006000 molecular weight units are used in formulations for
UV- and electron beam-curable PSAs [174]. Acrylated polyester oligomers
(with a molecular weight of 30008000) were tested as hot-melt PSAs [155].
According to Harder [175] a HMPSA on acrylic basis has been
prepared by solution polymerization. Low molecular weight, low viscosity
polymers have been synthesized which can be coated by 90140
C and
postcrosslinked, using EB or UV curing. For instance, Acronal DS 3429 is a
UV-curable acrylate copolymer for HMPSAs [176]. It is a highly viscous
clear liquid, which can be processed at 100140
C. It possesses a viscosity of
about 15,000 mPa.s at 120
vs. 80
C [262].
Hot-melt PSAs are also suggested for coating onto nonwoven substrates
[265]. Raw materials also dier as a function of the coating machine. As
an example aqueous acrylic tape adhesives are designed as a function of
the coater geometry [266]. The required viscosities are: for rotogravure,
75100 mPa.s; for Meyer Rod, 300800 mPa.s; and for knife-over-roll,
40008000 mPa.s. On the other hand foam generation is higher for Meyer
Rod than for rotogravure, and even higher for knife-over-roll. A detailed
discussion of the formulation dierences as a function of the coating method
is given in Section 2.3 of Chap. 9.
Chemical Basis for Indirectly (Transfer) Coated PSAs. Indirect
(transfer) coating implies good wetting at low surface tension, or high
viscosity. Both are intrinsic properties of hot-melt PSAs or some solvent-
based PSAs. Diculties appear mostly with the use of water-based PSAs,
where special wetting agents and thickeners must be used.
2.6 Solid State Components of the Laminate
Quite dierent plasticizer levels are required for the formulation of
adhesives used for lms (50%) or other materials (26%) because of the
dierent exibility and porosity of these substrates [267]. As illustrated
by this example the solid state components of the laminate inuence the
choice of the adhesive components by their dierent anity towards these
components and by changing the adhesive composition through chemical
interaction with the PSAs.
Chemical Composition of PSAs 221
Pressure-sensitive adhesives for lm coating must meet some special,
face stock-related requirements. Pressure-sensitive adhesives for PVC
coating should meet the general requirements for lm coating in addition
to some special PVC-related requirements, as the requirements for soft PVC
are quite dierent from those for hard PVC; similarly, lled (opaque)
PVC possesses dierent properties from clear PVC. Sensitive lm face
stock materials need a nonaggressive adhesive formulation; for example,
soft PVC usually requires tackier-free adhesive formulations. Stabilizers
present in the PVC (e.g., Pb, Sn) produce oxidative degradation of the
tackier resin which is associated with the loss of the tack. Polyolen
carriers impose improved wettability and anchorage, and aging properties.
For such materials dimensional stability is aected thermally.
Porous, primerless papers as face stock material need nonmigrating
adhesive formulations. Generally, migration of the low molecular weight
components from the adhesive (e.g., plasticizer, tackier, surface active
agent, water, etc.) into the paper, or from the lm (plasticizer) or paper
(water, special chemicals like components of thermal papers) into the PSAs,
may alter the chemical composition of the coated adhesive. These selected
examples illustrate how the chemical composition may inuence the solid
state components of the laminate and vice versa. Not only the adhesive
properties, but also the coating characteristics of the PSAs may be inu-
enced by the solid state laminate components. As an example, carboxylated
neoprene latex is preferred to other latexes because it provides better specic
adhesion to aluminum foil. Tables 5.2 and 5.3 summarize the quite dierent
requirements imposed on PSAs as a function of the face stock material.
2.7 Product Build-Up
Pressure-sensitivity is the result of special chemical and macromolecular
build-up, but macroscopical product build-up may contribute to pressure-
sensitivity too. By transfer coating, the surface quality of the silicone layers
aects the smoothness of the PSA layer. The high gloss surface nish of the
release coating (with OPP) liner transfers to the adhesive increasing its tack
level by about 30% [268]. On the other hand transfer coating on such release
needs special formulation. Numerous pressure-sensitive products require
multiple (adhesive and nonadhesive) coated layers. In in-line coating
the coated web may become a complex structure, for instance: release-
corona-primer-PSA-corona-primer-PSA. As discussed in [269] the coating
technology for in-line manufacture is needed for special labels, tapes, or
forms. In such cases it is preferred to have the same vehicle for the dierent
coating layers (or to use 100% solids) and the adhesives should exhibit
222 Chapter 5
coating versatility for direct and transfer coating too. A special formulation
is required for double-side coated and carrier less tapes [270].
2.8 Environment Related Considerations
Environmental considerations inuence the chemical composition (formu-
lation) of the PSA also [269]. The most important problems concern
recycling during manufacture of PSAs and recyclability of pressure-sensitive
adhesive coated products, but advances in so-called bio-based pressure-
sensitive adhesives have been made too (see Chaps. 9 and 10).
Table 5.2 PSA for Labels: Main Requirements as a
Function of the Face Stock Material
Face stock
Required Performance Characteristics Paper Film
Adhesive properties
Converting properties
End-use properties
Water resistance
Shrinkage resistance
Aging resistance
Migration resistance
Clarity
very important, important, not necessary
Table 5.3 Performance Characteristics of Different PSAs
as a Function of the Face Stock Material
Characteristics as a Function
of the Face Stock Material CSBR EVAc AC
Film Clarity
Aging resistance
Water whitening resistance
Shrinkage resistance
Paper Migration resistance
very important, important, not necessary
Chemical Composition of PSAs 223
REFERENCES
1. H.A. Krecenski, J.F. Johnson and S.C. Temin, J. Macromol. Sci. Rev. in
Macromol Chem. and Physics, C26, 143 (1986).
2. I. Benedek, Development and Manufacture of Pressure-Sensitive Products,
Marcel Dekker, New York, 1999, Chapter 2.
3. I. Benedek, Pressure-Sensitive Formulation, VSP, Utrecht, 2000.
4. G.R. Hamed and C.H. Hsieh, J. Polymer Physics, 21, 1415 (1983).
5. Adhes. Age, (12) 36 (1986).
6. P. Green, Labels and Labeling, (11/12) 38 (1985).
7. J. Kendall, F. Foley and S.G. Chu, Adhes. Age, (9) 26 (1986).
8. J.C. Fitch and A.M. Snow Jr., Adhes. Age (10) 23 (1977).
9. I. Benedek, Development and Manufacture of Pressure-Sensitive Products,
Marcel Dekker, New York, 1999, Chapter 4.
10. Papier und Kunststofjverarb., (9) 48 (1990).
11. Coating, (18) 240 (1972).
12. J.C. Chen and G.R. Hamed, Rubber. Chem. Technol., (2) 319 (1987).
13. G.R. Hamed and C.H. Hsieh, Rubber Chem. Technol., 59, 883 (1986).
14. Coating, (12) 75 (1969).
15. C. Craig, Adhes. Age, (7) 31 (1988).
16. Adhes. Age, (12) 35 (1987).
17. A. Zawilinski, Adhes. Age, (9) 29 (1984).
18. Labels and Labeling, (11/12) 38 (1985).
19. R. Midgley, Adhes. Age, (9) 17 (1986).
20. Du Pont, Bulletin, DS 83/7 DGC/JP.
21. Adhasion, (11) 30 (1983).
22. I. Benedek, Adhasion, (12) 17 (1987).
23. A. Sustici and B. Below, Adhes. Age, (11) 17 (1991).
24. P. McConell (Eastman Kodak, USA), US Pat. 4,072,812/07.02.78; in C.N.
Clubb and B.W. Foster, Adhes. Age, (11) 18 (1988).
25. G. Trotter (Eastman Kodak, USA), US Pat. 4,264,756/28.04.81; in C.N. Clubb
and B.W. Foster, Adhes. Age, (11)18 (1988).
26. I. Benedek, Development and Manufacture of Pressure-Sensitive Products,
Marcel Dekker, New York, 1999, Chapter 4.2.1.
27. A. Steedman, European Adhes. Seal., (9) 6 (1997).
28. PCT/US/85/02424/WO 87.
29. R. Goodwin Jr., US Pat. 2,857,736.
30. K.L. Ullmann and R.P. Sweet, Silicone PSAs and Rheological Testing, Proc.
of the 22nd Annual Meeting of the Adhesion Society, Panama City Beach, FL,
February 2124, 1999, p. 410.
31. L.A. Sobieski and T.J. Tangney, Adhes. Age, (12) 23 (1988).
32. J. Pennace, Screen Printing, (7) 65 (1988).
33. I. Benedek, Pressure-Sensitive Formulation, VSP, Utrecht, 2000, Chapter 4.1.3.
34. I. Benedek, Pressure-Sensitive Formulation, VSP, Utrecht, 2000, Chapter 4.1.2.
35. C.K. Otto, Allg. Papier Rundschau, (16) 438 (1986).
224 Chapter 5
36. E.G. Ewing and J.C. Erickson, Tappi J., (6) 158 (1988).
37. G. Holden, E.T. Bishop and N.R. Legge, J. Polymer Sci., (26) 37 (1969).
38. K.E. Johnsen and M. Dehnke, Tappi, Hot Melt Symposium 1987; in K. E.
Johnsen and Q. Luvinh, DEXCO. Tri-block Copolymers for Adhesives Industry,
European Tape and Label Conference, Exxon, Brussels, 1989, Part 19.
39. R. Koch, Kautschuk, Gummi, Kunststoffe, (9) 804 (1986).
40. N. De Keyser, Styrenic Block Copolymers: the Quality Choice for Solventless
Adhesives, in Thermoplastic Rubbers, Shell Technical Manual, 8.19, 02.1992,
Shell, UK.
41. D. St. Clair, Adhes. Age, (11) 23 (1988).
42. Kautschuk, Gummi, Kunststoffe, (1) 30 (1987).
43. J.A. Miller and E. von Jakusch (Minnesota Mining and Manuf. Co., St.Paul,
MN), EP0306232B1/07.04.1993.
44. F.F. Lau and S.F. Silver (Minnesota Mining and Manuf. Co., St. Paul, MN),
EP 0130087B/02.01.1985.
45. U.S. Patent 4163077; in F.F. Lau and S.F. Silver (Minnesota Mining and
Manuf. Co., St. Paul, MN), EP 0130087B/02.01.1985.
46. Adhes. Age, (11) 32 (1985).
47. A. Roos and C. Creton, Adhesion of PSA Based on Styrenic Block
Copolymers, Proc. 24th Annual Meeting of Adh. Soc., Febr., 2528, 2001,
Williamsburg, VA, p. 371.
48. J.C. Chen and L.J. Fetters, Polym. Eng. Sci., 27 (17) 1300 (1987).
49. M.L. Williams, R.F. Landel and J.D. Ferry, J. Amer. Chem. Soc., 77, 3701
(1955).
50. X. Lu, Pressure Sensitive Adhesive Based on Block Copolymer Ionomer,
Proc. 24th Annual Meeting of Adh. Soc., Febr., 2528, 2001, Williamsburg, VA,
p. 161.
51. K.E. Johnsen, New Developments in Thermoplastic Elastomers, Tappi
Hot-Melt Symposium 85, June, 1619, Hilton Head, SC, 1985.
52. I. Benedek, Pressure-Sensitive Formulation, VSP, Utrecht, 2000, Chapter 3.2.3.
53. G.A. Luscheykiy, F.M. Medvedeva, L.I. Voytesonok, M.K. Polevaya and
L.D. Pin, Plast. Massy, (19) 16 (1985).
54. D. Petit (Norton Performance Plast.,Wayne, NJ, USA) EP717091/15.12.95; in
Coating, (4)134 (1997).
55. I. Benedek, Pressure-Sensitive Formulation, VSP, Utrecht, 2000, p. 285.
56. I. Benedek, Pressure-Sensitive Formulation, VSP, Utrecht, 2000, Chapter 3.2.5.
57. I. Benedek, Pressure-Sensitive Formulation, VSP, Utrecht, 2000, Chapter 5.
58. R. Jordan, Adhasion, (1/2) 17 (1987).
59. J. Andres, Haftklebstoffe in der Papier und Kunststoffverarbeitung, 4. PTS
Klebstoff Seminar, PTS Vortragsband, Munich, Germany, 03/84, p. 36.
60. A. Zosel, Int. J. Adhesion and Adhesive, 18, 265 (1998).
61. M. Virin, in TECH 12, Advances in Pressure Sensitive Tape Technology,
Technical Seminar Proceedings, Itasca, IL, May, 1989.
62. P.K. Dahl, R. Murphy and G.N. Babu, Org. Coatings. Appl. Polymer Sci.
Proceedings, (48) 131 (1983).
Chemical Composition of PSAs 225
63. E.W. Ulrich, US Pat., 2,884,126 (1959).
64. A. Zosel, Adhasion, (3) 17 (1966).
65. S.D. Tobing and A. Klein, Synthesis and Structure Property Studies in
Acrylic Pressure-Sensitive Adhesives, Proc. 24th Annual Meeting of Adh. Soc.,
Febr., 2528, 2001, Williamsburg, VA, p. 131.
66. Y. Sasaki, D.L. Holguin and R. Van Ham (Avery Int. Co., Pasadena, CA,
USA), EP 0252717 A2/13.01.1988.
67. C.M. Chum, M.C. Ling and R.R. Vargas (Avery Int., Co., Pasadena, CA,
USA), EP 1,225,792/18.08.1987.
68. R. Hinterwaldner, Coating, (4) 138 (1992).
69. H. Kuegler, US Pat., 2,544,692/25.01.1985.
70. Nat. Starch Chem. Co., USA, US Pat. 1,645,063; in Coating, (7) 184
(1974).
71. R.P. Wool and I. Lee, Polymer-Solid interfaces; Role of the Sticker and
Receptor Groups, Proc. 24th Annual Meeting of Adh. Soc., Febr., 2528,
2001, Williamsburg, VA, p. 297.
72. L. Li, M. Tirrell, A.V. Pocius and G.L. Korba, Adhesion Studies on
Acrylic PSAs: Temperature and Composition Effect, Proceedings of the
23rd Annual Meeting of the Adhesion Society, Myrtle Beach, SC, Febr., 2023,
2000, p. 31.
73. L. Li, C. Macosko, G.L. Corba, A. Pocius and M. Tirrell, Interfacial Energy
and Adhesion Between Acrylic PSA and Release Coatings, Proc. 24th Annual
Meeting of Adh. Soc., Febr., 2528, 2001, Williamsburg, VA, p. 270.
74. Cr.I. Simionescu, N. Asandei, I. Benedek and C. Ungurenasu, European
Polymer J., (5) 449 (1969).
75. Cr.I. Simionescu, N. Asandei, I. Benedek and C. Ungurenasu, European
Polymer J., (6) 925 (1970).
76. I. Benedek, N. Asandei and Cr.I. Simionescu, European Polymer J., (7) 995
(1971).
77. Cr.I. Simionescu, I. Benedek and N. Asandei, European Polymer J., (7) 1549
(1971).
78. Cr.I. Simionescu, I. Benedek and N. Asandei, European Polymer J., (7) 1561
(1971).
79. Cr.I. Simionescu, I. Benedek, S. Ioan and N. Asandei, Copolymerization
of Polar Monomers Using the Cp
2
TiCl
2
-AlEt
3
Catalyst, Proc. IUPAC Int.
Symp. on Macromolecules, Jul., 28, 1972, Helsinki.
80. Cr.I. Simionescu, I. Benedek, S. Ioan, M. Galin and N. Asandei, Rev. Roum.
Chim., 18, 325 (1972).
81. Cr.I. Simionescu, S. Ioan, I. Benedek and N. Asandei, Rev. Roum. Chim.,
18, 325 (1972).
82. I. Benedek et al., Rom. Pat., 56852/31.03.1970.
83. I. Benedek et al., Rom. Pat., 54213/1969.
84. I. Benedek et al., Rom. Pat., 59125/14.10.1971.
85. I. Benedek et al., Rom. Pat., 59674/07.01.1975.
86. P.A. Lovell and T.H. Shah, Polym. Commun, (2) 32 (1998).
226 Chapter 5
87. M. Kresti et al., WO 97/46634; in S.D. Tobing and A. Klein, Synthesis and
Structure Property Studies in Acrylic Pressure-Sensitive Adhesives, Proc. 24th
Annual Meeting of Adh. Soc., Febr., 2528, 2001, Williamsburg, VA, p. 131.
88. A. Aymonier, E. Papon, J.J. Villenave and P. Tordjeman, Direct Relation
Between Copolymerization Process and Tack Properties of Model PSAs,
Proc. 24th Annual Meeting of Adh. Soc., Febr., 2528, 2001, Williamsburg,
VA, p. 280.
89. M. Kajiyama, Phase structure of PSA Prepared from Solution and
Emulsion, Proc. 24th Annual Meeting of Adh. Soc., Febr., 2528, 2001,
Williamsburg, VA, p. 283.
90. E. Lauretti, F. Mezzera, G. Antarelli and A.L. Spelta, Gummi, Asbest.,
Kunstst., (16) 296 (1985).
91. J.A. Schlademann (Atlantic Richfield, USA), U.S. Pat. 0183386 A2/26.10.1984.
92. J.P. Keally and R.E. Zenk (Minnesota Mining and Manuf. Co., USA),
Canad. Pat. 1224.678/10.07.1982 (US Pat. 399350).
93. Coating, (7) 238 (1989).
94. H. Braun and Th. Brugger, Coating, (9) 307 (1993).
95. UV-Curable Acrylic Hot-Melts for PSA Application, BASF Symposium,
2/15/96; in S.D. Tobing and A. Klein, Synthesis and Structure Property
Studies in Acrylic Pressure-Sensitive Adhesives, Proc. 24th Annual Meeting
of Adh. Soc., Febr., 2528, 2001, Williamsburg, VA, p. 131.
96. K.H. Schumacher and T. Sanborn, UV-Curable Acrylic Hot-Melt for
Pressure Sensitive Adhesives-Raising Hot-Melts to a New Level of
Performance, Proc. 24th Annual Meeting of Adh. Soc., Febr., 2528, 2001,
Williamsburg, VA, p. 165.
97. R. Pfister, Coating, (6) 171 (1969).
98. F.M. Rosenblum, Adhes. Age, (6) 22 (1972).
99. Coating, (2) 45 (1969).
100. Die Herstellung von Haftklebstoffen, T 1.2.2; 17d, Nov. 1979, BASF, p. 1.
101. Coating, (4) 23 (1969).
102. H.W.J. Mueller, Adhasion, (5) 208 (1981).
103. K. Hagenweiler and K. Scholz (BASF), DOS, 2.328.430/1973.
104. K.C. Stueben, Adhes. Age, (6) 72 (1977).
105. Coating, (8) 247 (1969).
106. Adhasion, (3) 13 (1974).
107. R.P. Mudge (National Starch Chem. Co., USA), US Pat. 4,753,846.
108. X. Han, S. Xu and H. Li, Synthesis of Special Structural Vinyl-Acetate
Ethylene-Butyl Acrylate Latex, Proc. 24th Annual Meeting of Adh. Soc.,
Febr., 2528, 2001, Williamsburg, VA, p. 337.
109. E. Merz, Double LiaisonChimie des Peintures, (226) 263 (1974).
110. Wacker GmbH, German Pat. 4,322,516 (1982).
111. Adhasion, (12) 28 (1983).
112. Adhasion, (2) 3 (1977).
113. G.R. Frazer (Johnson, USA), EP 259.842/16.02.88; in CAS, 21 (3) (1988);
109:111731.
Chemical Composition of PSAs 227
114. S. Cartasegna, Kautschuk, Gummi, Kunststoffe, (12) 1188 (1986).
115. R.P. Mudge (National Starch Chem. Co., USA), EP 0,225,541/11.12.85.
116. Adhes. Age, (11) 28 (1981).
117. A. Koch and C.L. Gueris, Allg. Papier Rundschau, (16) 40 (1986).
118. I. Benedek, Pressure-Sensitive Formulation, VSP, Utrecht, 2000, p. 298.
119. I. Benedek, Pressure-Sensitive Formulation, VSP, Utrecht, 2000, Chapter 4.1.
120. I. Benedek, Pressure-Sensitive Formulation, VSP, Utrecht, 2000, Chapter 3.5.
121. R.D. Rich (Loctite Co.), EP 250.090/23.12.87 in CAS, 17 (92) (1988);
109:398787.
122. R. Jordan, Coating, (8) 213 (1982).
123. R. Jordan, Coating, (10) 278 (1982).
124. R. Jordan, Coating, (12) 335 (1982).
125. Allg. Papier Rundschau, (16) 462 (1986).
126. H. Fries, Gummi, Asbest, Kunststoffe, (9) 454 (1985).
127. A. Deshpande, D. Hyer, M. Kemper, K. Krajca, G. Locko and M. Moran,
Tackifiers for PSAs, Proc. 24th Annual Meeting of Adh. Soc., Febr., 2528,
2001, Williamsburg, VA, p. 177.
128. L. Jacob, New Developments of Tackifier Resins for SBS Block
Copolymers, 11th Munich Adhesive and Finishing Seminar, 1986, Munich,
Germany, p. 87.
129. Coating, (9) 27 (1972).
130. P. Mudge, Ethylene-Vinylacetate Based, Water-Based PSA, in TECH 12,
Advances in Pressure-Sensitive Tape Technology, Technical Seminar
Proceedings, Itasca, IL, May 1989.
131. I. Benedek, Development and Manufacture of Pressure-Sensitive Products,
Marcel Dekker, New York, 1999, Chapter 6.1.1.
132. P. Kroger and W. Schimmel, Vernetzung von Copolymerisaten auf
Acrylatbasis, 11th Munich Adhesive and Finishing Seminar, 1984, in
Coating, (2) 66 (1985).
133. N. Toshio, N. Ken, A. Kazumi and F. Kazumide (Nitto Electric Co., Japan)
Japanese Pat., C3 275 79/05.02.88; in CAS, 17, (4) (1988); 109:39109m.
134. M. Novak, American Ink Maker, (10) 44 (1983).
135. A. Homanner, Adhasion, (12) 16 (1982).
136. R. Milker and Z. Czech, Solvent Based Pressure-Sensitive Adhesives, 16th
Munich Adhesive and Finishing Seminar, 1991, Munich, Germany, p. 134.
137. A. Takemura, J. Asahara, R. Sugaya, N. Hori and H. Ono, The Surface
Properties and Performances of PSA, Proc. 24th Annual Meeting of Adh.
Soc., Febr., 2528, 2001, Williamsburg, VA, p. 375.
138. O. Yoshinori, A. Kimihisa, A. Minoru and H. Takenao (Toa Gohsei, Japan),
Japanese Pat., C3 89 345/20.04.88, in CAS, 21, (10) (1988), 109:112327.
139. J.A. Fries, New Developments in PSA, in TECH 12, Advances in Pressure
Sensitive Tape Technology, Technical Seminar Proceedings, Itasca, IL, May
1989, p. 27.
140. Adhes. Age, (12) 43 (1981).
141. C.T. Albright, EPA 0099087B1/23.12.1987.
228 Chapter 5
142. Hercules, Bulletin, OR-212C.
143. Adhes. Age, (10) 24 (1977).
144. Brit. Pat., 1,063,324; in Coating, (4) 114 (1969).
145. W. Blum, Z. Czech and F.R. Herrmann (Lohmann GmbH & Co.KG,
Neuwied, Germany), DE 4243270A1/21.12.1992.
146. H.P. Seng, Coating, (7) 245 (1992).
147. P. Holl, Verpackungs-Rundschau, (3) 214 (1986).
148. E. Funk, Paper, Film, Foil Conv., (8) 65 (1973).
149. G. Von Pilar, Einige Anmerkungen zur Diskussion u ber die Anwendung
strahlen-vernetzender Systeme im Bereich Trennpapiere, 7th Munich
Adhesive and Finishing Seminar, Munich, Germany, 1982.
150. H. Klein, Plastverarb., 37, (4) 58 (1986).
151. G. Strohner, Adhasion, (1/2) 24 (1985).
152. G.W. Drechsler, Coating, (7) 235 (1993).
153. Der Polygraph, (13) 963 (1973).
154. Der Polygraph, (14) 1000 (1973).
155. J.M. Loutz, Coating, (9) 328 (1987).
156. I. Benedek, Pressure-Sensitive Formulation, VSP, Utrecht, 2000, Chapter 3.1.2.
157. J.O. Hendricks (Minnesota Mining and Manuf. Co., St. Paul, MN) US
Pat., 2,956.904; in J.R. Seidel, 4. PTS Klebstoff Seminar, Mu nchen, PTS
Vortragsband, Nr. 02/1985, p. 64.
158. H.W.J. Mu ller, 4. PTS Klebstoff Seminar, Mu nchen, PTS Vortragsband,
Nr. 03/1984, p. 12.
159. P. Holl, Methoden unde Mo glichkeiten der Elektronenstrahlvernetzung
bei bahnfo rmigen Materialien, 5. PTS Klebstoff Seminar, Mu nchen, PTS
Vortragsband, Nr. 02/1985, p. 84.
160. H. Ro ltgen, Coating, (12) 311 (1985).
161. Coating, (11) 292 (1982).
162. E. Pagendarm, 10th Munich Adhesive and Finishing Seminar, Munich,
Germany, 1985, p. 42.
163. E. Strahler, Coating, (5) 163 (1996).
164. Papier u. Kunststoff Verarb., (2) 53 (1996).
165. Y. Sasaaki, Electron Beam Curing of Pressure-Sensitive Adhesives,
European Tape and Label Conference, 03.07.1993, Brussels, Belgium.
166. C.V. Chieh (Morton Thiokol, USA), EP 0,147,142.
167. F.T. Birk, Coating, (9) 278 (1985).
168. W.J. Traynor, L.C. Moore, R.M. Martin and J.D. Moon (Minnesota Mining
and Manuf. Co., St. Paul. MN, USA); US Pat., 4,762,982/23.02.88; in CAS,
17 (4) (1988); 109: 39101c.
169. R. Hinterwaldner, Adhasion, (3) 14 (1985).
170. W. Beumer, M. Koehler and J. Ohngemach, Radcure86, Conf. Proc. 10th,
4/43 (1986); in CAS Coatings, Inks Related Products, 22:3 (1988).
171. G. Li Bassi and F. Broggi (Fratelli Lambert S.p.A, Albizzate, Italy),
Polym. Paint Colour J., 178, 197 (1988); in CAS Coatings, Inks Related
Products, 18:2 (1988).
Chemical Composition of PSAs 229
172. K. Li, P. Mallya, P. Iyer, C. Kuang and W. Wang, Synthesis of
Benzocyclobutenone Containing Polymers for Ultraviolet, Light Curable
Pressure-Sensitive Adhesive Applications Proc. 24th Annual Meeting of Adh.
Soc., Febr., 2528, 2001, Williamsburg, VA, p. 368.
173. A.J. Morris, J. Plast. Film Sheeting, (1) 50 (1988); in CAS, Adhesives, 25
(1988); 109:191649v.
174. H.F. Huber and H. Mu ller (Dynamit Nobel AG, Troisdorf, Germany); in
10th Radcure, 1986, Conference Proc., 12/112/12.
175. C. Harder, Acrylic Hot-MeltsRecent Chemical and Technological
Developments for an Ecologically Beneficial Production of Adhesive Tapes;
State and Prospects, European Tape and Label Conference, Brussels,
Belgium, Apr., 2830, 1993.
176. G. Auchter, J. Barwich, G. Rehmer and H. Ja ger, Adhasion, 37 (12) 14
(1993).
177. R. Hinterwaldner, Adhasion, (10) 24 (1985).
178. E.M. Barisonek and G. Froelic, Adhasion, (11) 28 (1985).
179. R. Hinterwaldner, Adhasion, (12) 15 (1985).
180. M.M. Feldstein, T.A. Borodulina, R.Sh. Vartapetian, S.V. Kotomin, V.G.
Kulichikhin, D. Geschke and A.E. Chalykh, Correlations Between
Activation Energy for Debonding and that for Self-Diffusion in Pressure-
Sensitive Adhesive Hydrogels, Proc. 24th Annual Meeting of Adh. Soc.,
Febr., 2528, 2001, Williamsburg, VA, p. 137.
181. T.A. Borodulina, M.M. Feldstein, S.V. Kotomin, V.G. Kulichikin and
G.W. Cleary, Viscoelasticity of PSA and Bioadhesive Hydrogels Under
Compressive Load, Proc. 24th Annual Meeting of Adh. Soc., Febr., 2528,
2001, Williamsburg, VA, p. 147.
182. A.A. Chalykh, A.E. Chalykh and M.M. Feldstein, Polym. Mater. Sci. Eng,
81, 456 (1999).
183. G.V. Vinogradov, A.I. Elkin and S.E. Sosin, Polymer, 19, 1458 (1978).
184. M.M. Feldstein et al., US Pat. Appl. 09/900.67; in T.A. Borodulina, M.M.
Feldstein, S.V. Kotomin, V.G. Kuilichikin and G.W. Cleary, Viscoelasticity
of PSA and Bioadhesive Hydrogels Under Compressive Load, Proc. 24th
Annual Meeting of Adh. Soc., Febr., 2528, 2001, Williamsburg, VA, p. 147.
185. M.M. Feldstein et al., PCT Appl. US 01/21417(2001); in T.A. Borodulina,
M.M. Feldstein, S.V. Kotomin, V.G. Kuilichikin and G.W. Cleary,
Viscoelasticity of PSA and Bioadhesive Hydrogels Under Compressive
Load, Proc. 24th Annual Meeting of Adh. Soc., Febr., 2528, 2001,
Williamsburg, VA, p. 147.
186. M.M. Feldstein, A.E. Chalykh, A.A. Chalykh, G. Fleischer and R.A. Siegel,
Polym. Mater Sci., Eng., 81, 467 (1999).
187. G.V. Gordon, T.M. Leaym, M.J. Owen, M.S. Owen, S.V. Perz, J.L. Stasser,
J.S. Tonge, M.K. Chaudhury and K.A. Vorvolakos, ResinPolymer
Interaction in Silicone Release Coatings, Proc. of the 23rd Annual
Meeting of the Adhesion Society, Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, Febr.,
2023, 2000, p. 39.
230 Chapter 5
188. G.V. Gordon, R.L. Tabler, S.V. Perz, J.L. Stasser, M.J. Owen and J.S. Tonge,
Rheology in the Release of Silicone Coatings, in Book of Abstracts, 215th
ACS National Meeting, Dallas, 29 April (1998).
189. B.Z. Newby, M.J. Chaudhury and H.R. Brown, Macroscopic Evidence of
Interfacial Slippage on Adhesion, Science, 269, 1407 (1995).
190. I. Benedek, Development and Manufacture of Pressure-Sensitive Products,
Marcel Dekker, New York, 1999, Chapter. 4.3.1.
191. G. Josse, O. Poizat and C. Creton, Probe Tack Tests of PSAs on Silicone
Release Coatings, Proc. of the 23rd Annual Meeting of the Adhesion Society,
Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, Febr., 2023, 2000, p. 36.
192. A.E. Bly, Adhes. Age, (10) 29 (1972).
193. J. Pennace and G. Hersey, PCT/IPN/WO 87/03537/18.06.1987.
194. L.H. Clemens, S.S. Kanter and M. Mazurek (Minnesota Mining and Manuf.
Co., St. Paul, MN, USA), US Pat., 4,728,571/01.03.1988; in Adhes. Age, (7) 45
(1988).
195. A. Fau and A. Soldat, Silicone Addition Cure Emulsions for Paper Release
Coating, in TECH 12, Advance in Pressure-Sensitive Tape Technology,
Technical Seminar Proceedings, Itasca, IL, May 1989, p. 7.
196. A.W. Bamborough, 16th Munich Adhesive and Finishing Seminar, Munich,
Germany, 1991, p. 96.
197. I. Kesola, Production of Release Paper, European Tape and Label
Conference, Exxon, Brussels, Belgium, 1989, p. 9.
198. T. Cosgrove, I. Weatherhead, M.J. Turner, R.G. Schmidt, G.V. Gordon and
J.P. Hannington, NMR Spin-Spin Relaxation Studies of Reinforced
Polydimethylsiloxane Melts, Polym. Prepr, 39, 545 (1998).
199. M. Brogly, L. Vrevin, G. Castelein and J. Schultz, Silicone Release Coatings/
PSA Adhesive Strength Modulation. How PMDS based Network
Composition and Structure Influence Nanoscale Properties of the
Interface, Proc. 24th Annual Meeting of Adh. Soc., Febr., 2528, 2001,
Williamsburg, VA, p. 134.
200. A.N. Gent and J. Schultz, J. Adhesion, 3, 281 (1972).
201. G.V. Gordon, R.L. Tabler, S.V. Perz, J.L. Stasser, M.J. Owen and J.S. Tonge,
Adhes. Age, (11) 35 (1998).
202. G.V. Gordon, R.L. Tabler, S.V. Perz, J.L. Stasser, M.J. Owen and J.S. Tonge,
Release Force Control: The Bottom Line. Synergism Between Adhesive and
Liner; Proceedings of the Pressure-Sensitive Tape Council, 1999, Technical
Seminar, Washington DC, May 57 (1999).
203. M.K. Chaudhury and G.M. Whitesides, Langmuir, 7, 1975 (1991).
204. R. Thomas, Allg. Papier-Rundschau, (16) 437 (1986).
205. Coating, (12) 244 (1984).
206. Coating, (12) 366 (1986).
207. H. Ro ltgen, Coating, (11) 400 (1986).
208. R. Hinterwaldner, Coating, (3) 73 (1985).
209. K. Brach (Design Cotg. Co., USA), US Pat. 4,288,479/08.09.1981, in Adhes.
Age, (12) 58 (1981).
Chemical Composition of PSAs 231
210. R. Hinterwaldner, Coating, (6) 158 (1983).
211. D.H. Teesdale, Coating, (6) 243 (1983).
212. J.D. Blizzars and D. Narula (Dow Corning Corp., Midland, MI), EP
0,183,377/29.10.1984.
213. L. Bothorel, Emballages, (278) 372 (1972).
214. L. Dengler, Coating, (6) 143 (1974).
215. K. Kriz and T.H. Plaisance (De Soto Inc.) US Pat. 0129433 15.12.1987; in
CAS, Coating, Inks Related Products, 10, 2 (1988).
216. G. Galli, L. Penzo and F. Pina (Manuli Autoadhesivi, Italy) US Pat.
4,725,4547 16.02.88.
217. R.D. Gafford and G.R. Faircloth, Adhes. Age, (12) 24 (1987).
218. I. Benedek, Development and Manufacture of Pressure-Sensitive Products,
Marcel Dekker, New York, 1999, Chapter 6.1.2.
219. D.J. Kinning, J. Adhesion, 60, 249 (1997).
220. I. Benedek, Pressure-Sensitive Formulation, VSP, Utrecht, 2000, Chapter 3.1.
221. R. Thomas, Allg. Papier Rundschau, (16) 437 (1986).
222. A.K. Schultz and N. Kofira, The Use of Non-Migrating Surfactants in
Pressure-Sensitive Adhesive Applications, Proc. 24th Annual Meeting of Adh.
Soc., Febr., 2528, 2001, Williamsburg, VA, p. 163.
223. M. Okubo, Makromol Chem., Makromol. Symp. (35/36) 307 (1990).
224. Adhasion, (2) 15 (1973).
225. T.W. Brooks, Tappi J., (9) 29 (1984).
226. M.D. Green, F.J. Guild and R.D. Adams, Analysis of Functional Surface
Modification of Pre-Treated Polypropylene, Using Multi-Modal XPS and
AFM, Proc. 24th Annual Meeting of Adh. Soc., Febr., 2528, 2001,
Williamsburg, VA, p. 254.
227. I. Benedek, Development and Manufacture of Pressure-Sensitive Products,
Marcel Dekker, New York, 1999, Chapter 6.
228. M.H. Mazurek (Minnesota Mining and Manuf Co., St. Paul, MN, USA), EP
46,739,332/15.08.1991.
229. I. Benedek, Pressure-Sensitive Formulation, VSP, Utrecht, 2000, Chapter 2.1.
230. I. Benedek, Pressure-Sensitive Formulation, VSP, Utrecht, 2000.
231. I. Benedek, Pressure-Sensitive Formulation, VSP, Utrecht, 2000, Chapter
4.2.1.
232. D. De Jaeger, 11th Munich Adhesive and Finishing Seminar, Munich,
Germany, 1986, p. 87.
233. Adhasion, (4) 28 (1985).
234. R. Hinterwaldner, Coating, (4) 110 (1991).
235. Acronal DS3429, EDM/KE,4/94,1994, BASF, Ludwigshafen, Germany.
236. European Adhesives and Sealants, (9) 3 (1987).
237. R. Kardashian, Adhes. Age, (6) 38 (1986).
238. J.R. Seidel, 4th PTS Adhesive Seminar, Munich, Germany, 1984, p. 49.
239. W.C. Perkins, Radiation Curing, (8) 8 (1980).
240. Coating, (3) 68 (1985).
241. J.M. Casey, Tappi J., (6) 151 (1988).
232 Chapter 5
242. J. Lechat, The Pressure Sensitive Labelstock Market in Western Europe, Finat
World Congress, Monaco, 1989.
243. Vinnapas, Eigenschaften und Anwendung, Technical booklet, Wacker,
Munich, Germany, 1976, p. 11.
244. I. Benedek, Pressure-Sensitive Formulation, VSP, Utrecht, 2000, Chapter 2.4.2.
245. M. Gerace, Adhes. Age, (8) 85 (1983).
246. Allg. Papier Rundschau, (5) 228 (1987).
247. I. Benedek, Adhasion, (4) 25 (1987).
248. I. Benedek, Pressure-Sensitive Formulation, VSP, Utrecht, 2000, p. 131.
249. A.K. Schultz, PCT Int. Appl. WO 9832726 (1998).
250. A. Schultz and A. Siddiqui, PCT Int. Appl. WO9832773 (1998); in A.K.
Schultz and N. Kofira, The Use of Non-Migrating Surfactants in Pressure-
Sensitive Adhesive Applications, Proc. 24th Annual Meeting of Adh. Soc.,
Febr., 2528, 2001, Williamsburg, VA, p. 163.
251. D.R. Bassett, Coating Technology, J. Coatings Technology, 73 (912) 43
(2001).
252. J. Feng and M.A. Winnick, Macromolecules, 30, 4324 (1997).
253. C.M. Miller and H.W. Barnes, Factors Affecting Water Resistance of
Latex-Based PSAs, Proc. 24th Annual Meeting of Adh. Soc., Febr., 2528,
2001, Williamsburg, VA, p. 153.
254. H.W. Yang, Effect of Polymer Structural Parameters on PSAs, Proc. of the
22nd Annual Meeting of the Adh. Soc., Panama City Beach, FL, Febr., 2124,
1999, p. 63.
255. Coating, (10) 309 (1969).
256. Coating, (10) 180 (1975).
257. Adhasion, (10) 80 (1966).
258. A. Kenneth (Allied Colloids), EP 0,147,067/29.11.1983.
259. Adhes. Age, (12) 53 (1982).
260. Coating, (3) 360 (1985).
261. Tappi J., 67 (9) 104 (1983).
262. R. Hinterwaldner, Coating, (7) 176 (1980).
263. Coating, (11) 316 (1984).
264. Ucecryl M10X, Preliminary Technical Bulletin, UCB Chemicals, Drogenbos,
Belgium, Sept., 1992, 3103/27582.
265. Wolfgang Graebe, Papier u. Kunststoffverarb., (2) 49 (1985).
266. Adhes. Age, (11) 28 (1983).
267. Coating, (4) 11 (1974).
268. P. Greenway, International Forms, (3) 40 (1997).
269. I. Benedek, Development and Manufacture of Pressure-Sensitive Products,
Marcel Dekker, New York, 1999, Chapter 2.2.1.
270. I. Benedek, Pressure-Sensitive Formulation, VSP, Utrecht, 2000, p. 30.
Chemical Composition of PSAs 233
6
Adhesive Performance
Characteristics
1 ADHESION-COHESION BALANCE
Pressure-sensitive adhesives possess adhesion, required for bonding and
debonding, and cohesion necessary against debonding. Adhesion is
characterized by tack and peel, whereas cohesion is described by shear
resistance (and partially by peel). The special balance of these properties, the
adhesion/cohesion balance, embodies the pressure-sensitive character of the
adhesive. For any PSA, tackied or not, both tack and peel adhesion can
be considered as the end result of two distinct processes, namely, a bonding
process and a bond breaking process. The eciency of the bonding process
is related to the adhesives ability to exhibit viscous ow. In order to achieve
peel adhesion the bonding stage involves some dwell time. During this time
the adhesive must ow in the absence of any externally applied forces. The
more liquid-like the behavior of the polymer under these conditions, the
more pronounced the degree of bond formation. The debonding process
involves a more rapid deformation of the adhesive mass. The polymers
resistance to deformation at higher strain rates becomes very important; the
higher this resistance, the higher the force which must be applied to separate
the adhesive from the adherend (i.e., the peel resistance). Therefore, high
tack, high peel strength adhesives should exhibit good ow at low strain
rates, but good resistance to ow at higher strain rates.
1.1 Tack
In Chapter 2 a short denition of the tack was given and the
interdependence of tack/adhesive rheology was discussed; this chapter
235
describes the external aspects of the tack. Tack of PSAs is not an exactly
dened, physical characteristic; it may be dened as a separation energy.
Tack is a function of T (i.e., Tack >0 if T>T
g
). The tack is inversely
proportional to the elasticity modulus [1]. On the other hand, the modulus
depends on the branching, as does the T
g
.
Tack is the resistance oered by an adhesive lm to detachment from
a substrate; it is the measure of the stretchiness of an adhesive, or the ability
to form an instant bond when brought into low pressure contact with a
substrate to which the adhesive is to adhere [2]. Tack, and the methods used
to measure it were discussed by Johnston [3]. The concept of tack remains
dicult to dene. It was called tack, wet tack, quick stick, initial adhesion,
nger tack, thumb tack, quick grab, quick adhesion, and wettability. The
Pressure-Sensitive Tape Council prefers quick stick [4] and denes it as
that which allows a PSA to adhere to a surface under a very slight
pressure. The American Society for Testing and Materials [5] denes tack
as the force required to separate an adherent and an adhesive at the interface
shortly after they were brought rapidly into contact under a light pressure
of short duration.
Measurement of the Tack
Tack is measured either by touch or quantitatively by means of a loop tack
tester. Loop tack, dened as the quick stick tack value, is the force
required to separate at a specic speed, a loop of material (adhesive surface
facing outwards) which was brought into contact with a specic area of a
standard surface (in the absence of signicant pressure). Tack also may
be measured by the rolling ball or rolling cylinder method (for a detailed
description of the methods see Chap. 10). In the last decade the development
of contact mechanics favored the use of probe tack-like tack test methods.
Asymmetric adhesion tests using either at or spherical punches played an
important role in understanding the fundamental mechanism of adhesion.
The geometry of a spherical punch pressing against a at substrate has been
used in fundamental studies of the tackiness of crosslinked elastomers [69].
Flat punch tests have often been the choice of industrial research labs and
quality control and are the basis of commonly used ASTM standards.
Tack Measured as Coefficient of Friction. It is believed that the
resistance to the rolling motion of a ball on a PSA reects the tackiness
of the adhesive, because the motion must be closely related to bonding and
debonding processes, which occur simultaneously at the contact surface.
This way of expressing tack is useful in some practical cases, but the physical
meaning of the measured values is not necessarily clear. It is more scientic
236 Chapter 6
to express the tack in terms of a rolling coecient of friction which depends
on the physical properties of the materials [10]. The rolling coecient of
friction can be determined experimentally from the pulling cylinder
method more easily than from the rolling ball method, and one can
theoretically calculate the rolling coecient of friction by making some
assumptions concerning the deformation and failure mode of PSAs.
The velocity of the rolling ball changes at every moment and, at the
same time, the rolling coecient of friction varies as a function of velocity.
Assuming that F is the static frictional force, N is the normal force, and I
are the angle of rotation and moment of inertia of a cylinder, respectively,
f is the rolling coecient of friction of the PSA, P and Mg are the force
components in parallel with and perpendicular to the rolling cylinder,
respectively, and if the cylinder is pulled at a constant velocity, P is given by
the following equation:
P = (f ,R)Mg (6.1)
The rolling coecient of friction of a viscoelastic material can be written as
the sum of two terms:
f = f
c
f
a
(6.2)
where f
c
represents the rolling friction caused by the compressive
deformation of the substrate material and f
a
that caused by adhesion or
extensional deformation of the substrate, which are shown in Fig. 6.1.
In the case of PSAs f
a
must be much larger than f
c
. If compressive
deformation of the adhesive is neglected, the strain of the adhesive c at is
expressed as [10]:
c = (R,h)(1 cos ) (6.3)
and the rate of strain c
/
is:
c
/
= (R,h) sin = (v,h) sin (6.4)
where h and v are the original thickness of the adhesive layer and velocity
of the cylinder, respectively. For a mechanical model, the stress o generated
by the elongation of the adhesive can be expressed as a function of ,
where
f
is the angle at the moment of failure. Assuming that the moment
caused by the extended part of the adhesive is equal to f
a
Mg (according to
the denition of the rolling coecient of friction) f
a
may be expressed as a
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 237
function of the cylinder characteristics (i.e., width b, radius R, moment, and
stress):
f
a
= (R
2
b,Mg)
Z
0
o() cos sin d (6.5)
Graphs of f
a
versus log v are dierent for dierent viscoelastic models and
failure criteria [10]. Mizumachi calculated the f
a
/v functions for a single
Voigt element, a single Maxwell element, two Maxwell elements, multiple
Maxwell elements, and multiple Maxwell elements in parallel (Fig. 6.2).
In some cases a dependence of f
a
on the modulus E, viscosity j, velocity
v, adhesive thickness, and cylinder radius was found. It would be reasonable
to expect that a curve of f versus log v for a PSA generally exhibits a peak
value or values that become small when the velocity becomes extremely
high or extremely low [10]. For adhesive practice it is very important to
summarize the dependence of the tack on the adhesive rheology (modulus/
viscosity) and on the coating weight C
w
:
Tack = f (E,j,C
w
) (6.6)
The inuence of the rolling ball or cylinder geometry on the measured
tack value may be derived from the general conditions of the adhesion,
Figure 6.1 Rolling friction caused by compressive deformation of the substrate
(adhesive) and by its extension deformation during rolling of the ball.
238 Chapter 6
friction, and wear of elastomers [11]. Equilibrium conditions and the
kinetics of adherence between a single hard spherical asperity and a smooth
surface of a soft elastomer were studied using fracture mechanics concepts
(see Chap. 3, Section Contact Mechanics). According to Greenwood [12],
when an elastic cylinder rolls over a plane, the movement of the area of
contact can be regarded as a propagating crack at the trailing edge (fracture)
and a healing crack at the leading edge. If the cylinder is truly elastic and the
process of forming or destroying free surface reversible, then there will be no
contribution to the rolling friction from the surface energy. In practice, with
an imperfectly elastic roller, the friction depends both on the viscoelastic
properties of the roller and on the surface energy; surprisingly the two seem
to be not additive but multiplicative. It has long been believed that only the
fracture process at the trailing edge is signicant, and that the energy
recovered from the destruction of free surface at the leading edge is
negligible. Conditions for the appearance of reattachment folds and
detachment waves were established as a function of several parameters;
namely, the normal applied load, the sliding or rolling speed, and the radius
of the curvature. The radius a
H
of the contact area is given by:
a
H
= (PR,K),3 (6.7)
Figure 6.2 Viscoelastic model elements for PSA. 1) A single Maxwell element;
2) two Maxwell elements in parallel connection; 3) a single Voigt element.
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 239
where P is the normal applied load, R is the radius of the ball, and
K = (4E,3)(1 v
2
) (6.8)
where E and v are the modulus and Poissons coecient of the adhesive. The
contact area is given by two dierent elds, one of compression in front of
the ball and another of tension (smaller than that of compression) behind
the ball [13]. The friction force of the ball depends on the temperature and
on the velocity of the ball, and this dependence is similar to that of the loss
modulus on the frequency and temperature (i.e., it may be described by
the WilliamsLandelFerry equation) [14]. The friction is given by the
propagation of the small debonding waves (Fig. 6.3), which are related to
the peeling o of the ball,
VR = nvF (6.9)
where v is the velocity of the ball, R is the local resistance against the motion
of the ball, V is the relative speed of the ball, and F is the peel force. As can
be seen from Eq. (6.9), rolling ball measurements can be formulated as peel
measurements. (Since the peel edge can be regarded as the tip of an
advancing crack, the adhesive ahead of the advancing peel front is subjected
to very large hydrostatic tension due to the lateral constraint imposed by the
substrate and the cover sheet [15]. The brils during peeling are modeled as
elastic strings and the bril break down at a critical length like by the rolling
of the ball. It is evident that peel adhesion will depend on the relaxation of
the adhesive material. The friction is the result of the competition between
the entrainment of the adhesive by the ball and the interfacial relaxation due
to the molecular motion. This interfacial relaxation depends on the rheology
of the PSA, but at the same time it depends on the thickness of the adhesive
Figure 6.3 Friction given by the propagation of small debonding waves.
240 Chapter 6
and its anchorage onto the face stock material. If this holds, the nature of
the face stock surface has a strong inuence on the tack measured by the
rolling ball. This conclusion is very important because of the quite dierent
dependence of the tack measured as loop tack on the face stock material. In
this case the exibility of the surface plays a determining role on the mea-
sured tack value. It should be mentioned that, on the basis of our knowledge
about peel adjustment with the aid of the face stock surface (primer), it is
quite normal to have the same dependence for tack measurements by rolling
ball, whereas shown earlier, peeling phenomena occur.
The examination of the friction force allows a correlation between tack
and shear resistance. The friction force F
f
is the sum of two components [16]:
F
f
= F
adh
F
def
(6.10)
where F
adh
is the adhesion component and F
def
the deformation component.
The latter is a function of the internal cohesion of the material, therefore
tack will be a function of the cohesion as well.
Tack Measured as Cohesion. Hamed and Hsieh [17] measured tack as
cohesion. In the debonding step tack is a function of the cohesion; the upper
limit of the tack of an elastomer is its cohesive strength. If during bond
formation, complete contact and interdiusion occur, then the interface will
be modied, and the measured tack must be identical to the cohesive strength
of the elastomer [17]. Hamed and Hsieh proposed relative tack (tack
divided by cohesive strength) as a measure of the completion of the tack
bond. If the relative tack equals zero, then no tack bond was formed. Relative
tack is rate dependent; Hamed and Hsieh measured tack as the average peel
force per unit width. At lowtest speeds the ratio of tack to cohesive strength is
less than the same ratio at higher test rates [17]. At suciently low stress rates
the short inter-diused chains have time to relax, relieving the applied stress.
On the other hand, the cohesive strength is controlled by the longer chains,
which cannot slip past one another very easily. At higher strain rates even the
short molecules may have little time for the molecular rearrangements needed
to relieve stress; hence bond strength will increase rapidly as there is
insucient time for failure by chain slippage and chains may rupture.
Tensile tests of SIS block copolymers show that decreasing the SI
content or increasing the crosshead velocity leads to a higher stress for all
extensions and to a more pronounced strain hardening [18]. The strain
hardening observed in the brillation part of the probe test curves can be
correlated to tensile tests; in both cases the lower the SI content, the more
pronounced the strain hardening. Experimental results show, that the
beginning of the probe test (where the cavitation process takes place)
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 241
quantitatively corresponds to the small strain shear properties of the
adhesives (i.e., tack depends on the cohesion) while the end of the test
(brillation, strain hardening) can be qualitativelyso farrelated to the
large strain elongational processes.
Tack and Adhesive Fracture Energy. Adhesion and tack of polymers
are not fundamental material properties like the modulus or the viscosity;
they strongly depend on the test methods used and the measurement
conditions. Adhesion performance is characterized by the adhesive fracture
energy. Two stages characterize the tack test that is based on the
measurement of the strength vs. time: the contact phase and the separation
phase. The tack energy (G) increases with the aptitude of the adhesive to
deform by cavitation and stringing during the debonding process. For non-
stringing adhesives (low viscous dissipation in the bulk of the adhesive) G is
sensitive mainly to the surface energy and to the surface roughness of the
probe. According to [19] a constant contact load is applied during a given
contact time then the probe is pulled up at constant debonding rate; a
constant contact area is applied for very short contact time (less than 1 sec)
and the probe is pulled up. The force and the contact area are monitored vs.
time. The product of the area subtended by the debonding force vs. time by
the pulling rate gives the tack energy. Actual contact area increases with the
thickness and then applatizes. Tack energy is a square function of the wet
area. First Zosel [1] developed an instrument which measures the fracture
energy and allows the adjustment of the most important parameters during
the bonding and debonding processes, such as contact time, contact
pressure, rate of separation, and temperature. The (bonding/debonding)
force vs. time plot of the instrument can easily be transformed into a stress-
strain curve, giving the tensile stress as a function of the tensile strain during
bond formation and separation. An appropriate measure of adhesive bond
strength and tack is the energy of separation per unit area of surface (i.e., the
adhesive failure energy) [2022]. This apparatus resembles the probe tack
tester and a very high correlation between both methods was found.
According to [23] the use of a Mechano Optical Tack tester allows the
determination of the tack strength (F), tack energy (G), and the actual
contact area (A), for tests at controlled contact force (F
c
), contact time (t
c
),
and release rate (r) [2429]; G (J/m
2
) is given by the relation:
G = (r,A)
Z
tf
F(t) dt (6.11)
Tack curves are load displacement curves generated during asymmetric
adhesion test. Several past investigations have shown that for elastomeric
242 Chapter 6
adhesives the relation between the crack tip velocity and G is a unique
function for each combination of substrate and adhesive [30,31]. Empirically
one suggested form of this unique function is:
G = G
o
[1 (a
T
v, . . .)] (6.12)
where =(v/v*)n, G
o
describes the interfacial contributions to the adhesion,
and includes the quantities pertaining to bulk dissipative processes near
the crack tip. Theoretical models were proposed by Gay and Leibler [32]
and Creton and Leibler [33] to account for the eect of the surface energy,
surface roughness, and the adhesive Youngs modulus on the cavitation and
brillation process of stringing adhesives.
Peel Test Used for Estimating the Tack. A modied 90
peel test
(now known as PSTC Test Method 15 for Quick Stick) is used for tack
measurements [34,35].
Tack Measured as Plasticity. The measurement of the tack is not as
reproducible as the measurement of the Williams plasticity [36]. Practically
tack is measured as quick stick, loop tack, or rolling ball tack. None of these
methods is sucient to characterize tack alone (see Chap. 10). Therefore the
tack index was dened as [37]:
Tack Index =
A B 50(17 C)
3
(6.13)
where A is the value measured in a 90
C
impart tack, but give poor cohesive strength, while resins with a softening
point above 70
C) imparts the
maximum tack at a higher level (52%) than a higher melting point resin
(e.g., Pentalyn H, melting point of 95
C [43].
Since the glass transition temperature of PIB is approximately 60
C,
tack measurements were performed at 1025
C to 60
C leads to lower o
max
and c
max
values in probe tack tests regardless of the percent diblock content of the
base polymer. At high temperature the interfacial crack propagation
becomes easier and debonding proceeds quickly by crack propagation.
The most useful signals in PSA analysis are G
/
(the shear modulus) and
G
//
(the loss modulus). G
/
is a direct measurement of the tack strength, and
G
//
is a direct measurement of the peel strength [59]. It is assumed that the
application of the adhesive (tack test) would occur at an angular frequency
near 0.1 rad/sec. It is further assumed that the peel test would approximate
the higher frequency of 10 rad/sec. The G
/
range of 50,000 to 200,000 Pa is
accepted as an ideal PSA performance. Frequency dependent F-D measure-
ments (force-distance curves) with friction force microscopy (FFM), were
made as they represent a nanoscale analogous to the macroscopic probe
tack test; lateral modulation measurements are being developed, too.
Influence of Test Methods and Conditions. Dierent test methods give
rise to dierent tack values. On the other hand, labeling practice points
towards a strong inuence of the labeling conditions (mainly of the
temperature) on the tack. As discussed in detail in [60] an ideal PSA gives
instantaneous tack and peel on a rigid substrate. Certain pressure-sensitive
products must adhere to soft substrates and provide enough adhesion after a
given time under special application conditions (temperature, pressure,
dwell time, etc.) only. For such products (e.g., protective lms) application
tack characterizes better the adhesivity of the product. Chap. 2 gives a
detailed description of the tack dependence on the experimental conditions
(time/temperature).
Influence of Face Stock Material on Tack. As observed when
measuring the tack with dierent methods, the nature and dimensions
of the face stock material inuence the value of the tack. Loop tack
measurements are sensitive to the face stock exibility, while rolling ball
tack is inuenced by the anchorage of the adhesive on the face stock (i.e., by
the face stock surface). Wet-out on the face stock material inuences the
tack of the pressure-sensitive laminate; however, experimental results show
some discrepancies; Toyama et al. [61] found maximum tack for a surface
tension of the face stock equal to the surface tension of the adhesive. On the
other hand, Sherrif et al. [62] and Counsell and Whitehouse [63] found that
tack increases with increasing surface tension of the face material. The
surface inuences the tack values measured as loop tack (Table 6.3) [64].
Tack characterizes the short bonding time and debonding behavior of
the adhesive. During bonding the pressure-sensitive laminate must conform
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 249
to the substrate in order to establish a maximum contact area. A high
debonding resistance is favored by a large contact area. Thus the exibility
(i.e., the bulk properties) of the face material will strongly inuence the tack
of the PSAs. This behavior is illustrated by the sensitivity of the tack test
methods to the exibility of the face stock material.
In rolling ball tack tests the adhesive does not merely contact the ball,
but climbs up the back of the ball just prior to release, very much like a low
angle peel. The more exible the face, the worse the situation becomes,
especially if the self-adhesive tape specimen is not rmly secured prior to the
test. Kaelble [65] showed that there is an area of compression just behind
the peel front. This results in automatic pressure application of the tape to
the test panel, no matter how minimal the initial application pressure. A
polyethylene (PE) lm, unlike other lm tapes, does not have a tack plateau
but continues to climb in tack value [3]. At maximum load the PE lm con-
tributes to the value of tack obtained due to its extremely high extensibility.
In industrial practice the low adhesivity of special protective lms
is the resultant of the simultaneous reduction of the coating weight and of
the thickness of the carrier lm. Thus the coating weight can be decreased
without the loss of the peel and tack [60].
Tack Values. In adhesive practice there is a need for reference values
of the tack since the formulator and end-user have to compare the obtained
tack values with their target performance. This remains a dicult question
because tack values depend on the measurement methods and conditions,
the face stock material used, and the coating weight. Tack values obtained
for adhesives with a dierent chemical basis or physical state dier.
However, for those skilled in the formulation and use of PSAs, there are
some target values of the tack which need to be achieved. Table 6.4
summarizes some tack values for PSAs with dierent chemical bases and
measured with dierent methods.
Table 6.3 The Influence of the Face Stock Material on the Tack
Loop Tack (N)
Coating Weight (g/m
2
) Soft PVC Paper
22 7.3 5.7
24 5.8 5.5
43 3.3 3.2
46 2.5 3.8
56 3.3 4.2
A water-based EVAc PSA was used.
250 Chapter 6
Improvement of the Tack
On the basis of theoretical considerations and practical experience one can
assume that hot-melt and solvent-based PSAs possess a higher tack than
water-based ones (cf. the lower molecular weight for the base polymers of
hot-melt PSAs and no poor tack additives for solvent-based PSAs); soft
base polymers (exible, branched chain) yield better tack. Low molecular
weight polymers and uncrosslinked polymers (or with a low degree of
crosslinking) display higher tack levels. Using nonmigrating surfactants
(NMS) improvement in peel, tack, and shear were realized [66]. Latexes
prepared with NMS exhibited a loop tack increase from 1.67 to 4.0 (psi).
Since PSA bonding typically occurs at the plateau region of the viscoelastic
curve, bonding is facilitated by lowering the G
/
at this region. G
/
can be
eectively lowered by increasing the entanglement molecular weight of the
polymer; PSA debonding, however, happens at much higher frequency,
typically between 10012,000 rad/sec. The loss modulus at this frequency is
in the transition region of the viscoelastic curve and its value is highly
dependent on the T
g
of the polymer. Increasing the T
g
results in higher G
//
in this region. The tack properties will be improved. Increasing of the glass
transition temperature can be achieved by special branched comonomers,
e.g., vinyl neodecanoate and vinyl neododecanoate [67]. Tackied polymers
possess better tack as do plasticized polymers. Finally, higher coating
weights result in higher tack levels (see Fig. 6.4).
The coating weight also inuences the peel adhesion and shear (see
Sections 1.2 and 1.3), as well as other characteristics like wettability (see
Table 6.4 Tack Values for PSAs on Different Chemical Bases, Measured with
Different Methods
Chemical Basis
Rolling Ball
Loop Tack (N/25 mm)
Base polymer Supplier Chemical nature Tack (cm) Glass PE
1360 Hoechst EVAc 17.0 6.9 3.4
FC88/PC80 UCB AC 7.0 13.1 7.6
FC88 UCB AC 7.5 13.3 8.0
V205 BASF AC 2.0 6.0 4.2
V208 BASF AC >30.0 7.9 7.9
3703 Polysar CSBR 25.0 5.3 2.7
3703/V205 Polysar/BASF AC/CSBR 20.0 6.2 1.8
3703/V205 Polysar/BASF AC/CSBR 6.5 8.4 7.6
Tackified emulsions were used.
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 251
Chap. 2). Therefore, before discussing other adhesive characteristics, a short
examination of the coating weight as a quality parameter is presented.
Role of Coating Weight and Parameters Influencing It
Benedek [68] summarized the inuence of the coating weight on the PSA
label quality and its importance for the screening and testing of PSAs. The
coating weight inuences the geometry and the quality of the PSA layer. Its
inuence on the quality of the PSA layer is indirect, via drying [69]. The
coating weight inuences the drying of the adhesive layer. The drying rate R
is given as a function of the mass transfer coecient c
m
, the heat transfer
coecient c
h
, and the latent heat of evaporation L [70] (i.e., as a function of
mass and heat transfer):
R = f (c
h
s t),L = f (c
m
s p) (6.18)
where
t =t t
s
p =p
s
p
t
s
=surface temperature
p
s
=vapor pressure at t
s
p =partial pressure
s =surface area
For the drying of aqueous adhesive layers, one can assume that the
drying rate R also depends on the layer thickness h, concentration c, c, and
specic gravity , [69]:
R = (h t c),( L h) (6.19)
For solvent-based adhesives, the drying rate depends on the diusivity
D, concentration c, and layer thickness h [69]:
R = D c,4h
2
(6.20)
Generally, the drying rate is inversely proportional to the layer
thickness (i.e., to the coating weight C
w
):
R = f (1,C
[
w
) (6.21)
As shown in Fig. 6.5 for low coating weight values, the exponent [ is
smaller than 1, whereas for high coating weights, the exponent should be
larger than 1 (i.e., for drying PSAs with a high coating weight, the layer
252 Chapter 6
thickness is the most important rate determining parameter). The
dependence between the wet coating weight, solids content, and drying
time was studied by Hansmann [70].
The strong inuence of the coating weight on the drying has an
indirect eect on the adhesive characteristics. The equilibrium water content
of the paper and water-based PSAs layer depends on the drying degree (i.e.,
on the coating weight). On the other hand, residual humidity aects tack,
peel, and shear (see Section 1.2).
The direct inuence of the coating weight on the peel and shear will be
discussed in Chap. 10. As a general statement, the coating weight has a
positive eect on tack and peel, and a negative one on the shear and drying.
In a rst approach tack T and peel P are proportional to the coating weight,
shear S and the drying speed R are inversely proportional. Thus:
T = f (C
w
)
,
(6.22)
P = f (C
w
)
o
(6.23)
Figure 6.5 Dependence of the drying speed on the coating weight. Weight loss (%)
as a function of the time, for dierent coating weights, and (wet adhesive thickness,
jm: 1) 60; 2) 100; 3) 200) during drying of a water-based PSA.
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 253
S = f (C
1
w
)
c
(6.24)
R = f (C
1
w
)
(6.25)
In summary the dependence of the adhesive properties P
adh
on the coating
weight (C
w
) can be represented as follows:
P
adh
= f [(C
oo
w
) (C
c
w
)
1
] (6.26)
namely, the coating weight inuences the versatility of the adhesive in a
complex manner. Evidently, the development of the PSA chemistry leads
to better adhesives (i.e., with a higher tack and peel adhesion) at a lower
coating weight.
The most important factors inuencing the coating weight are the face
stock material, the substrate to be adhered to (adherent), the permanent/
removable character of the adhesive, and the coating conditions. In general
it can be stated that the optimum coating weight value depends on the
chemical composition and on the end-use of the PSAs. On the other hand,
the coating weight must be correlated to the uniformity of the coated layer
and to the coating (lm-forming) quality, depending on the combination of
the following parameters:
+ Machine characteristics: speed and sense of rotation of the
metering cylinders, concentricity of the rolls, gap widths, properties
of rolls (e.g., surface finish, stability of material, deflection),
configuration, number and combination of rolls, hydraulic
pressure, and temperature control
+ Adhesive characteristics: cohesive strength, flow, and rheological
properties of the adhesive.
Chemical Composition and Coating Weight. According to their
chemical nature, synthesis, or formulation, dierent PSAs possess a dierent
adhesion-cohesion balance. Tack and peel may be improved by increasing
the coating weight. Thus, the chemical nature of the PSAs will inuence the
required coating weight. On the other hand, as discussed in detail in [71]
regulation of the crosslinking degree allows changes in the peel and tack for
the same coating weight and adhesive.
Influence of Coating Conditions on the Coating Weight. The most
important parameter is the coating technology (i.e., the direct/indirect
nature of the coating operation). Direct coating supposes depositing the
254 Chapter 6
adhesive on the face stock and thus adhesive bleeding through the porous
surface remains possible. Hence the measured coating weight could be lower
than the one being deposited. A detailed analysis of the inuence of the
coating conditions (coating technology) on the coating weight will be given
in Section 2.2 of Chap. 9.
A lot of parameters inuence the coating weight [68]. For laboratory
tests it is important to describe the dependence of the coating weight on the
knife opening (clearance) and viscosity. For a coating device with a blade,
the pressure dierence p depends on the viscosity j, width of the blade b,
web velocity V
w
, and blade angle as follows [72]:
p = (4j V
w
),(b ) (6.27)
For the simplest case of a parallel blade, the blade angle may be replaced
by the blade opening (i.e., the distance between the blade and the cylinder).
In a rst approximation a linear correlation is found between coating weight
and blade opening (Fig. 6.6).
On the other hand, the dependence of the coating weight on the
viscosity appears more complex. The coating weight or layer thickness H
w
Figure 6.6 The dependence of the coating weight on the clearance (blade opening).
Unlled, water-based PSA formulation.
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 255
for a Newtonian uid depends on the surface tension S
T
, blade opening d,
viscosity j, and specic gravity , [73]:
H
w
= f (S
T
,d,j,,) (6.28)
There is a complex dependence of the coating weight on the viscosity
(Fig. 6.7). Unthickened dispersions behave quite dierently from thickened
ones; thickened dispersions give a higher coating weight at higher viscosities
than unthickened ones (Fig. 6.8).
The viscosity also depends on llers and pH; adjusting the coating
weight with llers (viscosity) or through the pH also is possible. Table 6.5
demonstrates that lled dispersions do not display a linear dependence of
the coating weight on the blade opening.
Surfactants may change the viscosity of the aqueous dispersions and
hence the coating weight. Storage time and temperature also inuence the
viscosity and thus the coating weight. In fact practical coating conditions
dier quite a bit from laboratory ones. Shear thinning and thickening and
ow under dierent centrifugal forces may inuence the coating weight.
Laboratory coating conditions may be regarded as static whereas industrial
conditions are dynamic. Here the web velocity and shear conditions are the
Figure 6.7 The dependence of the coating weight on the viscosity. Water-based,
unthickened PSA formulation.
256 Chapter 6
most important parameters of the coating weight for a given adhesive and
coating device geometry.
Practically, during coating, in order to keep the coating weight
tolerance within maximum 5% the viscosity of the emulsion must be kept
at a constant level [74]. For an emulsion PSA on a reverse gravure coater,
it is ideal to have a high solids content with a low viscosity. Low viscosity
Figure 6.8 Coating weight dependence on the viscosity. Water-based, thickened
PSA formulation.
Table 6.5 Dependence of the Coating Weight on the
Clearance (Blade Opening) for Water-Based Acrylic
PSAs Containing Filler
Coating Weight (g/m
2
)
Filler content
(parts/100 parts, wet weight)
Clearance 0 5 10 20 30
60 25.5 20.0 33.0 44.0 29.0
100 43.0 36.0 40.0 38.0 45.0
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 257
means a high coating weight; conversely, high viscosity means a low coating
weight. The minimum level of the viscosity also depends on the surface
tension of the adhesive; common viscosities for reverse gravure range from
1724 DIN sec.
Pressure-sensitive adhesive solutions or dispersions that have dierent
chemical bases may have a dierent solids content and viscosity. Thus, for
the same viscosity and wet coating weight, a quite dierent dry coating
weight and tack level may be obtained. This is illustrated by Fig. 6.9.
For aqueous dispersions the coating weight also depends on the
porosity of the web (paper). Therefore direct or transfer coating will result in
dierent coating weights (i.e., for the same coating weight the thickness of
the adhesive layer on the coated side will dier) (Table 6.6).
The obtained coating weight depends on the type and characteristics
of the metering device used. A gravure cylinder with a line screen of
40, 70 jm depth, yields a coating weight of 57 g/m
2
[75]. When coating
a 50%-solids adhesive with adequate viscosities, the rheology of the
system is such that to achieve a 34 g/m
2
solid coating weight, a 35-jm
gravure cell is suggested, while 22.2 g/m
2
solids requires a 22-jm deep
gravure cell.
Figure 6.9 Tack dependence on the coating weight. Rolling ball tack as a function
of the coating weight for water-based PSAs on dierent chemical bases: 1) CSBR
tackied; 2) CSBR; 3) acrylic.
258 Chapter 6
For a metering cylinder, the coating weight will depend on the blade
opening between blade and cylinder, the machine speed, and the lm
transfer from the cylinder to the substrate [76]. Machine speed inuences
the coating weight; higher velocities yield higher coating weights [77]. As
discussed in [60] the coating device aects the nominal coating weight value
also. For instance, using a Meyer Bar a lower eective coating weight of
1.8 g/m
2
gives the same adhesivity obtained with the gravure cylinder and
2.4 g/m
2
adhesive.
Influence of the End-Use of the Label on Coating Weight. As discussed
in detail in [71] the product class (e.g., label, tape, protective lm, etc.)
inuences the coating weight. Protective lms are manufactured with 115 g/
m
2
coating weight, labels use 1525 g/m
2
PSA, tapes have generally coating
weight values above 20 g/m
2
. For the same product class the end-use aects
the coating weight value also. The end-use of the label requires PSAs with a
permanent or removable character. On the other hand, the end-use of the
label determines its application and labeling technology. This also depends
on the adhesion/cohesion balance. Labeling guns require very tacky adhe-
sives; for decals a high tack is less important. Peel is a function of the
coating weight. In Chap. 2 it was shown that removability depends on peel
adhesion and on the coating weight. According to the permanent/removable
character of the designed label, one can use a higher or lower coating weight.
Mounting, insulating, and splicing tapes possess coating weight values
higher than 30 g/m
2
. Removable tapes like protective lms are coated with
less than 10 g/m
2
adhesive. The coating weight values used for dierent
pressure-sensitive products are listed in [71].
Table 6.6 Dependence of the Coating Weight and Peel on the Coating Method
Coating Method
PSA Coating Weight (g/m
2
) Direct Transfer
Peel on glass
(N/25 mm)
1 18.0 17.0
20.0 17.0 PT
2 19.5 21.0
21.0 21.0 PT
3 15.0 12.0
21.0 19.0 PT
4 10.0 7.0
15.0 9.0
Water-based acrylic PSA coated on paper face stock material. PT=paper tear.
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 259
Influence of the Face Material on the Coating Weight. The dry
coating weight (i.e., the weight of the dry adhesive applied per unit surface
area) can vary substantially depending upon the porosity and irregularity of
the face material and of the substrate surface to which the face stock is to be
adhered. For instance, higher adhesive loadings are preferred for adhering
porous, irregular ceramic tiles to porous surfaces, while lower adhesive
loadings are required to manufacture tapes, lms, and other articles from
relatively nonporous smooth-surfaced materials such as synthetic polymer
lms and sheets. When the adhesive is applied on nonporous polymeric or
metallic face materials intended for adhesion to nonporous polymeric or
metallic surfaces, adhesive loadings of about 885 g of dry adhesive per m
2
are generally adequate. High adhesion in tapes manufactured from
continuous sheet polymeric substrates can usually be achieved with dry
adhesive coating weights of about 1632 g/m
2
, while coating weights of
about 1428 g/m
2
of adhesive are usually employed for paper-backed tapes,
such as masking tapes. Textile carrier materials for labels or tapes need
coating weight values above 40 g/m
2
. The anchorage of the adhesive on
the carrier material inuences the coating weight also. As discussed in [71]
primed removable products work with less coating weight. The conform-
ability and deformability of the face stock material aects the coating weight
also. For instance, soft and thin LDPE carrier for protective lm requires
lower coating weight values than HDPE or PET.
Influence of the Substrate on Coating Weight. The adhesive ow is
inuenced by the nature of the contact surface (liner as adherent). Chemical,
physical, and mechanical interactions with the solid state component may
hinder the adhesive ow. Therefore the chemical nature (e.g., anity and
polarity) of the surface and the physical nature (e.g., porosity and
roughness) will inuence the interaction of the adhesive with the substrate.
The adhesive ow inuences the bonding and debonding characteristics.
According to Tordjeman [19] in probe tack tests the actual contact
area increases with the thickness and then applatizes. The contact area A
c
is
given as a function of the contact force F
c
and the apparent modulus E
a
as
follows:
A
c
- Na)
2
[F
c
,E
a
(6.29)
where the apparent modulus E
a
takes into account the competition between
the thickness eects and the roughness a):
E
a
= E(1 a)
2
,2 h
2
) (6.30)
260 Chapter 6
The coating weight determines the real thickness of PSAs and the
thickness of the adhesive layer which can ow freely. Thus the coating
weight will depend on the nature of the substrate. As a practical example,
adhesion onto HDPE is generally lower than adhesion onto LDPE [78];
therefore the coating weight should be increased for adhesion to HDPE.
The inuence of the carrier material and of the substrate on the peel will
be discussed in detail in the Section 1.2.
Dependence of Coating Weight on Adhesive Quality. The coating
weight may also depend on the quality of the adhesive. Under certain con-
ditions the emulsion polymerization of water-soluble monomers may yield
suspensions (i.e., the monomer is homopolymerizing) with bulky, non-
dispersed polymer particles remaining (coagulum, grit). This phenomenon
is especially encountered with acrylnitryl copolymers; Acronal 81 D may
contain so much coagulum that a coating weight of at least 100 g/m
2
is
recommended (i.e., more than the diameter of the largest solid particle in
the uid adhesive layer) [79].
Coating Weight Values. There are a lot of factors inuencing the
value of the coating weight. On the other hand, the development of
the PSA chemistry has led to adhesives with improved tack and peel
adhesion (i.e., with lower coating weight). Some years ago coating weight
values of 30100 g/m
2
were recommended [80]; actually 1520 g/m
2
are more
common. Table 6.7 gives some typical values of the coating weight used
for labels on dierent face stock materials and for dierent end-uses.
Techniques for measuring the coating weight and tolerances are covered in
Chaps. 8, 9, and 10.
1.2 Peel Adhesion
Peel adhesion is the force required to remove a PSA-coated exible material
from a specied test surface under standard conditions (e.g., specic angle
and rate). It gives a measure of adhesive or cohesive strength, depending on
the mode of failure [88]. Johnston [57] stated as an analogy that the adhesive
consists of many little springs, as depicted in the Maxwell and Voigt models
to simulate viscoelastic behavior, and that these springs range from strong
to weak. The former contribute to the adhesion (peel), the latter contribute to
tack. In fact, the measured peel energy includes a signicant contribution
from energy dissipation within the bulk of the polymer. Thus for a given
extensible polymer, the higher the work of adhesion (due to the interaction
at the surface), the higher the dissipation energy (due to polymer
deformation) and the higher the peel energy [89]. As discussed earlier, in
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 261
Chap. 3, Section 3, based on contact physics and mechanics, debonding is
related to cavitation and brillation of the PSA, and its modulus.
Measurement of the Peel Force
Peel is measured as the force required to remove a PSA-coated material
which was applied to a standard test plate, at a specic rate and angle. In
some cases not only the value of the peel force, but also the failure mode
(deformation or destruction of the components of the pressure-sensitive
laminate or of the substrate) has to be examined in order to obtain a correct
appraisal of the removability of PSAs.
The results of a peel test are very useful in comparing dierent
adhesives, but due to a complicated stress distribution, they lack the ability
to quantitatively investigate the molecular origins of adhesion. For this
reason asymmetric adhesion tests are favored in studying the interfacial and
bulk contributions to adhesion. Due to the disadvantages of the at punch
(alignment diculty and brillation upon pull-o) Crosby and Shull [30]
use the spherical geometry. This test provides adequate data to generate tack
curves. Pocius et al. [90] studied the release behavior of acrylic tapes from
release coating based upon long alkyl side-chain polycarbamates by the
Table 6.7 Coating Weight Values of Industrial Labelstock
Adhesive characteristics
Nature Adhesive layer
Chemical Physical
Coating
weight (g/m
2
)
Coating
thickness (jm)
Face
stock Refs.
Acrylic Hot-melt 25 Paper 46
Acrylic Water-based 25 Paper 81
Acrylic Solvent-based 20 Paper 81
30 82
2629 83
Acrylic Water-based 2729 Film 2
Acrylic Water-based 25 Paper 84
Acrylic Water-based 25 Paper 85
CSBR Water-based 2528 Film 38
Acrylic Water-based 20 Paper 86
Acrylic Hot-melt 25150 Paper 87
Acrylic Solvent-based/water-based 25 45
262 Chapter 6
methodology of contact mechanics and peel strength data (90
peel of PSA
tapes measured on glass plate coated with release). The extrapolation of the
contact mechanics data (at low rate) matches the peel data (at high rate).
They studied the adhesion energy as a plot of crack speed (nm/s). On the
basis of brillation, the debonding force is computed by Verdier and Piau
[91] using the following correlation:
G = F,l (6.31)
where F is the force and l is the bond width.
G = [a (L e),zc
max
]
Z
c
max
o(c,c
/
,T) dc (6.32)
where c
max
is the maximum elongation of the lament, l is the periodicity of
the laments, a is the lament width, L is the lament height, and e is the
adhesive thickness. The elongation rate (c
/
) is taken to be V/e; o is the stress
given by Lodges model. According to Lin and Hui [15] the brillated zone
length is determined by the fracture criterion h =h
c
and s =s
o
. The
dependence of the normalized peel velocity V/E*A on the normalized peel
force (F/E*I
1/3
) is shown for dierent values of normalized h
c
; normalized
peel velocity is proportional to normalized peel force; A is the rate constant
associated with bril deformation. The normalized peel height (L/2I
1/3
) is
plotted against normalized peel force for dierent h
c
/(2I )
1/3
values. The peel
height decreases with increasing peel force. In addition the dependence of
the normalized peel height on the normalized peel force is independent
of the critical bril length. For a given peel force the brillated zone size
increases with critical bril failure length.
According to [92] the peel force P relates to tensile strain c and stress o
by the following equation:
P = (bl,2)
Z
c
0
o(c) dc (6.33)
where b is the width and l is the thickness of the adhesive lm. The specic
work of PSA lm tensile straining (A) is identical to the work of adhesion:
A =
Z
o(c) dc (6.34)
As follows from Eqs. (6.33) and (6.34), the mode of adhesive joint
failure is determined by the ratio between the two limiting tensile stress
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 263
values o
a
(which characterizes the strength of the adhesive bond) and
o
c
) which relates to the cohesive strength of the PSA polymer). For o
a
>o
c
the failure is cohesive, whereas an adhesive type of debonding occurs at
o
c
>o
a
. The slip-stick point position corresponds to the condition of
o
a
-o
c
. (Slip-stick is the phenomenon when the adhesive separation front
can move faster than the rate of testing.) In the case of interfacial failure
the peel curve is noisy but approximately constant [93]. According to [94]
when failure is cohesive, the peel force is rather steady; for uncrosslinked
PSA the peel force drops when the mode of failure changes from cohesive to
adhesive [95].
The 180
peel but it
inuences it for other kinds of debonding. The strain energy release rate G,
during debonding of a cantilever beam sample, containing at its midline a
thin PSA layer, was utilized to quantify the adhesion of PSA by Taub and
Dauskardt [101]. One might expect the value of the adhesive fracture energy
(G
c
) from the peel tests to be signicantly lower than that determined from
CDB (Double Cantilever Beam) specimens, as was observed in the case of
values of G
c
deduced using the FEA-CZM (cohesive zone model) analysis of
the peel tests [102].
Factors Influencing Peel Adhesion
Bonding plays an important role in the peel resistance. Parameters
inuencing the adhesive ow during the bonding step will inuence the
peel adhesion. In a manner similar to tack, peel is inuenced by the PSA
nature and geometry, and by the nature of the face stock material. The
inuence of the adhesive thickness, viscosity, backing rigidity, and peeling
velocity in the cohesive regime was stated [103]. Test methods and
conditions modify the peel value as well. More pronounced for the peel
force are the inuence of the dwell time and of the adherent.
Influence of the Adhesives Nature on Peel. Similar to tack, peel
resistance is a function of the chemical nature and macromolecular
characteristics of the base polymers. On the other hand, and in contrast
to tack, peel adhesion increases with the cohesion (i.e., with the molecular
weight) up to a limit. A quite dierent adhesion/cohesion balance is required
for good peel adhesion onto polar or nonpolar substrates. Regarding the
inuence of the adhesives nature, one should dierentiate between the
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 265
chemical composition of the base elastomers, the chemical composition of
the formulated adhesive, and the technology dependent composition of the
coated PSAs; one should also note the inuence of aging, the chemical
composition of the PSA, and solid state components of the laminate,
because of the environmental and reciprocal interactions between the
adhesive and the neighboring components (e.g., face stock and release liner).
Influence of the Chemical Composition of the Base Elastomer on the
Peel. The anchorage of the adhesive on the substrate is governed by a
physical and a chemical component. Chemical interactions between the adhe-
sive and the substrate result in adhesion build-up; the chemical composition
of the base elastomers strongly inuences this adhesion build-up. Small
portions of highly polar monomers (e.g., acrylic acid) produce adhesion
build-up. On the other hand, PSAs with a vinyl polymeric backbone and with
grafted polysiloxane moieties produce initially repositionable labels [104].
The inclusion of polar carboxylic groups in the adhesive may inuence
its peel value and change its anity towards polar surfaces [105]. In a similar
manner such groups inuence the peel of the adhesive through water
sensitivity. Built-in carboxyl groups may produce a change in the peel value
from special substrates through pH changes [106]. Introducing polar,
functional groups into ethylene vinyl acetate copolymers improves their
adhesion [107]. The role of the carboxyl sticker groups on the peel adhesion
strength (G) of linear polybutadiene to aluminum surfaces coated with
amine and other receptor groups was investigated in [108]; G went though a
maximum at some optimal concentration of the sticker groups (ca. 3 mol %).
According to [109] the acrylic acid content dramatically increases adhesion
and adhesion hysteresis of acrylic copolymers. The addition of acrylic acid
also decreases a critical crack propagation speed above which a much
stronger rate dependence of the adhesion energy is observed. The contri-
bution to adhesion strength by these groups is evaluated by surface energy
measurements and by peel strength measurements (energy dissipation due to
polymer deformation).
Earlier studies [110112] have shown that the modulus G
/
value at low
frequencies can be related to the wetting and creep behavior (bonding) of the
adhesive and the modulus at high frequencies can be related to the peel or
quick stick (debonding). A general correlation was developed between tape
properties (release and peel adhesion). Good adhesion for tapes is given
when G
/
is low at low frequency rates, i.e., 0.1 rad/sec and a relatively high
slope exists for G
/
as the frequency is increased [113]. The peel strength is
proportional to the ratio of G
//
and G
/
at the respective debonding and
bonding frequencies. Gordon et al. [114116] presented an empirical corre-
lation between the bulk viscoelastic properties of commercial adhesive and
266 Chapter 6
the release prole observed from peel force vs. peel velocity measurements.
It was shown that the bulk viscoelastic properties of the adhesive play a
dominant role in controlling release proles in a 180
peel strength of
PSA formulations based on crosslinkable rubber (e.g., SIS, electron beam-
curable) remain fairly constant over the entire range of electron beam doses
[50]. Yarusso et al. [95] studied as a model PSA, anionic polyisoprene. The
eects of the initial molecular weight and of the degree of crosslinking were
studied. As stated, high gel content could compensate for low MW. This was
not true for peel behavior. Three dierent failure modes were observed
in the adhesion testing. Adhesion failure with no apparent change in the
appearance of the stainless steel plate was favored by high molecular weight,
high gel content, and high peel rate. Cohesive failure leaving tacky adhesive
both on the tape and on the panel was favored by low molecular weight, low
gel content, and low peel speed. When the molecular weight was low, but the
gel content was high, and the peel speed was low, we observed a very thin
residue on the stainless steel plate, which was often of a bluish or brownish
color and was nontacky. Generally, crosslinking exerts a more complex
inuence on the peel. A low degree of crosslinking improves the cohesion
and thus the peel, whereas a high crosslinking degree lowers the tack and the
peel. As an example one can consider the increase of the peel for Cymel
crosslinked neoprene latex and the dramatic reduction of the peel upon
adding zinc oxide to the formulation [52].
For the crosslinked adhesive more complex three-dimensional ow
patterns are obtained by peeling. At very high velocities stick release is
observed [91]. Peel data for moderately crosslinked, epoxidized natural
rubber (ENR) are shown to be time-temperature superposable, while those
for a lightly crosslinked ENR are not. Strain crystallization, because of the
resultant hysteresis, could provide the additional dissipative mechanism and
hence the anomalously high peel strength at elevated temperature for the
lightly crosslinked ENR [121].
Tobing [122] has shown that for gel free, low-T
g
acrylics (based on
2-EHA) there was no signicant dierence between emulsion vs. solvent-
borne PSA lm adhesive performances. However, commercial products
have a high level of gel and low shear. Interlinking of the microgels
268 Chapter 6
by covalent bonds in the lm (using a functional monomer, e.g., IBMA) is
needed. In special acrylic emulsions 0.51.0 wt% IBMA (isobutoxymethy-
lacrylamide) was copolymerized to provide interlinking of the microgels in
the lm upon heating. When the MW of the linear polymer was greater than
2M
e
and the M
c
of the microgels was greater than M
e
, a synergistic eect
was obtained.
Influence of the Molecular Weight of the Adhesive on the Peel. The
inuence of the molecular weight of the polymer components of the PSAs
on the rheology of the PSAs was examined in Chap. 3. The rheology of the
adhesive inuences its adhesive characteristics; therefore, the peel also is a
function of the molecular weight [123]. The increase of the modulus with the
molecular weight reinforces the peel; on the other hand, it reduces the chain
mobility and diusion rate, and decreases the peel [124]. Physical adhesion
can develop from adequate wetting at a well-dened interface or by
diusional interpenetration of segments across the interface, when this is
thermodynamically possible. The fracture energy G of a joint follows a
relation of the form [125]:
G = f (D t)
a
(6.41)
where D is the diusion coecient, which is inversely proportional to the
molecular weight, and t is the time. For adhesive formulations tackied with
butyl rubber, peel adhesion increases with the molecular weight of the
tackier. On the other hand, when tackifying CSBR, higher melting point
resins decrease the adhesion on polyethylene. The tendency to transfer
adhesive or residue to the substrate is especially sensitive to the initial
molecular weight even at high gel content.
The dispersion of the molecular weight plays an important role in
debonding also. Commercial acrylic adhesives, like rubber very broad
spectrum of relaxation times. And in particular low MW fractions provide
the fast relaxation times necessary to achieve a large real contact area within
a short contact time (typically 1 sec). In the case of monodisperse polymers
these low MW fractions are absent and the contact area depends mostly on
the elastic properties of the polymer at bonding frequency. The distinctive
feature of these linear monodisperse samples is that the transition from
cohesive to adhesive failure with increasing strain rate always corresponded
to a maximum on the value of the c
max
vs. strain rate [126]. However, the
strain rate at which the cohesive-adhesive transition and the maximum in
c
max
occurred increased when the molecular weight decreased. If failure
proceeds through disentanglement of the polymer chain, both the bril
stress o
bril
and c
max
increase continuously as V
deb
M
3
increases because
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 269
disentanglement becomes more dicult. If the failure mechanism is not
disentanglement but a debonding process the critical stress o sustainable
by the bril-punch interface is the rupture criterion. On expects o
r
to be
constant so in this regime c
max
decreases with V
deb
M
3
since: c
max
oo
r
/
V
deb
M
3
. The two limiting cases are interfacial dewetting (V
deb
t --1) and
brittle interfacial fracture (V
deb
t >> 1). Experimental results have shown
that a large spectrum of relaxation times is a necessary condition for the
performance of PSAs. If short relaxation times are absent (i.e., no low MW
fraction) the contact with the substrate is not achieved within short contact
times, while if long relaxation times are absent, a brillar and adhesive
fracture cannot be achieved.
Influence of the Adhesive Geometry on the Peel Adhesion. Adhesive
geometry includes the dimensions and form of the adhesive layer; the former
depend on the coating weight. The coating weight strongly inuences the
value of the debonding force. In general peel adhesion is a function of the
thickness of the adhesive [127] and, like tack, peel is very sensitive towards
the coating weight. Generally, at low coating weights, the peel increases with
the coating weight, implying a debonding through adhesive failure.
Concerning the inuence of the coating weight on the peel resistance,
the peel force P depends on the peel stress s, sample width b, layer thickness
h, and creep modulus E
c
as follows [105]:
P = (s
2
b h),E
c
(6.42)
As can be seen in Fig. 6.10 there exists a complex dependence of the peel on
the coating weight; generally there is an inection point in the plot. Up to
this point peel increases rapidly with the coating weight; after this point peel
depends less on the coating weight. The shape of the plot depends on the
adhesive and face material. In order to avoid quality consistency deviations
caused by a variation of the coating weight, the coater should use a coating
weight above this critical value. It should also be mentioned that in the
upper domain (over the critical value), the peel dependence on the coating
weight is less dependent on the face stock. Generally, the dependence of the
peel on the coating weight may be formulated as follows:
P = f (C
b
w
) (6.43)
where b ,=1 and possesses quite dierent values in the over and under critical
domains. As discussed in Chap. 2 for given application conditions, surface
roughness, and carrier deformability, the dependence of the peel force on
270 Chapter 6
the coating weight can be described by a simplied plot [see Eq. (2.43)],
which is a linear dependence (like the Kaelble equation), valid over the
critical coating weight.
Taub and Dauskardt [128] shifted the so-called R curvesenergy
release rate G (J/m
2
) =f (PSA thickness)towards lower values of G with
increasing layer thickness (in the range of 30250 jm) until a critical layer
thickness is obtained. For thicknesses greater than this critical thickness, the
R curves become relatively insensitive to changes in the layer thickness. This
insensitivity to adhesive layer thickness is consistent with data reported in
the literature for cohesive failure in PSA peel tests [129].
By the analysis of PSA fracture mechanics in the course of peeling,
Chalykh et al. [92] established that the peel force P relates to tensile strain
c and stress o by an equation which includes b (the width) and l (the
thickness) of the adhesive lm. The peel force P, to rupture the adhesive
bond obeys the modied Kaelble equation (3.15) [130,131].
Bikermann [118] also proposed a derivation of the energy release rate
as follows:
F = 0.3799boe
(1,4)
(2h)
(3,4)
(E,,)
(1,4)
(6.44)
Figure 6.10 Dependence of the peel on the coating weight. 1) Peel on
polyethylene; 2) peel on glass.
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 271
where F is the force (F=bG), b is the adhesive width, o is the rupture stress,
e is the adhesive thickness, 2h is the backing thickness, and E and Y are the
Young moduli of the backing and adhesive respectively.
The adhesion energy calculated from indenter tests is given by the
follo-wing correlation [18]:
W
adh
= h
o
Z
o(c)dc (6.45)
where h
o
is the initial lm thickness, o the nominal stress, and c the strain.
As discussed earlier, tack also is measured as peel adhesion. Tack
increases with the coating weight. Figure 6.11 illustrates the simultaneous
increase of tack and peel with the coating weight; however, if the debonding
occurs by break in the adhesive layer (cohesive failure) the peel does
not depend on the coating weight [132]. The peel strength depends on
the thickness of the adhesive layer and of the face stock material.
Peel increases with increasing thickness of the adhesive. This increase of
Figure 6.11 The inuence of the coating weight on the tack and peel. The
dependence 1) of the rolling ball tack and 2) of the peel on polyethylene on the
coating weight for a water-based acrylic PSA formulation.
272 Chapter 6
the peel with the adhesive thickness is illustrated in Table 6.8. The inuence
of the thickness of the adhesive layer on the peel was also studied by
Schlimmer [133], who found that peel adhesion does not depend on the layer
thickness.
The use of large amounts of adhesive leads to a relatively strong bond
between the adhesive and the target substrate, thus making the product less
peelable. Generally, one nds that lower coating weights make peelability
of the product in use easier to achieve, but make a uniform coating more
dicult to obtain. For paper coating with acrylic PSAs the coating weight
amounts to at least 12 g/m
2
, and usually 1420 g/m
2
depending on the nature
of the adhesive. The inuence of the coating weight on the peel was studied
by several authors [3,123,134]. The 90
peel test [47] (see Section 3.1 of Chap. 10). For the 90
peel a nonlinear
dependence of the peel on the coating weight was established; for 180
peel
adhesion a linear dependence of the peel force on the coating weight is given.
Peel dependence on the coating weight also is a function of the
substrate, face stock, and adhesive. For silicone-based adhesives, in most
cases a coating weight-independent adhesion value on steel is obtained at
coating weights over 46 g/m
2
. Table 6.9 shows that peel adhesion increases
with the coating weight; after a certain value of the coating weight (which
depends on the adhesive and substrate) peel adhesion increases at a slower
rate and eventually reaches a plateau.
Table 6.8 Dependence of the Peel on the Thickness of
the Adhesive Layer
Wet Adhesive
Layer Thickness (jm)
Coating Weight
(g/m
2
)
Peel (N/25 mm)
PVC Paper
60 22 7.3
24 5.6
70 24 5.8
25 5.5
100 43 3.3
46 3.2
130 46 2.5
47 3.8
160 56 3.3
67 4.2
A 200-mPa.s EVAc water-based PSA was coated on soft PVC via
an 80 g/m
2
paper (transfer coating).
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 273
The existence of a critical coating weight value plays an important role
in the end-use of pressure-sensitive products with low nominal coating
weight, e.g., protective lms, where the coating weight may attain the critical
value. Figure 6.12 illustrates the dependence of the peel resistance on the
coating weight for two dierent adhesives. At low nominal coating weight
values (0.51.5 g/m
2
) changes of 2535% of the coating weight lead to
pronounced (5060%) reduction of the peel value. As seen, the reduction
Table 6.9 Dependence of the Peel on the
Coating Weight (Peel on Glass and Polyethylene
as a Function of the Coating Weight)
Coating Weight
(g/m
2
)
Peel (N/25 mm)
Glass PE
9.4 17.0 PT 15.0
18.8 17.0 PT 16.0
33.5 22.0 PT 14.0
39.6 25.0 17.0
61.8 25.0 19.0
A tackified water-based acrylic PSA was used.
PT=Paper tear.
Figure 6.12 Dependence of the peel resistance on the coating weight and adhesive
nature: (1) and (2) are dierent adhesive grades.
274 Chapter 6
of the coating weight decreases the peel resistance and below a critical
coating weight value (which is adhesive and substrate dependent) joint
failure may occur.
Dependence of the Peel on the Shape of the Adhesive Layer. In
general, defects in an applied continuous PSA layer should be avoided for
common adhesive coatings. However, there are special coatings with a
discontinuous character of the adhesive layer, mostly in order to avoid the
build-up of high peel resistance. On the other hand, the structure of the
continuous adhesive layer also inuences the peel resistance [132]. As
discussed in [60] the coating device aects the shape of the coated adhesive
layer. Crosslinked adhesives coated with a gravure cylinder give peel values
which dier from those obtained with a Meyer Bar. Regulating the shape of
the PSA allows the control of the adhesion for removable adhesives too
[135]. See Chap. 2 for a more detailed discussion of the inuence of the
adhesive form on the peel.
Influence of Coating Technology on Peel. Direct coating achieves
better anchorage of the PSAs on the face stock, and therefore better
removability. For optimum anchorage, sheet-stock PSAs are often directly
coated on to the face material, rather than transfer coated via the release
liner. The state of the adhesive during the coating operation also inuences
the peel. Water-based PSAs contain dierent water-sensitive and hygro-
scopic components; hence they may contain less or more humidity than the
laminate. The residual water content acts like a plasticizer and reduces the
peel [78]. Hyde and Yarusso [136,137] discovered that under certain hot-
melt coating conditions PSA blends of NR and miscible aliphatic tackifying
resins can also undergo strain-induced crystallization. This phenomenon
would not be observed in coatings prepared from solvent- or water-based
adhesives. In this case the molecular orientation of the rubber phase
imparted by the strain-induced crystallization process leads to a reduction of
tack and an anisotropy in the peel adhesion performance. The peel adhesion
is substantially lower in the coating machine direction compared to the
transverse direction. This property allows for repositioning of the tape.
Influence of Face Stock Material on the Peel. The rheology of the PSA
depends on the solid state components of the laminate. Peel is a function of
the rheology of the adhesive and it also depends on the face stock material.
Both the bulk properties of the face stock material and its surface quality
aect the peel resistance. Peel is determined by the deformability not only of
the adhesive, but also of the face stock [138]; the stiness (exural modulus)
of the face stock inuences the peel angle and thus the peel value [132]. The
eect of the face material becomes part of the result; as an example one can
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 275
consider a 180
[3]. The same adhesive at the same coating weight can display
a variety of peel values when coated onto dierent face stock materials.
Depending on the substrate, adhesives may be classied as removable or
permanent. The same substrate material may have dierent surface proper-
ties; for example, yellow plastic items may be labeled less easily than white
ones because of the llers used [139].
The bulk characteristics of the face stock material, its stiness, and
plasticity/elasticity aect the transfer of the debonding forces (see Chap. 2).
On the other hand, the chemical composition of the face stock material
inuences the interaction between the adhesive and the face stock material.
This inuence should be taken into account especially for PVC foils [132].
The geometry and dimensions of the face stock can aect the peel resistance
as well. Mechanical eects in the peel test were studied by Kim et al. [140].
The peel strength measured by the peel test method is a practical adhesion
(an engineering strength per unit width) and does not represent the true inter-
facial adhesion. The measured value is a combination of the true interfacial
adhesion strength and forces required for plastic and elastic deformation of
the adhesive lm and substrate. The major controlling factors in the peel
strength are thickness, Youngs modulus, yield strength, the strain harden-
ing coecient of the adhesive lm, compliance of the face material, and
interfacial adhesion strength. The mechanical characteristics of the face
stock material, its exibility, and elasticity (plasticity) inuence the transfer
of the debonding energy to the adhesive layer (see Chap. 2).
The decrease or damping of the peel force is caused by the deforma-
tion (elongation) of the face stock material under tension, changing the
direction or distribution of the force (change of the debonding angle), and
by the stiness of the material; these phenomena decrease the peel force [3].
Thus, one can write:
Peel = f [(Stiffness)
1
, (Plasticity)
1
] (6.46)
The stiness depends on the exural modulus E
f
whereas elongation
depends on the elongation modulus E
e
of the face stock. Thus:
Peel = f [1,(E
f
,E
e
)] (6.47)
This equation is conrmed by practical data from the labeling industry.
Sti aluminum foils used as face stock material exhibit a lower peel value.
Similarly, opaque soft PVC gives a lower peel value than clear (softer) PVC.
276 Chapter 6
For some adhesives, in spite of the weak adhesion, there is a possibility
of achieving high peel strength values if the adhesive lm exhibits a low
modulus [141]; this means that:
Peel = f (E
f
,E
1
e
) (6.48)
According to [142] a disadvantage of the peel testing is the signicant
plastic deformation that the peel arm undergoes. The extent of plastic defor-
mation is a function of peel angle and peel rate and therefore the measured
G
c
(fracture energy) values are said to be geometry dependent.
Bikermann [118] proposed a derivation of the energy release rate see
[Eq. (6.44)] where h (the backing thickness) and Y (the Young moduli of the
backing) take into account the inuence of the carrier material.
In the formula discussed by Kaelble [143] the factor Eh
3
takes into
account the backing rigidity. Piau et al. [103] stated that for steel as carrier,
lower peel and lower increase of the peel with the velocity. In the peeling
master curve they represent the quantity
3/7
G as a function of jV, where
=jVe
2
/(Eh
3
) is a dimensionless number representing the eect of the
adhesive viscous forces compared to the rigidity eects of the backing.
Fukuzawa and Uekita [119] suggested a theoretical formula of peel
adhesion (P):
P = b[W
a
AX
2
(e
B,X
B,X 1)
2E
s
I
s
(o sin o),(1 cos o)],(1 cos o)
(6.49)
which includes in its parameters A and B the work of adhesion W
a
, between
the PSA and the adherend, the work of deformation of the PSA (W
d
), and
the work of bending of the backing W
b
. The modulus of the PSA (E
a
), the
modulus of the backing E
s,
and the moment of inertia of the backing I
s
(I
s
=bt
3
s
/12; where b is the width of the PSA tape, t
s
is the thickness of
the backing) are taken into account also. An increase in the modulus of the
backing causes an increase in the peel adhesion. If the modulus of
the backing attains 39 E
9
dyn/cm, peel increases.
Fracture energy values measured from the SLBT were compared to
values obtained using the pull-o test (and were of the same order of
magnitude for dierent substrates). However, for high energy substrates
results from a 90
6E
+
FR,H - t
p
(6.50)
where F is the peel force per unit width, t is the yield stress of the cover sheet
in shear, and E* =E /(1v
2
). The cover sheet is modeled as elastic, so that:
M=E*Ik, where I =H
3
/12, k is the radius of curvature of the cover sheet at
P(x, y), and M is the moment at P [15].
As discussed above, reduction of the coating weight to values under
the critical weight causes joint failure. In principle such reduction may be the
result of carrier (and adhesive) deformation also [147].
Comparative industrial experiments with protective lms having
carrier lms with standard and reduced thicknesses for the same adhesive
and adhesive coating weight, conrm the decrease of the peel resistance with
the reduction of the thickness of the carrier lm too (Table 6.10). Films
with strongly reduced thickness show very low adhesion. The mean peel
Table 6.10 The Influence of the Carrier Thickness
on the Peel Resistance of Adhesive Coated Films
Adhesive
Code
Carrier
Thickness (jm)
Peel Resistance
on Stainless Steel
180
(N/10 mm)
1 50 0.15
25 0.05
2 80 2.50
40 0.90
3 80 2.50
45 0.80
4 45 1.10
35 0.80
5 40 0.40
30 0.01
278 Chapter 6
resistance value of about 0.6 N/10 mm is reduced to 0.10.06 N/10 mm. That
means that such lms, although they possess a standard adhesive coating
weight, do not work like standard products. The adhesion of such protective
lms with very thin carrier material is extremely low and does not allow
their standard use. Tensile stresses in the carrier lm may produce bond
failure. The deformability of the carrier (reduction of its thickness
by stretching) depends on its thickness. The deformability of the carrier
produces two eects. In general, reduction of the carrier thickness causes
the decrease of the peel force. In the extreme case, an excessive reduction of
the carrier thickness leads to bond failure. Astonishingly this phenomenon
occurs at a carrier thickness which is sucient for self-supporting or
processing of the laminate. That means, that the pressure-sensitive laminate
cannot be used although its components (the adhesive and the carrier) work.
The adhesive lm can be laminated on the product to be protected and the
adhesion between the lm and substrate is sucient if no in-plane tensioning
of the carrier appears, but stretching of the lm causes debonding. Such
pressure-sensitive products with very low (dynamically tested) adhesion
behave under statical use adequately. However, their end-use quality cannot
be evaluated by means of standard tests. As stated, bond failure appears at
a critical carrier deformability (Fig. 6.13). It is supposed that in this
case the simultaneous, carrier-induced deformation of the adhesive leads to
Figure 6.13 Dependence of the peel resistance on the maximum tensile force (F
m
)
in the carrier lm.
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 279
an apparent reduction of the coating weight which causes bond failure
(Fig. 6.14). For thin plastic lms the maximum tensile strength (F
m
) is
preferred as an index of the carrier deformability. Thus, the peel resistance
can be described as a function of the coating weight (C
w
) and the parameter
(F
m
) of the carrier deformability which aects the coating weight according
to the following correlation:
P = C
o
w
F
,
m
(6.51)
The dependence of the peel resistance on the carrier thickness is given in a
general form by the following correlation:
P = f (F
,
m
k
2
) (6.52)
where the coecient k
2
takes into account the minimum lm thickness
required for dimensional stability. The correlation between adhesive coating
weight, carrier strength, and peel resistance can be written in the following
form:
P = f [(C
o
w
k
1
),(F
,
m
k
2
)] (6.53)
Figure 6.14 Bond failure and deformation of the removable, adhesive coated,
thin plastic carrier.
280 Chapter 6
There is a critical deformability which leads to a critical coating weight:
C
wcr
= f (F
mcr
) (6.54)
Our experience suggests that the critical value of F
m
(situated between
89 N) is attained by mono-extrudates at a lm thickness of about 35 jm.
Co-extrudates display such values at a lower thickness, of about 20 jm.
A theoretical minimum peel is observed for a 180
peel angle. In
reality, minimum peel values were obtained for lower peel angles. These
discrepancies may be explained by the low exibility of the face stock
material; however, gradually increasing face stiness and thickness
decreases the peel angle and so the peel adhesion [3]. On the other hand,
the extra work needed to bend the face material will raise the observed
adhesion value. In order to overcome this, a reverse adhesion test can be
performed by mounting the tape to be evaluated, adhesive surface up, onto
a standard test panel, to eliminate the backing eect. The 180
peel adhesion
values (under-layered) show a linear dependence on the thickness of the face
material [3]. Table 6.11 contains typical 180
and 90
)
PSA Paper Film 90
180
)
Dwell
Time
Chemical nature Physical state Paper Film 90
180
peel adhesion on
stainless steel was measured.
282 Chapter 6
material thickness one needs to consider two additional features that aect
the result, namely, the rapidly decreasing peel angle, which will drop the
observed peel value, and the extra work needed to bend the face material,
which will raise the observed peel adhesion value [3]. As an example PET
face lm shows a drop in peel adhesion from around 2 mil onwards,
aluminum shows a continual rise, and polyethylene lm shows little change
or a slight decrease. To overcome this, a reverse adhesion test can be
performed [3]; a standard PET lm strip is applied and rolled down to
standardize the face material eect. A plot of adhesion vs. face thickness
can then be drawn which can be extrapolated (for dierent PET thicknesses)
indicating the value of adhesion without the added inuence of the face
stock.
The inuence of the carrier rigidity is evidenced by special debonding
tests which are aected by the stiness (exibility) of the carrier material.
Such a characteristic test is the shaft loaded blister test (SLBT). The shaft
loaded blister test may have both the ease and convenience of peel testing
and the plastic deformation characteristic for a pressurized blister test [142].
The theoretical framework for measuring the fracture energy using the shaft
loaded blister test was developed by Wan and Mai [144]. For small angle of
deection the following relation exists between P (the shaft load), w
o
(the
central shaft displacement), a (the crack length), h (lm thickness), and
material properties (E):
Ehw
3
o
,8 Pa
2
- 0.5 W (6.55)
where the interfacial adhesion (W) can be calculated as a function of P.
Unfortunately, the experimental results are contradictory. Samples consist-
ing of stacked lms (either 1, 2, or 4 plies thick) were investigated utilizing
the shaft loaded blister test to determine if the backings tensile rigidity had
any eect on the measured G (apparent strain energy release rate) [149].
The results suggest that the number of plies had no eect on the measured
G when an experimental compliance calibration is incorporated into the
calculations. G values measured from the SLBT were compared to values
obtained using the pull-o test (and were of the same order of magnitude for
dierent substrates). In a similar manner the (calculated) value of W is not a
function of the number of stacked lms, n. On the other side the sensitivity
of W to the lm thickness h reects that the actual system is a viscoelastic
bimaterial made up of the polymer backing and PSA, whereas the theoreti-
cal system is a single elastic material.
In the peeling master curve Piau et al. [103] represent the quantity
3/7
G as a function of jV, where =jVe
2
/(Eh
3
) is a dimensionless number
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 283
representing the eect of the adhesive viscous forces compared to the
rigidity eects of the backing. Miyagi et al. [150] relate the stiness of the
laminate to the shear modulus of the adhesive. The stiness is dened as P/o
where P is the load applied at the center of the support and o is the resulting
displacement of the support. Their analysis provides the following
expression for stiness:
P,o = (4E,[) {b[2(t h)]
3
,L
3
] (6.56)
where [ is a function of the adhesive thickness (t), carrier thickness (h),
length (L), and sample width (b); E and G are the tensile and shear moduli
of the carrier, and G
a
is the shear modulus of the adhesive. The stiness
increases with the adhesive shear modulus, as a function of t/h.
The surface properties of the carrier material aect the adhesive
performances of the pressure-sensitive products too. When a laminate is
being debonded, there are at least four possible modes of failure, including:
adhesive failure with debonding of the adhesive from the web, adhesive
failure with debonding of the adhesive from the substrate, cohesive
failure or splitting of the adhesive itself, and paper/lm tear or failure of
the web itself. The failure mode is inuenced by the surface quality of the
face stock [151,152]. Clay-coated papers exhibit paper tear if the surface
strength of the layer is not sucient [153]; water-based dispersions of
polymethylacrylate can be used for removable paper labels, but they are not
removable from PVC and lacquered surfaces [84]. The substrate nature
inuences the peel and removability; for example, a two-year warranty was
given for Fascal 1800, except from PMMA, nitrolacquer, and polystyrene
surfaces.
In an ideal case, the correlation between the anchorage of PSAs to
the face stock material A
F
, cohesion of the adhesive C, and adhesion of the
PSAs on the substrate A
s
should be valid [138]:
A
F
> C > A
S
(6.57)
In the case of permanent adhesion A
s
should be higher than the
mechanical resistance of the face stock material or of the substrate. For
removable adhesives, A
s
should be less than the minimal forces producing a
deformation or deterioration of the face stock material or of the substrate.
Energy considerations imply an adequate anchorage of the PSA onto the
face stock material, but this will depend on the surface quality of the face
stock material. In fact the surface characteristics of the face stock material
inuence the anchorage of the PSAs on the face stock material through the
284 Chapter 6
wetting of the surface and the anchorage of the coated, wetted adhesive on
this surface. The rst step in the bonding process is the wet-out of the
surface by the adhesive; surface roughness and energy aect this wettability.
Wettability is an initial prerequisite to high adhesion. Adhesion is at a
maximum at zero interfacial energy. The inuence of the surface properties
of the carrier material and of the adherent on the adhesive performances will
be discussed in the next sections together with the eect of the experimental
conditions.
Influence of the Release Liner on the Peel. The surface and bulk pro-
perties of the release liner inuence the peel resistance of the PSA. The
structure, nature, and thickness of the adhesive layer aect the peel value
[138]. Silicone transfer to PSAs, contamination of the adhesive layer through
crosslinking catalysts, or mechanical damage of the PSA layer (as a replica of
the release layer) may negatively inuence the peel resistance.
At a given peel rate release force decreases as coating thickness is
increased (1.44.2 jm) [117]. This is consistent with earlier understandings
of varying adhesive thickness. The increasing thickness h of the deformable
layer within the PSA laminate results in shifting the viscoelastic window to
lower frequencies. Traditional high release agents (HRAs) used in release
coatings freeze out interfacial slippage resulting in increased adhesive
deformation. The HRA reduces the segmental mobility of the PDMS chain
within the cured network leading to increased shear stress and an increase in
the practical peel force.
In a manner similar to the face stock the bulk properties of the liner
inuence the peel of a label from the release liner. When increasing the
thickness of the release liner, the high speed release values are approxima-
tively doubled when the liner is removed from the label. This conrms that
the nature of the release liner (probably its stiness) has a considerable
inuence on the high speed release force.
Influence of Label Laminate Construction on Peel Adhesion. The
energy absorption during peeling decreases the value of the peel force.
Therefore, multilayer labels, with more deformable liquid adhesive layers
and with the ability to absorb the debonding energy by viscous ow, show
lower peel values than single-ply labels (Table 6.14).
The peel resistance depends on the rheology of the adhesive layer R
and on the peel force F (see Chap. 2). The rheology of the adhesive layer
depends on its thickness h. In the case of multilayer labels, the adhesive
thickness is the sum of the dierent layers or:
h = h
i
(6.58)
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 285
Therefore the increased layer thickness improves the ow properties of the
adhesive (i.e., its energy absorption capacity). Thus it is assumed that the
peel is inversely proportional to the number N of the adhesive layers,
Peel = f (N
1
) (6.59)
On the other hand, increasing the layer number increases the stiness of the
laminate (i.e., it changes the debonding angle) and thus decreases the peel
too (see the inuence of the face stock on the peel). Therefore, it is more
accurate to assume a pronounced eect of the number of layers through
viscous ow (higher adhesive thickness) and peel angle (higher laminate
stiness), or:
Peel = f (1,N
o
) (6.60)
where o>1. As shown in Table 6.15, this hypothesis is conrmed by
experimental data. Increasing the number of layers increases the stiness
of the laminate and at the same time decreases the peel value. Increased
stiness requires more energy for the exure of the face stock material (i.e.,
the peel force increases). Thus, the peel will depend on the number of layers
according to a more complex correlation.
Peel = f (N
[
,N
o
) (6.61)
Table 6.14 Peel Dependence on the Laminate Structure. Stiffness and Peel Values
for Mono- and Bilayer Laminates, with the Same Face Stock and Different
Adhesives
Laminate Structure Characteristics
Face stock PSA
Stiness
(mN/cm)
Peel on glass
(N/25 mm)
First layer Soft PVC Untackied acrylic
Second layer Paper Tackied water-based acrylic 698 17.4
Tackied water-based
acrylic/CSBR
480 17.8
Tackied water-based acrylic 515 16.0
Tackied solvent-based
rubber-resin
483 10.5
The untackified acrylic adheres to the test substrate.
286 Chapter 6
where o>>[. A multilayer lm-based label may increase the energy
absorption by the viscous ow of the solid state components (face stock
included) (i.e., the peel decreases again). Thus, one can assume that:
Peel = f [(N
[
),(N
o
N
,
)] (6.62)
where o takes into account the adhesive slip and the change of the
debonding angle, [ denotes the increase of the mechanical resistance with
the number of layers, and , accounts for the deformation of special lm-
based face stock materials. For multilayer lmic labels the dependence of the
peel on the number of layers may be summarized by the following equation:
Peel = f (N
[
,N
o
) (6.63)
where N
o
=N
o
N
g
(i.e., N
o
>N
o
). It may be assumed that the peel decrease
with increasing number of layers is more pronounced for lm labels than for
paper labels. This hypothesis is conrmed by the data in Table 6.16. Paper
laminates show a less pronounced peel decrease with increasing number of
layers (Table 6.17). In a similar way paper layers in hybrid (paper/lm)
labels impart increased peel adhesion.
In some experiments the inuence of the stiness deformation
resistance of multilayer laminates was studied. In these tests a lm label
was reinforced with paper labels coated with dierent PSAs. The
distribution of the peel forces depends on the deformability of the lm
face stock, or on the slip between the labels (i.e., the adhesive nature). As
seen from Table 6.16, reinforcing the lm label with an elongation-resistant
Table 6.15 Dependence of the Peel on the
Number of Layers
Laminate Characteristics Peel (N/25 mm)
Number
of layers
Stiness
(mN/cm) On glass On PE
2 18 4.3 2.9
4 60 3.9 2.6
6 100 3.6 2.6
8 152 3.7 1.5
Water-based acrylic formulation. Film face stock
material.
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 287
material (paper) improves the peel value. On the other hand, the peel value
of multilayer laminates increases with the internal rigidity (no motion) of the
sandwich (i.e., with the adhesion between the laminate face components).
The slight anchorage of a rubber-resin adhesive on soft PVC dramatically
decreases the peel value of the sandwich. Control of the viscous ow can be
achieved by superimposing adhesive layers.
Influence of Experimental Conditions on Peel. The surface tension,
surface structure (roughness), and thickness of the substrate inuence the
peel resistance [138]. Test conditions such as dwell (contact) time, contact
pressure, debonding rate, debonding angle, and temperature also aect the
peel resistance. At lower speed, viscous ow is the predominant inuence on
adhesion (peel value), while at higher speed, the elasticity determines the
adhesion; at lower speed, peel adhesion increases. Some of these parameters
were discussed earlier (see Chap. 2).
Concerning the stress rate and its inuence on the peel, an increase of
the temperature allows increased molecular mobility resulting in increased
tack and reduction in shear resistance. A high rate of stress is equivalent to a
Table 6.17 Peel Dependence on the Number of Layers for a Multilayer
Paper/Film Laminate
Laminate Construction
Laminate Stiness
(mN/cm)
Peel on Glass
(N/25 mm)
PSA Film 46 8.4
PSA Film PSA Film 130 6.4
PSA Film PSA Paper 245 8.0
PSA Film PSA Film PSA Paper 483 7.8
Table 6.16 The Influence of the Number of
Layers on the Peel Adhesion of Film Laminates
Number
of Layers
Stiness
(mN/cm)
Peel on Glass
(N/25 mm)
2 39 23.5
4 236 19.5
6 408 12.0
8 644 8.0
Water-based PSA coated on soft PVC.
288 Chapter 6
drop in temperature. Adhesive transfer may occur at higher unwinding force
and rate; faster peeling rates may transfer the adhesive or break the label.
Physical and chemical interactions between the adhesive and the sub-
strate result in a build-up of the adhesion (i.e., the peel increases with the
dwell time) [138]. This is a general behavior observed for PSAs with dierent
chemical compositions (e.g., acrylics or neoprene latices) [58]. The build-up
of the peel depends on the chemical composition and time [105,106,154].
Because of the slow ow of the adhesive, adhesion tests require at least 0.5
sec of dwell time [155]. The surface of a PSA can be axed to a substrate to
which it will be adhered, but once axed, adhesion builds to form a strong
bond. Removable adhesives can be formulated so as not to display adhesive
build-up, that is, their adhesion to the substrate does not increase to the
point where the label (tape) cannot be removed cleanly, even after exposure
to heat in a drying oven. Adhesion build-up requires a long time [3].
Dierent peel values are obtained when testing immediately after applica-
tion (PSTC 1), after a 20 min dwell time (ASTM D-1000), and after a 24 h
dwell time. The adhesion can still be climbing after 30 days. Peel adhesion
is a function of the dwell time [156]; after 10, 30, 60, 180 min, and 24 h
dwell times the following peel values were obtained: 4.0, 4.6, 5.3, 5.5, and
8.0 N/2 cm. Dierent methods specify dierent dwell times: AFERA 4001
requires 10 min, PSTC 1 and FINAT specify 20 min and 24 hr, respectively
[139]. In order to test adherent ber tear, tape is applied to cardboard with a
2 lb roller, immediately pulled o at a 90
2W,,E
+
p
> 1 (6.64)
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 289
where o is the aspect ratio of a typical surface prole (or asperity) and [ is
the number of asperities per unit length, the surfaces will jump into contact
with each other with no applied load, and the contact area will continue
to expand until the two surfaces are in full contact. Self-adhesion can be
avoided by increasing the aspect ratio of the asperities, by decreasing
the work of adhesion, by decreasing the density of the asperities, or by
increasing the modulus of the polymer. In the coating and testing practice,
adhesive contact is needed, i.e., the PSA has to conform onto substrate or
carrier.
According to Tordjeman et al. [19] the actual contact area is a function
of the contact force (F
c
) and the apparent modulus (E
a
) which takes into
account the competition between the thickness eects and the roughness
[see correlation (6.29)].
Other phenomena can compete with adhesive conformation during the
dwell time also. The study of the adhesion of butyl rubber to rigid counter
surfaces showed [160] that after 1000 hr of contact at 80
C the strength of
adhesion become about ten times larger than the value measured after short
contact times, and still showed no signs of reaching an equilibrium level.
This increase is attributed to slow molecular rearrangements at the interface
rather than to development of specic bonds, because it took place to a
similar degree for butyl rubber and chlorobutyl rubber, against dierent
substrates. A similar but somewhat smaller increase in adhesion also
occurred for vulcanized layers.
For tackied adhesives the overall work of adhesion was measured as
a function of the storage time [161]. Generally it decreases with increasing
storage time; the resin migrates to the surface. The increase of the domains
size with increasing time suggests that at long times there will be a surface
layer of tackier-enriched material, making a more rigid surface that will
inhibit wetting and degrade the overall adhesive performance.
The strength of an adhesive bond formed with PSA is generally
recognized to be dened by two major contributions: specic interaction
forces across the adhesive-substrate interface and the work of viscoelastic
deformation of the PSA polymer to rupture the adhesive bond. Within the
frameworks of the diusion theory of adhesion, the well-known eect of
adhesive strength enhancement with the time of adhesive-substrate contact
is treated as the time required to provide the penetration of PSA
macromolecules into the substrate [162,163]. One of the contributing
mechanisms to polymer adhesion is said to be diusion of chain elements
across the polymer/polymer interface. The concept makes sense when
polymers in close contact are above their respective T
g
. The common
features of various PSA polymers are high diusivity and translational
molecular mobility as well as brillation of the polymer at cohesive failure
290 Chapter 6
under applied debonding stress. Diusion across the interface contributes to
bond strengths in joints involving exible polymer chains, where dispersion
forces dominate at the interface, and where favorable acid-base interactions
abet the dispersion forces [164]. Chalykh et al. [165] studied the kinetics
of interfacial zone formation in the closure of adhesive bonding to a
polyethylene substrate and showed the lack of PSA interpenetrating into the
substrate and vice versa: no interdiusion across the interface occurs.
During the stage of adhesive bonding the molecular mobility of PSA
polymers contribute to the process of polymer relaxation, which in turn
accounts for the increase of the strength of adhesive joints with PSA-
substrate contact times. There is no need to advocate the diusion theory of
adhesion to explain the relevance of enhanced molecular mobility for the
adhesive behavior of PSA polymers [163].
As discussed in Chap. 2, the time-temperature strongly aects the
peel. When increasing the temperature the viscosity of the adhesive
decreases and its anchorage to the substrate will be improved [105]; on
the other hand, adhesion increases and thus peel reaches a maximum for
a given temperature. Temperature inuences the eect of roughness also.
As demonstrated in [166,167] the debonding mechanism of SIS-based PSA is
strongly inuenced by roughness; at normal temperatures surface roughness
is detrimental for good contact. High numbers of defects are trapped at
the interface, relaxation is incomplete. At higher temperatures roughness
prevents the cavities from rapidly expanding in the plane of the lm and
increases the adhesion energy. At low temperatures adhesion decreases and
the peel adhesion decreases as well [106]. One should take into account
the poor peel adhesion properties of most current PSA labels at low
temperatures (deep-freeze labels). The rate of separation and the tempera-
ture are related to the adhesive strength in a complicated manner, and these
factors can dramatically inuence whether or not adhesive or cohesive
failure will occur. Peel decreases with decreasing temperature [3]. Cohesion
and auto-adhesion of styrene-butadiene elastomers were studied by Hamed
and Hsieh [17], through peel tests at dierent peeling rates and
temperatures. Peel resistance depends on the dierence between the
application temperature and the T
g
of the adhesive. For instance, at 0
C
the peel resistance value of an untackied acrylic adhesive is about 210%
lower than the peel resistance value of the same adhesive at 23
C [168]. By
unwinding of tapes so-called adhesive inversion may occur also [169]. In this
case the separation (debonding) by unwinding of the tape does not occur at
the interface of adhesive/printed carrier but between adhesive and primed
carrier. Such behavior can be observed especially at temperatures lower than
10
C and 40
C could be
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 291
predicted from the prole of the velocity spectrum of the rolling adhesive
moment [170].
The dependence of the peel force on the peel rate is complex. It has
been shown that several regimes can be obtained as a function of the peel
rate [167]. The rst regime is the cohesive regime and it can be divided into
three dierent ones (as a function of the peeling rate). A two-dimensional
one (at very low speeds), a three-dimensional one showing regularly spaced
ribs, and nally a three-dimensional one, showing the breaking of ribs at
the edge of the free surface [103]. Assuming that one can add the cohesion
energy w
c
, Piau et al. [103] propose the following relation for the rst regime
for low velocities:
G = w
c
{1 0.1(Eh
3
,jVe
2
)
3,7
(jV,,
s
)] (6.65)
For the dependence of the peel force on dierent parameters Kaelble
[143] proposed a law using Bikermanns approach, for a Newtonian
adhesive:
F,b = 2
2 (Eh
3
,e)1,2j
1,2
(K,t
m
)
1,2
q
(6.66)
where j is the viscosity of the adhesive, K/t
m
is a peeling velocity factor
which is not so well dened, but t
m
possibly will vary like e/V.
Fukuzawa and Uekita [119] proposed a theoretical formula of peel
adhesion see [see Eq. (6.49)] as a function of the peel angle and peel rate. At
low peel rates the peel adhesion depends mainly on the work of adhesion,
but at high peel rates it is inuenced by the work of deformation.
According to [92] the maximum of the curves (peel force-peel rate)
corresponds to the change in mode of failure from cohesive (at lower peel
rates, -300 mm/min) to adhesive at higher debonding rates. At low tensile
rates the adhesive fracture occurs at comparatively small tensile stress
values, but at signicantly greater values of elongation, c. With the increase
in extension rate, the critical magnitude of tensile stress at fracture (o
f
)
grows rapidly, approaching a limiting value which corresponds to a
maximum cohesive strength of the PSA lm (o
c
). At the same time the
work of PSA tensile straining varies, passing through a maximum.
As conrmed in [160] also the peel strength is strongly dependent on
the eective rate of peeling. At low rates the elastomer layer could not be
detached cleanly. Instead it split apart leaving rubber behind (cohesive
failure). Under these circumstances the peel strength is the same as the tear
strength measured by tearing apart a thin sheet of the elastomer. As the peel
292 Chapter 6
rate was increased, however, an abrupt transition occurred to interfacial
failure at much lower peel forces, only about one twentieth as high. This
transition is attributed to failure of entanglements to ow apart at a critical
peel rate. After the transition the peel strength again increased with peel rate
paralleling the cohesive strength of the polymer itself but now only about
one tenth as high. This increase is attributed to increasing viscous losses in
peeling away the elastomer as it approaches the glassy state.
According to [94] the dierence between stick and slip peel force
diminishes as the rate increases. There are two interfacial debonding zones
as a function of the rate. The atness of the peel force vs. peel rate response
is optimal at intermediate molecular weight with very high molecular weight
leading to poor adhesion at low rates [95]. In the correlation used by Gent
and Schultz [21] and later by Carre and Schultz [171]:
G = w
o
g(M
c
) (V) (6.67)
where w
o
is the cohesive energy, g(M
c
) is a molecular dependent term, and
is a dissipative function of the velocity, the function (V) has been deter-
mined in a few cases to be a power law of the velocity. Using a statistical
software package, peel strengths were measured for PSA tapes, according to
the following correlation [172]:
Load = 0.55 0.88
+
rate 1.17 10
3+
time (6.68)
It has been demonstrated, that single pull peel testing does not always
predict the joint failure that occurs as a result of cyclic loading at subcritical
loading levels [173175]; adhesive joints when critically loaded at levels
below the load at rst yield in the single pull experiment, can open up at
appreciable rates. The application conditions of pressure-sensitive products
and their inuence on the end-use properties are discussed in detail in [176].
Peel Force from the Release Liner. A special case of peeling is the
separation of the label from the release liner (i.e., labeling). As discussed
above the peel resistance depends on the peeling rate and angle. As stated by
[177] the peel decreases with the angle: 90
peel. In a similar manner the peel force to separate the PSA from the release
liner depends on the peeling rate and angle, and adhesive/release nature [177]:
Peelforce = f (V, o) (6.69)
where V and o denote peeling rate and angle. Separation rates of 200 m/min
are common during labeling. At these rates condensation silicone release
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 293
layers display an increase of the peel. In the FTM 10 test method a much
lower test rate is used, while the FINAT method is designed for a rate of 10
300 m/min with the rst test apparatus built in 1984. For testing purposes a
sample of 2.5 70 cm or 5 70 cm was proposed; samples have to be stored
under pressure (70 g/m
2
, 20 hr, 23
C,
respectively [177], because the release nature and age also inuence the
peel. There are some new materials that are supposedly insensitive to release
nature and age (e.g., Nacor 80). Acrylic PSAs require a separate study for
each formulation with regard to the level of the release force and its stability.
For current water-based acrylic PSAs on solventless release liners, release
forces average 0.050.06 N/25 mm (FTM 3). Interaction between water-
based acrylic PSAs can increase this value to more than 0.10.15 N/25 mm
(e.g., Vinacryl 4512). Increasing the concentration of the methylsilicate
HRA, increases release force. However, the largest impact of the HRA
on release force is typically at low to intermediate peel velocities (0.005
to 0.17 m/s) while increasing the molecular weight between crosslinks mainly
inuences release at high peel rates [117].
Textiles, nonwovens, and surfaces coated with alkyd-, PUR-, acryl-,
epoxy-, nitro-, and powder-lacquers, and plastisols be used as contact
surfaces for testing purposes. Crystal glass is proposed as substrate by
FINAT, steel by AFERA, and glossy stainless steel by ASTM or BWB-TL
[178]. These materials are used in order to eliminate the inuence of the
adherent on the peel.
If the only factor governing the peel force were the total extent of
contact (i.e., the number and type of interactions across the interface) then
the scale of the contact zone would not inuence the measured peel strength
[17]. In general this is not true, particularly for soft vulcanized elastomers,
whose strengths are a measure of dissipative energy losses that occur while
they are being peeled away. Adhesive strength to paper and stainless steel is
greater than to polyester lm [83]. Therefore the bond fails due to breakdown
within the adhesive layer when paper is used. When polyester lm is used as
face material it peels away, leaving the adhesive layer virtually intact on the
steel plate. The inuence of the adherent is illustrated by PSA labels applied
on PVC (where the peel value changes in plasticized PVC) or by removability
from fragile substrates (e.g., lightweight papers) [179]. Peel and tack should
be tested on dierent substrates (e.g., cellulose, polyamide, glass, cardboard,
metal) [180]. Temperature resistance, the lowest application temperature,
and the suggested operating end-use temperature should be determined. The
inuence of the adherent surface on the peel is shown in Table 6.18.
The mechanical strength of the substrate inuences the peel resistance
too. Paper possesses an anisotropic structure. Cellulose bers which have the
294 Chapter 6
typical dimensions of 4 20 2000 jm, are layered with most of the bers
lying like ribbons in the plane of the paper sheet. Therefore paper is very
resistant to in-plane stresses and very sensitive to out-of-plane or z direc-
tional stresses. It is susceptible to delamination. Such delamination occurs at
higher peel rate [181]. The peel force initially rises until the peel force applied
to the paper surface is high enough to remove bers after which the force
drops to a low steady-state value, corresponding to delamination (paper
failure). Therefore paper delamination is characterized by a high initiation
force and a relatively low propagation force. Microscopic observation
reveals that paper failure starts with the lifting of an individual ber.
Bikermann and Whitney [182] reported that paper is much more likely to
delaminate in peel if the tape overlaps the edge of the paper. In peeling the
actual lifting forces on the paper surface are less than the measured forces
because of viscous dissipation in the PSA layer. The actual forces were
calculated on the paper surface in peel from the observed stretching of paper
in 90
peel. Comparing peel force and the actual force at the paper surface,
as a function of the peel rate the two types of forces were equal at low peel
rates, whereas the forces experienced by the paper were about 2/3 of the
Table 6.18 The Influence of the Adherent Surface (Substrate) on
the Peel. Peel Values of PSAs with Different Chemical Bases, as a
Function of the Substrate Used
Chemical Composition Peel (N/25 mm)
Base components Supplier Glass Cardboard PE
1360 Hoechst 12.0 PT 2.0 11.0
V205 BASF
80D BASF
CF52 A&W
FC88 UCB 15.0 PT 11.0 PT 13.0
PC80 UCB
CF52 A&W
FC88 UCB 18.0 PT 11.0 PT 12.0
CF52 A&W
V205 BASF 18.0 PT 15.0
80D BASF
CF52 A&W
V205 BASF 14.0 PT 10.0 13.0
V208 BASF
80D BASF
CF52 A&W
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 295
measured force at high peel rate. Yamauchi and coworkers reported peel
forces and failure modes as a function of peel rates and paper types [183].
Pelton et al. [184] studied the peel force as a function of log (peel rate),
and found quite dierent interdependences for glassine, copy paper, and
lter paper. Glassine (tracing) paper, a smooth, nonporous substrate gave
interfacial failure only and peel force increased with peel rate. Filter paper
showed paper failure and low peel forces. Copy paper showed increasing
peel forces with peel rate until the failure mode changed to paper failure
giving low peel forces. Filter paper, which is strong by conventional
measurements, gave only paper failure. Thus roughness, porosity, and the
extent of adhesive penetration dictate whether paper failure occurs with peel.
According to [185] the deformability of the substrate must be taken
into account. For small values of the adherend thickness, the assumption of
bending-dominated crack propagation becomes invalid when the opening
forces become signicant. At the other extreme the peak stress in the
interface region aects the plastic deformation of the adherends. Thus, peel
force depends on the adherend thickness. For a given macroscopic energy
release rate the plastically deforming adherends do not allow high levels of
opening stresses to be developed within the adhesive. Thus the appropriate
stress levels for development of a microcracking zone are reached before the
adhesive fails cohesively at the crack tip. In contrast the elastic adherends
induce much higher levels of opening stress over an extended region in the
adhesive layer. Thus before cohesive failure at the crack tip occurs, large
enough stress are developed ahead of the crack tip to allow a microcracking
zone to be developed. This change in mechanism means that toughness of
joints may not be the same for substrates that remain elastic as opposed to
cases where they deform plastically. The deformability of the substrate has
to be taken into account by the choice of the peel test methods also. For
instance T-peel is used for exible adherends [186,187] (see Chap. 10 too).
Chalykh et al. [92] investigated the strength of the PSA joints
on dierent substrates (PE, PP, PVC, PET, PA, and hydrate cellulose). The
strength of the adhesive bond for the substrate was found to be ordered like
the corresponding magnitudes of the thermodynamic work of adhesion.
W
a
: HC > PA > PVC > PP > PE (6.70)
Piau et al. [103] measured for steel as carrier, lower peel and lower increase
of the peel with the velocity. The adhesion energy of the acrylic adhesive on
silicone release coating is 10 times smaller than that on steel. Moreover the
stress-strain curves have dierent shapes on steel [188].
296 Chapter 6
In peeling tests described in [91] dierent substrates (Pyrex
TM
,
Plexiglas
TM
and PMMA) were used. Four mechanisms of cohesive failure
have been found as the reduced velocity increased. The peeling mechanism
on Plexiglas also led to the creation of another mechanism not observed
on Pyrex. Peel values on various substrates (stainless steel, cardboard, and
polyethylene) for dierent adhesives are listed in [189].
Other Factors. Peel adhesion does not depend on the number of
passes with a standard application roller and it does not depend on the
solvent used to clean the test plates. On the other hand, peel increases with
the application pressure and temperature [132].
Rheology is frequency dependent and strain frequency inuences the
peel; repeated, cyclical peeling o reduces the peeling force (see Chap. 3).
Readherence onto a paper substrate decreases as the number of peeling
trials grows. In a lot of experiments the peel of an experimental PSA from
newspaper as substrate was tested. The following data for the peel force
were collected as a function of the number of peel trials:
+ Peel from paper, first trial: 110 g/12 mm.
+ Peel from paper after 50 peel trials: 85 g/12 mm.
+ Peel from paper after 100 peel trials: 75 g/12 mm.
The readherability of a pressure-sensitive product was tested after repeated
lamination and delamination [190].
The dependence of the peel on the cohesion is very complex. For some
adhesive formulations based on natural rubber and SBR a direct
proportionality between peel and cohesion was established [191].
Humid environments can adversely aect bond strength. Soaking
conditions, even high humidity, often cause irreversible loss of adhesive
strength or failure. According to Czech [192] for splicing tapes the peel
adhesion strongly depends on the relative humidity.
Release transfer to the adhesive surface can reduce the peel resistance
also. Druschke [193] found for a noncovered PSA layer a peel value of
12.3 N/20 mm which changed to 9.7 N/20 mm for the same adhesive after
release paper contact. The subsequent adhesion, i.e., the peel resistance
value after contact with release paper depends on the initial peel resistance
of the adhesive and on the substrate [194]. Another problem is peel retention
after aging. The requirements concerning peel retention after aging dier as
a function of the product build-up and end-use.
Improvement of Peel Adhesion
Improving the peel means optimizing it in such a way that it meets the end-
use requirements. Regulating means increasing or decreasing the peel value
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 297
and changing the character of the bond rupture related to the requirements
of a permanent (paper tear) or removable (adhesion break) bond.
Permanent/Removable PSAs. Pressure-sensitive adhesive-coated
materials are functionally divided into two broad classes: permanent and
removable [79]. The rst of these is represented by the so-called permanent
materials in which the properties of PSAs are selected so as to form an
adhesive bond with the target substrate which is strong and, apart from
degradation, does not weaken signicantly with time. The second broad
class consists of removable or peelable PSA-coated materials in which
the PSAs form an adhesive bond, of functionally adequate strength with the
target, but which after an extended period of adhesion (typically days to
months) can be peeled away from the substrate, without damaging it,
without leaving any residue of PSA on the target substrate, and without the
adhesive-coated material tearing itself apart. To be peelable PSA-coated
materials require a combination of properties. The PSAs must form a
bond of adequate strength with the target substrate, but which does not
subsequently either dramatically weaken, in which case the adhesive-coated
material might fall o the substrate, or signicantly increase in strength, as
this would tend to limit peelability. From these considerations it follows
that the adhesive should possess an adequate cohesive strength in order to
minimize any tendency of the adhesive lm itself to rupture, as well as a high
bonding strength to the face material (anchorage) onto which the adhesive is
coated. It is clear that the formation of a strong bond between a PSA and
its face material and a relatively much weaker bond between adhesive and
target substrate are in conict. Consequently, many of the peelable PSAs
currently on the market do not fully meet these contradictory requirements;
eectively, they are only less permanent than typical permanent PSA-coated
materials. The reduction of the peel is a relatively simple procedure which
(at least theoretically) can be achieved by increasing the viscous component
of the PSA, that is, the component converting the high speed bond-breaking
force in permanent adhesive deformation (viscous ow). Unfortunately this
viscous ow may exhibit adhesive break (i.e., after bond breaking adhesive
residue is left on the adherent). Such a peel reduction is inadequate to obtain
a convenient removable PSA.
Summarizing, a limited peel value and a high shear strength are
required for removable adhesives [86]. A typical value for removable
pressure-sensitive tapes is 10 N/25 mm [195]; lower values (2.55 N/25 mm)
are required for labels. Shear values of at least 100 min at room temperature
were suggested [196]. In fact these values should be considered as guidelines
only since paper tear occurs at 2025 N/25 mm. Removable PSAs should
exhibit a peel adhesion value of 1.5 N/25 mm [195]; 16 N/20 mm are
298 Chapter 6
suitable values for removable labels [197]. In general, the same removable
water-based acrylic PSAs for labels may be used for tapes. Removable PSA
labels are a special type of permanent label, where low peel force levels,
as a function of dwell time, and a pure adhesive break from the substrate
are assumed. Removable behavior depends on energy dissipation which
inuences the debonding (Fig. 6.15).
The adhesive (its bulk properties, formulation, nature, structure, and
molecular weight), laminate components, laminate geometry, and debond-
ing conditions inuence the removability. During peeling tests at least four
possible modes of failure may occur [198]:
1. Adhesive failure (primary): debonding of the adhesive from the
face material (i.e., not removable).
2. Adhesive failure (secondary): debonding of the adhesive from the
substrate (i.e., removable).
3. Cohesive failure: splitting of the adhesive itself (i.e., not
removable).
4. Web or film tear: failure of the face material itself, hence not
removable.
Energy dissipation during debonding depends on such parameters as
interfacial adhesion, polymer rheology, rate of peel, temperature, angle
of peel, face stiness, and coating weight. Several requirements have to
be fullled in order to achieve good removability [199]. These include
Figure 6.15 Schematical presentation of stress dissipation as a function of the time
for permanent and removable PSAs.
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 299
self-adhesion on the substrate (tack), peel adhesion (in order to assure
bonding), cohesion in order to avoid legginess or stringing, and superior
adhesion to the face stock rather than to the substrate (anchorage). For
suitable peelable labels adhesive failure from the substrate is desired. As
discussed earlier removability implies lower stresses, and lower stresses are
possible using stress-restricting polymers, llers, or a primer coating [200].
Peel depends on the nature and geometry of the bonding components (i.e.,
the self-adhesive label and substrate). For a given adhesive, face stock, and
substrate, the interaction of the adhesive with both solid state components
of the joint will depend on the interface adhesive/solid state component. The
type of face material is governed by the end-use of the label; therefore
the label-maker should optimize the interface between the face stock and
the PSA. The most important parameters of the face stock inuencing
the removability of the PSA label are its exibility and the anchorage
(adhesion) of the adhesive to the face stock. Eective bonding between the
face and the adhesive is critical to the performance of the PSAs; for example,
given an adhesive with internal integrity, the adhesive properties exhibited
by that system will be proportional to the anity of the adhesive for the face
material. Face stock interactions bring the denition of permanent and
nonpermanent PSAs much more into focus by emphasizing the fact that if
a permanent bond is formed between the label and the substrate, the failure
mode will be face oriented and the result is 100% transfer of the adhesive to
the substrate. Conversely, if the bond to the substrate is nonpermanent, then
a clean release from that substrate is encountered and the adhesive remains
on the face material.
Repositionability and readherability are performance characteristics
that depend on the peel build-up. Both allow the debonding of the PSP after
its application and its rebonding. Repositionability is an aging-related
characteristic; it needs a slow build-up of the adhesion on the substrate. In
this case peel build-up is delayed in time but is not limited as an absolute
value. Repositionable labels may also be permanent.
According to a simplied theory bonding and debonding can be
controlled through the value of G
/
and through the dependence of this value
on the frequency. For removable products G
/
possesses the same (small)
value at dierent frequencies. Thus a main possibility for regulating the peel
resistance is the control of the G
/
of the PSA.
Use of Primers. Primers are necessary when using removable PSAs
[201,202]; they modify the face stock-PSA interaction. Polyolen face
stock materials are generally top coated to improve printability; in a similar
manner primer coatings are applied on polyolen face stock materials to
increase the anchorage of the adhesive [203]; PVC-based tapes also need
300 Chapter 6
a primer coating [204,205]. Soft PVC should be primed when used with
rubber-resin-based PSAs [206]. There are a few studies describing the use
of primers in order to obtain removable adhesives [207209]. The use of
the primer generally decreases the peel value [210]. Primers are generally
used to promote a stronger bond between PSAs and face materials, to absorb
stress, and to strengthen the face stock, especially when paper labels are
concerned.
There are very dierent recipes for primers. As in the case of adhesive
base elastomers, primer coatings use more crosslinking agents, harder resins,
resin solutions, or self-crosslinked elastomers. A primer coating for
polyethylene face stock material typically is composed of a chloroprene
rubber (2060 pts, 60% chlorine), an EVAc copolymer (4080 pts, with 25%
VAc), and chloropolypropylene (115 pts with 2550% chlorine) [209].
While stearic acid is eective in preventing adhesive build-up, it leaves a
greasy deposit referred to as a ghost which could stain the substrate; the
metallic stearates do not do this [210]. Contact cements (polymers with high
cohesive strength and a strong tendency for two surfaces of the polymer to
adhere to one another when placed in contact) are preferred as primers;
isoprene polymers and polychloroprene are particularly good as contact
cement. The use of a crosslinked contact cement as a primer improves
peelability and increases bonding on the carrier from 0.5 to 2.4 kg [211,212].
More about primer formulations can be found in Chaps. 7 and 8. A detailed
discussion of primer formulations for dierent pressure-sensitive products is
given in [213]. One approach is to use a key coat including particulate
matter, so as to make the surface of the coating rougher, and provide a
better key for PSAs; primers provide a bond between adhesive and face
stock [214,215]. Primed face stock ensures more uniform peel values and
thus better removability (Table 6.19).
In order to achieve a maximum anchorage of the adhesive to the face
material, a silicone release coating may be used as a primer for silicone
adhesives [51]. In making PSA tapes, polyacrylamide may be used as the
binder between the hydrophilic cellulose and the hydrophilic butadiene-
styrene latex. The primer also improves the anchorage for natural rubber-
based PSAs [216]; the primer modies the separation energy of the surface.
Primers are somewhat exible and generally have high anchorage to
the face material. Thus, they can absorb impact stresses without adhesion
failure [200]. There are removable PSA formulations with a primer coating
that contain a contact cement with the same contact cement in the PSA as
well. The exible sheet label has on one side a primer coating rmly bonded
to the face stock, which includes a contact cement, and above the primer
coating is a peelable PSA (including the same contact cement). The contact
cement serves to rmly bond the primer coating and the adhesive coating
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 301
together. Contact cements are a class of adhesives which function by
exploiting the properties of certain polymers, which exhibit a high cohesive
strength and a natural tendency for two surfaces of the polymer to adhere
when placed into contact. Examples include polymers such as isoprene,
natural rubber, polychloroprene, and one class of acrylic polymers. A low
T
g
is a property common to polymers which are used in contact cements.
The stress absorption capacity is a function of the primers own
softness. As shown in Table 6.20, adhesives with a dierent hardness (peel)
act as a primer coating in dierent manners. The soft (removable) ones do
not cause any peel decrease; the peel adhesion decrease is proportional
to primer stiness. In these experiments dierent adhesives were used as
the primer (rst) coating. The second layer (i.e., the PSA contacting the
substrate) has always been the same (a permanent, tacky PSA). The necessity
of stress absorption (i.e., energy absorption) is illustrated by the data of
Table 6.21. It can be seen from Table 6.21 that the peel value of the
removable adhesive layer increases with the coating weight of the primer
coating. A primer coating weight equivalent to 510% of the permanent
adhesive weight is able to change the peel of removable PSAs.
The peel force will be inuenced by the material (PSA) in the non-
contact area as well [17]. When the elastomer is more viscous, the strength
will be less aected by aws (noncontacted zones) compared to an elastomer
Table 6.19 The Influence of the Primer on the
Removability of PSA Labels
Removability
Substrate With primer Without primer
Steel 2 3
Copper 2 2
Aluminum 1 3
Glass 2 4
PE 2 5
HPVC 2 3
PMMA 2 2
PA 2 5
PET 1 5
Average 1.8 3.4
Removability was evaluated subjectively. The following
removability indices were used: 1 very low peel, no
residues; 2 low peel, no residues; 3 low peel, legging;
4 medium peel, no residues; 5 high peel, no residues.
302 Chapter 6
that responds more elastically. As discussed above, primers may improve
stress distribution. Another stress-reducing possibility is the choice of the
adequate polymer (PSA) formulation or the use of adequate llers [200].
The primer coat typically is present on the coated face stock in an
amount ranging from 220 and more often 510 g/m
2
. The lower limit is
determined by the requirement to ensure complete coverage of the coated
face material, with a good coating pattern, and the upper limit is determined
Table 6.21 Influence of the Primer Structure/ Geometry on the
Peel Value/Removability
Removability
Relative thickness of the layer (%)
Substrate 100 75 50 0
Steel 2 1 1 3
Copper 2 C 1 1 2
Aluminum 1 2 2 2
Glass 2 1 1 3
PE 2 2 2 5
PMMA 2 1 1 2
PET 2 1 1 5
Average 1.85 1.3 1.3 3.1
Removability was evaluated subjectively. The following removability
indices were used: 1 very low peel, no residues; 2 low peel, no
residues; 3 low peel, legging; 4 medium peel, no residues; 5 high
peel, no residues; C cohesive failure.
Table 6.20 The Influence of the Softness of the
Primer on the Peel Value/Removability of PSA
Primer Peel (N/25 mm)
Soft hot-melt PSA 20.0
Removable rubber-resin
solvent-based PSA
23.0
Hard hot-melt PSA 24.0
Permanent rubber-resin
solvent-based PSA
24.0 PT
None 24.0 PT
A tackified water-based acrylic PSA was used.
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 303
primarily by costs as there appears to be no signicant benet in increasing
the coating weight of the primer beyond the limit indicated; generally
25 g/m
2
of primer is used [86]. For tapes with an adhesive layer of
1620 jm, the thickness of the primer coating should be 11.5 jm [217].
The thickness of the primer (manufactured via an electron beam) from a
monomer blend should be less than 5 jm, preferably less than 1 jm, and
ideally less than 0.5 jm. Indeed it is believed that thicknesses approaching
a single molecular layer would function eciently [218].
The use of polyaziridine as a primer shows the eect of the cross-
linking on the removability of PSAs. Peel adhesion of the crosslinked PSA
(after 24 hr) is 0.51 kg/cm versus 0.67 kg/cm for the uncrosslinked one. The
crosslinking of PSAs shows similarities with the use of lightly crosslinked
rubbers in thermoplastics for controlled soft-phase dispersions.
Readhering adhesives permit removal of the coated face material and
allow readherence to another surface. Paper substrates which were
precoated with removable, readhering adhesives are commercially available.
One commonly known product of this type is marketed under the trade
name Post It as note pads [219]. In order to achieve a good removability,
many dierent procedures are used, including the use of hard (T
g
>10
C)
suspension particles, crosslinking the matrix, and low coating weights
(7 g/m
2
) [199].
Stress-Resistant Polymers. Stress-resistant polymers are those which
develop a controlled crosslink density or which are internally soft. This
means that crosslinking agents or plasticizers may improve the removability.
Like craze deformation for plastic-elastomeric blends, PSAs are subject to
energy dissipation via deformation work; thus shear deformation is
necessary [200].
Flexibilizers. Polymers exhibit two kinds of fracture mechanisms:
ductile and brittle. Ductile fracture involves overall yielding of the specimen
and since the volume of yielded material is large, this failure mechanism
absorbs a great deal of energy; however, it is slower than brittle fracture.
Removable PSAs undergo ductile fracture in that they absorb all the break
energy.
A number of superimposed adhesive layers having dierent gradients
of shear/creep compliance can meet the requirement of releasable adhesion
to plastic surfaces such as polyethylene. Flexibilizers are plasticizer com-
pounds which react with the polymer; because of their volume they are able
to keep the chain segments apart. These plasticizers increase tack, but lower
cohesion [200]. Adding a 15% butyl dispersion to a water-based PSA
formulation may improve its removability properties [220]. Flexibilizers, like
304 Chapter 6
plasticizers introduce creep, which is a function of molecular weight and
plasticizer loading, or
Creep = f [(Plasticizer), (Molecular weight)
1
] (6.71)
A high molecular weight and a low plasticizer level reduce creep. Plasticizers
may be incorporated in the peelable PSAs to soften the adhesive and
thus improve peelability. Care should be exercised as some plasticizers
can have a tackifying eect on adhesive polymers and this may limit
the amount to be used; however, it is possible to use quite large quantities
of plasticizers, even up to 50 wt% on the solid adhesive, but more often
they are used at 1020 wt%. Generally, plasticizers impart a fast tack
increase, a slower peel increase, and very fast decrease of the cohesive
strength.
Fillers. Stress reduction by llers (i.e., reducing peel adhesion) is
well known in the tape industry (e.g., 0.510% ller, particle size 150 jm,
in rubber-based PSAs) [221]. Peel adhesion decreases in formulations
containing llers [106]. Rubber dispersions also may be used as llers for
water-based PSAs [220].
Strengthening of the Face Stock. Paper face materials can lead to
paper tear, when peeling o the label. Reinforcing the ber structure of the
paper face stock with a primer can strengthen the surface layer in order to
avoid ber tear. High strength face stock materials (e.g., rubber latex-
impregnated papers) are often used. In some cases the primer strengthens
the face stock material [216].
Reduction of the Contact Surface. Peel adhesion depends on the
surface area between the label and the adherent. Reducing the contact
surface between the label and the adherent improves peelability or
removability. Peel resistance and removability can be regulated by
modifying the ratio between the adhesion surface and the application
surface [222]. There are dierent methods to reduce the contact area
between the adhesive and the substrate, including: reducing the coating
weight of the adhesive, increasing the stiness of the face stock (or
substrate), applying a discontinuous coating on the face stock material, and
removing contact points or areas between adhesive and substrate.
Discontinuous adhesive coatings (i.e., ungummed areas) reduce the
contact area since in some cases, it suces to coat only a minor portion
of the face stock surface with adhesive [223226]; a number of adhesive
and nonadhesive zones may be used [219,227]. There are several patents
concerning the use of lled PSAs that decrease the adhesive/adherent
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 305
contact area. Some use glass beads as ller [228]; microspheres also may
be used [229]. The reduction of the contact surface may be achieved by
overlapping the contact surface of the PSAs with powdery materials [230].
As an example, adhesive tapes applied for sealing windows and bonding side
moldings onto cars use UV-cured acrylic adhesives containing 215 parts
per hundred (phr) hydrophilic silica-glass microspheres [231]. Adding an
expandable ller to the formulation reduces the peel resistance. Regulation
of the contact surface can be achieved also by crosslinking the whole
adhesive surface and making it suciently fragile to allow crack migration
of the uncrosslinked adhesive.
Coating Weight Adjustment. As far as the PSA component is
concerned the properties which contribute to peelability are principally a
limited tack, a low build-up factor (lack of age hardening), and a relatively
soft adhesive. These properties can be achieved conventionally, by omitting
or only using a low level of tackier, or by including tack deadeners, such as
waxes, and by including plasticizers. The most important parameter is
the adjustment of the coating weight. A way to reduce the peel (i.e., to get
a removable PSA) is the reduction of the coating weight. Reducing the
coating weight from 2025 to 1510 g/m
2
allows removability for PSA
formulations that are based on acrylic, vinyl ether, and plasticizer. For PSAs
coated on paper the coating weight for repositionable labels may be as low
as 7 g/m
2
. In this case an initial peel value of 110 g/12 mm (180
peel at
300 mm/min) is enough to resist a vertical application (5 hr debonding
method) [199].
Shear Strength for Removable Adhesives. Permanent adhesives
generally possess a higher cohesive and shear strength than removable
ones. On the other hand, several high-shear adhesives used for tapes also
are proposed for removable labels (e.g., Ashland, Aroset 2530-W-50). For
removable adhesives a shear value of 501000 min at 70
C or 501000 min
at 175
Peel on Steel
Chemical Physical End-use of the laminate Value Units Ref.
Acrylic Hot-melt PSA Label 90105 oz/in 46
Acrylic Solvent-based Transfer tape > 7 lb/in 234
Highly aggressive label/tape 60100 N/100 mm 235
SIS Hot-melt PSA Packaging tape 1018 N/25 mm 236
SBS Hot-melt PSA Double-sided carpet tape 8.5 N/cm 237
Hot-melt PSA Permanent label 6977 oz/in 238
Hot-melt PSA Removable label 1114 oz/in 239
Acrylic Water-based Application tape/lm 1.35.0 N/25 mm 240
Acrylic Water-based Protective lm 100200 cN/cm 241
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 307
denite pressure. Practically one measures the holding time under standard
conditions. Unfortunately there are no standard values of the time until
shear failure occurs.
Measurement of the Shear Resistance
Test conditions inuence the shear resistance also. Holding power is
basically a viscosity eect. It was found that the shift factors used to plot
shear measurements at several temperatures on a master curve were almost
identical to the shift factors used for G
/
and G
//
master curves. The shear
resistance of PSAs may be measured statically or dynamically. Currently,
static shear test methods use a constant load at longer test times; they
generally show poor reproducibility and need very long measurement times.
Better results are obtained with the hot shear test, where the cohesion of
the sample is measured at an elevated temperature. Dynamic shear tests
measure the cohesion of the sample in a tensile tester under increasing load
(force). It has previously been indicated, that molecular disentanglement can
take place at a testing rate of 0.01
//
/0.25 mm per minute [96]. A dynamic
shear test can be set up on an adhesion tester at this slow speed. While the
width of the sample can be of any standard width, the height of the sample
needs to be limited, so that it does not become a tensile test of the backing.
If a hot shear test is carried out in such a way that the test temperature is
gradually raised, and if the temperature at which the bond fails is taken as a
characteristic value, specialists speak about a dead load hot strength test
or shear adhesion failure temperature (SAFT). There also are shear test
methods that measure neither the time until debonding nor the temperature
of the debonding but rather the deformation of the sheared sample (i.e., the
slip of the sample after a given time is measured) [234].
A combined peel and shear strength of the adhesive can be tested (e.g.,
20
C, coated on
PET) are 25 min and 100 min, respectively, which correlates with a peel from
steel of 68 N/25 mm. The adhesion-cohesion balance and its regulation for
various pressure-sensitive products is discussed in detail in [232].
Factors Influencing Shear Resistance
Like tack and peel adhesion, shear is inuenced by the characteristics of the
adhesive and of the laminate, as well as by the debonding conditions.
Nature of the Adhesive. Special built-in functional groups, cross-
linking, and high molecular weight can ensure high shear and low tack
properties. The use of harder monomers also improves the cohesion. For
example, a higher acrylic acid level in solvent-based acrylic PSAs yields
higher shear values [245]. Cohesive strength is independently controlled by
the hard monomer content and increases as the concentration of this hard
monomer increases [2]. Cohesive properties of a polymer can be aected by
introducing polar groups that interact by forming secondary bonds; such
interactions are classied as hydrogen, dipole-dipole, and dipole-induced
bonding. Monomer-reinforced copolymers are suitable as PSAs, since they
possess high shear strength [246]. Minor amounts of unsaturated olen
carboxylic acids and/or sulfoalkyl esters of such carboxylic acids improve the
cohesive strength of PSAs; it is preferred that the polymer contains at least
about 0.1 wt%, usually about 0.110 wt% of these components. The higher
the percentage of iso-octyl acrylate, the tackier the adhesive; conversely, the
higher the percentage of acrylic acid, the higher the shear properties.
Permanent adhesives generally provide a higher level of cohesion shear
strength than removable adhesives. Rubber-resin adhesives ensure a compro-
mise between high cohesive strength for conformance to curved containers
and good quick stick required in automatic labeling [247]. Acrylic adhesives
provide a high level of adhesion to surfaces that are dicult to adhere to.
However, most acrylic-based adhesives do not have a cohesive strength
equal to normal rubber-resin systems and may display cold ow. Showing
up as a halo of adhesive around the die-cut label, cold ow can inhibit
ecient labeling. All adhesives used in automatic labeling systems require a
level of quick stick that will provide for ecient adhesion with a minimal
application pressure.
It is the general nding of the industry that for the same tack and peel
values acrylic emulsion PSAs show much lower shear holding power
compared to that of their solvent-based counterparts [248]. The dierence
in shear holding power between emulsion vs. solvent-based PSAs is about
12 orders of magnitude, depending on the monomeric composition used.
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 311
Tobing and Klein [248] have shown that for gel free low-T
g
acrylics (based
on 2 EHA or BuAc) there was no signicant dierence between emulsion vs.
solvent-borne PSA lm adhesive performances. However, commercial
products have a high level of gel and low shear. The four-fold decrease of
shear by tackifying was attributed to the lack of entanglement between
the linear polymer chain and the microgels. In a novel acrylic emulsion
0.51.0 wt% IBMA (isobutoxymethylacrylamide) was copolymerized to
provide interlinking of the microgels in the lm upon heating.
Shear Dependence on Coating Weight. Shear depends on the coating
weight. A suitable test for the measurement of shear properties of an adhesive
is the thick (6 mm) adherend shear test (TAST) since it is conducted using a
tensile testing machine. However, nite element analysis shows that the stress
distribution in the thick adherend shear test is not pure shear. The values of
maximum shear strain gained from the thick adherend shear test are not
comparable to those obtained from tests in pure shear [249].
Shear Dependence on Molecular Weight. Cohesion increases with the
molecular weight. The ultimate tensile strength of a polymer reaches a
maximum at about 5001000 main chain atoms. Longer molecules do not
impart higher strength because their various segments act independently of
each other. The inuence of the molecular weight on the shear resistance is
illustrated by the changes of the shear resistance due to adhesive aging (i.e.,
destruction and depolymerization). SIS block copolymers undergo oxidative
degradation at elevated temperatures by a mechanism which leads
predominantly to scission of the polymer chains. This leads to a fall in
molecular weight and a resulting decrease in viscosity and holding power
[250]. The composition of the adhesive (i.e., its nature and molecular weight)
inuences the shear; shear measured as SAFT is directly dependent on the
softening point (i.e., the molecular weight of the resin) [251]. The dependence
of the shear on the molecular weight is illustrated by the manufacture of hot-
melt PSAs. When high shear mixers are used the degradation depends on the
mixing environment. In contact with open air, degradation occurs rapidly
and polymer breakdown is observed. A dramatic reduction in melt viscosity
and holding power results from even immediate degradation [252]. Polymer
viscosity and shear are interdependent [253]. The latter depends on the
molecular weight and its distribution. A broad MWD polymer may have a
lower cohesive strength than one with a narrow MWD and lower molecular
weight. The dependence (increase) of the cohesive strength as a function
of the molecular weight was described by Schrijver [254]. For HMPSA, the
eect of MW and aromatic content of the resin on the shear resistance was
observed. The number average molecular weight showed a strong correlation
312 Chapter 6
with shear adhesion values [255]. The holding power has been shown [256] to
be controlled by zero shear viscosity which is related to M
w
, M
e
, and T
g
by
the following equation:
Log j
o
=3.4 log M
w
2.4 log M
e
A,(T T
g
70) B (6.72)
where A and B are constants. This equation shows that while j
o
is reduced by
M
e
it is also increased by T
g
of the polymer. Copolymers containing vinyl
neoester units exhibit higher M
e
and T
g
, thus one can expect that peel, tack,
and holding power can all be improved. As illustrated in [67] shear for EHA-
based copolymer was 3.91.6 hrs (1
//
0.5
//
1 kg); the neo-based polymer
gave shear values of 1621 hr. The shear resistance is improved by the
increase of the melting point of the resin [47]. Gordon et al. [257], using
dierent Escorez (manufactured by Exxon Chemical) resins with dierent
softening points, list the SAFT data of 60/40 adhesive formulas. The SAFT
improves with increasing softening point of the resin. In a similar manner
shear increases with the increase of the ring-and-ball softening point of
Bevitack (Bergvik-Arizona) resins used as tackier for hot-melt PSAs [258].
For tackication of Neoprene Latex 102, the 32
C)]
Molecular Weight of
the Base Elastomer 50 60 70 50 60 70
1 M
1
20 2 1
1.5 M
1
420 120 60
3 M
1
> 1200 > 1200 780
A CSBR was used as base elastomer.
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 313
cohesive strength and higher peel adhesion values [260]. Physical cross-
linking has the same inuence as chemical crosslinking. The benecial
inuence of a 100% pure triblock in hot-melt PSA formulations is demon-
strated in creep testing. Here the PSA is subjected to a dead load shear, and
if every molecule of the rubber is able to fully participate in the associative
crosslinking shear, bond holding times are excellent.
Reactive resins with methylol groups in the uid state are ecient
tackiers but also crosslink with the neoprene rubber used as elastomer,
and lead to high strength bonds [45]. Aqueous PUR dispersions were used to
improve the adhesion of acrylic adhesives for better lm formation and
mechanical properties [53]. The molecular interaction between acrylic
and polyurethane not only inuences the product stability but also governs
the adhesion performance. The use of nonionic PUR yielded higher shear
strength (from 28 kN/m
2
to 65 kN/m
2
), but the use of anionic PUR resulted
in very high shear strength (700 kN/m
2
). Anionic PUR behaved like a
crosslinker. Shear resistance in acrylic formulation improved as crosslinker
concentration increased. Electron beam-cured crosslinkable rubbers are
used for PSAs also; the SAFT increases for these polymers with increasing
gel content, but the relationship between gel content and SAFT is a gradual
slope [50]. A polymer gel content greater than 0.8% is required to increase
the high temperature holding power above 300 min. Crosslinking increases
the modulus; therefore crosslinked adhesives have the highest shear holding
power (Table 6.24).
Unfortunately crosslinking is associated with the loss of tack (and
peel) and thus it may not be suitable for PSA modication, except under
strictly controlled conditions (e.g., solvent-based adhesives). Ulrich [261]
addressed the need to improve both the adhesion and the heat resistance
at 70
C) Ref.
Acrylic Solvent-based AZ 0 0.1 hr RT
Acrylic Solvent-based AZ 1 1.0 hr RT
Acrylic Solvent-based 1.0 min 70 9
Acrylic Solvent-based 1 5000 min 70 9
AZ, aziridine; RT, room temperature.
314 Chapter 6
adhesion and by crosslinking the tackied PSA for better heat resistance
at 70
C)
PSA Formulation PET Paper
A 90 60
B 60 45
C 70 55
D 75 60
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 317
coating weight and smoothness of the adhesive layer, and thus the shear
resistance.
Improving Shear Resistance
The values of the shear resistance depend on the cohesion of the adhesive
and on the laminate geometry. Cohesion may be improved with
hard monomers and by increasing the molecular weight (crosslinking).
The laminate geometry inuences the adhesive ow. Upon improving the
anchorage of the adhesive to the face stock the adhesive bond fails via
cohesive break (i.e., within the adhesive layer). Therefore a low coating
weight (an optimum as a function of the roughness of the solid state
components of the label) will improve the shear resistance. Cold ow may be
limited by use of llers; in some cases the use of reactive llers improves
the shear resistance also. The homogeneity of the adhesive strongly
inuences the resulting shear strength (see Chap. 8).
Shear Values
There are many data available about shear strength. Unfortunately most
of them are static shear values at room temperature. For these the method
used (i.e., the sample, dimensions, weight, adherent) inuences the measured
absolute values. On the other hand, and in a quite dierent manner
from tack and peel values, shear test results for PSAs with dierent chemical
bases do not allow a real comparison of their cohesion-related properties
(e.g., cuttability); they are used more as an internal check of the adhesion/
cohesion balance for small changes in a given formulation. Test methods
and test conditions strongly inuence the measurements. For instance
the SIS block copolymers have such high room temperature shear
values, that only highly plasticized formulations can be evaluated in a
convenient period of time [255]. For SIS copolymers the shear properties
were measured in the linear viscoelastic regime (small strain) on a parallel
plate rheometer. Dierences due to the change of the SI content occur in
the range 5 10
3
5 10
1
rad/sec, where an increase in the SI content
leads to a decrease in the elastic modulus G
/
and to an increase in the
loss modulus G
//
[18]. Shear values obtained for hot-melt PSAs are generally
lower than those for solvent-based PSAs (Table 6.26). Dispersion-based
PSAs may exhibit lower or higher shear values as a function of
the formulation. High shear, high molecular weight solvent-based acrylic
PSAs are superior in shear to rubber-resin-based PSAs; CSBR exhibits
higher shear than common acrylic PSAs. Crosslinking improves the
cohesion even more.
318 Chapter 6
T
a
b
l
e
6
.
2
6
T
y
p
i
c
a
l
S
h
e
a
r
V
a
l
u
e
s
P
S
A
C
h
e
m
i
c
a
l
B
a
s
i
s
P
h
y
s
i
c
a
l
S
t
a
t
e
S
h
e
a
r
R
e
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
S
t
y
r
e
n
e
r
u
b
b
e
r
-
r
e
s
i
n
W
a
t
e
r
-
b
a
s
e
d
N
o
t
e
T
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e
A
c
r
y
l
i
c
R
u
b
b
e
r
-
r
e
s
i
n
H
o
t
-
m
e
l
t
V
a
l
u
e
U
n
i
t
(
o
C
)
M
e
t
h
o
d
R
e
f
.
x
E
l
e
c
t
r
o
n
b
e
a
m
-
c
u
r
e
d
S
I
S
3
0
0
m
i
n
9
5
P
S
T
C
7
5
0
x
3
0
0
m
i
n
R
T
P
S
T
C
7
5
0
x
C
r
o
s
s
l
i
n
k
e
d
>
2
0
h
r
R
T
P
S
T
C
7
S
e
l
f
-
c
r
o
s
s
l
i
n
k
e
d
2
6
0
h
r
R
T
2
6
4
x
4
.
6
d
R
T
2
6
5
x
K
r
a
t
o
n
G
X
/
R
e
g
a
l
r
e
z
1
0
0
/
1
5
0
>
5
0
0
0
h
r
R
T
l
/
/
l
/
/
1
0
0
0
g
2
6
6
x
1
0
m
i
n
R
T
2
6
7
x
0
.
5
2
m
i
n
7
0
2
6
7
x
C
r
o
s
s
l
i
n
k
e
d
>
2
0
0
m
i
n
R
T
2
6
7
x
C
r
o
s
s
l
i
n
k
e
d
2
0
1
0
0
m
i
n
7
0
2
6
7
1
0
0
h
r
8
8
2
6
8
x
>
1
6
h
r
R
T
0
.
5
/
/
0
.
5
/
/
,
1
0
0
0
g
4
6
x
0
.
7
2
h
r
R
T
0
.
5
/
/
0
.
5
/
/
,
5
0
0
g
2
x
8
3
h
r
7
0
1
.
2
7
2
.
5
4
c
m
,
1
0
0
0
g
2
6
9
x
x
R
e
m
o
v
a
b
l
e
1
6
8
3
h
r
7
0
5
h
r
R
T
1
0
.
0
P
T
3
.
0
1
7
.
0
1
5
1
0
.
0
P
T
1
.
0
1
8
.
5
1
0
.
0
P
T
5
.
0
8
.
0
2
0
2
2
.
0
2
0
.
0
1
.
5
1
0
.
0
P
T
1
.
0
1
7
.
0
1
2
.
0
P
T
1
2
.
0
5
.
5
2
5
2
7
.
0
2
0
.
0
1
.
5
1
6
.
0
P
T
1
4
.
0
4
.
9
3
0
1
4
.
0
P
T
1
.
0
1
7
.
0
3
5
1
3
.
0
P
T
1
.
0
1
5
.
0
4
0
2
1
.
0
1
4
.
0
1
.
5
1
5
.
0
P
T
1
.
0
7
.
0
2
1
.
0
1
4
.
0
6
.
0
5
0
2
5
.
0
1
5
.
0
1
.
5
5
5
3
5
.
0
P
T
1
7
.
0
1
.
5
6
0
3
5
.
0
P
T
2
2
.
0
1
.
5
A
C
:
A
c
r
o
n
a
l
V
2
0
5
(
B
A
S
F
)
;
E
V
A
:
1
3
6
0
(
H
o
e
c
h
s
t
)
;
C
S
B
R
:
3
7
0
3
(
P
o
l
y
s
a
r
)
;
R
B
:
r
o
l
l
i
n
g
b
a
l
l
.
324 Chapter 6
to that of tackied EVAc, but lower than the tack of tackied CSBR,
namely:
Tack : CSBR(formulated) > AC(formulated) > EVAc (formulated)
(6.77)
as far as the tack properties are concerned. As discussed in Chap. 2, adhesive
properties also depend on the face stock material. A short examination of
the performance of acrylic-based PSAs in comparison with other adhesives
coated on paper and lm, follows next.
Permanent/Removable Paper Label Applications. Generally, remova-
ble adhesives exhibit low tack. Common acrylic-based removable PSAs are
Table 6.29 Tack as a Function of the
Tackifier Level
Tackier Level (parts
per 100 PSA wet weight)
Tack (quick
stick; g/cm)
20 270
40 570
60 710
80 800
100 880
Quick stick measured for tackified water-
based PSA (25 g/m
2
on PET).
Table 6.30 Tack Dependence on the Molecular Weight. Influence of a High
Molecular Weight Acrylic PSA on the Tack of a CSBR-Based, Tackified
Water-Based PSA Formulation.
Chemical Composition of
the PSA (parts, wet weight)
Compound code 3703 20094 CF 52 V205
Supplier Polysar Syntho A&W BASF RB Tack
Nature CSBR Acrylic Tackier Acrylic (cm)
32 33 35 25.0
32 23 35 20.0
32 13 35 6.5
32 35 33 2.5
RB, rolling ball.
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 325
untackied formulations. Rubber-based, solvent-based, or water-based
removable formulations, generally are tackied and thus they are tackier
than acrylic-based ones (Table 6.31). On the other hand, the removability
assumes a primer coating and/or a low coating weight.
Film Application. SBR has low light and aging stability and EVAc has
a limited water resistance. These disadvantages make theminadequate for lm
coating applications. On the other hand, both need tack improvement (i.e., a
tackier). The use of soft PVC as the main face stock material implies no or a
low tackier level. Thus, only acrylic-based PSAs meet the whole range of
quality requirements for foil coating; they show the best unformulated tack,
another important feature for lm-coating adhesives (Table 6.32).
Adhesion to Polar/Nonpolar Surfaces. Acrylic-based PSAs are the
best unformulated materials in the whole range of required peel forces
for polar substrates. Unfortunately, the peel of untackied acrylic PSAs on
polar surfaces is not sucient (Table 6.33). The peel of other PSAs on
nonpolar substrates is low too, except for the new class of ethylene-vinyl
acetate-maleinate and ethylene-vinyl acetate-acrylic copolymers [272].
Peel of Tackified Acrylic PSAs
Tackication improves adhesion to polar and nonpolar surfaces. Polymers
like SBR and EVAc need more tackier than acrylic PSAs (Table 6.34).
A detailed discussion about tack and required tackier level is included in
Chap. 8. Formulations with less than 30 wt% tackier do not provide
enough peel on polyethylene for common acrylic formulations (Table 6.35).
On the other hand, there are some new acrylic PSAs which display
adequate peel adhesion on polyethylene at low (20 wt%) tackier loading
levels (Table 6.36).
Table 6.31 Rolling Ball Tack (cm) of Rubber-Resin-Based
Formulation Versus Acrylic PSA. Dependence of the Tack on
the Coating Weight
Chemical Composition of PSA
Coating
Weight (g/m
2
)
Solvent-based
rubber/resin
Water-based
tackied acrylic
8.6 4.0 6.4
18.4 2.1 2.4
28.0 1.9 1.9
326 Chapter 6
Table 6.32 PSAs used for Film Coating
Chemical Composition Adhesive Characteristics
Basis Code Supplier
Parts
(wet)
Peel
(N/25 mm)
RB tack
(cm)
Acrylic V205 BASF 100 0 5.0
V205 BASF 70 15.0 2.5
V208 BASF 30
PC80 UCB 100 6.0 3.5
FC88 UCB 100 8.0 3.5
ECR555 Exxon 100 5.0 1.0
FC88 UCB 80 3.5
PC80 UCB 20
FC88 UCB 70 10.0 6.5
880D BASF 30
V205 BASF 80 11.0 4.5
20084 Syntho 20
FC88 UCB 70 11.0 4.5
2313 Nobel 30
EVAc 1360 Hoechst 100 4.0 6.0
1360 Hoechst 70 3.0
1370 Hoechst 30
Acrylic-EVAc blend 913 UCB 50 7.0
1360 Hoechst 50
FC88 UCB 30 10.0 3.5
V205 BASF 30
1360 Hoechst 30
EVAc-acrylic EAF60 Wacker 100 10.0
VU895 Wacker 100 11.0 2.5
EVAc-maleinate Nacor 90 National 100 7.0 8.5
Table 6.33 Typical Peel Values of Untackified PSA on Polyethylene
Code Supplier Nature Peel (N/25 mm)
V205 BASF Acrylic 20.0
80D BASF Acrylic 3.8
85D BASF Acrylic 10.3
1360 Hoechst EVAc 5.0
EAF60 Wacker EVAc 7.0
3703 Polysar CSBR 7.0
20094 Syntho Acrylic 0.2
Instantaneous peel was measured; coating weight 20 g/m
2
.
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 327
Table 6.34 Required Tackifier Level for AC PSA Versus CSBR PSA. The
Dependence of the Peel and Tack on the Tackifier Level
Tackier Level
(parts/100
wet weight)
AC Formulation CSBR Formulation
Peel (N/25 mm)
RB tack
(cm)
Peel (N/25 mm)
RB tack
(cm)
Glass PE Glass PE
20 20.0 PT 15.0 2.5 14.0 PT 10.0 3.0
33 22.0 PT 17.0 2.5 15.0 PT 11.0 2.5
43 22.0 PT 20.0 PT 2.0 17.0 PT 16.0 PT 1.5
50 22.0 PT 19.0 1.5 19.0 PT 14.0 PT 1.5
AC: an 80/20 wet weight parts blend of Acronal V205/80D; CSBR: 3703 (Polysar); tackifier:
CF52(A&W); PT: paper tear; RB: rolling ball.
Table 6.35 Required Tackifier Level for AC PSA Formulations. Peel Dependence
on the Tackifier Level (Peel Adhesion on PE Film and Plate)
Tackier Level
(% wet weight)
Peel (N/25 mm)
PE lm
(coating weight, g/m
2
)
PE plate
(coating weight, g/m
2
)
10 20 10 20
16 6.0 2.0 23.0 6.0
20 15.0 5.0 20.0 7.0
24 20.0 5.0 15.0 5.0
29 17.0 8.0 20.0 PT 5.0
33 15.0 8.0 21.0 PT 20.0 PT
Table 6.36 Peel on Polyethylene for Low Level Tackified Special WB PSA
Chemical Composition, Parts (wet weight)
Code 5650 ECR-576 Exoryl 2001 SE-351
Supplier Hoechst Exxon Exxon A&W Peel on PE
Nature AC AC AC Tackier (N/25mm)
100 16.5 PT
100 20 19.5 PT
100 17.5 PT
100 20 18.0 PT
100 5.2
100 20 15.4
328 Chapter 6
Proposals from tackier suppliers include the use of 2550% tackier
resin for aggressive, soft, acrylic dispersions on an ethyl hexyl acrylate basis
(Fig. 6.20). Other base elastomers require higher tackier levels.
Figure 6.21 and Table 6.37 illustrate the low tackifying response of
CSBR-based PSAs as compared to acrylic-based PSAs. For common water-
based PSA formulations with standard adhesive performance character-
istics, EVAc and SBR require higher tackier loadings than acrylic PSAs
(Fig. 6.21). In a similar manner tackied acrylic PSAs show a more
pronounced response to tackication than ethylene vinyl acetate copolymers
(Table 6.38).
Generally, higher peel adhesion is obtained with less tackier for
acrylic PSAs; the absolute value (level) of the achieved peel also is higher
(Table 6.39). One can conclude that the peel of tackied acrylic PSAs on
polar or nonpolar surfaces is superior:
Peel : AC (Tackified) > CSBR (Tackified) >> EVAc (Tackified)
(6.78)
Figure 6.20 Suggested tackier level for PSA formulation on dierent chemical
bases. 1) Acrylic; 2) vinylacrylic; 3) SIS; 4) SIS; 5) SIS; 6) acrylic; 7) SBR; 8)
vinylacrylic; 9) EVAc.
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 329
Cohesion of Acrylic-Based PSAs
Except for some special adhesives with improved low temperature (and
room temperature) uidity (e.g., deep-freeze adhesives), common unformu-
lated acrylic PSAs possess enough intrinsic shear strength to be converted
and processed without problems. Other polymers (e.g., EVAc, CSBR)
have better cohesion (measured as shear) than acrylic PSAs, but their
Figure 6.21 Ternary composition diagram. Common PSA formulation for
1) CSBR, 2) EVAc, and acrylic formulation. Water-based tackied PSA.
Table 6.37 Tackifying Response of Water-Based CSBR PSA Formulations
Chemical Composition, Parts (wet weight) Adhesive Characteristics
RB tack
(cm)
PSA 3703
Polysar
Tackier CF 52
(A&W)
Peel (N/25 mm)
On glass On PE
50 50 19.0 PT 15.0 PT 1.5
57 43 17.0 PT 16.0 PT 1.5
67 33 15.0 PT 11.0 2.5
80 20 14.0 10.0 3.0
330 Chapter 6
Table 6.38 Tackifying Response of Water-Borne EVA-Based PSA Formulations
Chemical Composition, Parts (wet weight) Adhesive Properties
Code
Supplier
1360
Hoechst
1370
Hoechst
CF52
A&W
Peel
(N/25mm)
RB tack
(cm)
50 50 100 7.0 >30
50 30 100 3.0 >30
70 50 100 15.0 PT 20
50 50 70 6.0 >30
50 30 70 3.0 >30
50 30 50 8.0 >30
Table 6.39 Peel/Tackifier Level Correlation for Water-Based PSAs on Different
Chemical Bases
PSA
Tackier
Level
Peel
(N/25 mm)
Code Supplier Nature Level
3703 Polysar CSBR 50 50 19.0 PT
3703 Polysar CSBR 66 33 15.0 PT
3703 Polysar CSBR 77 23 14.0 PT
Nacor 90 National EVAcM 50 50 20.0 PT
Nacor 90 National EVAcM 66 33 20.0 PT
Nacor 90 National EVAcM 77 23 18.0 PT
FC88 UCB AC 50 50 16.0
FC88 UCB AC 66 33 8.5
FC88 UCB AC 77 23 7.0
V205 BASF AC 40 50 19.0
80D BASF AC 10
V205 BASF AC 49.5 33 10.5
80D BASF AC 16.5
V205 BASF AC 57.75 23 9.0
80D BASF AC 19.25
3703 Polysar CSBR 25 50 27.0 PT
80D BASF AC 25
3703 Polysar CSBR 35 33 25.0 PT
80D BASF AC 35
3703 Polysar CSBR 38.5 23 23.0 PT
80D BASF AC 38.5
1360 HOE EVAc 50 50 15.0
1360 HOE EVAc 66 33 12.0
1360 HOE EVAc 77 23 6.5
The concentration (level) of the components is given in parts wet weight. Tackifier: CF52 from
A&W.
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 331
shear-correlated properties like cuttability are not superior. As an example
for the upper limit, crosslinked, solvent-based acrylic PSAs exhibit shear
levels in excess of 260 hr [150]. On the other hand, soft, high tack acrylic
PSAs show 15 min shear times. Table 6.40 summarizes characteristic shear
values for PSAs on dierent chemical bases; it shows that acrylic PSAs
display the best shear values in the range of unformulated polymers with
similar tack. This statement is very important for lm label applications,
where new ethylene-maleinate multipolymers display very good nonpolar
peel adhesion, but low cohesion.
Shear Strength of Tackified Acrylic PSAs
Common tackier levels lead to a decrease in cohesion. This is a function of
the nature of the acrylic, the nature of the tackier, and the mixing ratio.
Shear loss is less pronounced for CSBR and EVA. Table 6.41 illustrates
the variation of the shear through tackication for dierent classes of raw
materials. Unfortunately higher shear does not lead to better converting
properties for CSBR/EVAc.
Aging Resistance
For common PSAs generally, time and temperature stability of the
adhesive/laminate at room temperature is required. There are special end-
uses where high temperature stability or low temperature performance is
necessary. Table 6.42 summarizes data concerning UV and temperature
stability of dierent PSAs.
Because of their bonding ability (accentuated ow) common acrylic
PSAs show only a limited temperature stability in PSA labels. High
molecular weight or partially crosslinked acrylic PSAs display an improved
thermal stability; partial crosslinking may be obtained with special built-in
monomers (e.g., acrylonitrile). Therefore some common ethyl hexyl-based
acrylic PSAs with acrylonitrile as comonomer will display higher than
normal shear values. Because of the temperature resistance of these nitrile-
based crosslinks, especially high hot shear values are obtained.
Laminate Properties
Some aspects of the laminate properties are dealt with in Chaps. 2 and 8.
The adhesive/solid state component interactions inuence the stability of
the laminate properties. First, these interactions may be restricted to mutual
interactions between adhesive and paper-based face stock material. The
most important mutual interaction takes place between the porous, rough
332 Chapter 6
T
a
b
l
e
6
.
4
0
S
h
e
a
r
V
a
l
u
e
s
a
s
a
F
u
n
c
t
i
o
n
o
f
t
h
e
P
h
y
s
i
c
a
l
S
t
a
t
e
a
n
d
C
h
e
m
i
c
a
l
N
a
t
u
r
e
o
f
t
h
e
P
S
A
C
h
e
m
i
c
a
l
C
h
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
i
s
t
i
c
s
C
h
e
m
i
c
a
l
b
a
s
i
s
C
r
o
s
s
l
i
n
k
e
d
P
h
y
s
i
c
a
l
S
t
a
t
e
S
h
e
a
r
R
e
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
A
C
R
R
E
V
A
c
Y
e
s
N
o
S
B
W
B
H
M
V
a
l
u
e
U
n
i
t
T
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e
(
o
C
)
M
e
t
h
o
d
R
e
f
.
x
x
x
0
.
7
2
h
r
R
T
0
.
5
/
/
0
.
5
/
/
,
5
0
0
g
2
x
x
x
5
1
0
m
i
n
R
T
2
6
7
x
x
x
>
2
0
0
m
i
n
R
T
2
6
7
x
x
x
4
0
9
0
m
i
n
R
T
0
.
5
/
/
0
.
5
/
/
,
5
0
0
g
x
x
x
1
m
i
n
7
0
2
6
9
x
x
x
5
0
0
0
m
i
n
7
0
2
6
9
x
x
x
>
1
0
,
0
0
0
m
i
n
R
T
0
.
5
/
/
0
.
5
/
/
,
5
0
0
g
4
6
x
x
x
2
6
0
h
r
R
T
2
6
4
x
x
x
>
2
0
0
m
i
n
R
T
2
6
7
x
x
5
0
0
4
5
0
0
m
i
n
R
T
4
6
x
3
h
r
R
T
0
.
5
/
/
0
.
5
/
/
,
5
0
0
g
2
7
3
x
4
.
6
d
R
T
2
6
5
x
5
0
4
0
0
m
i
n
R
T
1
5
9
x
x
3
0
0
m
i
n
9
5
2
0
x
x
1
0
0
h
r
8
8
2
7
4
x
x
1
h
r
R
T
2
7
5
x
x
1
h
r
R
T
2
7
6
A
C
:
a
c
r
y
l
i
c
;
R
R
:
r
u
b
b
e
r
-
r
e
s
i
n
;
E
V
A
c
:
e
t
h
y
l
e
n
e
-
v
i
n
y
l
a
c
e
t
a
t
e
;
S
B
:
s
o
l
v
e
n
t
-
b
a
s
e
d
;
W
B
:
w
a
t
e
r
-
b
a
s
e
d
;
H
M
:
h
o
t
-
m
e
l
t
;
R
T
:
r
o
o
m
t
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e
.
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 333
Table 6.41 Influence of the Tackification on the Shear of Water-Based PSA on
Different Chemical Bases
Tackier Level
PSA Supplier Nature 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
V205 BASF AC 41 38 36 33 38 25
80D BASF AC 39 37 34 32 22 25
Hot shear 9 7 7 4
RT shear 100 80 55 39 27 55
3703 Polysar CSBR 40 30 25
V205 BASF AC 20 22.5 19
80D BASF AC 20 7.5 8
Hot shear 19 22 13
RT shear 250 25 14
3703 Polysar CSBR 40 37.5 35 30 22.5 25
80D BASF AC 40 37.5 35 30 22.5 25
Hot shear > 1500 > 1200 240 2 2 2
RT shear
3703 Polysar CSBR 70 55 50
Hot shear
RT shear 1300 500 368
Shear data given in minutes. Hot shear was tested at 50
C
)
T
i
m
e
(
d
a
y
s
)
W
h
i
t
e
P
V
C
T
r
a
n
s
p
a
r
e
n
t
P
V
C
T
e
s
t
m
e
t
h
o
d
C
o
d
e
S
t
a
t
u
s
C
h
e
m
i
c
a
l
b
a
s
i
s
L
o
n
g
i
t
u
d
i
n
a
l
T
r
a
n
s
v
e
r
s
e
L
o
n
g
i
t
u
d
i
n
a
l
T
r
a
n
s
v
e
r
s
e
M
o
u
n
t
e
d
U
n
m
o
u
n
t
e
d
R
e
f
.
0
1
W
B
A
C
7
0
7
0
.
2
0
0
.
3
0
0
.
1
5
0
2
W
B
A
C
7
0
7
0
.
5
0
0
.
4
0
0
.
8
5
0
.
6
0
0
3
W
B
A
C
7
0
7
0
.
4
0
0
.
8
5
0
.
5
0
0
4
W
B
A
C
7
0
7
1
.
7
0
1
.
2
0
0
5
W
B
A
C
6
7
7
6
.
0
0
x
2
7
8
0
5
W
B
A
C
6
7
1
1
7
.
0
2
7
8
0
6
S
B
A
C
6
7
7
8
.
0
x
2
7
8
0
6
S
B
A
C
6
7
1
1
1
.
0
2
7
8
0
7
W
B
E
V
A
c
7
0
7
0
.
5
0
0
.
4
0
x
2
7
9
0
7
W
B
E
V
A
c
7
0
7
2
.
6
0
1
.
4
0
x
2
7
9
0
8
W
B
A
C
6
7
7
0
.
4
0
0
.
4
0
x
2
8
0
0
9
W
B
E
V
A
c
7
0
7
2
.
0
3
.
0
x
2
7
5
1
0
W
B
A
C
7
0
7
0
.
5
1
.
0
x
2
7
5
W
B
:
w
a
t
e
r
-
b
a
s
e
d
;
S
B
:
s
o
l
v
e
n
t
-
b
a
s
e
d
;
A
C
:
a
c
r
y
l
i
c
;
E
V
A
c
:
e
t
h
y
l
e
n
e
v
i
n
y
l
a
c
e
t
a
t
e
.
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 337
foam formation than CSBR and EVAc. Finally, water-based acrylic PSAs
show better wet-out properties than EVAc- and CSBR-based PSAs, and can
be converted at higher speeds than CSBR and EVAc dispersions.
Special Features of Solvent-Based Acrylic PSAs
as Compared to Solvent-Based Rubber PSAs
Solvent-based acrylic PSAs have some special characteristics compared
to classical rubber-resin PSAs. First, a higher solids content (more than
2030%) is possible and the solids content/viscosity ratio can be adjusted
exactly. Usually special solvents are used and both solutions or dispersions
can be produced. In general fewer or no plasticizers and antioxidants are
used; nally crosslinking is possible.
Modification of Adhesive Properties
The main factors inuencing the adhesion are: the properties of the
adhesive, the properties of the carrier (face stock, liner), the construction
and geometry of the laminate, the coating weight, the coating technology,
and the age of the laminate. The adhesive properties of the PSAs can be
inuenced through polymer synthesis, formulation, and converting.
Polymer Synthesis. There exists a broad range of dierent functional
acrylic/methacrylic monomers which can be used for PSA synthesis. Acrylic
PSAs have the broadest monomer basis. Some of the monomers impart
adhesive properties, others are used as emulsier or stabilizer monomers.
A butyl acrylate (BuAc) base provides a higher cohesion level than ethyl
hexyl acrylate (EHA); other nonacrylic comonomers also can be used. For
example acrylonitrile imparts hardness and solvent resistance, styrene and
alpha-methyl styrene impart rmness and improve peel adhesion, t-butyl
styrene improves tack, methylmethacrylate makes the adhesive rmer, vinyl
acetate improves adhesion to certain plastic surfaces, etc. Compared to
acrylic-based PSAs, rubber- and EVAc-based copolymers possess a
narrower raw material basis.
EVAc-based PSAs must incorporate more than 18% ethylene, while
SBR-based PSAs contain less than 2535% styrene. Thus, their formulating
freedom remains limited. Most vinyl acetate copolymers need protective
colloids as their particle size and particle size distribution are limited;
they have a predetermined viscosity and solids content/viscosity ratio, and
a built-in water resistivity. EVAc-based PSAs do not have crosslinked
structures, whereas acrylic-based PSAs may have them. Styrene-butadiene
rubber-based PSAs must always have a gel/sol ratio as their properties
(peel, zshear, migration) depend on this.
338 Chapter 6
A pressureless well-known polymerization technology is available for
acrylic PSAs. Styrene-butadiene rubber PSAs need medium pressure and
EVAc PSAs require high pressure reactors. For solvent-based acrylic PSAs
a crosslinking technology was developed; for water-based acrylic PSAs
branching and grafting procedures were established.
Polymer Formulations. A general compatibility exists between
dierent acrylic PSAs, as well as between acrylic PSAs and other polymers.
However, no similar compounding freedom exists for rubber- or EVAc-
based polymers. Plasticizers and tackiers can be used for acrylic PSAs and
other polymers. Crosslinking by built-in comonomers, metal complexes, or
PUR is possible for acrylic PSAs; EVAc PSAs have no similar crosslinking
possibilities. Attempts were made to crosslink CSBR using polyisocyanates.
Converting. Theoretically there are three converting technologies for
acrylic PSAs: hot-melt, solvent-based, and water-based. Practically, only a
few experimental hot-melt acrylic PSAs exist (like experimental hot-melt
EVAc-based PSAs). Rubber-based PSAs also can be converted using all of
the above technologies.
The coating technology is a function of the adhesive, face stock,
release nature, and of converting, processing, and end-use requirements.
Acrylic-, rubber-, and EVAc-based PSAs allow direct or transfer coating.
Acrylic solutions are coated directly on paper and special lms, and
indirectly on soft PVC. Solvent-based rubber PSAs are directly or transfer
coated on paper. Water-based acrylic PSAs are directly or transfer coated
on lms. Through direct/transfer coating, anchorage, die-cutting, water
resistance, and release can be adjusted.
High viscosity (and high solids) water-based and solvent-based acrylic
PSAs are available, as well as low viscosity (ready-to-use) ones. Primers
provide better anchorage and less migration, and increase the removability.
Rubber-based PSAs need primers; acrylic PSAs can be converted with/
without primer. Common acrylic dispersions need more wetting agents
for transfer coating than for direct coating. They need more wetting agents
on solventless silicones than on solvent-based silicones. Wet-out depends on
the siliconized paper. The age of the siliconized liner inuences the wetting
also. Anchorage of the coated adhesive also depends on the age of the
laminate.
Special Features of Acrylic PSAs. Next the main attributes of acrylic
PSAs are highlighted. From the point of view of the end-user acrylic PSAs
provide the best balance between adhesive and cohesive properties, the best
independence from the face stock and substrate, the best aging properties
(e.g., oxidative stability, heat resistance, UV stability), and the best tack
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 339
at varying temperatures. In addition, they exhibit the best machinery
properties (adhesion/release balance), as well as FDA and BGA approval.
The advantages of acrylic PSAs for the converter include a broad range
of raw materials, a broad compatibility with other polymers, and dierent
tackifying possibilities (e.g., high polymers, resins, plasticizers). They accept
a broad range of tackifying resins, and display at low tackier level a more
pronounced tackier response. They are generally suitable for dierent face
stocks and for permanent and removable applications in rolls and sheets.
Acrylic PSAs possess excellent converting properties (e.g., wetting out,
drying speed, low foam, high mechanical stability) and allow many dierent
ways for adjusting peel adhesion and shear.
The disadvantages of acrylic PSAs for the end-user are relatively
lowadhesion on untreated, nonpolar surfaces, relatively low die-cuttability if
formulated for high tack and coated on lightweight laminate components,
and relatively low water resistance for water-based PSAs. Disadvantages of
acrylic PSAs for the converter include the lack of available acrylic hot-melt
PSAs and the lack of or limited compatibility with rubber-based adhesives.
Solvent-based acrylic PSAs are superior to water-based PSAs.
Although acrylic PSAs are the most expensive PSAs, they are used
with increasing dynamism. There are only a few manufacturers formulating
monomers for acrylic PSAs (mainly for EHA and BuAc). The most
important component for acrylic PSAs are the tackier resins. In this eld
there is an abundant supply of new and classical products.
Formulating Ease and Costs. Acrylic PSAs are multipolymers, so
their properties can be varied using dierent monomer feeds and
polymerization technologies. Solvent-based technology is more expensive
but has the advantage of crosslinking (higher quality at a higher price level).
Water-based technology presents the advantage of high solids, seed and
branching, and particle size distribution control. Depending on the end-use
requirements, it is possible to synthesize or buy acrylic PSAs for
compounding, resulting in more or less expensive products. Acrylic PSAs
can be tackied using a medium level of tackier loading only; they have
a reserve of adhesive properties and theoretically they can be modied
with llers.
The price of the laminate depends on the following components: the
face stock, the release liner, the adhesive, and the choice of the converting
(laminating) technology.
Paper. Tackied acrylic PSAs show good anchorage and low
migration (solvent-based or water-based), thus they also can be used with
inexpensive non-surface-treated paper. On the other hand, water-based
acrylic PSAs need special (primered) face stock in order to obtain a good
340 Chapter 6
die-cuttability. Heavy, voluminous papers increase the die-cuttability also.
Removable water-based acrylic PSAs also need primered papers.
Film. Water-based and solvent-based acrylic PSAs can be used with-
out restrictions for dierent lm materials. The same acrylic can be used for
paper as well. Direct coating on nonpolar lms requires a surface treatment.
Acrylic PSAs can be coated on paper-based release liners as well as on
lm-based release materials. Solvent-based or solventless siliconizing can
be used. Direct/transfer coating provides another possibility for release level
modication. Transfer coating of water-based acrylic PSAs on solventless-
silicones remains the cheapest way.
Solvent-based acrylic PSAs are the most expensive adhesives. Hence:
+ The use of filled solvent-based acrylic PSAs decreases the adhesive
costs.
+ Compounding solvent-based acrylic PSAs also decreases the
adhesive cost.
+ Tackifying solvent-based/water-based adhesives decreases the
costs.
+ Common water-based acrylic PSAs are less expensive than solvent-
based ones (price ratio 2/1).
+ Tackified water-based acrylic PSAs are the most cost-effective
materials within the range of acrylic PSA adhesives.
Converting Costs. Converting acrylic PSAs is possible in solution
or as an aqueous dispersion. Converting solvent-based acrylic PSAs is
more expensive than water-based acrylic PSAs, whereas converting solvent-
based rubber-resin PSAs is less expensive than acrylic PSAs. Converting
low viscosity water-based acrylic PSAs costs less than coating highly
viscous ones. As pointed out before, acrylic PSAs can be converted directly
or by transfer, and transfer coating remains less expensive than direct
coating.
REFERENCES
1. A. Zosel, Colloid Polymer Sci., 263, 541 (1985).
2. C.M. Chum, M.C. Ling and R.R. Vargas (Avery Int. Co, USA), EP 12257927/
18.08.1987.
3. J. Johnston, Adhes. Age, (11) 30 (1983).
4. Glossary of Terms Used in Pressure Sensitive Tapes Industry, PSTC, Glenview,
IL, 1974.
5. ASTM, D-18786 IT; Pressure-Sensitive Tack of Adhesives, American Society
for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia.
6. M. Barquins and D. Maugis, J. Adhesion, 13, 53 (1981).
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 341
7. D. Ahn and K.R. Shull, Macromolecules, 29, 4381 (1996).
8. K.L. Johnson, K. Kendall and D. Roberts, Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond., A 324, 301
(1971).
9. K.R. Shull, D. Ahn, W.L. Chwen, C.M. Flanigan and A.J. Crosby, Macromol.
Chem. Phys., 199, 489 (1988).
10. H. Mizumachi, J. Appl. Polymer Sci., 30, 2675 (1985).
11. H. Barquins, Kautschuk, Gummi, Kunststoffe, (5) 419 (1987).
12. J.A. Greenwood, Viscoelastic Fracture and Healing, Proc. 24th Annual
Meeting of Adh. Soc., Febr.25, 2001, Williamsburg, VA, p.14.
13. H. Barquins, R. Courtel and D. Maugis, Wear, 38, 385 (1976).
14. K.A. Grosch, Proc. Roy. Soc., A274, 21 (1963).
15. Y.Y. Lin and C.Y. Hui, Modeling the Failure of an Adhesive Layer in a Peel
Test, Proc. 24th Annual Meeting of Adh. Soc., Febr.25, 2001, Williamsburg,
VA, p.230.
16. J. Wiedemeyer, VDI Berichte, 600 (3) 72 (1987).
17. G.R. Hamed and C.H. Hsieh, J. Polymer Physics, 21, 1415 (1983).
18. A. Roos and C. Creton, Adhesion of PSA Based on Styrenic Block
Copolymers Proc. 24th Annual Meeting of Adh. Soc., Febr.25, 2001,
Williamsburg, VA, p.371.
19. P. Tordjeman, E. Papon and J.J. Villenave, The Mechano-Optical Tack
Tester. A New Apparatus to Study the Tack Properties of PSA, Proc. 24th
Annual Meeting of Adh. Soc., Febr. 25, 2001, Williamsburg, VA, p.424.
20. A.N. Gent and A. J. Kinloch, J. Polymer Sci., A-2 (9) 659 (1971).
21. A.N. Gent and J. Schultz, J. Adhesion, 3, 281 (1972).
22. C. H. Andrews and A. J. Kinloch, Proc. Roy. Soc., A332, 385 (1973).
23. A. Aymonier, E. Papon, J.J. Villenave and P. Tordjeman, Direct Relation
Between Copolymerization Process and Tack Properties of Model PSAs,
Proc. 24th Annual Meeting of Adh. Soc., Febr.25, 2001, Williamsburg,
VA, p.280.
24. P. Tordjeman, E. Papon and J.J. Villenave, J. Polym. Sci., Polymer Physics,
Part B, 38, 1201(2000).
25. S.C. Misra, C. Pichot, M.S. El-Aasser and J. W Vanderhoff, J. Polymer Sci.,
Polym. Lett., 127, 567 (1979).
26. C. Pichot, M.F. Llauro and O.T. Pham, J. Polym. Sci. Polym Chem., 19,
2619 (1981).
27. M.S. El-Aasser, T. Makgawinata and J.W. Vanderhoff, J. Polymer Sci.,
Polymer Chem., 21, 2363 (1983).
28. S.C. Misra, C. Pichot, M.S. El-Aasser and J.W. Vanderhof, J. Polymer Sci.
Polym. Chem., 21, 2383 (1983).
29. M. Okubo, Makromol. Chem., Makromol. Symp., 35/36, 307 (1990).
30. A.J. Crosby and K.R. Shull, Debonding mechanisms of PSAs, Proc. of the
22nd Annual Meeting of the Adhesion Society, Febr. 21, 1999, Panama City
Beach, FL, p.320.
31. D. Maugis and M. Barquins, J. Phys. D; Appl. Phys., 11, 1989 (1978).
32. C. Gay and H. Leibler, Phys. Rev. Lett., 82, 936 (1999).
342 Chapter 6
33. C. Creton and H. Leibler, J. Polym. Sci., Polymer Physics, Part B, 34, 545
(1996).
34. R.S. Chang, Rubber Chem. and Technol., (20) 847 (1957).
35. J. Johnston, Adhes. Age, (11) 30 (1983).
36. S.N. Can, D.R. Burfield and K. Sogh, Macromolecules, (18) 2684 (1985).
37. Adhes. Age, (9) 19 (1986).
38. Shell, Technical Bulletin, Polybutenes.
39. M.A. Krecenski and J.F. Johnson, Polym. Eng. Sci., 29 (1) 36 (1989).
40. C. Creton, in Processing of Polymers, H.E.H. Meijer (Ed.) VCH, Weinheim,
1997, Chapter 15, pp.707741.
41. A. Midgley, Adhes. Age, (9) 17 (1986).
42. S. Tobing and D. Klein, J.Appl.Polym. Sci., 79, 2230 (2001).
43. N. Willenbacher and A.E. OConnor, Effect of Molecular Weight and
Temperature on the Tack of Model PSAs from Polyisobutene, Proc. 24th
Annual Meeting of Adh. Soc., Febr.25, 2001, Williamsburg, VA, p.378.
44. D.J. Harrison, J.F. Johnson and J.F. Yates, Polymer Eng. Sci., (14) 865 (1992).
45. Adhes. Age, (10) 24 (1977).
46. P.A. Mancinelli, New Developments in Acrylic HMPSA Technology, in
TECH12, Advances in Pressure Sensitive Tape Technology, Technical Seminar
Proceedings, Itasca, IL, May, 1989, p.165.
47. Polysar, Product and Properties Index, Arnhem, 02/1985.
48. Adhes. Age, (5) 32 (1987).
49. Adhes.Age, (9) 37 (1988).
50. E.G. Ewing and J.C. Erickson, Tappi J., (6) 158 (1988).
51. Dow Corning, Silicone PSA, Application Information, 1986.
52. Adhes. Age, (10) 16 (1977).
53. J. Ouyang, S. Jacobson, L. Shen, S. Reedell, Characterization of Acrylic
PUR-Based Waterborne PSAs, Proc. 24th Annual Meeting of Adh. Soc.,
Febr.25, 2001, Williamsburg, VA. p.236.
54. S.A. Parrie and P.F. Ritchie, Adhesion, (5) 201 (1967).
55. Pack Report, (10) 15 (1986).
56. J.A. Greenwood and K.L. Johnson, Philosophical Magazine, A 43, 697 (1981).
57. J. Johnston, Adhes. Age, (12) 24 (1983).
58. A. Bates, Adhes. Age, (12) 26 (1983).
59. S.R. Aubuchon, R. Ulbrich and S.B. Wadud, Characterization of Pressure-
Sensitive Adhesives and Thermosets by Controlled Stress Rheology and
Thermal Analysis, Proc. 24th Annual Meeting of Adh. Soc., Febr. 25, 2001,
Williamsburg, VA, p.427.
60. I. Benedek, Development and Manufacture of Pressure-Sensitive Products,
Marcel Dekker, New York, 1999, Chapter 5.
61. A. Kamagata, T. Saito and M. Toyama, J. Adhesion, (2) 279 (1972).
62. M. Sherrif, R.W. Knibbs and P.G. Langley, J. Appl. Polymer Sci., 17,
3423 (1973).
63. P.J. Counsell and R.S. Whitehouse, Development in Adhesives (W.C. Wake,
Ed.), Vol. 1, Applied Science Publishers, London, 1977, p. 99.
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 343
64. W.R. Dougherty, 15th Munich Adhesive and Finishing Seminar, Munich,
Germany, 1990, p.70.
65. D.H. Kaelble, Trans. Soc. Rheology, (2) 135 (1965).
66. A. Schultz, A. Siddiqui, E. Kleinfeld, L.R. Farwaha Phan and P. Hayes, US
Pat. 5928783 (2000); in A.K. Schultz and N. Kofira, The Use of Non-
Migrating Surfactants in Pressure-Sensitive Adhesive Applications, Proc. 24th
Annual Meeting of Adh. Soc., Feb.25, 2001, Williamsburg, VA, p.163.
67. H.W. Yang, Effect of Polymer Structural Parameters on PSAs, Proc. of the
22nd Annual Meeting of the Adhesion Society, FL, Febr.21, 1999, Panama City
Beach, p.63
68. I. Benedek, Adhasion, (5) 16 (1986).
69. T.K. Sherwood, Ind. Eng. Chem., 21, 12 (1929).
70. J. Hansmann, Adhasion, (4) 21 (1985).
71. I. Benedek, Development and Manufacture of Pressure-Sensitive Products,
Marcel Dekker, New York, 1999, Chapter 6.
72. W.D. Freeston, Jr., Coated Fabrics Technology, Technonic Publ. Co.,
1973, p.25.
73. S.S. Hwang, Chem. Eng. Sci., 34, 181 (1979).
74. Backofen & Meier AG, Bulach, Reverse Gravure Coating of Emulsion PSA,
Private Communication.
75. F. Weyres, Coating, (4) 110 (1985).
76. H.D. Patermann, Coating, (6) 224 (1988).
77. E. Brada, Papier u. Kunststoffverarb., (5) 170 (1986).
78. Adhasion, (10) 399 (1969).
79. Die Herstellung von Haftklebstoffen, Tl.2.2, 15d, Nov. 1979, BASF,
Ludwigshafen, Germany.
80. Adhasion, (9) 349 (1965).
81. Coating, (11) 4 (1988).
82. Coating, (11) 380 (1986).
83. C.P. Iovine (National Starch Chem. Co., USA), EP 0212358
A2/04.03.1987, p. 3.
84. H. Mu ller, J. Tu rk and W. Druschke, BASF, Ludwigshafen, EP 0, 118,
726/11.02.1983.
85. J.A. Fries, Tappi J., (4) 129 (1988).
86. Hyvis, Prospect, British Petrol, (1985).
87. Tappi J., 67 (9) 104 (1983).
88. P. Caton, European Adhes. Seal., (12) 18 (1990).
89. J. Boutillier, llth Munich Adhesive and Finishing Seminar, Munich, Germany,
1983, p.3.
90. Lihua Li, C. Macosko, G.L. Corba, A. Pocius and M. Tirrell, Interfacial
Energy and Adhesion Between Acrylic PSA and Release Coatings, Proc. 24th
Annual Meeting of Adh. Soc., Feb.25, 2001, Williamsburg, VA, p.270.
91. C. Verdier and J.M. Piau, Understanding Peeling of PSAs by Use of
Visualization, Proc. of the 23rd Annual Meeting of the Adhesion Society,
Myrtle Beach, SC, Febr.20, 2000, p.116.
344 Chapter 6
92. A.A. Chalykh, A.E. Chalykh, V. Yu Stepanenko and M.M. Feldstein,
Viscoelastic Deformations and the Strength of PSA Joints Under Peeling,
Proc. of the 23rd Annual Meeting of the Adhesion Society, Myrtle Beach, SC,
Febr.20, 2000, p.252.
93. B. Zhao, E. Miasek and R. Pelto, Peeling Tapes from paper, Proc. 24th
Annual Meeting of Adh. Soc., Febr.25, 2001, Williamsburg, VA, p.364.
94. G.R. Hamed and W. Preechatiwong, Peel Adhesion of Uncrosslinked
Styrene Butadiene Rubber Bonded to PET, Proc. of the 23rd Annual Meeting
of the Adhesion Society, Myrtle Beach, SC, Febr.20, 2000, p.511.
95. D.J. Yarusso, J. Ma and R.J. Rivard, Properties of Polyisoprene Based
PSAs Crosslinked by Electron Beam Radiation, Proc. of the 22nd Annual
Meeting of the Adhesion Society, Panama City Beach, FL, February 21,
1999, p.72.
96. Johnston, Alternate Methods for the Basic Physical Testing of PSA Tapes
and Proposals for the Future, Proc. of the 23rd Annual Meeting of the
Adhesion Society, Myrtle Beach, SC, Febr.20, 2000, p.327.
97. S.F. Christensen, Rheology of Adhesion, Proc. of the 22nd Annual Meeting
of the Adhesion Society, Panama City Beach, FL, Febr.21, 1999, p.66.
98. K. Kendall, Molecular Adhesion and Elastic Deformations, Proc. 24th
Annual Meeting of Adh. Soc., Febr.25, 2001, Williamsburg, VA, p.11.
99. J.W. Obreimoff, Proc. R. Soc., A127, 290 (1930).
100. K.L. Johnson, Brit. J.Appl. Phys., 9, 199(1958).
101. M.B. Taub and R.H. Dauskardt, The Effects of Crosslink Density and
Environment on the Adhesion of Pressure Sensitive Adhesives with
Application in Transdermal Drug Delivery, Proc. 24th Annual Meeting of
Adh.Soc., Febr.25, 2001, Williamsburg, VA, p.141.
102. J. Kinloch, H. Hadavinia, B.R.K. Blackman; M. Ring-Groth, J.-G. Williams
and E.P. Busso, The Peel Behaviour of Adhesive Joints, Proc. of the 23th
Annual Meeting of the Adhesion Society, Myrtle Beach, SC, Febr.20, 2000, p.25
103. J.M. Piau, G. Ravilly and C. Verdier, Experimental and Theoretical
Investigations of Model Adhesives Peeling, Proc. 24th Annual Meeting
Adh. Soc., Febr.25, 2001, Williamsburg, VA, p.287.
105. M. Mazurek (Minnesota Mining and Manuf.Co., St.Paul, MN, USA), EP
4.693.935/15.09.1987.
106. Adhasion, (10) 401 (1968).
107. European Adhesives and Sealants, (9) 4 (1987).
108. R.P. Wool and I. Lee, Polymer-Solid Interfaces; Role of the Sticker and
Receptor Groups, Proc. 24th Annual Meeting of Adh. Soc., Febr.25, 2001,
Williamsburg, VA, p.297.
109. L. Li, M. Tirrell, A.V. Pocius and G.L. Korba, Adhesion Studies on Acrylic
PSAs: Temperature and Composition Effect, Proc. of the 23rd Annual
Meeting of the Adhesion Society, Myrtle Beach, SC, Febr.20, 2000, p.31.
110. E.J. Chang, Adhesion, 34, 189 (1991).
111. J.B. Class and S.G. Chu, J. Appl. Polym Sci., 30, 815(1985).
112. H. Yang, J. Appl.Polym. Sci., 55, 645 (1995).
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 345
113. R. Sweet and K. Ulman, CRS Symposium 1997.
114. G.V. Gordon, R.L. Tabler, S.V. Perz, J.L. Stasser, M.J. Owen and J.S. Tonge,
Rheology in the Release of Silicone Coatings, in Book of Abstracts, 215th
ACS National Meeting, Dallas, March, 29 April (1998).
115. G.V. Gordon, R.L. Tabler, S.V. Perz, J.L. Stasser, M.J. Owen and J.S. Tonge,
Adhes. Age, (11) 35 (1998).
116. G.V. Gordon, R.L. Tabler, S.V. Perz, J.L. Stasser, M.J. Owen and J.S. Tonge,
Release Force control: The Bottom line
.Synergism Between Adhesive and
Liner, Proc. of the Pressure-Sensitive Tape Council, 1999, Technical Seminar,
Washington DC, May 5, 1999.
117. G.V. Gordon, M.J. Owen, M.S. Owens, S.V. Perz, J.L. Stasser
and J.S. Tonge: Interfacial and Bulk Contribution to Adhesive Release,
in Proc. of the 22nd Annual Meeting of the Adhesion Society, Panama City,
FL, Febr.21, 1999.
118. J.J. Bikermann, Trans. Soc. Rheol., 2, 9 (1957).
119. K. Fukuzawa and T. Uekita, The Mechanism of Peel Adhesion for PSA
Tape, Proc. of the 22nd Annual Meeting of the Adhesion Society, Panama
City Beach, FL, Febr. 21, 1999, p.63.
120. Firestone, Technical Service Report, 6110, August, 1986.
121. G.R. Hamed and W. Preechatiwong, Anomalous Time-Temperature-
Response of the Peel Adhesion of Crosslinked-Epoxidized Natural Rubber
to Polyester Film, Proc. of the 22nd Annual Meeting of the Adhesion Society,
Panama City, FL, Febr.21, 1999, p.304.
122. S. Tobing et al., Molecular Parameters and Their Relation to the Adhesive
Performance, J. Appl. Polyner Sci., 2001 in press; in S.D. Tobing and
A. Klein, Synthesis and Structure Property Studies in Acrylic Pressure-
Sensitive Adhesives, Proc. 24th Annual Meeting of Adh. Soc., Feb.25, 2001,
Williamsburg, VA, p.131.
123. A.W. Aubrey, G.N. Welding and T. Wong, J. Appl. Chem., (10) 2193 (1969).
124. E. Gronewaldt, Coating, (5) 144 (1969).
125. M.E. Fowler, Polymer, (11) 2146 (1987).
126. H. Lakrout, C. Creton, D. Ahn and K. Shull, Adhesion of Monodisperse
Acrylic Polymer Melts to Solid Surfaces, Proc. of the 23rd Annual Meeting of
the Adhesion Society, Myrtle Beach, SC, Febr.20, 2000, p.46.
127. Adhes. Age, (12) 19 (1986).
128. M.B. Taub, and R.H. Dauskardt, Adhesion and Debonding of PSA used in
Transdermal Drug Delivery Systems, Proc. 24th Annual Meeting of Adh.
Soc., Febr.,25, 2001, Williamsburg, VA, p.141.
129. D.W. Aubrey, G.N. Weldung and T. Wong, J. Appl. Polymer Sci., 13, 2193
(1969).
130. M.M. Feldstein, A.E. Chalykh, R. Sh. Vartapetian, S.V. Kotomin, D.F.
Baraimov, T.A. Borodulina, A.A. Chalykh and D. Geschke, Molecular
insight into Rheological and Diffusion Determinants of Pressure-Sensitive
Adhesion, Proc. of the 23th Annual Meeting of the Adhesion Society, Myrtle
Beach, SC, Febr.20, 2000, p.54.
346 Chapter 6
131. M.M. Feldstein, A.E. Chalykh, A.A. Chalykh, G. Fleischer and R.A. Siegel,
Polym. Mater. Sci. Eng., 81, 467 (1999).
132. Die Herstellung von Haftklebstoffen, Tl-2, 214d, Dec. 1979, BASF,
Ludwigshafen, Germany.
133. M. Schlimmer, Adhasion, (4) 8 (1987).
134. G. Henke, Schmelzhaftklebstoffe fur non wovens, 9th Munich Adhesive and
Finishing Seminar, Munich, Germany, 1985.
135. I. Benedek, Development and Manufacture of Pressure-Sensitive Products,
Marcel Dekker, New York, 1999, Chapter 2.
136. P.D. Hyde and D.J. Yarusso, ATR-IR Studies of Strain Induced
Crystallized Natural Rubber Pressure-Sensitive Adhesives, Proc. 24th
Annual Meeting of Adh. Soc., Febr. 25, 2001, Williamsburg, VA, p.433.
137. D.E. Yarusso and P.D. Hyde (Minnesota Mining and Manuf. Co, St. Paul,
MN) US Pat., 5, 866, 249.
138. Adhes. Age, (6) 32 (1986).
139. Adhasion, (6) 24 (1982).
140. J. Kirn, K.S. Kirn and Y.H. Kim, J. Adhesion Sci. Technol., (3) 175 (1989).
141. J. Skeist, Handbook of Adhesives, 2nd Edition, Van Nostrand-Rheinhold Co.,
New York, 1977.
142. E.P. OBrien and T.C. Ward, Characterization of thin films: Shaft Loaded
Blister Test, Proc. of the 23rd Annual Meeting of the Adhesion Society, Myrtle
Beach, SC, Febr.20, 2000, p.202
143. D.H. Kaelble, Trans. Soc. Rheol., 3, 161 (1960).
144. Kai Tak Wan and Yiu-Wing Mai, Internat. J. of Fracture, 74, 181 (1995).
145. A.J. Kinloch, B.R.K. Black, H. Hadavinia, M. Paraschi and J.G. Williams,
Proc. 24th Annual Meeting of Adh. Soc., Febr.25, 2001, Williamsburg,
VA, p.44.
146. K.S. Kim and N. Aravas, Int. J. Solid Structure, 24, 417 (1988).
147. I. Benedek, Bond Failure in Pressure-Sensitive Removable Thin Plastic Film
Laminates, Proc. of the 22nd Annual Meeting of the Adhesion Society,
Panama City, FL, Febr. 21, 1999, p.448.
148. J. Wilken, Allg. Papier Rundschau, (42) 1490 (1986).
149. E.O. Brien, T.C. Ward, S. Guo and D. Dillard, Characterizing the
Adhesion of Pressure-Sensitive Tapes Using the Shaft Loaded Blister Test
Proc. 24th Annual Meeting of Adh. Soc., Feb. 25, 2001, Williamsburg,
VA, p.113.
150. Z. Miyagi, S. Zaghi and D. Hunston, The Sandwich Bending Specimen for
Characterizing Adhesive Properties, Proc. of the 22nd Annual meeting of the
Adhesion Society, Panama City, FL, Febr. 21, 1999, p.119.
151. Adhasion, (5) 202 (1986).
152. Adhasion, (8) 237 (1976).
153. Coating, (1) 35 (1989).
154. Coating, (10) 271 (1988).
155. Allg. Papier Rundschau., (14) 340 (1987).
156. W. Druschke, Adhasion, (5) 30 (1987).
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 347
157. J.J. Elmendorp, D.J. Anderson and H. De Koning, Dynamic Wetting Effects
in Pressure Sensitive Adhesives, Proc. 24th Annual Meeting of Adh. Soc.,
Febr. 25, 2001, Williamsburg, VA, p.267.
158. M. Nardin and I.M. Ward, Materials Science and Technology, 3, 814 (1987).
159. C.Y. Hui, Y.Y. Lin and E.J. Kramer, The Mechanics of Contact and
Adhesion of Periodically Rough Surfaces, Proc. 24th Annual Meeting of Adh.
Soc., Febr. 25, 2001, Williamsburg, VA, p.340.
160. A.N. Gent, G.R. Hamed and W.J. Hung, Adhesion of Elastomers: Dwell
Time Effects and Adhesion to Fillers, Proc. of the 23th Annual Meeting of the
Adhesion Society, Myrtle Beach, SC, Febr., 20, 2000, p.6.
161. A. Paiva, M.D. Foster, A.J. Crosby and K. Shull, Studying Changes in
Surface Adhesion of PSAs with AFM and Spherical Indenter Test, Proc. of
the 23th Annual Meeting of the Adhesion Society, Myrtle Beach, SC, Febr.20,
2000, p.43.
162. A.J. Kinloch, Adhesion and Adhesives, Chapman and Hall, London, 1987,
Chapter 2.
163. A.E. Chalykh, Diffusion in Polymer Systems, Chemistry, Moscow, 198; in
A.E. Chalykh, A.A. Chalykh, D.F. Barainov, T.A. Borodulina, and M.M.
Feldstein, Contribution of PSA Polymer Creep Recovery to the Kinetics of
Adhesive Bonding, Proc. of the 23rd Annual Meeting of the Adhesion Society,
Myrtle Beach, SC, Febr.20, 2000, p.127.
164. H.P. Schreiber, Polymer Diffusion Processes and the Evolution of Adhesive
Bond Strength, Proc. 25th Annual Meeting of Adh.Soc., and the Second
World Congress on Adhesion and Related Phenomena, Febr. 10, 2002, Orlando,
FL, p.435.
165. A.A. Chalykh, A.E. Chalykh and M.M. Feldstein, Polym. Mater. Sci. Eng.,
81, 456 (1999).
166. J.C. Hooker, C. Creton, P. Torjemann and K.R. Shull, Surface Effects on
the Microscopic Adhesion of Styrene-Isoprene-Styrene-Resin PSAs, Proc. of
the 22nd Annual Meeting of the Adhesion Society, Panama City Beach, FL,
Febr., 21, 1999, p.415.
167. L. Benyahia, C. Verdier and J.M. Piau, J. Adhesion, 62, 45 (1997).
168. G. Bonneau and M. Baumassy, New Tackified Dispersions for Water-Based
PSAs for Labels, 19th Munich Adhesive and Finishing Seminar, 1994,
Munich, Germany, p.82.
169. G. Meinel, Papier u.Kunststoff Verarbeiter, (5) 177 (1989).
170. M. Cicotti, B. Giorgini and M. Barquins, Internat. J. of Adhesion and
Adhesives, (1) 35 (1998).
171. A. Carre and J. Schultz, J. Adhesion, 17, 135 (1984).
172. H.D. Brooks, J.Y. Kelly, P.H. Madison, C.D. Thacher and T.E. Long,
Synthesis and Characterization of Acrylamide Containing Polymers for
Adhesive Applications, Proc. 24th Annual Meeting of Adh. Soc., Febr.25,
2001, Williamsburg, VA, p.150.
173. J.C. Conti, E.R. Strope and E. Jones, Proceedings of the 20th Annual Meeting
of the Adhesion Society, 425 (1997).
348 Chapter 6
174. J.C. Conti, E.R. Strope, E. Jones and D. Rohde, Proceedings of the 21st
Annual Meeting of the Adhesion Society, 418 (1998).
175. J.C. Conti, E.R. Strope, R.D. Gregory and P.A. Mills, Cyclic Peel
Evaluation of Sterilized Medical Packaging, Proc. of the 22nd Annual
Meeting of the Adhesion Society, Panama City, FL, Febr. 21, 1999, p.116.
176. I. Benedek, Development and Manufacture of Pressure-Sensitive Products,
Marcel Dekker, New York, 1999, Chapter 8.
177. G. Hombergsmeier, Papier u. Kunststoffverarb., (11) 31 (1985).
178. L.M. Prytikin and W.M. Wacula, Adhasion, (12) 44 (1983).
179. Adhes. Age, (7) 36 (1986).
180. A. Dobmann and H. Braun, Neues Engineering Konzept fu r
Etikettenindustrie, 9th Munich Adhesive and Finishing Seminar, Munich,
Germany, 1985.
181. B. Zhao, E. Miasek and R. Pelto, Peeling Tapes from Paper, Proc. 24th
Annual Meeting of Adh. Soc., Febr. 25, 2001, Williamsburg, VA, p.364.
182. J.J. Bikermann and W. Whitney, Tappi, 46 (7) 420 (1963).
183. T. Yamauchi, T. Cho, R. Imamura and K. Murakami, Nordic Pulp Paper J.,
4, 128 (1988).
184. R. Pelton, W. Chen, H. Li and M. Engel, The Link Between Paper
Properties and PSA Adhesion, Proc. of the 23rd Annual Meeting of the
Adhesion Society, Myrtle Beach, SC, Febr., 20, 2000, p.127.
185. M.S. Kafkalidis, M.D. Touless and S.M. Ward, Toughness of Adhesive
Joints with Elastic and Plastic Substrates, Proc. of the 22nd Annual Meeting
of the Adhesion Society, Panama City, FL, Febr. 21, 1999, p.214.
186. ASTM D 187661T
187. European Standard NMP 458, No. 1694D.
188. G. Josse, O. Poizat and C. Creton, Probe Tack Tests of PSAs on Silicone
Release Coatings, Proc. of the 23rd Annual Meeting of the Adhesion Society,
Myrtle Beach, SC, Febr., 20, 2000, p.36.
189. I. Benedek, Pressure Sensitive Formulation, VSP, Utrecht, 2000, Chapter 2.4.1.
190. US. Pat., 3,691,140/12.09.1972; in H. Miyasaka, Y. Kitazaki, T. Matsuda and
J. Kobayashi (Nichiban Co. Ltd., Tokyo, Japan), Offenlegungsschrift, DE
3544868A1/18.12.1985.
191. Bevitack, Technical Bulletin, Bergvik-Arizona, 1990.
192. Z. Czech, European Adhes.Seal., (6) 4 (1955).
193. W. Druschke, Adhasion, (6) 27 (1987).
194. P. Holl, Verpackungs-Rundschau, (3) 220 (1986).
195. Adhes. Age, (5) 24 (1987).
196. J.C. Fitch and A.M. Snow Jr., Adhes. Age, (10) 23 (1977).
197. Novamelt Adhesive Technology, Technical Bulletin, (1994).
198. A.C. Makati, Tappi J., (6) 147 (1988).
199. M.H. Tanashi, K. Yasuaki, M. Tetsuaki and K. Yunichi (Nichiban Co., Ltd.,
Tokyo, Japan), OS/DE 3,544,868 Al/15.05.1985.
200. G.L. Schneeberger, Adhes. Age, (4) 21 (1974).
201. J. Lin, W. Wen and B. Sun, Adhasion, (12) 21 (1985).
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 349
202. Coating, (4) 123 (1988).
203. Coating, (1) 13 (1970).
204. H. Reip, Adhes. Age, (3) 17 (1972). V104
205. H.K. Porter Co., USA, US Pat., 3.149.997; in Adhasion, (2) 79 (1966).
206. Offset Technik, (8) 8 (1986).
207. Offset Praxis, (11) 98 (1986).
208. J. Merretig, Coating, (3) 50 (1974).
209. Kjin Co., Jap. Pat., 28.520/70; in Coating, (2) 38 (1972).
210. I.J. Davis (National Starch Chem. Co., Bridgewater, USA), US Pat., 4, 728,
572/01.03.1988.
211. D.J. Bebbington (Wiggins Tape Group Ltd.) EP251672/07.01.1988; in CAS
Silicones, 14, 4 (1988).
212. T. Tatsuno, K. Matsui, M. Takashi and M. Wakimoto (Kansai Paint Co.
Ltd.), Japan Pat., 22285927/11.12.1987; in CAS Adhesives, 14, 3 (1987).
213. I. Benedek, Pressure Sensitive Formulation, VSP, Utrecht, 2000, pp. 2528.
214. Tappi J., (5) 25 (1988).
215. G. Schweizer, Das Papier, 10A, 1(1985).
216. Coating, (6) 184 (1969).
217. Coating, (11) 89 (1984).
218. T.J. Bonk (Minnesota Mining and Manuf. Co., St.Paul, MN, USA), EP 12,
070, 831/03.10.1984.
219. R. Schuman and B. Josephs (Dennison Manuf. Co., USA), PCT/US86/
02304/28.10.1986.
220. K. Go ller, Adhasion, (4) 101 (1974).
221. Coating, (4) 23 (1969).
222. J.C. Pasquali, EP 0122847/24.10.1984.
223. German Pat., 2,110,491, in Coating, (12) 363 (1973).
224. U.E. Krause (Hensel Textil Co.), EP 0,238,014 A2/23.09.1987.
225. Coating, (3) 42 (1969).
226. M. Hasegawa, US Pat., 4,460,634/17.07.1984; in Adhes. Age, (3) 22 (1987).
227. Eastman Kodak, US Pat., 359, 943; in Adhasion, (5) 328 (1967).
228. Vitta Co., US Pat., 3,598,073, in Adhasion, (5) 328 (1967).
229. Japan Pat., 2.736/75; in US Pat., 3.691.140/18.09.72.
230. E. Pagendarm, OS/DE 3.628.784 Al/25.08.1986.
231. 3M Kokkai, Tokyo Koho, Jap. Pat., 63.175.091, in CAS, 25 (7) (1988).
232. I. Benedek and L. Heymans, Pressure-Sensitive Adhesives Technology,
Marcel Dekker, New York, 1999, Chapter 6.
233. I. Benedek, Pressure Sensitive Formulation, VSP, Utrecht, 2000, Chapter 5.
234. P. Tkaczuk, Adhes. Age, (8) 19 (1988).
235. Minnesota Mining and Manuf. Co. St. Paul, MN, USA, EP 4,693,935/18.09
1987.
236. C. Donker, R. Luth and K. Van Rijn, 19th Munich Adhesive and Finishing
Seminar, Munich, Germany, 1994, p.87.
237. L. Jacob, New Development of Tackifiers for SBS Block Copolymers,
19th Munich Adhesive and Finishing Seminar, Munich, Germany, 1994, p.87.
350 Chapter 6
238. Novamelt Research GmbH, Technical Bulletin, 1999.
239. Poli-Film Kunststofftechnik GmbH, Wipperfu rth, Germany, Technical
Bulletin, 1994.
240. Novacel GmbH, FRG, Technical Bulletin, 1994.
241. Adhes. Age, (12) 43 (1981).
242. Tappi J., (9) 104 (1983).
243. K.N. Nakao, J. Adh. Soc. Japan, (6) 6 (1970).
244. K. Fukuzawa and T. Uekita, New Methods of Evaluation for Pressure-
Sensitive Adhesives, Proc. of the 22nd Annual Meeting of the Adhesion
Society, Panama City Beach, Florida, Febr. 21, 1999, p.78.
245. J. Andres, Allg. Papier Rundschau, (16) 444 (1986).
246. US Pat., 4,563,389; in S. Krampe and C.L. Moore (Minnesota Mining and
Manuf. Co., St.Paul, MN, USA), EP 0,202,831 A2/26.11.1986.
247. A.W. Norman, Adhes. Age, (4) 36 (1974).
248. S.D. Tobing and A. Klein, Synthesis and Structure Property Studies in
Acrylic Pressure-Sensitive Adhesives, Proc. 24th Annual Meeting of Adh.
Soc., Febr.25, 2001, Williamsburg, VA, p.131.
249. R.D. Adams, R. Thomas, F.J. Guild and L.F. Vaughan, Thick Adherend
Shear Tests, Proc. 24th Annual Meeting of Adh. Soc., Febr., 25, 2001,
Williamsburg, VA, p.59.
250. R.A. Fletscher, The Temperature Factor in Compounding Thermoplastic
Rubber-based HMA, 11th Munich Adhesive and Finishing Seminar, Munich,
Germany, 1986, p.36.
251. A. Sustici and B. Below, Adhes. Age, (11) 17 (1991).
252. A. Bell, Shell Bulletin, TB, RBX/73/8/6.
253. J.A. Schlademan, Coating, (1) 12 (1986).
254. L.M. Schrijver, Coating, (3) 70 (1981).
255. J.A. Schlademan and J.G. Bryson, Proc.of the 21st Annual Meeting of the
Adhesion Society, Savannah, GA, Febr., 1998.
256. A. Pocius and C. Dahlquist, Adhesion and Adhesives, ACS Audio Courses
(1986); in H.W. Yang, Effect of Polymer Structural Parameters on PSAs,
Proc. of the 22nd Annual Meeting of the Adhesion Society, Panama City Beach,
FL, Febr. 21, 1999, p.63.
257. J.M. Gordon, G.B. Rouse, J.H. Gibbs and W.M. Risen Jr., J. Chem. Phys.,
(66) 4971 (1977).
258. G. Meinel, Papier u. Kunststoffverarb., (10) 26 (1985).
259. H.J. Boob and H.M. Ulrich, Kautschuk, Gummi, Kunststoffe, (3) 209 (1984).
260. L.A. Sobieski and T.J. Tangney, Adhes. Age, (12) 23 (1988).
261. M. Ulrich, US Pat., 24. 906; in Handbook of Pressure Sensitive
Technology (D. Satas, Ed.), Van Nostrand-Rheinhold Co., New York,
1982, p.203.
262. Coating, (2) 43 (1987).
263. W.J. Whitsitt, Tappi J., (12) 163 (1988).
264. Tappi J., (5) 182 (1988).
265. L. Krutzel, Adhes. Age, (9) 21 (1987).
Adhesive Performance Characteristics 351
266. Coating, (7) 186 (1984).
267. Adhes. Age, (11) 27 (1983).
268. C.K. Otto, Allg. Papier Rundschau, (16) 438 (1986).
269. J.P. Keally and R.E. Zenk (Minnesota Mining and Manuf. Co., St. Paul, MN,
USA), Canad. Pat., 1, 224, 678/19.07.1982 (USP. 399, 350).
270. Adhasion, (2) 43 (1977).
271. I. Benedek, Pressure Sensitive Formulation, VSP, Utrecht, 2000, Chapter 3.
272. R.P. Mudge (National Starch Chem. Co., Bridgewater, USA), US Pat., 4,
753, 846/28.06.1988.
273. Tappi J., (9) 105 (1984).
274. Allg.Papier Rundschau, (5) 228 (1987).
275. R.P. Mudge (National Starch Chem. Co., Bridgewater, USA), EP 0, 225, 541/
11.12.1985.
276. J.A. Fries, New Developments in PSA, Tappi HM Seminar, 2 June, 1990,
Toronto, Canada.
277. I. Benedek, Pressure Sensitive Formulation, VSP, Utrecht, 2000, p.55.
278. Paper, Film and Foil Converter, (3) 76 (1988).
279. Vinamul GmbH, Nacor 90, Data sheet, 1988.
280. D.G. Pierson and J.J. Wilcynski, Adhes. Age, (8) 53 (1990).
352 Chapter 6
7
Converting Properties of PSAs
Convertability is the ability of the adhesive to be used for coating and
laminating, and the property of the laminate to be used for label (or tape)
manufacturing. The most important factors which contribute towards good
convertability of a self-adhesive laminate include the nature of the face
paper, the type of the adhesive and silicone, the release force, the properties
of the siliconized release liner, and the die-cutting properties of the adhesive
and of the face paper. There are two dierent aspects of the convertability of
an adhesive, namely the convertability of the uid adhesive (solvent-based,
water-based, or hot-melt), and the convertability of the coated adhesive
(processability); good convertability implies the suitability of the adhesive
uid to be coated without any problem, and the capability of the laminate
to be processed (cutting, die-cutting, printing, labeling, etc.) without any
problem. As discussed in detail in [1] and in Chap. 3, Section 1.4,
convertability in practice is the sum of the convertability of the adhesive and
that of the laminate.
1 CONVERTABILITY OF THE ADHESIVE
Because of the dierent materials used as face stock materials and the dif-
ferent technologies and adhesives used, the coatability of the liquid adhesive
is a function of many dierent parameters (e.g., the physical state of the
adhesive, the nature of the face stock, the coating technology, the laminate
structure, the end-use properties, the cost, and the nature of the release).
1.1 Convertability of Adhesive as a Function
of the Physical State
The convertability (coatability) of the adhesive is characterized by the
parameters such as the wet-out, the coating rheology, coating speed, and
353
versatility. All of these parameters depend on the physical state of the
adhesive, whether it concerns a diluted liquid system, yielding an adhesive
layer through the evaporation of the carrier liquid (water or solvent) or a
100%-solid system, giving a solid adhesive layer by a physical (hot-melt) or
chemical (UV or electron beam) process. Hence the coatability of diluted
and undiluted systems needs to be discussed separately.
Coatability of Diluted Systems
Diluted adhesive systems are dened as solutions or dispersions of
adhesives. There are aqueous or solvent-based adhesive solutions, and
aqueous or solvent-based dispersions. The most important ones are organic
solvent solutions of adhesives (solvent-based adhesives) and water-based
dispersions of adhesives (water-based adhesives). In fact most of the solvent-
based adhesives also contain (at least partially) dispersions (like rubber-resin
adhesives), and most of the dispersion-based aqueous adhesives contain
some dissolved materials (e.g., thickeners, tackifying polymers, etc.). In
Chap. 2, the special features of the wetting out of solvent-based adhesives as
well as their coating rheology were discussed. For coating practice more
information is given by the versatility of the PSAs.
Coatability of Solvent-Based Adhesives
Factors inuencing the coatability of solvent-based systems include the
inuence of the solvent content on the coating thickeners, coating appea-
rance, and the mechanical-hydraulic forces in the coating nip [2]. Solvent-
based adhesives are mostly solutions of rubber-resin mixtures or acrylic
copolymers. Their physical properties depend on both components, namely
on polymer and solvent, and on the composition of the adhesive solution.
Solvent-based adhesives are generally highly viscous systems with low
surface tension solvents as the carrier; they are (at least partially) directly
coated onto high surface energy webs. The wet-out of solvent-based PSAs is
less difficult than with water-based PSAs. The coating rheology of solvent-
based PSAs concerns the rheology of a true solution, thus is mainly viscosity
driven and more simple than that of water-based systems. Coating versatility
is the capability of an adhesive to be coated on different machines, using
different coating technologies without changes in its composition or perform-
ance characteristics. Because of the high viscosity of the solutions, there are
only a limited number of coating devices able to use solvent-based PSAs.
Coating speed is the most important coatability-related property of
solvent-based PSAs. The key issues include:
+ different coating devices for different viscosities;
+ base viscosity as a function of the polymerization recipe;
354 Chapter 7
+ thickening/diluting response of the adhesive;
+ different technologies (transfer/direct) for different adhesives;
+ different technologies for different end-uses.
In general the most important parameters of the liquid solvent-based
adhesive (solids content and viscosity) can be easily and precisely adjusted
because the (mechanical) stability of the system is independent of viscosity
(or solids content). On the other hand, there is no need for an exact
adjustment of these properties because of the higher viscosity. Thus solvent-
based PSAs are suitable to be used on different coating devices. The
(possible) different nature of the used solvents only acts as a limiting factor.
Therefore,
Versatility : Solvent-based PSAs > Water-based PSAs (7.1)
The coating speed remains the most important converting property of
solvent-based adhesives. In contrast to water-based PSAs, there is no limit
(minimum speed) for the coating speed because of the unlimited wet-out of
these adhesives. The limits of the running speed for a given machine are
dictated only by the explosion limits of the solvents. Theoretically, a high
solids content and low boiling point solvent allow high drying speeds; thus
an increase in solids content and the appropriate choice of adequate solvents
ensure better running speeds. The newest experimental products generally
contain a higher solids content. Theoretically, a 100%-solids content (at very
low molecular weight) is possible; however, the most concentrated aqueous
dispersions have 6769% solids content (theoretically 75% is possible).
Thus ways to achieve higher coating speeds appear to be quite different for
solvent-based or water-based PSAs.
Coatability of Water-Based Systems
The coatability of water-based adhesives also is a function of the wet-out,
coating versatility, coating rheology, and coating speed. As stated by [3] the
driving force for dynamic wetting is in fact the surface tension of the
adhesive rather than the work of adhesion. Thus, the wet-out of water-based
systems constitutes a dicult problem because of the high surface tension of
the carrier (water), the low viscosity of the most important ready-to-use
formulations, the low density, and the transfer technology used for coating.
The use of co-solvents is limited, while higher viscosities need dierent
coating devices. In contrast to solvent-based PSAs, an improvement of the
wet-out characteristics (with surface active agents) induces irreversible
changes to the adhesive properties. Thus the coatability of water-based
formulations is more sensitive than that of solvent-based PSAs.
Converting Properties of PSAs 355
For water-based PSAs, the coating rheology concerns a dispersion, not
a solution, and is thus time dependent. No changes in carrier material are
allowed and the dispersed polymer is of high molecular weight; coalescence
yields a composite, anisotropic layer. Coating devices are very sensitive
towards viscosity and thus their coating versatility is reduced; the coating
speed depends on solids content as well as on dispersion characteristics.
A minimum level of surface tension is required for dynamic wetting, the
maximum speed for a machine is dictated by rest water content (humidity)
of the dried layer. Rest humidity content is an equilibrium value which
depends on the wet-out additives; thus wetting out is the most important
convertability parameter. The coating speed is more dependent on the
coating weight for water-based PSAs than for solvent-based PSAs. In
addition, the formulating freedom with coating speed remains very limited,
unlike with solvent-based PSAs. The special features of the wetting out for
aqueous dispersions were discussed in Chap. 2 concerning the rheology of
water-based dispersions. Summarizing, the most important key issues
concerning the wet-out are:
+ wet-out as the combination of wetting/dewetting;
+ dynamic versus static wetting;
+ factors acting against dewetting (shear, coalescence);
+ parameters influencing wetting/dewetting (surface tension, contact
angle, viscosity, density);
+ surface tension and parameters influencing it;
+ contact angle, and the problems of measuring this parameter;
+ the influence of the viscosity (versatility, wet-out, coating weight).
The theoretical aspects of the coating rheology of water-based adhesives
were discussed in Chap. 2.
There is a qualitative difference between the coating rheology of the
liquid and that of the semisolid (dried) adhesive layer. The former is like a
solvent-based (solute) rheology, whereas the latter is more that of a
reinforced matrix. For the first step of the coating, temporary and reversible
shear sensitivity of the water-based PSAs determines their behavior on and
after the metering roll. In the second stage, the diffusivity of the coated layer
and its flow determine the drying speed and the aspect of the dried,
coalesced adhesive film. Coating rheology of solvent-based adhesives is a
function of polymer and solvent quality, whereas coating rheology of water-
based adhesives is a function of the dispersion structure. On the other hand,
the influence of the metering device, and of the drying regime is more
pronounced than for solvent-based PSAs. Slight shear rate changes may
avoid stripe structures, air and heating adjustment may avoid adhesive
blow-away, viscosity control may help adjust the smoothness of the final
356 Chapter 7
coating. Unlike solvent-based adhesives, formulating only has a limited
influence on the coating rheology of the adhesive. Key parameters include:
+ adhesive build-up on the machine, mechanical stability, due to
insufficient flow;
+ coagulum build-up on the machine and during formulation
(mechanical stability);
+ coating uniformity (striped, textured structures, insufficient flow);
+ stability of the viscosity (thixotropy and decrease of the viscosity,
either reversible or irreversible);
+ foam formation.
Coating versatility refers to the suitability of the water-based PSAs to be
coated by dierent coating technologies. Today in Europe two coating
methods for emulsion PSAs dominate their respective elds [4], namely:
metering bar systems for tapes and protective lms, and reverse gravure for
labels. The coating technology will be discussed in more detail in Chap. 9. The
mechanical stability of the water-based adhesive on the coating machine is
characterized by the following parameters: coagulum build-up on the ma-
chine, grit build-up in the dispersion, stability of the viscosity, and foaming.
Several latex adhesives have a tendency for coagulum build-up on the
metering roll of the reverse roll coater. Such coagulum may arise either from
poor mechanical stability under shear loading or from imperfect doctoring
leading to a thin coating on the roll, which dries and cannot be redispersed
so that these particles eventually transfer to the applicator roll [5].
Dispersions with a high solids content and a high surface tension tend to
build up dry, tacky residues. Frequently changing the rheology (diluting and
thickening) leads to deposit-free water-based adhesives. Often the adhesive
layer build-up on the machine is associated with insufficient fluidity of the
almost dried adhesive, giving a coating appearance that is textured with
stripes. Diluting/thickening also helps to avoid this phenomenon.
Unlike adhesive build-up, grit (coagulum, discrete deposits) build-up
is associated with insufficient mechanical stability of the dispersion (i.e., an
insufficient stabilizing agent level in the formulation). According to [6]
tackified acrylic emulsions are more susceptible to high shear induced
coagulation. A higher acrylic acid level in the copolymer reduces the coagu-
lum. Generally, tackified formulations are more sensitive (the IR spectrum
of the coagulum showed that it is 3 times higher in tackifier than is the
formulation); rosin-ester tackified PSAs are more sensitive than acid-resin
tackified formulations (e.g., an acid-rosin with 60 ppm standard coagulum
content does not influence negatively current paper coating formulations;
rosin-ester dispersions must possess less than 20 ppm coagulum).
Converting Properties of PSAs 357
Theoretically, high shear stirring tests show the grit build-up and the
lack of mechanical stability; generally, most PSA formulations withstand
this test. Real data can be obtained with a two-cylinder laboratory device, or
practically, a 3-day running test on the production line.
Most unthickened PSA dispersions exhibit only slight thixotropy (i.e.,
changes in the viscosity after formulation that are generally irreversible). It
is to be noted that 0.51.5 s (Ford Cup sec) are normal absolute values for
observed changes in the viscosity during 824-hr production runs.
Foaming does not really constitute a problem as most machines do not
attain critical speeds. Most dispersions possess viscosities below 500 or
above 5000 mPa s. Also there are a variety of very efficient defoamers.
Water-based PSAs require longer drying times (and hence longer
dryers) than solvent-based adhesives, and 15 to 150 m dryers are currently in
use. The coating speed of the adhesive not only has economical importance,
but ease of adjustment also influences the tolerances of the coating weight.
For gravure roll coating a short contact time between web and pressure roll
means a low coating weight, whereas a long contact time (low speed) leads
to a high coating weight. With a given gravure size it is possible to change
the coating weight within a range of approximately 10% [8].
Aqueous systems require more drying heat. The heat of evaporation of
water amounts to 540 cal/g, while that of typical coating solvents, such as
methyl ethyl ketone (MEK) and toluene, is 100200 cal/g. On the other hand
water-based systems are dried more efficiently with large volumes of air
rather than with air of higher temperature [7]. This difference translates into
longer ovens, lower line speeds, and higher utility costs [8] for water-based
systems. Therefore the running speed has its economical importance,
possibly leading to lower costs and higher productivity (Fig. 7.1).
Figure 7.1 Parameters of the PSA laminate inuenced by the coating speed.
358 Chapter 7
Originally several technical parameters were evaluated in order to
improve the drying speed of the diluted systems, including an increase of the
solids content and the transfer coating technology. With transfer coating a
high coating speed of the non-water-sensitive web was possible; an increase
of the solids content allows (at least theoretically) a reduction of the volatiles
and a higher drying speed. The speed limiting steps are the foaming, the
appearance of the coated layer, and the residual water content of the dried
adhesive. It is evident that for a water-based PSA exhibiting an adequate
rheology the upper limit of the running speed is:
Running speed = Maximum drying speed for normal dispersions
(7.2)
For high solid dispersions:
Running speed = Maximum speed leading to a smooth coated layer
(7.3)
For medium viscosity dispersions:
Running speed = Maximum speed which limits foam formation
(7.4)
The physical state of the PSA influences its drying properties [9].
Solvent-based and water-based PSAs display a quite different evaporation
behavior (i.e., they require a quite different temperature gradient during
drying) (Fig. 7.2). The coating and drying speed will depend on the proper
adjustment of the drying (oven) temperature. Key aspects include the
economical/technical importance of the running speed, the built-in
characteristics of the water-based PSAs influencing the running speed,
and the technical limits of the running speed.
Coatability of Hot-Melt PSAs
According to their physical state the coatability of hot-melt PSAs is limited.
Their viscosity depends on the temperature and on their chemical
composition/aging. Because of the restricted range of raw materials
available for their formulation, there is a narrow temperature interval
suitable for them to be coated. On the one hand, this interval is situated at
relatively high viscosities. Thus special metering devices only (see Section 2.2
of Chap. 9) may be used; on the other hand, the high viscosity in the
Converting Properties of PSAs 359
molten state allows a good wet-out. Contactless coating methods for
HMPSAs have been developed to allow the use of hot spray technology in
the nonwovens market.
Coating Versatility. The coating versatility of hot-melt PSAs remains
limited. Generally, special agents (e.g., waxes, oils) are used in the
formulation (see Section 2.9 of Chap. 8) in order to extend the coatability
range of the adhesive.
Coating Rheology. Hot-melt PSAs based on Kraton G are coated at
a viscosity of 25,00080,000 mPa s (at 177
C, for
hard PVC 75
C
Moisture
Content (%)
Specic Elastic
Modulus (kNm/g)
4 9.1
6 8.2
8 6.5
10 5.5
12 4.5
14 4.0
16 3.3
Table 7.12 The Influence of the Orientation of Plastic
Films on Their Modulus
E Modulus (N/mm
2
)
Material PVC PET MOPP BOPP
Value 4000 4500 200 2000
Converting Properties of PSAs 387
causes high and partially uncontrolled elongation, and deformation of the
web during film extrusion or coating; therefore curling and shrinkage may
occur. These defects may be at least partially avoided using laminates or
films with a special profile (i.e., a higher thickness at the edge of the film)
[143]. The low stiffness of the films makes their high speed application (with
labeling guns) difficult.
Advances in label dispensing have also influenced materials used
for high speed applications. Conventional dispensers for paper-based PSAs
do not require special application systems because of the inherent stiffness
of the paper. With todays conformable and squeezable PSA film products
sophisticated application systems are equipped with conventional dispensing
heads. As seen in Table 7.13, the stiffness, the dimensional stability, and
the die-cutting properties of paper as face stock material are generally
superior to those of different films [144]. Therefore pressure-sensitive
laminates based on thin plastic films usually possess release liners based on
voluminous paper.
On the other hand, plastic films bring a new level of transparency and
humidity resistance. Generally, the choice of an adequate plastic material
depends on the end-use of the label. Cast PVC is used for large labels,
calendered PVC for cheaper ones; PET is suggested for heat resistant labels,
cellulose acetate for clear ones. HDPE is recommended for dimensionally
stable items, pearlescent polypropylene for toiletries, extended polyethylene
in sleeving applications, etc. With regard to their stiffness the different face
stock materials may be listed in the following ranking [145]:
Stiffness: OPP > PVC > Paper > Polystyrene > Polyethylene (7.5)
The mechanical and thermal properties of dierent carrier materials are
discussed in detail in [146]. As far as their cost eectiveness is concerned,
Table 7.13 Stiffness, Dimensional Stability and Die-Cutting
Properties: Common Films Versus Paper
Material Stiness
Dimensional
Stability
Die-Cutting
Properties
LDPE Low Fair Low
HDPE Fair Good Fair
OPP Good Good Good
H-PVC Very good Fair Good
PET Very good Very good Very good
Paper Very good Fair Very good
388 Chapter 7
there is a quite dierent ranking (which may dier as future trends in plastic
prices vary):
Cost effectiveness:
Paper > OPP > Polyethylene > PVC > Polystyrene (7.6)
As alluded to earlier porosity of the face stock material allows pene-
tration of the adhesive. Smoothness and the nonpolar character of the
face stock surface impart slight anchorage of the adhesive. In the case of
film-based face stock materials, plasticizers or slip additives may migrate to
the surface of the film. Emulsions or suspensions make polymers exude
surfactants on the film surface.
Fibrous materials may suffer fiber tear during rapid debonding. In all
these cases a top coat (primer) on the face stock surface is required. Table 7.14
summarizes the application and mechanisms of the primer coating.
It is not the aim of this book to discuss the manufacture and perform-
ances of various pressure-sensitive products, which are described in detail in
[1]. However, the understanding of the mechanism of how pressure-sensitive
adhesive-coated products work, requires a short presentation of the auxiliary
components (e.g., release liner) also.
Release Liners. The release liner does not play any role in the
bonding of the label, but it inuences the coating, converting, and labeling
properties. Like the face stock material, the release liner is a sheet-like, thin,
Table 7.14 Application and Mechanism of the Primer Coating
Primer Eect as a Function of the Application Method of the PSA
Direct coating Transfer coating
1. Improves the anchorage of PSA: Improves the anchorage of PSA:
no smoothening eect required smoothens the paper face stock surface
increases the chemical anity of the increases the chemical anity of
the contact surface the contact surface
2. Strengthens the face stock: Strengthens the face stock:
reinforcement of the ber structure reinforcement of the ber structure
strengthening of the surface layer strengthening of the surface layer
3. Absorbs stresses Absorbs stresses
4. Stiens the face stock material; Stiens the face stock material;
changes the peel and cuttability changes the peel and cuttability
5. Limits adhesive bleedthrough Less important
6. Inuences drying No importance
Converting Properties of PSAs 389
solid state component, and is usually paper or lm based. Its release,
dehesive nature is given by a special polymer coating (see Chap. 5). The
most important factors aecting the release liner include the nature of
the adhesive (chemical type, thickness, modulus, diluents), the nature of the
silicone coating (chemical composition, coating weight, lm continuity,
degree of cure, crosslink density), the face material variations (roughness,
porosity), the laminate characteristics (paper age, laminate age, thickness
and modulus, adhesive coating method), and the matrix stripping operation
(speed, angle, physical dimensions) [147].
The most widely used material for release liners remains paper [26].
More than 50% of liner material is based on calendered paper, more
than 20% on top-coated paper, and only 2% on films. The liner is the
packaging material for the adhesive, the carrier material for die-cutting,
and the transport material for the labels. The role of the paper as transport
(end-use) material for the label is replaced by plastic films in some
specific application fields such as medical labels, where polyethylene with
adequate stiffness and good die-cuttability is used [70]. Another application
field concerns metallic labels or PSA-coated materials, where the quite
different toughness of the metal and plastic substrate brings about low
peel adhesion or where the plastic-based release liner displays a better
weatherability.
Release papers are specially coated materials, normally made from
3060 g/m
2
high density papers (glassine types) which have a special coating
that repels the solidified PSAs. A silicone coating is generally used, but
release papers can carry a wax or another type of nonsticky coating. The
nature of the paper influences in a decisive manner the dehesive properties of
silicone liners. Low profile tolerances, chemical inertness, high barrier pro-
perties, good wetting out, smoothness, no yellowing, and high dimensional
stability are necessary [148]. The type of pore formation and surface structure
of the base paper exert a determining influence on the consumption of
silicone and the degree of film forming during the coating process. By means
of various measuring techniques for paper it is now possible to record the
influence of the base paper on the silicone coating. These include the mea-
surement of rigidity, porosity, and above all, penetration. The presence of
migrating species in a release coating can be disastrous to adhesive perfor-
mance. Very small quantities of silicone fluids such as the ones included in
antifoam agents can detackify rubber-based adhesives.
Release liners must fulfill a variety of demands. They must offer the
correct physical properties for the envisaged end-use, as well as allowing
the converter to use existing equipment and chosen silicone systems to
obtain the required release properties. Glassines, treated Krafts, polyolefin-
coated papers, and pigment-coated grades are available. A typical base
390 Chapter 7
paper comprises clay, cellulose pulp fibers for strength, and short fibers for
smoothness and uniformity. In order to achieve a closed silicone film, with
less than 1 g/m
2
of silicone, a very smooth and even surface is necessary. The
pigment coating must be free of pits and flaws if subsequent release
problems are to be avoided.
For several years PVC films have been used as release liners for rubber
and silicone PSAs. Better results were obtained using stiffer or siliconized
films. The main films used as liners for siliconizing include polyester, OPP,
LDPE, HDPE, and polystyrene. Films used as release liners make labeling
easier (photosensitive regulation), faster (the ratio stiffness/thickness is
better for films than paper), and different colors may be produced; there
is no humidity influence on the film, no rehumidification after drying is
necessary. Film release liners are smooth and impart smoothness to the
PSAs. No blocking through die-cutting occurs. As they can be molten,
recycling as polymer is possible.
2.2 Printability of the Laminate
The printing methods used for labels and the most important problems
occuring during printing PSA materials are summarized by Fust [149,150].
There are close correlations between printability and other technical
requirements of the material used for the production of labels [151]. If
a large metallized high-gloss surface such as gold, silver, or copper is
required, this can be best achieved with thermoplastic foils like PVC, PET,
or OPP. While PVC lms can be easily printed, OPP foils may require
considerable development eorts in order to fulll the special requirements
made on the quality of the printed surface. Furthermore, the mechanical
resistance which plays a signicant role for the printing, die-cutting, or
matrix stripping, and for the application of PSA labels, must be included
into these basic considerations. The caliper of the substrate also is
important.
There are some differences between the printability of polyethylene
and polypropylene [47]. Polyethylene is printable by gravure, with a mini-
mum film thickness of 0.025 mm polypropylene of 0.012 mm. Polypropylene
is superior to polyethylene concerning the resistance towards fatty materials,
has better gas barrier properties, and higher elasticity. On the other
hand, the anchorage of printing inks on polypropylene improves only
after 1224 hr. For paper the printability depends on the lay-flat properties.
Lay-flat depends on waving which is a function of the flexibility; the latter
depends on the paper weight. Paper with a 4080 g/m
2
base weight shows
waving with short wavelength, heavy papers (100 g/m
2
) show waving with
longer wavelengths [152].
Converting Properties of PSAs 391
The use of screen printing for PSA laminates was addressed by Perner
[153]; screens with 2143 mesh are used. Flex printing uses up to 48 gravure
lines (Raster). Gravure printing uses 60 line numbers; offset printing also
is carried out [140]. The most explosive growth area is label stock for
nonimpact printing applications [34]. Direct thermal printing is the largest
segment, followed by toner-based printing (laser, ion deposition, magneto-
graphy, etc). The nonimpact techniques of direct thermal and thermal
transfer printing are the most reliable and cost effective means of bar coding.
Printability depends mainly on the quality of the face material. For
laminates the nature of the face is a function of the adhesive also; adhesive/
face interactions change the face quality. Generally, the following pheno-
mena influence the printability, namely the lay-flat (flatness) of the laminate
(curl control), the dimensional stability of the laminate (and uniform
caliper), and the surface quality of the laminate (gloss, smoothness, opacity).
The lay-flat of the laminate generally depends on the face/adhesive
equilibrium and the moisture content, and is especially important for paper-
based labels. The dimensional stability of the laminate is a function of the face
material and its environment/adhesive resistance. For paper labels it depends
more on the laminate/moisture interaction; for film labels it is a function
of the liner/adhesive interaction, or ink/film, face stock/adhesive interaction.
Temperature sensitive cold flow of the adhesive (edge bleeding or
oozing) influences the printability (especially for heat generated laser
printing, or xerox printing). The surface quality of the laminate can be
influenced through adhesive migration in the face, or migration of the face
components in the adhesive layer (soft PVC). For paper labels adhesive
penetration changes the visual appearance of the face; special additives from
the adhesive (e.g., antioxidants) can make the anchorage of the ink difficult.
In general the mechanical stability of the laminate has its importance also.
Labels are now printed at speeds of 175200 m/min and higher [34].
Lay-Flat
Pressure-sensitive adhesive laminates may lose their lay-at properties
(i.e., agging, curling, wing-up of the laminate occurs). The curling of PSA
lms depends on the thickness and on the stiness (elasticity) of the lm
[154]. For paper or other ber-like materials the construction of the web
(ber direction) and ber sensitivity towards water may have an inuence on
the lay-at properties [155]. On the other hand, shrinkage of the paper-
forming bers as a function of the chemical composition, respectively
manufacturing technology, determines the wet elongation of the bers. For
multilayer papers, wet elongation, elasticity, and thickness of the paper are
the most important factors inuencing the lay-at [155]. Wet elongation also
392 Chapter 7
depends on the humidity of the medium, thus generally in industrial practice
webs (especially paper) are rehumidied in order to avoid curling due
to changes in the water content [12]. In general, sheet or roll materials
have dierent lay-at problems. The rolling eect (concavity) is mainly
known for paper rolls; the tunnel eect (convexity) is displayed by sheets
(or lms).
Eliminating preheating and reducing the humidity content of the
release liner (to 4.24.5%) may improve lay-flat. These phenomena may be
explained on the basis of the theoretical knowledge concerning the paper
structure. By water absorbtion or desorbtion, changes in the volume of
cellulose fibers occur [156], they swell or shrink (20% changes in the fiber
diameter). These changes occur across the original machine direction: at
30% relative humidity (RH) the water content of the paper increases to 4%;
at 50% RH the humidity of the paper reaches 8% at 70% RH a 9%
absolute value of the humidity is observed. Practically, lay-flat may be
improved using special release liners, with higher thickness, and with
controlled humidity (corresponding to the equilibrium content at 55% RH
and 20
C). Hygrorest [157] is such a product. Single cut labels after curing
do not lie flat in the delivery boxes. Differences in moisture desorption of
face papers cause edge wrinkling upon conversion [158]; lay-flat depends on
the wet elongation of the paper [159]. For a multilayer construction the
deformation depends on the tension s; this tension is a function of the
modulus E, elongation c, and wet elongation e, or
o = E(c e) (7.7)
Taking into account the distance between medium and bottom layer (Z), the
elongation is given by the following equation:
e = e
Zk (7.8)
where k is the inverse of the radius of curvature.
Dimensional Stability
Dimensional stability is exemplied by shrinkage. Shrinkage of soft PVC
lms is aected by the stability of the lm and its anchorage (if mounted) on
the substrate (Figs. 7.8 and 7.9). Prestretched (e.g., calendered or cast)
plastic lms tend to shrink if subjected to elevated temperatures. Mounted
lms shrink back less than unmounted ones, because of the xing eect
of the adhesive. In the case of labels, cohesive strength prevents shrinkage
and subsequent dirt accumulation on the exposed adhesive. Cohesive
Converting Properties of PSAs 393
strength depends on the built-in cohesive strength of the adhesive and on the
time-temperature stability of the adhesive (Fig. 7.10).
Cellulose acetate used in tapes exhibits a shrinkage of 0.6% (24 hr at
71
C [161]. On the
other hand, humidity changes can cause a shrinkage of 1% in cellulose films.
Drechsler [162] demonstrated the influence of the surface layer on the base
film, and on the shrinkage of the base film. He states that a 30 jm biaxially
oriented polypropylene (BOPP) film shrinks at 70
C. A polymer lacquer
on both sides increases the temperature resistance to 7578
C; a coating
of acrylic PSAs increases the shrinkage resistance to 7580
C. The shrinkage
of biaxially oriented polypropylene (8% MD, 4% TD) is more pronounced
than for oriented polyester (3% MD, 2% TD). Paper also undergoes
shrinkage.
Figure 7.9 Parameters inuencing the dimensional stability of a PVC lm.
Figure 7.8 Parameters inuencing the shrinkage of a PVC lm.
394 Chapter 7
Drying of the paper during laminating causes a shrinkage of 0.81%
TD (corresponding to a decrease of the relative humidity from 50 to 30%).
Dimensional changes of the label paper produced by environmental
humidity may occur during printing or cutting too [163]. The test methods
to quantify the shrinkage will be discussed in Section 3.1 of Chap. 10.
Surface Quality of Labels
The surface appearance of the label is inuenced by the adhesive (i.e., its
migration, penetration, bleeding, and stainingsee Chap. 2, Section 3.2;
Chap. 3, Section 2; Chap. 5, Section 2.4; and Chap. 6 also). Migration may
also produce coating and/or printing defects [164]. Penetration is a function
of the face stock material, of the adhesive, and of the manufacturing
parameters, and depends on the porosity of the paper, its humidity content,
and pH [165]. Dispersion-based PSAs display a higher tendency to migration
than solvent-based ones. Therefore migration tests are carried out for water-
based PSAs at a lower temperature (i.e., 60
), plastics (1924
), and
polyethylene (25
a
= f (
ab,
ac
) (7.13)
The viscoelastic properties of the bulk adhesive are different from
those of the composite material. Generally, the viscoelastic properties of
composite solvent-based adhesives are superior to those of the bulk
material. The viscoelastic properties of water-based (composite) PSAs are
inferior to those of the bulk adhesive. This behavior can be explained by the
different nature of the additives. The viscoelastic properties of the bulk
material depend on its chemical nature, molecular weight, MWD, and
structure (crosslinked, branched, or linear) (see Chap. 2); hence,
ab
= f (Nature, Molecular weight, MWD, Structure) (7.14)
Figure 7.12 The inuence of the adhesive on the creep.
Converting Properties of PSAs 401
The tackied adhesive should also be considered as the bulk adhesive
although tackication (with plasticizer or resin) decreases the cohesion level.
Generally, low cold ow (good cuttability) implies more elasticity amid a
less viscous character of the viscoelastic uid (i.e., higher cohesion). From
knowledge of the inversely proportional relation between cohesion and
adhesion, in a rst approximation, good cuttability means high cohesion
and low adhesion:
C = f [(Cohesion), (Adhesion)
1
] (7.15)
The chemical/physical structure of the adhesive determines its viscoelastic
characteristics and the dependence of the viscoelastic behavior on the
temperature/stress rate. During cutting, the temperature of the laminate
increases and, consequently, the viscosity of the material decreases.
Thus the value of viscosity at higher temperature (cohesion at higher
temperature) is very important for cuttability purposes. The most simple
method of measuring the temperature dependence of the viscosity is the test
of the shear at elevated temperatures, and the test of the hot shear (HS)
at different temperatures gives the hot shear gradient (G
HS
) (see Chaps. 6
and 10). Figure 7.13 illustrates the dependence of the hot shear on the
temperature for different tackified formulations.
Figure 7.13 The dependence of the hot shear for dierent tackied formulations.
1), 2), 3), 4), and 5) are dierent water-based acrylic PSA formulations.
402 Chapter 7
Different formulations display a different temperature sensitivity of
the cohesion (Fig. 7.13). On the other hand, cutting tests carried out
with different formulations demonstrate that formulations with a limited
temperature sensitivity of the shear display better cuttability. Room tempe-
rature shear values are more important for the cohesion/adhesion balance,
influencing mainly the peel on polyethylene.
Cuttability and Adhesive Properties of Resin. The adhesive properties
of the resin inuence the cuttability of the laminate. Unfortunately, there is
no theoretical or empirical equation clarifying the dependence of the
cuttability (C) of the laminate on the adhesive properties (shear, peel, and
tack) of the adhesive;
C = f (Adhesive properties) (7.16)
The best documented interdependence is the correlation of cuttability and
shear. Unfortunately the best known shear values are room temperature
shear values, and there are only a few hot shear data available; no hot shear
gradient data are known from the literature. Cuttability improvement is a
function of the shear increase (order of magnitude) and of the hot shear
gradient (G
HS
). Thus, the cuttability improvement (I
c
) depends on the shear
as follows:
I
c
= f (log HS), (HS
ni
HS
n
)
1
(7.17)
where HS
n
denotes the hot shear at a given temperature, HS
ni
is the hot
shear at another temperature with T at least 10
C, HS is the
improvement of the hot shear (HS=HS
i
HS
o
, where HS
o
is the hot
shear of a known product with an average cuttability). Table 7.16 illustrates
the dependence of the hot shear and G
HS
on the formulation (resin nature).
Table 7.16 Dependence of the Hot Shear and Hot Shear Gradient on the
Formulation.The Influence of the Resin Nature for Water-Based Acrylic
Formulations
Tackier Hot Shear Values (min) (
C)
Code Nature Supplier 30 40 50 60 70
CF 52 Acid rosin A&W 90 35 12 10 11
DEG G Rosin ester DRT 390 170 72 45 21
MBG 64 Rosin ester Hercules 330 90 72 38 23
CF 8/21 Rosin ester A&W >1500 192 160 55 26
E-9241 HC-resin Exxon 230 144 90 45 40
Acrylic =a 40/60 (wet/wet) weight blend of V205/80D (BASF).
Converting Properties of PSAs 403
Although changes in the room temperature shear and slight changes in
hot shear are possible, no cuttability improvement can be observed (except
for CF 52). On the other hand, the study of the G
HS
and the dependence of
the cuttability (and peel) on G
HS
denote the necessity of a minimum G
HS
for
good cuttability (Fig. 7.14). It is evident that slight changes in the
formulation (using resins with a higher melting point) do not necessarily
impart an improved cuttability.
For shear tests the modulus of the adhesive is important also. The
contact area A between the adhesive and the face stock/release liner may be
estimated according [99] as a function of the modulus E, the roughness of
the surface 1/[, the limited contact area A
l
, and the density , of the adhesive:
A = A
l
(1 e
([,),E
) (7.18)
The viscous flow, creep, or cold flow of the adhesive may be charac-
terized by its cohesion (see Chaps. 2 and 3). Smearing by cutting will be
described by the elongation viscosity and relaxation of the fluid adhesive.
The coefficient of viscous traction j
o
(t) as a ratio of tensile stress s(t)
and elongation rate c
/
is [174]:
j
o
(t) = o(t),c
/
(7.19)
Figure 7.14 Interdependence of 1) hot shear, 2) peel, and 3) cuttability.
404 Chapter 7
On the other hand, the section A(t) during elongation also depends on the
elongation rate:
A(t) = A
o
e
c
(7.20)
The coefficient of viscous traction (elongation viscosity) includes an
ideal elastic and a viscoelastic component, both dependent on the modulus
E. The viscoelastic part depends on the relaxation time of the material. If
elongation occurs rapidly, the tension is given by the following equation:
o(t) = [E(t) [(t)]c
o
(7.21)
where E(t) is the tension relaxation modulus (a ratio of tension and
elongation) and c(t) is the relaxation function:
E(t) = [o(t)c
o
] [(t) (7.22)
c(t) is approximated for rubber according to the following equation:
[(t) f (1.0)t
j
(7.23)
For tests carried out at a constant rate:
o(t) = K(t t
o
) (7.24)
where K is a constant and t is the time. The relaxation modulus for natural
rubber is not zero at temperatures as high as 100
C.
Blending a high T
g
, hard resin with a lower T
g
elastomer provides a desirable
formulating latitude. On the other hand, PSA coating and converting, and
end-use of the PSA label require other special performance characteristics.
These can be achieved only through formulating. The scope of the
formulation of PSAs is to produce tailored adhesives for each one of the
Manufacture of PSAs 429
intended end-uses. Generally, the coating technology of the adhesive, the
converting technology of the adhesive, the end-use properties, and
economical considerations inuence the formulation of PSAs.
As described in detail in [9] formulation inuences the manufacturing
technology (global product technology, adhesive coating technology, and
adhesive manufacturing technology), converting properties of the adhesive
(coatability, drying, running speed, etc.) and the end-use performances
of the pressure-sensitive products. The existing coating and converting
machines, as well as environmental considerations, determine the choice of
an adhesive. End-use properties of the label require special face stock
materials and/or PSAs with certain adhesive properties. Economical
considerations also limit the choice of the laminate components and
formulating components. Generally, PSA formulations contain polymers
(elastomers), tackiers (resins or plasticizers), llers, stabilizers, and carrier
agents (solvent, water). This constitutes a base formulation, where all the
components (except the carrier agent) contribute to the adhesive properties.
2.1 Adhesive Properties
There are many reasons for formulating. The rst one is the need to improve
the adhesive properties. Rubber-like base materials used for PSAs do not
possess sucient intrinsic tack and peel adhesion. Most viscoelastic
materials with built-in tack through the synthesis do not possess enough
peel adhesion to nonpolar surfaces, and soft, tacky PSA raw materials
exhibit too low a cohesion level. In other cases the removability of the PSA
must be improved. Therefore the whole range of the adhesive properties
has to be achieved through formulation.
Adhesion/Cohesion Balance
A proper balance between high tack, peel adhesion, and high cohesion is
necessary in most cases. It should be mentioned that formulating for high
tack and peel (discussed generally in terms of tackication), using viscous,
formulating agents (tackiers and plasticizers) decreases the shear resis-
tance. A high cohesion level is given by the rubber-like component of the
adhesive or by partial crosslinking.
Tack. The main goal of the formulation is to improve the tack and
the peel adhesion of PSAs. Generally, this is achieved by the use of
plasticizers and tackiers. Tackifying in order to obtain an improved tack is
easier. As can be seen from Table 8.2, a tackier level of 1020% is enough
for tack improvement of acrylic-based PSAs. A higher tackier level is
imposed mainly for the improvement of the peel adhesion, not of the tack.
430 Chapter 8
T
a
b
l
e
8
.
2
T
a
c
k
i
f
i
e
r
L
e
v
e
l
R
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
t
o
I
m
p
r
o
v
e
t
h
e
T
a
c
k
F
o
r
m
u
l
a
t
i
n
g
C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t
s
C
h
e
m
i
c
a
l
C
o
m
p
o
s
i
t
i
o
n
,
P
a
r
t
s
b
y
W
e
i
g
h
t
(
w
e
t
)
C
o
d
e
S
u
p
p
l
i
e
r
N
a
t
u
r
e
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1
0
1
1
1
2
1
3
1
4
3
7
0
3
P
o
l
y
s
a
r
C
S
B
R
1
0
0
8
0
3
3
3
3
4
3
4
0
C
F
5
2
A
&
W
A
C
r
o
s
i
n
2
0
2
3
2
3
1
9
2
6
8
0
D
B
A
S
F
A
C
3
3
1
0
0
4
3
V
2
0
5
B
A
S
F
A
C
1
0
0
3
8
3
4
E
x
o
r
y
l
2
0
0
1
E
x
x
o
n
A
C
1
0
0
1
0
0
S
E
-
3
5
1
A
&
W
E
s
t
e
r
r
o
s
i
n
2
0
2
0
5
6
5
0
H
o
e
c
h
s
t
A
C
1
0
0
1
0
0
2
0
N
a
c
o
r
-
9
0
N
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
E
V
A
c
o
p
o
l
y
m
e
r
1
0
0
1
0
0
R
o
l
l
i
n
g
b
a
l
l
t
a
c
k
(
c
m
)
1
5
.
0
3
.
0
1
.
5
7
.
0
2
.
5
6
.
0
1
.
8
2
.
6
5
.
9
4
.
5
3
.
0
2
.
8
1
1
.
0
8
.
0
Manufacture of PSAs 431
This statement appears very important for formulations of PSAs coated on
soft PVC, where the adhesive should contain a minimum resin level in order
to avoid resin/plasticizer interaction.
Trends for the improvement of the tack also are observed. New, wider
converting machines (more than 2 m wide) are being built, giving rise to a
higher variation of the coating weight (1226 g/m
2
). New face stock and
substrate materials, based on polyethylene-polypropylene copolymers, are
being introduced with poorer anchorage and peel values. New PSA raw
materials with lower tackifying response (EVAc, CSBR) are now used.
Hence, new lm coatings with better tack properties are necessary. More
removable and semipermanent labels (with lower coating weights) are
needed. All these changes require adhesives with improved tack properties
(e.g., more tackier or more ecient tackiers). Extreme application
and end-use conditions (e.g., ying labeling, adhesion to low or high
temperature-, humid or tensioned substrates, postapplication printing, etc.)
impose higher tack also.
Peel. High peel adhesion requires a certain tack level for bonding
and a certain cohesion for debonding. Tack increases continuously upon
adding soft, viscous components to the formulation. The dependence of the
peel on the ratio of elastic/viscous components is more complex, going
through a maximum as a function of the level of the soft component. The
same ambiguous inuence of the crosslinking on the peel should be noted.
There are adhesive formulations with crosslinking agents leading to low peel
adhesion (i.e., removable PSAs), but in some cases crosslinking leads to high
peel adhesion (see Section 1.2 of Chap. 6).
Shear. The most important means to inuence the cohesion are
tackication and crosslinking. Commonly used tackier levels cause a
decrease in shear strength. The loss of the shear resistance due to the
tackication process is a function of the elastomer and tackier nature and
their ratio. Figure 8.2 indicates that a tackier level above 20% decreases
the shear strength of acrylic PSAs.
It is desirable to obtain as much tack as possible without losing a
signicant amount of internal strength (cohesion). The better balance of
adhesion and cohesion properties is dicult to obtain through polymeriza-
tion only. The addition of hard monomers to increase the cohesive strength
generally results in a decrease of the tack [10].
2.2 Formulating Opportunities
Formulating by mixing includes tackication, cohesion regulation, detack-
ication, and polymer degradation [2]. Tackication covers blending with
432 Chapter 8
high polymers, resins, and plasticizers. Tackication with high polymers
includes tackication with elastomers, viscoelastomers, viscous macro-
molecular compounds, and plastomers. It is possible to modify the adhesive
properties of a PSA by changing the base rubber-like polymer (i.e., through
blending dierent elastomers). For rubber-resin formulations this implies
the use of dierent qualities of natural rubber, or blends of natural rubber
with synthetic elastomers (e.g., stereoregulated ones). For synthetic PSAs,
mixtures of acrylics, or acrylics with EVAc or CSBR can be used. Although
generally used, this formulating freedom is less well known or applied than
blending the rubber-like component with low molecular, viscous materials
(mainly resins), known as tackication.
2.3 Tackification
Tackifying or tackication refers to the increase of the tack and peel adhesion
through formulation: as formulating agents low molecular weight, soft
materials such as resins and plasticizers or special elastomers can be used.
Tackification with Resins. The T
g
and modulus of acrylic PSAs can be
adjusted by polymerizing with dierent ratios of acrylic monomers. Resin
addition oers an additional possibility for this modication [6]. Tackifying
Figure 8.2 The inuence of the tackier level on the shear resistance. Hot shear
(50
e
r
r
e
s
i
n
B
a
s
e
p
o
l
y
m
e
r
s
C
o
d
e
S
u
p
p
l
i
e
r
N
a
t
u
r
e
M
W
T
g
(
C
)
C
o
d
e
S
u
p
p
l
i
e
r
N
a
t
u
r
e
T
g
(
C
)
R
e
g
a
l
r
e
z
1
0
1
8
H
e
r
c
u
l
e
s
H
y
d
r
o
g
e
n
a
t
e
d
H
C
-
r
e
s
i
n
4
0
7
2
2
8
0
D
B
A
S
F
A
C
5
3
R
e
g
a
l
r
e
z
1
0
3
3
H
e
r
c
u
l
e
s
H
y
d
r
o
g
e
n
a
t
e
d
H
C
-
r
e
s
i
n
4
9
3
7
V
2
0
5
B
A
S
F
A
C
4
0
R
e
g
a
l
r
e
z
1
0
6
5
H
e
r
c
u
l
e
s
H
y
d
r
o
g
e
n
a
t
e
d
H
C
-
r
e
s
i
n
7
2
3
1
7
1
0
2
L
B
A
S
F
A
C
5
8
R
e
g
a
l
r
e
z
1
0
7
8
H
e
r
c
u
l
e
s
H
y
d
r
o
g
e
n
a
t
e
d
H
C
-
r
e
s
i
n
8
1
9
2
9
A
1
2
0
B
A
S
F
A
C
5
0
P
i
c
c
o
l
y
t
e
5
9
0
H
e
r
c
u
l
e
s
T
e
r
p
e
n
e
r
e
s
i
n
3
2
S
3
0
4
B
A
S
F
S
A
C
2
2
P
i
c
c
o
t
e
x
7
5
H
e
r
c
u
l
e
s
A
r
o
m
a
t
i
c
r
e
s
i
n
2
9
D
H
1
3
0
H
o
e
c
h
s
t
E
V
A
c
5
P
i
c
c
o
t
e
x
9
1
9
1
/
9
2
E
x
x
o
n
C
5
a
l
i
p
h
a
t
i
c
H
C
4
6
D
H
1
3
7
H
o
e
c
h
s
t
E
V
A
c
2
5
P
i
c
c
o
t
e
x
3
2
3
E
x
x
o
n
M
o
d
i
e
d
C
5
H
C
1
2
A
K
6
0
0
C
o
n
d
e
a
A
C
V
A
c
2
4
P
i
c
c
o
t
e
x
9
2
5
1
E
x
x
o
n
M
o
d
i
e
d
C
5
H
C
1
2
A
K
6
1
0
C
o
n
d
e
a
S
A
C
1
2
P
i
c
c
o
t
e
x
3
3
9
E
x
x
o
n
C
y
c
l
i
c
h
y
d
r
o
g
e
n
a
t
e
d
H
C
2
9
X
Z
8
7
5
4
D
O
W
C
S
B
R
4
3
P
i
c
c
o
t
e
x
9
2
7
1
E
x
x
o
n
M
o
d
i
e
d
C
5
2
5
3
7
0
3
P
o
l
y
s
a
r
C
S
B
R
5
4
P
i
c
c
o
t
e
x
3
4
8
E
x
x
o
n
C
5
/
C
9
H
C
2
6
3
9
5
8
P
o
l
y
s
a
r
C
S
B
R
3
1
Manufacture of PSAs 435
criteria will be considered, namely the ease of tackifying, the tackier level,
and the obtained tack. The suitability of PSAs to be tackied (ease of tacki-
cation) should be examined with respect to the chemical nature and the
physical state of the base polymer and of the tackier. Elastomers with
dierent chemical bases used as main PSA components have dierent
tackifying responses (i.e., their compounding at a same level of tackier
results in dierent levels of improvement of tack and peel, and a decrease of
the shear). As discussed in Chap. 6, acrylic PSAs display a special, high
tackifying ability compared with EVAc or CSBR. Acrylic hot-melt PSAs
display an excellent compatibility with the same tackiers and plasticizers as
SIS block copolymers [11]. Acrylic PSAs display good compatibility with
common tackiers (plasticizers or tackier resins). They are compatible with
tackier resins of a dierent chemical basis (e.g., rosin acid, rosin ester,
hydrocarbon, urea-formaldehyde resins). CSBR shows better compatibility
with hydrocarbon resins; EVAc possesses only a limited compatibility with
all kinds of resins. There is a general compatibility between low tack/high
peel and high tack/low cohesion acrylic PSAs, or between acrylic and
other PSAs (EVAc or CSBR). Compounding of acrylic PSAs with EVAc
yields high shear; compounding with CSBR leads to high tack. The data
of Tables 8.4 and 8.5 demonstrate the adjustment possibilities of the peel
adhesion based on PSA compounding.
Figure 8.3 The eect of the tackier on the modulus. The dierent behavior of the
modulus for 1) a pure and 2) a tackied formulation versus 3) ideal comportment.
Modulus change with increasing temperature/decreasing strain rate.
436 Chapter 8
T
a
b
l
e
8
.
4
P
e
e
l
M
o
d
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
T
h
r
o
u
g
h
T
a
c
k
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
A
C
P
S
A
s
w
i
t
h
O
t
h
e
r
P
S
A
s
F
o
r
m
u
l
a
t
i
n
g
C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t
s
A
d
h
e
s
i
v
e
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
i
e
s
1
2
P
e
e
l
(
N
/
2
5
m
m
)
R
o
l
l
i
n
g
B
a
l
l
t
a
c
k
(
c
m
)
C
o
d
e
B
a
s
i
s
L
e
v
e
l
(
p
b
w
,
w
e
t
)
C
o
d
e
S
u
p
p
l
i
e
r
B
a
s
i
s
L
e
v
e
l
(
p
b
w
,
w
e
t
)
C
o
a
t
i
n
g
W
e
i
g
h
t
(
g
/
m
2
)
G
l
a
s
s
P
E
F
C
8
8
U
C
B
A
C
1
0
0
P
C
8
0
U
C
B
A
C
1
8
8
.
0
4
.
0
3
.
5
F
C
8
8
U
C
B
A
C
P
C
8
0
U
C
B
A
C
1
0
0
1
9
6
.
0
5
.
0
2
.
5
F
C
8
8
U
C
B
A
C
8
0
P
C
8
0
U
C
B
A
C
2
0
3
0
4
.
0
3
.
5
F
C
8
8
U
C
B
A
C
7
0
2
3
1
3
N
o
b
e
l
A
C
3
0
2
3
1
1
.
0
5
.
0
4
.
5
F
C
8
8
U
C
B
A
C
5
0
2
3
1
3
N
o
b
e
l
A
C
5
0
2
4
8
.
0
3
.
0
7
.
5
F
C
8
8
U
C
B
A
C
5
0
8
8
0
D
B
A
S
F
A
C
5
0
2
1
1
3
.
0
8
.
0
7
.
0
F
C
8
8
U
C
B
A
C
7
0
8
8
0
D
B
A
S
F
A
C
3
0
2
1
1
0
.
0
5
.
0
6
.
5
V
2
0
5
B
A
S
F
A
C
1
0
0
8
0
D
B
A
S
F
A
C
1
9
4
.
0
5
.
0
V
2
0
5
B
A
S
F
A
C
8
0
8
0
D
B
A
S
F
A
C
2
0
2
0
1
6
.
0
P
T
9
.
0
1
0
.
0
N
o
t
e
:
T
h
e
s
a
m
p
l
e
s
1
t
h
r
o
u
g
h
7
a
r
e
f
i
l
m
c
o
a
t
i
n
g
s
;
t
h
e
s
a
m
p
l
e
s
8
a
n
d
9
a
r
e
p
a
p
e
r
c
o
a
t
i
n
g
s
.
p
b
w
=
p
a
r
t
s
b
y
w
e
i
g
h
t
;
P
T
=
p
a
p
e
r
t
e
a
r
.
Manufacture of PSAs 437
The use of chloroprene latex as a shear modier is well known.
Neoprene 102 latex is a noncrystallizing low gel dispersion; its low gel
content allows good quick stick and a good holding power when properly
formulated [12]. Tack improvement can be achieved using soft, tacky acrylic
dispersions or polyvinyl ether derivatives [13].
It is dicult to predict the resin level required to achieve a certain tack
or peel value because of the dependence on the nature of the tackied
elastomer and on the nature of the tackifying resin. The nature of the face
stock/adherend should be taken into account as well. A level of up to
3040% (by weight) tackifying resin is used in formulated acrylic PSAs [14].
Generally, acrylic PSAs require a lower tackier loading level than CSBR-
and EVAc-based PSAs. Acrylic PSAs need 3040% tackier in order to
ensure a high level of polyethylene peel. The use of more than about 25 wt%
tackier in the total adhesive is common, and more than 50% will lead to
the adhesive being nonpeelable.
The modulus increases at higher resin loadings. A modulus increase
will usually begin in the range of 4060% resin loading [14]. Hence this is the
upper limit of the tackier amount. On the other hand, it was mentioned
before that more than 20% tackier resin leads to lower shear strength. The
minimum/maximum amount of the tackier depends on the acrylic nature
(chemical composition, molecular weight), the nature of the tackier, and on
Table 8.5 Adjustment of the Adhesive Properties via PSA Compounding
Formulating Components Chemical Composition, Parts by Weight (wet)
Code Supplier Base 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
V205 BASF AC 100 30 40 64
1360 Hoechst EVAc 100 30 30 50 70 50 25
FC88 UCB AC 100 30 20
913 UCB AC 50
1370 Hoechst EVAc 30
85 D BASF AC 50 100 100 16
3703 Polysar CSBR 100 20
Adhesive Properties
Peel (N/25 mm) from glass 4.0 8.0 10.0 10.0 11.0 12.0 12.0 10.0 10.0 PT
Peel (N/25 mm) from PE 4.0 2.0 4.0 5.6 5.0 0.2 5.0 8.0
RB tack (cm) 6.0 6.0 3.5 3.5 3.5 7.0 3.0 8.0
Coating weight (g/m
2
) 18 18 18 24 24 21 23 20 21 20 18
Note: Samples 1 through 7 are paper coatings; samples 8 through 12 are film labels.
438 Chapter 8
the converting and end-use properties (face stock, edge bleeding or oozing,
migration, die-cutting, etc.). The tackier level is a function of the desired
adhesion/cohesion balance, and of the end-use properties of the laminate.
Theoretically, it also is a function of the unformulated PSA and of the
tackier nature (compatibility). Thus for natural rubber, a two-phase
structure for natural rubber-resin mixtures was proposed [15]. More resin
and low molecular rubber have migrated to the surface. Only a 12% resin-
rich phase was identied optically [16]. In some cases of tackied PSAs, if
the ratio of the energy loss modulus and energy storage modulus (tan o) is
examined by dynamic mechanical analysis (DMA), another peak appears.
This extra peak may be related to a resin-rich phase; there could be some
phase separation between the resin and the rubber so that the rubbery
matrix exists as a two-phase material. When tackifying block copolymers
the compatibility of the additives with both phases must be taken into
account. Aromatic resins (e.g., coumarone-indene) associated with the
polystyrene domains give nontacky materials. Aromatic associating resins
inuence the tensile strength less than resins associating with the elastomer.
There are compatibilizers like resin acids.
In hot-melt PSAs the aromatic resins are compatible with the
polystyrene domains, and increase (or decrease) the stiness depending
on the melting point (>90
C, or -70
C softening
temperature are used. As an example for an acrylic a 30 parts (dry) tackier
level of acid rosin is suggested. Unfortunately the shear level of these
formulations is not sucient to give good die-cuttability with normal (not
voluminous or multilayer) face stock and release paper. There are, however,
trends concerning the improvement of the cohesion.
In the future the rst possibility to improve the shear strength of the
tackied dispersion is a decreased tackier loading level. For this purpose
one needs high tack dispersions which require only a minor amount of
tackier in order to obtain a high tack/peel level. Table 8.7 illustrates the
range of some recent developments in this eld; it can be seen, that special
dispersions need no more than 20% tackier. The second possibility is to use
special tackier-friendly acrylic-based PSAs which can absorb more than
4050% tackier, without the loss of the shear. Table 8.8 illustrates some
Table 8.6 Shear Dependence on the Adhesive/Tackifier Nature/Level
Formulating Components
PSA Tackier Chemical Composition, Parts by Weight (wet)
Code Supplier Nature Code Supplier 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
3703 Polysar CSBR 69 52 37 36 43 38 24
3958 Polysar CSBR 10 37
6157 Polysar AC 50
80 D BASF AC 34 32
V205 BASF AC 16 39 33 32
CF52 A&W 31 48 32 48 49 38 33 50
CF301 A&W 33
Hot shear (70
C) hr 22 29 >22 >24
Manufacture of PSAs 441
new developments in this eld. Although both categories of products
possess higher shear, the practical shear/die-cutting tests do not lead to
superior results compared to current products. The obtained tack level
depends on the base elastomer (chemical and macromolecular character-
istics), on its physical state, on the tackifying agent (chemical and other
characteristics), and on the tackier level and technology. Generally, the
obtained tack level should be examined for the same kind of PSAs.
A detailed analysis of the obtained tack level is given in Chap. 6, including
Table 8.8 Tackification of Tackifier-Friendly Acrylic PSAs
Formulating Components Adhesive Characteristics
AC-PSA WB tackier resin
RB tack
(cm)
180
peel
(N/25 mm)
RT shear
(min) Code Level Code Level
80 D 72
V 205 38 324 40 10 12 30
V 205 70 8/21 30 15 13 30
80 D 60 8/21 40 13 9 200
2395 60 TX 60 8 13 460
2395 60 124T 60 8 9 600
2395 60 301CF 60 9 12 34
1304 60 SE80CF 40 14 16 90
620 60 SE80CF 40 9 15 14
AC, acrylic; WB, water-based; RB, rolling ball; RT, room temperature.
Table 8.7 Tackifying with a Low Resin Loading
Tackied PSA
Dispersion
Adhesive Characteristics
Peel at RT
(N/25 mm)
Shear at
50
C (min)
1090 (UCB) 20.0 PT 100
5650 (Hoechst) 16.5 70
2001 (Exxon) 4.5 60
85 D (BASF) 16.8 30
80 D (BASF) 6.5 90
20094 (Syntho) 0.2 120
A blend of 100/20 PSA/Tackifier (wet/wet) was used. Tackifier: SE
351 (Akzo-Nobel). Face stock: paper; RT, room temperature.
442 Chapter 8
a comparative evaluation of the adhesive performance characteristics for
PSAs on a dierent chemical basis.
Choice of Tackifier. To modify properties many variations on the
starting formulation are possible, namely the ratio of hard to soft resin, a
change of the softening point of the hard or soft resin, and change in the pH
of the compound. Generally, tackiers are employed to impart or control
one or more of the following properties in PSAs: tack, peel strength,
cohesive strength, staining, migration or adhesive bleedthrough, bleeding
or oozing, stringing or legging, and aging characteristics. Their use also
inuences the most important coating characteristics (e.g., the rheology,
foam generation, substrate wet-out, and mechanical stability). Generally,
the most important criteria for the choice of tackiers include the nature
of the base PSA (to be tackied), the balance of the desired adhesive,
converting and end-use properties, the tackifying technology, and econom-
ical considerations.
Compatibility of Resin. Compatibility is a key parameter for the
mixing of formulation components. The term compatibility is used of
polymers for their dispersing at molecular level. The main aspects of
compatibility and its inuence on the formulation were discussed in [2,29],
in correlation with the theoretical basis of the tackication with resins.
Compatibility is a general requirement for optimum tackication [30] (see
Chaps. 2 and 3). The resin functions as a solid solvent for a portion of
the polymer, and the resin and the polymer must display similar solubility
characteristics if the resin is to act as a tackier (mutual compatibility).
Several papers were published on the eect of the resin on PSA properties
and on the compatibility of resins with elastomers, especially in combination
with block copolymers [31,32]. Hydrogenated hydrocarbon resins (e.g.,
Regalrez, Hercules) may be selected according to their cloud points [33].
Cloud point measurements reveal aromatics. As discussed in Chap. 2, for a
rst test of compatibility the T
g
is used. For hot-melt PSAs the position of
the T
g
shows whether the resin is compatible with the end- and midblocks
of the polymer. The tackication of the midblock inuences the modulus,
elongation, and tack of the adhesive. Generally, tackifying of the aromatic
domain is suggested for contact adhesives, for PSAs tackication of the
midblock is required. Polystyrene displays a limited compatibility with
natural rubber only [34]; it is adequate for butadiene-styrene copolymers.
Poly(vinylcyclohexane) possesses good solubility in natural rubber, but it
cannot be dissolved in butadiene-styrene copolymers. Poly(butylstyrene)
may be used in natural rubber- and butadiene-styrene-based PSAs.
Traditionally most hot-melt PSA systems are based on SIS block
Manufacture of PSAs 443
copolymers. They are usually easier to tackify than SBS materials. Their
better compatibility with tackifying resins and greater elasticity have
ensured SIS block copolymers a larger part of the hot-melt PSA market.
In recent years more attention was paid to the tackication of SBS-based
block copolymers. These polymeric materials are cheaper than SIS
copolymers, but nevertheless oer interesting performance characteristics.
A clear color and good aging resistance for the tackier resins are needed.
SBS does not exhibit enough elasticity, exibility, or tackier compatibility.
Tackiers for these rubbers must display good compatibility, a light color,
good aging stability, and a satisfactory cohesion/tack balance. The most
important resins for tackifying SBS block copolymers are Escorez ECR-366,
ECR-368, and ECR-369 (Exxon) [35], where ECR-366 is a modied C
5
aliphatic hydrocarbon resin.
As discussed in detail in [2] resin compatibility can be predicted using
the solubility parameter concept. Compatible tackier works like a solvent.
The incompatible tackier works like a ller. Tackication supposes mutual
solubility [31,3638] and is achieved if on the mutual solubility diagram of
the elastomer and tackier the solubility domain of the elastomer is enclosed
within the domain of the resin [39]. This does not happen for hydrocarbon
resins and rubber; however, as seen earlier, hydrocarbon resins are adequate
tackiers for natural rubber. In the studies of Schlademan and Bryson
[40,41] the specic gravitiy of the resin was used to estimate its role as a
compatibilizer; the specic gravity was found to be a rough measure of
the solubility parameter (o); later the refractive index was chosen. As stated,
the polarity, the molecular weight, and the structure of the macromolecular
compounds play a decisive role in their compatibility. The inuence of the
tackier on the modulus is another index of compatibility [2]. Tackier
compatibility can be examined by DMA measurements. The resin molecular
weight controls the loss/storage peak (tan o). A compatible system exhibits a
maximum eect in lowering G
/
during bonding.
Compatibility also depends on the molecular weight and MWD;
a narrow MWD indicates better compatibility. As an example Regalrez
resins have a MWD characterized by a ratio M
n
/M
w
=1.1 1.4 [33]. In a
similar manner for classical hot-melt adhesives the compatibility of the
waxes depends on their MWD and melting point, and inuences the
bleeding [35]. Block copolymer acrylic-based PSAs display very good
compatibility with hydrogenated rosin esters and C
5
/C
9
hydrocarbon-
based resins [24]. Generally, compatibility is a function of the melting point
of the resin and its composition. Regalrez as an example shows good
compatibility with acrylic-based PSAs up to a ring-and-ball softening point
of 78
C to about 115
C,
while preferred tackiers have softening temperatures of about 50
C to
about 110
e
r
r
e
s
i
n
d
i
s
p
e
r
s
i
o
n
A
c
r
y
l
i
c
P
S
A
R
o
l
l
i
n
g
b
a
l
l
t
a
c
k
(
c
m
)
1
8
0
p
e
e
l
(
f
r
o
m
P
E
,
N
/
2
5
m
m
)
S
h
e
a
r
a
t
5
0
C
(
m
i
n
)
C
o
d
e
S
u
p
p
l
i
e
r
S
o
f
t
e
n
i
n
g
p
o
i
n
t
(
C
)
C
h
e
m
i
c
a
l
B
a
s
i
s
L
e
v
e
l
(
w
e
t
)
C
o
d
e
L
e
v
e
l
(
w
e
t
)
1
C
F
5
2
A
&
W
5
5
6
5
R
o
s
i
n
a
c
i
d
2
1
.
4
V
2
0
5
3
5
.
7
2
1
1
3
2
5
P
T
1
0
2
H
5
7
8
6
H
e
r
c
u
l
e
s
9
5
1
0
5
R
o
s
i
n
e
s
t
e
r
2
1
.
4
8
0
D
2
1
.
4
2
H
5
7
8
6
H
e
r
c
u
l
e
s
9
5
1
0
5
R
o
s
i
n
e
s
t
e
r
4
2
.
8
V
2
0
5
3
5
.
7
1
6
>
3
0
1
4
P
T
9
8
8
0
D
2
1
.
4
3
M
B
6
9
8
H
e
r
c
u
l
e
s
L
i
q
u
i
d
R
o
s
i
n
e
s
t
e
r
7
.
2
V
2
0
5
3
5
.
7
2
1
5
2
0
P
T
2
5
0
4
5
7
6
A
k
z
o
9
5
1
0
5
R
o
s
i
n
e
s
t
e
r
3
5
.
7
8
0
D
2
1
.
4
4
M
B
H
e
r
c
u
l
e
s
5
5
6
5
R
o
s
i
n
e
s
t
e
r
4
2
.
8
V
2
0
5
3
5
.
7
1
6
2
2
0
P
T
3
7
6
1
5
2
8
0
D
2
1
.
4
5
5
1
1
D
R
T
5
5
6
5
A
C
-
r
o
s
i
n
4
8
.
4
V
2
0
5
1
9
.
3
1
9
4
2
5
P
T
5
5
8
0
D
3
2
.
2
6
D
E
G
D
R
T
3
5
4
5
R
o
s
i
n
e
s
t
e
r
4
8
.
4
V
2
0
5
3
5
.
7
2
0
2
.
5
2
3
P
T
4
0
8
0
D
2
1
.
4
7
D
E
G
D
R
T
3
5
4
5
R
o
s
i
n
e
s
t
e
r
1
4
.
3
V
2
0
5
3
5
.
7
2
1
5
2
0
P
T
4
7
8
0
D
R
T
6
0
8
0
R
o
s
i
n
e
s
t
e
r
2
8
.
6
8
0
D
2
1
.
4
8
9
2
5
1
E
x
x
o
n
H
C
4
8
.
4
V
2
0
5
3
5
.
7
1
8
1
.
5
2
5
P
T
1
5
8
0
D
2
1
.
4
9
9
2
5
1
E
x
x
o
n
H
C
3
3
.
4
V
2
0
5
3
5
.
7
1
9
2
.
5
2
0
P
T
2
5
9
2
7
1
E
x
x
o
n
H
C
1
5
8
0
D
2
1
.
4
1
0
O
U
8
0
O
u
l
u
3
3
.
4
V
2
0
5
3
5
.
7
2
0
7
1
7
P
T
2
0
1
1
O
U
3
0
O
u
l
u
L
i
q
u
i
d
A
C
-
r
o
s
i
n
1
5
.
0
8
0
D
2
1
.
4
C
F
5
2
A
&
W
5
5
6
5
4
8
.
4
V
2
0
5
3
5
.
7
1
8
2
.
5
1
8
5
8
0
D
2
1
.
4
448 Chapter 8
a function of the resin concentration, which increases continuously with
increasing resin concentration when tackifying natural rubber with resin.
Resins with a softening point of about 50
C and 64
C,
and 26
C and 82
e
r
r
e
s
i
n
A
d
h
e
s
i
v
e
C
h
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
i
s
t
i
c
s
P
r
o
d
u
c
t
/
C
o
d
e
S
u
p
p
l
i
e
r
S
o
f
t
e
n
i
n
g
p
o
i
n
t
(
C
)
B
a
s
i
s
L
e
v
e
l
(
p
a
r
t
s
,
w
e
t
)
R
o
l
l
i
n
g
b
a
l
l
t
a
c
k
(
c
m
)
1
8
0
p
e
e
l
f
r
o
m
P
E
(
N
/
2
5
m
m
)
S
h
e
a
r
a
t
5
0
C
(
m
i
n
)
P
o
l
y
e
t
h
y
l
e
n
e
i
m
i
n
e
B
A
S
F
R
T
P
o
l
y
e
t
h
y
l
e
n
e
i
m
i
n
e
2
0
1
7
.
0
3
.
5
1
2
.
0
1
5
.
0
H
e
r
c
o
l
y
n
D
H
e
r
c
u
l
e
s
R
T
H
C
/
e
s
t
e
r
2
0
2
1
.
0
4
.
0
1
6
.
0
1
5
.
0
C
F
3
0
1
A
&
W
6
0
6
5
A
c
i
d
r
o
s
i
n
1
0
0
1
9
.
0
6
.
0
1
0
.
0
2
0
0
.
0
C
y
m
e
l
C
y
a
n
a
m
i
d
e
R
T
M
e
l
a
m
i
n
e
2
0
2
0
.
0
3
.
0
1
0
.
0
2
0
.
0
C
F
5
2
A
&
W
5
5
6
5
A
c
i
d
r
o
s
i
n
1
0
0
1
8
.
0
2
.
4
1
4
.
0
1
0
0
.
0
B
a
s
e
P
S
A
:
C
S
B
R
d
i
s
p
e
r
s
i
o
n
(
1
0
0
p
a
r
t
s
)
.
R
T
,
r
o
o
m
t
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e
;
H
C
,
h
y
d
r
o
c
a
r
b
o
n
.
450 Chapter 8
T
a
b
l
e
8
.
1
1
T
h
e
I
n
f
l
u
e
n
c
e
o
f
t
h
e
H
i
g
h
C
o
h
e
s
i
o
n
A
C
C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t
s
a
n
d
L
i
q
u
i
d
T
a
c
k
i
f
i
e
r
R
e
s
i
n
s
o
n
t
h
e
A
d
h
e
s
i
v
e
F
o
r
m
u
l
a
t
i
n
g
C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t
s
T
a
c
k
i
e
r
r
e
s
i
n
B
a
s
e
a
c
r
y
l
i
c
P
S
A
A
d
h
e
s
i
v
e
C
h
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
i
s
t
i
c
s
C
o
d
e
S
u
p
p
l
i
e
r
S
o
f
t
e
n
i
n
g
p
o
i
n
t
r
a
n
g
e
(
C
)
L
e
v
e
l
(
p
a
r
t
s
,
w
e
t
)
C
o
d
e
S
u
p
p
l
i
e
r
L
e
v
e
l
(
p
a
r
t
s
,
w
e
t
)
C
o
a
t
i
n
g
W
e
i
g
h
t
(
g
/
m
2
)
R
o
l
l
i
n
g
b
a
l
l
t
a
c
k
(
c
m
)
P
e
e
l
(
N
/
2
5
m
m
)
S
h
e
a
r
a
t
5
0
(
m
i
n
C
)
C
F
5
2
A
&
W
5
5
6
5
3
3
V
2
0
5
B
A
S
F
2
7
2
0
3
.
0
1
9
7
8
0
D
B
A
S
F
2
0
C
F
5
2
A
&
W
5
5
6
5
3
3
V
2
0
5
B
A
S
F
4
7
1
9
3
.
0
6
.
0
1
0
8
0
D
B
A
S
F
2
0
C
F
5
2
A
&
W
5
5
6
5
3
3
F
C
8
8
U
C
B
5
2
0
6
.
5
1
9
1
8
2
0
0
9
4
S
y
n
t
h
o
5
V
2
0
5
B
A
S
F
4
7
8
0
D
B
A
S
F
2
0
F
C
8
8
U
C
B
1
0
C
F
5
2
A
&
W
5
5
6
5
3
3
2
0
0
9
4
S
y
n
t
h
o
1
0
2
0
6
.
5
1
5
P
T
2
0
V
2
0
5
B
A
S
F
4
7
8
0
D
B
A
S
F
2
0
C
F
5
2
A
&
W
5
5
6
5
3
3
2
0
0
9
4
S
y
n
t
h
o
1
0
2
0
9
.
0
1
4
P
T
2
0
V
2
0
5
B
A
S
F
4
7
8
0
D
B
A
S
F
2
0
C
F
5
2
A
&
W
5
5
6
5
3
3
2
0
0
9
4
S
y
n
t
h
o
2
0
2
2
1
.
4
1
4
P
T
1
9
V
2
0
5
B
A
S
F
4
7
H
e
r
c
o
l
y
n
D
H
e
r
c
u
l
e
s
R
T
1
0
8
0
D
B
A
S
F
2
0
R
T
,
r
o
o
m
t
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e
.
Manufacture of PSAs 451
T
a
b
l
e
8
.
1
2
T
h
e
I
n
f
l
u
e
n
c
e
o
f
t
h
e
R
e
s
i
n
N
a
t
u
r
e
o
n
t
h
e
A
d
h
e
s
i
v
e
C
h
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
i
s
t
i
c
s
F
o
r
m
u
l
a
t
i
n
g
C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t
s
R
o
s
i
n
a
c
i
d
R
o
s
i
n
e
s
t
e
r
A
c
r
y
l
i
c
P
S
A
A
d
h
e
s
i
v
e
C
h
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
i
s
t
i
c
s
C
o
d
e
S
u
p
p
l
i
e
r
C
o
d
e
S
u
p
p
l
i
e
r
C
o
d
e
S
u
p
p
l
i
e
r
F
o
r
m
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
(
p
a
r
t
s
,
w
e
t
)
C
o
a
t
i
n
g
W
e
i
g
h
t
(
g
/
m
2
)
R
o
l
l
i
n
g
b
a
l
l
(
c
m
)
1
8
0
p
e
e
l
(
N
/
2
5
m
m
)
S
h
e
a
r
a
t
5
0
C
(
m
i
n
)
C
F
5
2
A
&
W
5
3
2
5
1
A
&
W
V
2
0
5
B
A
S
F
3
5
.
7
2
1
5
.
0
2
0
P
T
2
5
8
0
D
B
A
S
F
2
1
.
4
452 Chapter 8
A detailed discussion of the choice of tackier depending on its nature and
softening point will be given later (see Section 2.8).
Influence of Physical State of the Tackifier. Both solvent-based and
water-based tackifying resins can be added to water-based acrylic PSAs.
Generally, it is not possible to add molten tackiers to water-based acrylic
PSAs, but there are some special halogenated copolymer dispersions with
good thermal resistance. Relatively low melting point resins (95
C) may be
added to aqueous adhesive dispersions (polyvinyl ethers) in a molten state.
Some liquid resins can be added as such (without emulsifying) to compound
a latex (e.g., Cymel 301 in neoprene latex) using high speed agitation;
because of the good mechanical and chemical stability of the latex, there is
no coagulation problem. In HMPSA formulations liquid resins can replace
processing oils also. The use of liquid resins as tackiers also depends on the
properties of the face stock material. Ordinary low cost papers without
an over-layer or special thermal papers are more sensitive to adhesive
bleedthrough. The use of liquid resins or a high surface-active agent
concentration in the tackier must therefore be avoided.
Dierent acrylic latexes were tackied with polybutene and polybutene
emulsions [54]. From comparative testing in both systems it is anticipated
Figure 8.4 The inuence of the softening point of the tackier resin on the holding
power of a PSA formulation. The increase of the holding power with the increase of
the softening point of the resin.
Manufacture of PSAs 453
that the tack and adhesion results are similar, independent of the system
used. On the other hand, the shear strength for carrier-free resin tackied
acrylic PSAs is higher than with resin emulsions [14]. In formulating practice,
the use of tackifying resin dispersions is more widespread because of
technological advantages [55]. In the early stages of PSA formulation,
rubber-resin PSAs were tackied with resin solutions. The rst tackied
acrylic formulations also used tackier solutions. Later tackier dispersions
in combination with water-based PSAs were developed. Solvents may be
used as an additive (1020%) in latexes [56,57]. In a similar manner, the
solids content of latexes may be improved with rubber solutions (20%) [56].
Kajiyama [58], showed that phase structures of PSAs prepared from
solution and emulsion dier, and prepolymerization tackication reduces
the molecular weight of the base viscoelastomers.
Tackification of Water-Based PSAs. The same tackifying resins used
for solvent-based PSAs also are envisaged for water-based PSAs. Theore-
tically, there are three dierent ways for the addition of tackier resins into
water-based systems, i.e., as resin solutions, resin dispersions, and as a bulky,
molten material. From a technical point of view the most convenient method
is the use of resin dispersions. From the point of view of the adhesive
properties, solution or molten resin feed-in seems to be better because there
are no water-sensitive additives in the resin. Practically, resin solutions only
have a limited use (for PSA coating onto lm); molten resin may be added in
heat-resistant dispersions (like chloroprene) only. Resin-tackied water-
based PSAs acquire a composite character with limited compatibility of the
emulsion-borne components; thus the tackifying eect is less eective than in
the case of solvent-based systems. On the other hand, resin uidity in the
adhesive layer is enhanced by its composite structure, therefore strike-
through (penetration) is more prevalent in water-based systems and the shear
resistance of water-based PSA-tackier systems reduced even much more
[59]. Water-soluble chemicals from the paper or lm also may negatively
inuence the aging properties of the resin. Because of the composite structure
of the resin particles, the heat resistance of the resin dispersions may dier
from that of the bulk material, inuencing the storage and converting
properties of the laminate. In summary, the most important factors
inuencing the choice of tackiers for water-based systems are the limited
number of resins available as an emulsion, and the limited allowable loading
level of liquid low cohesion resins, because of the decrease of converting
properties and heat resistance, and increase of the penetration (adhesive
bleedthrough), and the limited number of resins with good aging stability.
A detailed study of the tackication of water-based dispersions with
rosin-type tackier dispersions with a broad range of T
g
and softening point
454 Chapter 8
(16
C to 45
C and 2590
C softening
point resin [60]. On the other hand, the best overall balance of performance
properties is obtained using moderate (30%) levels of high softening point
tackiers. A similar inuence of T
g
, molecular weight, and MWD on the
tackication of hot-melt PSAs (SIS triblock copolymers) was demonstrated
by Tse and McElrath [61]. They showed that if narrow MWD resins are
blended with SIS, the position of loss tan o on the temperature scale
corresponds to the molecular weight of the resin. This is because the resin T
g
is controlled by its molecular weight (see Chaps. 2 and 3). Film coatings
require high transparency and no yellowing during end-use. For this
purpose hydrocarbon resins are preferred.
Tackifiers and Converting Properties. As discussed in [2] the formu-
lation of the adhesive with tackier resins may be carried out for multiple
purposes (regulation of the technological or adhesive properties). For PSA
formulations the main scope concerns the regulation of the adhesion/
cohesion balance. Generally resins inuence the following characteristics of
the formulation: adhesion, peel resistance, shear resistance, temperature and
chemical resistance, gloss, transparency and barrier properties. Resins
generally decrease the melt viscosity of polymers and aect their exibility.
Tackication with resins may be a technological necessity also (e.g.,
tackication for processing). Tackiers aect the converting performances
of the adhesive (e.g., coatability) and of the pressure-sensitive product (i.e.,
confectionating, printing, and labeling). Good converting properties of the
aqueous dispersion (coating properties) and of the laminate (processing) are
essential (i.e., an adequate rheology, low foam generation, good substrate
wet-out, excellent mechanical stability, and high converting speed or drying).
Aqueous dispersions exhibit non-Newtonian shear thinning characteristics
and variations in the viscosity recovery. This dierence may produce an
undesirable corduroy eect which is termed ribbing or striation. Acid
resin-tackied acrylic-based PSAs show better ow properties. Generally,
tackied dispersions display a less adequate rheology.
Tackied aqueous dispersions contain more surface-active agents than
untackied ones; hence they tend to generate more foam than pure PSAs.
The wet-out behavior of tackied water-based PSAs is generally a function
of the base acrylic (CSBR or EVAc) and of the tackifying resin. For the
Manufacture of PSAs 455
same base, for PSAs using dierent tackiers and sulfosuccinates as wetting
agents, the wetting out on the siliconized release paper depends on the pH;
at higher acidity one needs less wetting agent for an adequate wet-out.
Generally, the surface tension and the wetting out of tackier disper-
sions from dierent suppliers vary quite a bit (as a function of the experience
and knowledge of dispersing technology). Table 8.13 illustrates the wetting
characteristics of dierent tackier dispersions. Wetting ability was evaluated
by the amount of added surface agent necessary for good wet-out.
An additional deciency of tackied water-based adhesives is the
tendency for coagulum to build up on the metering roll when conventional
emulsions are applied by a reverse roll coater. According to [62] a tackied
acrylic emulsion is more susceptible to high shear induced coagulation. The
use of higher solids emulsions increases opportunities for particle-particle
interaction, particularly when the emulsions are subject to mechanical stress.
If there is an insucient protective layer on the particle surface to
repel other particles, the polymer particles will fuse, eventually yielding
a signicant mass of gel particles. Such coagulum may arise either from
poor mechanical stability under shear conditions, or from imperfect
doctoring leading to a thin coating on the roll, which dries and cannot be
redispersed, so that these particles eventually transfer to the application roll
and disturb the appearance of the coating. Generally, acid rosin tackiers
show better mechanical stability than ester-based ones. In order to increase
the mechanical stability of the tackied dispersion, it is proposed to use
Table 8.13 Wetting Ability of Different Aqueous Tackifier Dispersions
Water-Based Tackier
Code Supplier Wetting Agent (%) Wetting Ability
MBG-152 Hercules 3 Very low
DEG/G DRT 1 Average
MBG-64 Hercules 2.5 Low
50 D Oulu 3 Very low
EH-4576 Akzo 4 Very low
E-9251 Exxon 1 Good
E-9271 Exxon 1 Good
CF 52 A&W 1 Good
SE 351 A&W 1.5 Low
CF 8121 A&W 2 Low
The wetting ability was tested on solventless silicone-coated release paper at a
viscosity of 400 mPa.s; Lumithen IRA (BASF) was added as wetting agent.
456 Chapter 8
ester-based tackiers to neutralize the acrylic mixture, and to add the
tackier dispersion in a second step. Laboratory tests show a slight
dierence between the drying speed of the tackied and pure unformulated
acrylic-based PSAs (Table 8.14).
Industrial experience generally indicates a higher converting (coating)
speed for tackied water-based acrylic-based PSAs (a 520% increase
of speed). A possible explanation of this increase is based on the dependence
of the coalescence on the surface tension. Coalescence is proportional to
surface tension, thus tackier dispersions with a higher surface tension
display higher coalescence and allow higher coating speeds (see Chap. 3).
Die-cutting is the most important feature of the laminate inuenced by
the tackier resin. Tackifying resins inuence the cohesion of the adhesive,
and thus its shear strength and its diecuttability. It is to be expected that
high softening temperature resins impart better shear and die-cuttability than
the low softening point ones. On the other hand, laminate shear and die-
cuttability depend on the hygroscopy of the components also. Tackiers
from dierent suppliers exhibit dierent die-cuttability properties (Fig. 8.5).
A comparison of the die-cuttability of dierent tackiers (tackied
adhesives and laminates) indicates that ester-based tackiers are superior
to acid-based ones.
Tackifier and End-Use Properties. As discussed in Chap. 5, the choice
of the base elastomer and in a similar manner the choice of the tackier
Table 8.14 Drying Speed of Pure and Tackified
Water-Based PSA
Weight Loss of the Wet Coating (%)
Time (min) Pure PSA Tackied PSA
0.0 0.0 0.0
1.5 0.8 0.9
2.0 1.4 1.5
3.0 2.3 2.7
4 3.3 3.8
6 5.4 5.6
8 7.4 7.2
9 7.7 8.0
10 8.5 8.7
12 9.9 10.0
Evaluation of a 100 jm coating on Mylar of a V 205/80 D/CF
52 blend at room temperature.
Manufacture of PSAs 457
inuence the end-use properties of the PSA laminate and the label; quite
dierent end-use properties can be achieved. As an example, for clear face
stock material the adhesive color (resin color) is very important. Lightly
colored hydrocarbon tackiers (liquid resin tackiers) were suggested for
EVAc- and SBS-based adhesive systems [63]. Generally, water-white- and
UV-stable water-based PSA formulations can be obtained on the basis of
hydrogenated hydrocarbon resins [64].
Japanese PSA-based tape production started with natural rubber-resin
or polyterpene/natural rubber combinations [65]. The resin and polyterpene
were replaced by C
5
and C
5
/C
9
petroleum resins due to their cost/
performance balance and grade diversication for meeting the needs of the
quality-oriented Japanese PSA tape market. The main reason for the use
of hydrogenated water-white resins in PSAs seems to be their excellent
weathering performance rather than their color and transparency char-
acteristics. Phenolformaldehyde resins give better plasticizer resistance than
rosin esters [66]. Special resins and resin formulations are suggested for
repositionable and removable PSAs. As an example an aqueous dispersion
of a methyl ester or glycerol ester of hydrogenated rosin is recommended
[67] (see Chap. 6). The tackifying results demonstrate the necessity for the
Figure 8.5 The inuence of the supplier (dierent formulation of the resin
dispersion) on the cuttability of the PSApaper laminate. 1), 2), and 3) are formulations
based on the same resin from dierent tackier resin dispersion suppliers.
458 Chapter 8
use of soft, essentially aliphatic resins, since the more aromatic resins exhibit
a high degree of initial tack, which increases upon aging, thereby no longer
retaining the removable character of the formulation [55]. The nonreactive
resins impart a tack increasing with time to synthetic rubbers, and the
reactive resins function as curing agents for synthetic rubbers [68]. For
removable aqueous natural rubber-based PSAs, preferred classes of
tackiers are anionic aqueous dispersions of hydrogenated rosin esters
and anionic aqueous dispersions of hydrogenated rosins [67].
The resin stability inuences the end-use properties of the PSAs also.
Abietic acid contains a conjugated double bond and will react with oxygen.
This will increase the softening point of the resins and the subsequent tack
of the adhesive will decrease with time. Crystalline tackiers are more stable
than amorphous ones. Amorphous tackiers provide higher tack at room
temperature, but they display lower tack at lower temperatures [69].
Regarding the use of tackiers for SIS/SBS-based formulations, while
the temperature has little eect on the properties of PSA laminates produced
on the closed die coater, it clearly has a considerable inuence on those of
the roller-coated products. At the same time, tapes coated with the die
coater are superior to those produced with the roll coater [70]. Therefore the
aging stability of the resin is inuencing the formulation and end-use
properties of the PSA laminate. The tackier resin type also inuences
the staining of CSBR-based PSA formulations. Rosin acid-based materials
outperform hydrocarbon resins for example, as do higher softening point
resins within any type [53].
It should be noted, that for an adequate choice of the tackier resin the
examination criteria of the desired adhesive/end-use properties have to be
chosen correctly. As illustrated in Fig. 8.6 the sensitivity of a formulation
towards the tackier resin nature, measured by various adhesion tests
may strongly dier. For instance, for the same formulation the optimum
of a specic adhesion performance is achieved by the use of dierent
resins [71].
Figure 8.6 Dependence of the adhesive properties on the tackier nature.
Manufacture of PSAs 459
Special Features. It should be stressed that it remains very dicult to
carry out an elastomer-independent evaluation of the tackier performance
characteristics. Solvent-based PSA formulations use natural rubber (crepe
or smoked sheets), styrene-butadiene copolymers (SBS and SIS block
copolymers) or elastomers, as well as acrylic PSAs. Rubber as an elastomer
is used for hot-melt PSAs almost only as a block copolymer, or for water-
based PSAs almost only as CSBR. Tackication of natural rubber as a
function of its status (bulky or latex) leads to permanent or removable
products [72].
Therefore the dierences in the chemical nature and structure of the
rubber-based elastomers cause dierences in the behavior of the same resin
upon tackication. Additional eects arise from the dispersed state of the
components. Styrene-butadiene rubbers may have a linear, branched, or
crosslinked structure. Their properties depend on molecular weight, T
g
,
colloid factors, and stabilizer systems. Block copolymers commonly have
a linear structure although some radial copolymers have now become
available. Generally, rosin and its derivatives are more closely associated
with emulsion CSBR latexes [73]. With CSBR the latex with the higher
butadiene content accepts more resin and the ultimate tack is nearly double
that of the reduced butadiene system. For this system, if an 80
C SP resin is
used, the optimum tack occurs at a slightly lower resin content than for a
52
p
e
e
l
(
N
/
2
5
m
m
)
S
h
e
a
r
a
t
8
0
C
(
m
i
n
)
V
2
0
5
B
A
S
F
A
C
E
H
A
S
o
f
t
A
C
6
7
2
.
5
1
8
P
T
5
R
3
3
7
5
H
a
r
c
o
A
C
E
H
A
S
o
f
t
A
C
6
7
2
.
0
1
8
P
T
3
F
P
2
3
1
3
N
o
b
e
l
A
C
E
H
A
S
o
f
t
A
C
6
7
1
.
0
1
8
P
T
1
P
C
8
0
U
C
B
A
C
E
H
A
S
o
f
t
A
C
6
7
2
.
0
1
7
P
T
2
8
0
D
B
A
S
F
A
C
E
H
A
-
A
N
M
e
d
i
u
m
A
C
6
7
6
.
0
1
7
6
0
8
5
D
B
A
S
F
A
C
E
H
A
-
A
N
M
e
d
i
u
m
A
C
6
7
4
.
0
1
9
7
0
2
3
3
8
S
y
n
t
h
o
m
e
r
A
C
E
H
A
-
A
N
M
e
d
i
u
m
A
C
6
7
6
.
0
1
6
6
0
F
C
8
8
U
C
B
A
C
E
H
A
-
A
N
M
e
d
i
u
m
A
C
6
7
7
.
0
1
4
4
0
5
5
2
E
x
x
o
n
A
C
E
H
A
H
a
r
d
A
C
6
7
8
.
0
1
5
5
0
2
0
0
8
8
S
y
n
t
h
o
m
e
r
A
C
E
H
A
-
E
A
H
a
r
d
A
C
6
7
1
2
.
0
1
2
9
0
2
0
0
9
4
S
y
n
t
h
o
m
e
r
A
C
E
H
A
-
M
M
A
H
a
r
d
A
C
6
7
>
2
0
1
0
2
0
0
V
2
0
5
B
A
S
F
A
C
E
H
A
S
o
f
t
A
C
4
5
2
.
5
2
2
P
T
5
8
0
D
B
A
S
F
A
C
E
H
A
-
A
N
M
e
d
i
u
m
A
C
2
2
R
3
3
7
5
H
a
r
c
o
A
C
E
H
A
S
o
f
t
A
C
4
5
3
2
0
P
T
4
8
0
D
B
A
S
F
A
C
E
H
A
-
A
N
M
e
d
i
u
m
A
C
2
2
P
C
8
0
U
C
B
A
C
E
H
A
S
o
f
t
A
C
4
5
3
.
5
1
8
P
T
4
F
C
8
8
U
C
B
A
C
E
H
A
-
A
N
M
e
d
i
u
m
A
C
2
2
3
7
0
3
P
o
l
y
s
a
r
C
S
B
R
S
o
f
t
C
S
B
R
6
7
1
.
5
1
6
1
0
0
T
a
c
k
i
f
i
e
r
:
C
F
5
2
(
A
&
W
)
a
t
a
l
e
v
e
l
o
f
3
3
p
a
r
t
s
(
w
e
t
/
w
e
t
)
.
A
l
l
f
o
r
m
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
t
e
s
t
e
d
a
s
p
a
p
e
r
l
a
b
e
l
s
.
A
C
,
a
c
r
y
l
i
c
;
A
N
,
a
c
r
y
l
o
n
i
t
r
i
l
e
;
E
H
A
,
e
t
h
y
l
h
e
x
y
l
a
c
r
y
l
a
t
e
;
M
M
A
,
m
e
t
h
y
l
m
e
t
h
a
c
r
y
l
a
t
e
;
C
S
B
R
,
c
a
r
b
o
x
y
l
a
t
e
d
s
t
y
r
e
n
e
b
u
t
a
d
i
e
n
e
r
u
b
b
e
r
;
P
T
,
p
a
p
e
r
t
e
a
r
.
464 Chapter 8
Table 8.15 shows that the same tackier acts dierently on PSAs with
a dierent adhesion/cohesion balance. A medium (33%) resin concentration
generally provides good polyethylene peel adhesion and excellent tack
values for soft and medium PSAs. High molecular weight, highly cohesive
acrylic PSAs do not show enough tack and polyethylene peel; these
compounds cannot be tackied suciently without the presence of another
PSA. Measurements aimed at comparing the eect of CF 52 and
Dermulsene 511 do not reveal any dierences concerning the adhesion/
cohesion balance, converting and processing properties of the nished
product using a V 205/80 D blend as reference. Table 8.16 summarizes the
adhesion properties of tackied acrylic PSAs, formulated with rosin-based
tackier resins from the same supplier. The aggressivity of the formulations
decreases from 1 through 5 (i.e., from acid to ester), but acid rosin tackiers
also may yield dierent results (1, 3, 5). Here, tackier 3 is less aggressive
(lower tack and peel, although an acid rosin) but it brings higher shear,
better water resistance, and better aging properties. The better processability
of tackier 2 is probably due to its lower water sensitivity. Acrylic PSAs
display the best tackifying response with rosins due to their general
compatibility. Acid rosins are superior, providing a more aggressive tack
than rosin esters. Thus it can be expected that rosin esters would exhibit
poorer adhesive characteristics with other PSAs as well. Comparative tests
of CSBR tackication with acid rosins and rosin esters show only a slight
tack decrease, but more polyethylene peel decrease for the same resin level.
The aging resistance of the acid rosin does not meet the future, high
requirements. Although the resins anity towards crystallinity, and the
level, nature, and technology of the antioxidants/formulating aect the
Table 8.16 Tackifying the Same Base PSA with Different Rosins from the Same
Supplier
Adhesive Characteristics
Water-Based Tackier
Rolling Ball
Tack (cm)
Peel (N/25 mm)
Shear at
50
2
8
0
D
B
A
S
F
E
H
A
-
A
N
2
2
3
2
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
3
C
F
5
2
A
&
W
A
c
i
d
r
o
s
i
n
4
0
2
9
4
0
3
9
4
C
F
5
0
X
A
&
W
4
0
5
C
F
5
1
(
S
E
3
5
1
)
A
&
W
R
o
s
i
n
e
s
t
e
r
4
0
6
S
E
6
2
A
&
W
R
o
s
i
n
e
s
t
e
r
4
0
7
B
a
c
o
t
e
2
0
C
r
o
s
s
l
i
n
k
e
d
8
E
-
2
3
9
5
R
o
h
m
&
H
a
a
s
B
u
A
c
6
0
9
3
3
8
5
B
A
S
F
B
u
A
c
6
0
7
0
1
0
S
E
8
0
C
F
A
&
W
R
o
s
i
n
e
s
t
e
r
4
0
4
0
3
0
4
0
4
0
1
1
X
Z
9
5
0
4
3
D
o
w
B
u
A
c
6
0
1
2
X
7
9
5
0
4
4
D
o
w
B
u
A
c
6
0
1
3
R
e
v
a
c
r
y
l
4
9
1
H
a
r
c
o
E
H
A
P
E
P
e
e
l
N
/
2
5
m
m
F
T
M
1
1
3
1
3
6
.
9
6
.
8
6
.
7
8
.
2
7
.
0
9
.
3
7
.
6
6
.
7
8
5
9
C
B
P
e
e
l
N
/
2
5
m
m
1
8
1
1
1
4
1
6
1
3
8
7
6
.
0
7
.
2
6
7
.
2
L
o
o
p
S
S
N
2
2
2
1
2
7
2
6
2
3
2
6
1
8
2
4
2
3
1
2
2
1
L
o
o
p
P
E
N
1
5
1
2
1
4
1
0
1
2
1
6
1
3
1
3
1
0
9
.
4
5
S
h
e
a
r
R
T
h
r
1
1
1
5
1
1
2
8
2
2
3
8
2
7
.
6
6
6
5
4
6
0
3
0
7
8
4
2
5
0
C
m
i
n
1
8
5
0
5
5
1
6
1
1
4
4
2
1
6
8
4
0
1
2
F
a
c
e
s
t
o
c
k
:
P
E
T
(
M
y
l
a
r
)
.
Manufacture of PSAs 467
their higher water sensitivity. In this case the highest improvement of the
cuttability may be observed by lowering the tack. Generally, rosin esters
impart lower tack and polyethylene peel than acid rosins. Many formulations
with rosin ester tackiers are binary mixtures with a low softening
temperature component. Migration of this component causes loss of coating
weight and lowering of the tack peel values in time. Hence, the end-use
properties of the rosin ester-based formulations are inferior to those of rosin
acid-based ones. Acid rosins may be blended in without regulating pH.
Direct compounding of rosin esters with common acrylic PSAs gives rise to
mixtures with a higher mechanical sensitivity. Therefore some suppliers of
rosin esters propose a two-step compounding process. In the rst step the
formulation of the acrylic PSAs occurs; next, after increasing the pH of the
acrylic mixture to 7 or 8, the tackier is added. Adjusting the pH may cause
thickening of the whole mixture and change its rheology.
Summarizing, rosin esters were introduced as replacements for acid
rosins, due to the concerns regarding the loss of adhesive properties with
time. Their unique advantage is their supposed better aging stability. Rosin
esters require a higher loading level for the same level of adhesion. Because
of their binary formulation, rosin esters cause migration and give rise to
higher dispersion of the peel-tack values. Rosin esters possess a lower
mechanical stability and display poorer wet-out. Compounding rosin esters
requires adjustment of the pH (associated with thickening), thus it is a more
complex operation than with acid rosins. Rosin esters do not provide any
better processing or end-use properties, and are more expensive than acid
rosins. Practically, the raw materials base for rosin remains limited as they
are derived from natural products. Resources of tall oil resins remain limited
also. Because of the classical nature of the raw materials and of the old
processing technology, there are no possibilities to reduce manufacturing
costs. Thus one can assume that the price level of rosins will continue to
increase.
2.5 Hydrocarbon-Based Tackifiers
In order to determine the technical merits and shortcomings of hydro-
carbon-based tackiers, their adhesive, converting, and processing proper-
ties need to be examined in comparison to their main competitors (i.e., the
rosins). Hydrocarbon resins possess a limited compatibility, thus it can be
expected that from the point of view of the dry adhesive, they would show
better or similar tackifying properties only for certain PSAs (e.g., acrylic
PSAs). However, diculties may arise when tackifying high molecular
weight BuAc. However, it appears possible to design better converting or
468 Chapter 8
processing properties of the laminate, depending on the dispersing skill of the
resin manufacturer. Consequently, hydrocarbon resins are not yet universal
tackiers, but for the most important PSAs (e.g., acrylic- and CSBR-based
PSAs) they can provide technical advantages for the dry material as well as
for the aqueous dispersions.
Adhesive Properties of Hydrocarbon Resin-Tackified Formulations
Some years ago a trend was observed in the converting industry, namely a
switch from rosin acids to rosin esters, caused by the low aging stability
of the acid rosin-based formulations. Acid rosins are the best tackiers,
providing a good adhesion/cohesion balance for all the commonly used
PSAs. Hydrocarbon resins are generally inferior tackiers compared to
rosin-based ones. This holds true for the instantaneous adhesive properties
of the acid rosins. Aged formulations with acid rosins, including emulsions,
show poorer characteristics than hydrocarbon resin-based ones. Rosin ester
tackiers generally display inferior adhesive characteristics to acid rosins;
thus, opportunities exist for hydrocarbon resins mainly in comparison to
rosin esters. Hydrocarbon-based tackiers exhibit an adhesion/cohesion
balance similar to acid rosins. Slightly better shear values are possible, but
they are not high enough to improve the processing properties. For CSBR
high levels of hydrocarbon resins are necessary (like acid rosins) in order to
achieve sucient polyethylene peel (Table 8.18).
As the tackier loading increases from 25 to 30%, the failure mode
changes from adhesive failure to paper tear in both the 180
4
3
3
3
2
0
2
E
-
9
2
5
1
E
x
x
o
n
H
y
d
r
o
c
a
r
b
o
n
r
e
s
i
n
5
0
3
3
3
3
7
0
3
P
o
l
y
s
a
r
C
S
B
R
5
0
5
0
5
7
6
6
6
6
8
0
A
d
h
e
s
i
v
e
P
e
e
l
(
N
/
2
5
m
m
)
o
n
g
l
a
s
s
1
9
P
T
1
7
P
T
1
7
P
T
1
5
P
T
2
0
P
T
1
4
P
T
p
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
c
e
P
e
e
l
(
N
/
2
5
m
m
)
o
n
P
E
1
4
P
T
1
5
P
T
1
6
P
T
1
1
1
5
1
0
c
h
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
i
s
t
i
c
s
R
o
l
l
i
n
g
b
a
l
l
t
a
c
k
(
c
m
)
1
.
5
2
1
.
5
2
.
5
2
.
5
3
470 Chapter 8
T
a
b
l
e
8
.
1
9
T
a
c
k
i
f
y
i
n
g
A
c
r
y
l
i
c
P
S
A
w
i
t
h
H
y
d
r
o
c
a
r
b
o
n
R
e
s
i
n
s
a
n
d
R
o
s
i
n
s
N
r
C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t
S
u
p
p
l
i
e
r
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1
0
1
1
1
A
c
r
o
n
a
l
8
5
D
B
A
S
F
2
1
.
5
2
5
.
0
2
9
.
0
8
3
.
0
7
7
.
0
7
4
.
0
8
3
.
0
6
6
.
0
8
3
.
0
4
0
.
0
2
1
.
4
2
A
c
r
o
n
a
l
V
2
0
5
B
A
S
F
3
5
.
5
3
4
.
0
3
2
.
0
4
0
.
0
3
5
.
7
3
S
n
o
w
t
a
c
k
C
F
5
2
A
&
W
4
3
.
0
4
1
.
0
3
9
.
0
2
7
.
0
2
3
.
0
2
6
.
0
2
7
.
0
2
0
.
0
4
2
.
8
4
E
-
9
2
5
1
E
x
x
o
n
2
7
.
0
3
8
.
0
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
i
e
s
C
o
a
t
i
n
g
w
e
i
g
h
t
(
g
/
m
2
)
2
4
2
5
2
5
2
5
2
6
2
6
1
9
2
0
2
0
1
8
P
e
e
l
(
N
/
2
5
m
m
)
2
0
2
0
P
T
2
0
P
T
1
9
9
1
4
1
4
1
5
1
5
1
7
1
8
P
T
R
o
l
l
i
n
g
b
a
l
l
t
a
c
k
(
c
m
)
7
.
5
2
.
5
4
.
5
2
.
0
2
.
5
1
.
7
2
.
4
2
.
5
3
.
0
7
.
5
S
h
e
a
r
r
e
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
R
o
o
m
t
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e
(
h
r
)
4
0
4
0
3
0
4
5
2
9
4
0
5
0
C
(
m
i
n
)
1
6
2
3
2
0
C)
Hot Shear Values (min) Water-Based Tackier
CF 52 DEG/G MBG 64 E-9251 8/21
A&W DRT Hercules Exxon A&W
30 90 90 330 264 1440
40 100 162 90 102 192
50 12 72 72 90 192
60 10 45 38 46 51
70 11 22 23 40 26
Cuttability Fair Good Poor Fair Fair
Adhesive: Blend of Acronal V 205/80 D with 40% resin (wet weight) was used; face stock:
paper.
Manufacture of PSAs 473
resins. Consequently, hydrocarbon resins should be used in the following
applications:
+ permanent label (paper) adhesives, as hybrid tackifiers together with
rosin esters;
+ permanent label (paper) adhesives, as hybrid tackifiers together with
low tack rosin acids;
+ permanent label (paper) adhesives, as replacement of rosin esters,
providing a similar adhesion/cohesion balance to acid rosins, but
better aging stability;
+ permanent label (paper) adhesives, as a less expensive replacement of
acid rosins (but not generally applicable);
+ permanent label (film) adhesives for clear coatings onto PVC or
other films;
+ removable label (paper) adhesives, but only for formulations
containing a nontacky low peel natural latex and CSBR.
From a technical point of view rosins actually perform better than
hydrocarbon resins. However, there are three major disadvantages of the
rosin tackiers, namely the low level of adhesive properties of rosin esters,
Figure 8.9 General applicability, aggressivity (tack), and aging stability of
dierent tackier resins for PSA formulation purposes.
474 Chapter 8
the low aging stability of acid resins, and the inadequate coating/processing
properties of the aqueous dispersion (related to its water sensitivity).
Formulations containing some hydrocarbon resins and rosin esters
oer an adhesion/cohesion balance like that of acid rosins. Consequently,
there is a real opportunity for a partial replacement of rosins in
current recipes. Today about 60% of converters are using rosins. An
amount of 1020% of the rosin ester could be replaced by hydrocarbon
resins (i.e., a maximum of 12% of the current resin consumption). About
70% of labels are paper laminates with a maximum of 40% tackier resin,
or 28% of the whole PSA production is tackier based. Assuming the
12% hydrocarbon resin level could be reached, the use of about 4% hydro-
carbon resin (related to the whole amount of raw materials) seems to be
possible.
Table 8.21 Comparison of Rosin and HC Resins: Technical and Commercial;
Strengths and Weaknesses
Technical
Strengths Weaknesses
Rosin Hydrocarbon Rosin Hydrocarbon
Experience in use Limited experience
General usability Restricted usability
General
availability
Broad range
of grades
Limited range
of grades
Good adhesive
properties
Good adhesive
properties
Fair converting
properties
Fair converting
properties
Good aging
resistance
Poor aging
resistance
Colorless Yellowing
Commercial
Unlimited raw
material basis
Limited raw
material basis
Unlimited
technology
Limited
technology
C
to 135
C)
are available. Aromatic, modied polyterpenes oer improved tackifying
capabilities with high molecular weight polymers (SBS, SIS) when compared
with hydrocarbon, rosin esters, and modied polyterpenes. Terpene-phenol
resins oer the best thermal stability of any adhesive tackier [78]. Such
resins are synthesized from phenol and terpene derivatives. They are polar,
and give adequate adhesion and thermal and aging resistance. Terpene-
phenol resins and other heteroatom-containing polar tackier resins (e.g.,
coumarone-indene, phenolic, ketone, functionalized, and reactive resins) are
described in detail in [79].
2.6 Special Tackifier Resins
Special tackier resins are multicomponent systems containing various
resins and/or other (nonresin) components. The most important products
are the hybrid resins and the resin dispersions. Hybrid resins are mixtures
of chemically dierent tackiers. Hybrid resin dispersions based on
colophonium and hydrocarbon resins were developed in order to improve
the adhesion on polyethylene or the cohesion. The formulation,
manufacture, and stability of resin dispersions is discussed in detail in
[79]. The economical aspects of the use of dierent tackier resins are
described in [80].
476 Chapter 8
2.7 Tackification with Plasticizers
Tackication may be carried out using resins or plasticizers. Generally for
PSAs formulation with plasticizers is carried out mainly for softening of the
bulky (coated adhesive) or/and reduction of the viscosity of the coatable
adhesive [2]. Such eects are desirable for removable formulations and for
hot-melt PSAs. In such cases tackication manifested as an increase of the
tack is a side eect of the plasticizing. In some applications such a side eect
is required (e.g., tackication of hot-melts), for other products (e.g.,
removable adhesive formulations) it must be avoided. Certain crosslinked
formulations contain a plasticizer intended to make it easier for the polymer
chains to slide over each other. The plasticizer may provide wetting too.
Monomeric plasticizers, oils, and polymeric plasticizers (liquid resins and
liquid polymers) are used as plasticizers.
The tackifying mechanisms and the inuence of the tackifying agent
on the T
g
is quite dierent for plasticizers and tackiers. The addition of
resins to an adhesive increases the T
g
of the base polymer, the addition
of plasticizers decreases it [81] (see Chaps. 2 and 3). Tackier resins may
increase the tack, without an important decrease of the shear resistance;
plasticizers increase the tack, but lower the cohesion. It remains dicult to
make a sharp distinction between tackiers (resins) and plasticizers (solvents)
as a result of their chemical basis. Actually both low molecular weight liquid
resins and relatively high molecular weight plasticizer liquids (solvents) are
known. The use of liquid tackier resins induces the same rheological changes
as with plasticizers. As an example, tackifying styrene-butadiene copolymers
is more dicult than tackifying SBS ones. A solvent-based copolymer with a
plateau modulus of 55 10 kPa needs a much lower T
g
tackifying resin
in order to decrease the modulus than an SBS copolymer (plateau modulus
4.3 10
6
); here the tackier should act like a plasticizer [82].
The inuence of the chemical nature, structure, and molecular weight
of solvents used as plasticizers was discussed [83]. Plasticizers used may be
solid (sulfonamide) or liquid (phthalates, phosphates, glycolates, etc.) [84].
Generally, plasticizers are reactive liquid components that interact with
PSAs. As discussed in [85] the interaction of the plasticizer with the polymer
is characterized by the specic interaction parameter (w). The value of this
parameter depends on the chain length, double bonds, and branching in
the plasticizer. The reduction of the T
g
increases with the decrease of w,
i.e., of the solvation. Polymer incompatibility with the plasticizer results
in an increase of the glass transition temperature. Adhesives based on
polyisobutylene (PIB), EVAc, polyvinyl ether (PVE), and thermoplastic
elastomers (SIS, SBS) are very sensitive towards compounds like dioctyl-
phthalate [86]. Aromatic plasticizers like dioctyl phthalate (DOP) associate
Manufacture of PSAs 477
with the polystyrene domains and act like aromatic oils (i.e., soften the
polystyrene domains). Therefore, a barrier layer must be present between
PVC and Cariex TR-1000 (Shell). Including plasticizer into poly(butyl-
acrylate) dispersions brings good removability after long time storage, but
produces migration, low cohesion, and adhesive transfer [87]. Plasticizers
increase tack but lower cohesion.
Classical plasticizers are used on a large scale in PSA applications. For
removable PSAs, recommended compounds include: 2-diethyl hexyl esters
of phthalic acid and 2-diethyl hexyl adipate, esters of sebacic and aceloinic
acids with 610 alcanols, alkyl esters of succinic, glutamic, adipic acid with
epoxidized soybean oil, phenol alkyl sulfonic acid ester, and propylene
glycol-alkyl-phenyl ether, di-2-ethyl-hexyl ester of thiodipropionic acid,
acetyltributylcitrate, and glycoldibenzoate; phthalic acid esters such as
di-n-butyl phthalate, di-isobutyl phthalate, di-2-ethylhexyl phthalate, and
polypropylene glycolmethylol ether [83,87]. The choice of the plasticizer
depends on the chemical basis of the PSA, application technology, and end-
use requirements. The compatibility of dierent adhesive raw materials with
plasticizers was discussed in a detailed manner [88]. The plasticizer nature
depends on the adhesive nature. As an example, for SBS butyl-benzyl
phthalate was suggested [42]. For electron beam-cured hot-melt PSAs
Parapol 350 (Exxon) and Flexon 1076 (Shell) are used as plasticizers. In this
case formulation ingredients like plasticizers have to be inert when subjected
to irradiation. To obtain optimum crosslinking with a minimum of
radiation, the selection of suitable resins and plasticizers is necessary (e.g.,
PSAs based on multiarmed SIS block copolymers crosslink much faster with
saturated than with unsaturated resins and plasticizers). On the other hand,
the rheology changes due to the plasticizer have a quite dierent scope in
permanent and removable adhesives. In permanent adhesives they improve
the tack, in removable ones they have to make the adhesive softer in order
to absorb the peel energy. Solvents and plasticizers increase the viscosity
of PSA dispersions [89]. The sensitivity of dierent plasticizers toward
antimicrobial agents also is quite dierent. Their environmental relevance,
toxicological ndings, and suitability for medical products are other aspects
to be taken into account at the time of their selection [90]. A common level
of 20% (wet/wet) is proposed for water-based permanent adhesives.
Compounding water-based acrylic PSAs with more than 10% plasticizer
requires special skills (e.g., plasticizing of Acronal 120).
Common plasticizers are low molecular (micromolecular) compounds;
other macromolecular products also may be used. As an example Parapol is
used as a tackier/plasticizer. It is a viscous, liquid copolymer of n-butene
and isobutylene. The viscosity of polybutenes ranges from light oil to highly
viscous oils. Their tackiness increases with increased molecular weight. In
478 Chapter 8
hot-melt PSAs they increase tack and also are applied to obtain softness and
low temperature exibility, and to control cohesive strength [91]. For many
years polybutenes were successfully used as tackiers/plasticizers in hot-melt
and solvent-based adhesive systems. Later the polybutene dispersions were
incorporated into water-based PSAs. Acrylic latexes were used because of
their increased compatibility with polybutenes. The successful incorporation
of polybutenes (at 2030% addition levels based on the nal dry lm)
would result in signicant cost savings. In hot-melt PSAs polybutenes
plasticize and provide tackiness by associating with the isoprene midblock,
which has negligible inherent tack. Polybutene contributes to the aggressive
tack and quick stick properties necessary for adhesive applications [92].
Generally, polybutenes can be incorporated into acrylic latex systems by
either of two methods, either by addition to the acrylic polymer latex,
where it acts as an external plasticizer, or by addition to the acrylic
monomers, prior to emulsion polymerization, where it acts as an internal
plasticizer. Polybutenes, polyisobutylene, and mineral oils were suggested
as plasticizers for C
3
/C
4
polyalphaolens also. Plasticizers are described in
detail in [93].
Common plasticizers known from the formulation of PVC are polar
substances. Such compounds are used mainly for polar elastomers based on
acrylics or EVAc copolymers. For the mostly hydrocarbon-based thermo-
plastic elastomers, nonpolar, hydrocarbon-based plasticizers are preferred
[2]. Plasticizers for HMPSAs include the aromatic, paranic, or naphthenic
extender oils. Paranic oils are compatible with the midblocks of
unsaturated or saturated rubbers, naphthenic oils are compatible with
both. Aliphatic plasticizers soften the SBCs, with a minimum eect on
their cohesion and adhesive properties. Aromatic plasticizers act on the
polystyrene blocks and destroy their association. The formulation with oil
gives dierent results for SIS and SBS block copolymers. The oil/resin ratio
does not inuence decisively the shear resistance of SIS-based formulations;
the decrease of the shear resistance caused by the oil can be balanced using
an endblock reinforcing resin. SBS-based adhesives need mid-block active
resins and processing oils. In this case formulations with oil and resin give
higher storage modulus [94]. Generally the increase of the oil concentration
in HMPSA formulations leads to decrease of the tack and peel. A detailed
discussion of the formulation with oils is given in [95].
Plasticizers aect the processing and coating technology of the
adhesive. As discussed above viscosity regulation is one of the reasons for
their use in HMPSA formulations. In water-based formulations they
inuence the drying speed also. For postcured adhesives the choice of the
plasticizer aects the curing speed. Migration of the plasticizer in the
adhesive may cause its diluting and changes in the adhesive, converting, and
Manufacture of PSAs 479
end-use properties thus formulation for plasticizer resistance needs special
skill (see Section 2.11).
In principle the scope of the formulation is to avoid polymer
degradation, but in some cases degradation is used as a manufacturing
method to modify or to transform one macromolecular compound in
another, or as a formulation method to provide a balance against excessive
molecular weight build-up. Degradation as a manufacturing method can be
carried out via mechano-chemical depolymerization or radiation-induced
depolymerization [2]. Generally such procedures lead to increased tack and
decreased peel resistance and cohesion.
The most important additives inuencing the adhesive properties are
the tackiers (resins and plasticizers). Detackifying agents are known too.
Principally detackication is the result of excessive immobilization of the
macromolecules. Therefore the methods which cause such immobilization
(e.g., crosslinking, functionalization, defunctionalization, etc. can lead to
detackication. Built-in nonpolar voluminous groups, deactivation of the
built-in polar groups, or improvement of the rigidity of the macromolecular
network provide detackication. The chemical possibilities for detacki-
cation are illustrated by the manufacture of release agents and by
formulation for removability (see Section 2.8). Detackifying resins are
known also. Detackication is discussed in detail in [96].
Tackiers change tack and peel in parallel. Other ingredients such as
crosslinking agents have a similar eect (see Chap. 6). Their choice will be
discussed in Section 2.8. There are many formulating additives which are
used for other purposes, but also inuence the adhesive properties; such
ingredients include llers, antioxidants, surfactants, etc.
2.8 Cohesion Regulation
Generally cohesion decrease is a side eect of the tackication. In principle
cohesion can be improved by the increase of the molecular weight,
crosslinking, or reinforcing (lling) [2]. Cohesion increase is mainly required
for shear related applications and for removability.
The scope of the crosslinking is always the increase of the cohesion.
Such an increase may be moderate (in order to improve the peel resistance),
pronounced (to increase the shear resistance), or excessive (to allow
cuttability and die-cuttability). Although reinforcing tackier resins are
also known, in adhesive manufacturing practice mainly crosslinking and
lling are used for the regulation of the cohesion. Crossslinking itself leads to
an increase of the molecular weight also and reinforcing with llers can cause
crosslinking too. Crosslinking is based on the built-in or formulated reactivity
of the components of the PSA. The build up of a network reduces the chain
480 Chapter 8
mobility and improves or reduces the elastical deformability. Crosslinking
occurs during polymer synthesis also; post-synthesis crosslinking of pressure-
sensitive adhesives is used to control the adhesion-cohesion balance or to
provide other converting or application related properties. As discussed in
Chap. 5, chain entangling is responsible for rubber-like properties of
uncrosslinked elastomers. At suciently low frequency of deformation
linear chains begin to disentangle (reptation). One chemical crosslink per
chain is sucient to prevent ow by reptation. However, entangling accounts
for 75% of the equilibrium modulus even at high degrees of crosslinking.
Crosslinking is based on chemical reactions between the macromolecules or
between the macromolecules and other components of the formulation. Such
chemical reactions can be carried out as common chemical reactions or as
polymerization. Polymers can be divided in the following classes concerning
their reactivity: noncrosslinkable, self-crosslinkable, and thermosetting
polymers. The best known curing methods include: thermal, self-cure,
moisture, and radiation crosslinking. The chemical basis for crosslinking was
described in Chap. 5, special aspects are discussed in Section 2.11.
Fillers can modify the rheology of viscous or viscoelastical systems,
without aecting their viscous character, or they can build up an elastical
network in such systems, transforming them into viscoelastomers or
elastomers [2]. Filled systems are special composites where the role of the
ller can be played by various components (e.g, crystallites, polymer
sequences, llers, etc.). There are nonreactive llers working physically and
reactive ones which can build up a chemically linked network (Section 2.11).
Fillers used for PSAs are described in detail in [97]. Reinforcing and special
llers (e.g., neutralizing, crosslinking, conductive, ame retardant, pressure-
sensitive, water soluble, and expandable llers) are used.
2.9 Coating Properties
In order to wet the face stock or release liner material during coating PSAs
must display a good wet-out ability. They must also resist shear forces
during coating (metering device) and thermal shocks during drying.
Formulating the adhesives in order to optimize the coating properties
intends to improve these characteristics. Wetting out depends on the receiver
surface. It is evident that direct coating on paper or lm is less dicult than
indirect coating via a release liner, because of the fairly dierent surface
tensions of these materials. On the other hand, direct coating on paper is
easier (concerning the wet-out) than direct coating onto lm as the nature
of the face stock lm inuences the wetting ability. Polar surfaces (PVC,
PC, PET) are easier to coat than polyolens. The nature of the silicone
(solventless or solvent-based) inuences the wetting behavior as well.
Manufacture of PSAs 481
Depending on these factors, dierent wetting agents at dierent levels can be
added to the formulation. When direct coating, bleedthrough (migration)
should be avoided; a high viscosity and high solids content is needed.
Drying, when direct coating, is limited by the temperature resistance
of the face stock material. Formulating is limited by the chemical resistance
of the face stock material. Dierent coating devices also require dierent
coating viscosities. The drying oven capacity implies a lower or higher solids
content. These few examples illustrate how coating properties of PSAs aect
their formulation. Next, the inuence of the coating technology on the
formulation will be discussed.
Influence of Coating Technology on Formulation
The most important feature of the coating technology is its direct or transfer
character. In direct coating the adhesive is deposited onto the face stock
material, mostly as a low viscosity liquid. In transfer coating PSAs are
temporarily coated onto a siliconized web, the adhesive transfer onto the
face stock material is carried out later after the drying operation (i.e., the
coating properties of the liquid adhesive have to be designed for the release
liner). Therefore quite dierent formulations are required for direct and
indirect or transfer coating. In some special cases (Monoweb) the PSA
coated onto the face stock material is protected by the back side of the face
stock material. Such applications are encountered mainly for protective
lms or tapes where a release layer is coated on to the back side of the face
stock material or the chemical composition of the face stock material allows
the peel o of the adhesive.
The quite dierent requirements for the formulation of PSAs as a
function of the coating technology are illustrated by the design of water-
based adhesives. In this case, for direct coating neither liquid resins nor peel
modiers should be used, and only a low level of crosslinking agents; highly
viscous, thickened dispersions are preferred. When necessary, surfactants
with good water resistance should be used. For indirect or transfer coating,
as a function of the liner nature, varying levels of wetting agents are needed.
Defoamers may be added also, but only at a low level. A higher mechanical
stability of the dispersion is required. The formulation for direct/transfer
coating inuences the release force from the release liner also. Aqueous
dispersions damage the siliconized release paper, and therefore the release
force between a transfer-coated adhesive and the release liner is higher. An
adhesive required to be coated directly onto a web via Meyer bar appli-
cation, requires a dierent set of intermediate properties (e.g., wet-out, total
solids, viscosity) compared to one designed for transfer coating on a reverse
roll coater via a silicone release liner.
482 Chapter 8
Influence of Face Stock Material on Formulation
Wetting out on paper is easier than on lms and a higher surface tension
can be tolerated; for the same reasons a lower viscosity may be used.
Unfortunately, low viscosity dispersions or solutions migrate easier through
porous paper. Wetting out on polymer lms is more dicult. Here the
polarity and the roughness of the lm inuence the coatability. As an
example, white or clear PVC displays a dierent wet-out ability and needs
dierent surface-active agent levels. Polyolens are dicult to be coated as
their slip agent content inuences the wettability. The porosity of paper and
the nature of the coating method inuence the coating weight as well as the
adhesive/converting/end-use properties.
Influence of Coating Machine on the Additive Choice
Shear on the coating machine depends on its construction and functional
parameters, as does foaming. Shear contributes to good wetting; foaming
can be avoided with the use of defoamers, therefore it works against wet-
out. Too high shear on the metering device or in pumps produces coagulum;
hence post-stabilizing with surface-active agents can be necessary. Insu-
cient thermal (drying) capacity requires the improvement of the volatility of
the adhesive carrier (solvents or water).
A given metering device can be used for a certain viscosity range.
Engraved cylinder rolls with dierent line screens use dierent viscosities
and solids contents. Dierent ow properties are required for dierent types
of metering devices (e.g., Meyer bar or gravure cylinder) and even the same
formulated adhesive coated on dierent coating devices may lead to quite
dierent coating weights and adhesive properties (Table 8.22).
Therefore dierent versions of the ow and adhesive properties are
needed as a function of the coating machine. Adjusting the adhesives
Table 8.22 The Influence of the Coating
Technology on the Adhesive Properties
Theoretical Coating
Weight (g/m
2
)
90
C [114].
Lower softening point tackiers help to improve the formulations low
temperature adhesive properties for frozen food packaging, cold tempera-
ture tapes, and labels [78].
The resin level has its inuence also. For the curved panel lifting test
(carried out at 150
Glass N/25 mm
Immediate 7 10
20 min 8 12
1 hr 8.5 14
24 hr 10 1620
Stainless steel Immediate 6
20 min
1 hr
24 hr
PE lm Immediate 4 5
20 min 5 6
1 hr 5
24 hr 6 812
Tack Rolling ball cm 2.53.5
Loop tack Glass N/cm 610 10
PE N/cm 4 6
Shear Hot shear Stainless steel min 60 20
496 Chapter 8
(loss of transparency) and wet adhesion are the most critical characteristics
(Fig. 8.12).
For labels axed at high speed, mostly on polyolen bottles, wet
adhesion and squeeze bottle anchorage are the most important properties
Table 8.24 End-Use Properties of PSA-Coated PVC Label Material
Water Resistance
Property Method Values Units
Water-whitening Subjectively >1017
-38
sec
%
Loss of transparency Colorimetry,
after 7 min
Wet adhesion Subjective push
away after:
on glass 1 min
5 min
10 min
30 min
60 min
Squeeze bottle
wet anchorage
Subjectively
after 24 hr
No wings, lifting,
high peel adhesion,
subjectively
Shrinkage
Properties
Position Method Values Units
Unmounted 7 days, 60
C
clear PVC MD 0.9 CD 0.6 %
white PVC MD 0.5 CD 0.4 %
Mounted 7 days, 60
C
Clear PVC MD 0.5 CD 0.4 %
White PVC MD 0.20.3 CD 0.15 %
Optical Appearance
Property Method
Coagulum No grit
Optical appearance Subjectively
Optical clarity Colorimetry
MD, machine direction; CD, cross direction.
Manufacture of PSAs 497
related to water resistance. There is no correlation between water-whitening
and the other water resistance-related properties, but there is a correlation
between wet anchorage and wet adhesion on glass or plastics (after
immersion in water or diluted solutions of detergents, over a period of time).
Wet anchorage is the adhesion of the PSAs onto the face stock (lm)
(Fig. 8.13 and 8.14). Hence, wet adhesion includes two separate aspects.
Figure 8.12 Water resistance of label sheets. Interdependence of the water
resistance performance with the adhesive characteristics.
Figure 8.13 Water resistance of PSA labels. Wet anchorage and wet adhesion,
where and how they work.
498 Chapter 8
First, one observes the adhesion of the wet PSA coating on the substrate,
and fast (or slow) increase of the adhesive forces between substrate and
coating, resulting from the drying of the coating (over a short period of
time/minutes). Testing occurs by trying to move the label parallel to the
surface. Next, the adhesion of the PSA coating on the substrate is measured,
the substrate with the axed label being subjected to immersion in water (or
water and surface-active agent) for hours, or days. Testing occurs by peeling
the label from the substrate surface.
Consequently, wet adhesion on the substrate tested through push-
away is a bonding wet adhesion (BWA) test. Wet adhesion tested through
peeling o is a debonding wet adhesion (DWA) test (Fig. 8.15). Testing of
the wet adhesion-related product performances will be described in detail in
Chap. 10 discussing the test methods for PSAs.
Formulating for Special Uses
Aging. The synthetic and natural polymers utilized in the adhesives
industry are frequently susceptible to degradation and this degradation is
markedly accelerated by interaction with oxygen at elevated temperatures as
well as with light. On the other hand, warranty times of at least 24 yr are
required for quality labels [148]. There are several practical data showing the
inuence of the formulation on the aging of PSAs. Adhesives working under
extreme temperature and humidity or UV light require aging resistant
Figure 8.14 Water resistance of PSA labels. Interdependence of the water
resistance parameters, peel, and tack-related parameters.
Manufacture of PSAs 499
formulating components. In some cases (lm coating) water-white UV-
stable PSA formulations are needed [33]. For special uses, like cereal inserts,
water-based PSAs with low edge ooze and adhesion bleed that comply with
US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulation 175.105 are required.
Such formulations need special base elastomers and surface-active agents.
Any adhesive composition must include an antioxidant to inhibit oxidation
of the tackifying agent and consequent loss of tackiness as the adhesive
composition ages [10]. The saturated hydrocarbon-based long-chain
structure of acrylic PSAs provides good chemical stability towards aging
through oxygen and light. Hence acrylic PSAs can be used without
protecting agents for opaque as well as for transparent face stock. Rubber-
based PSAs are inadequate for transparent webs. Thus there is a general
trend to give several years warranty for these laminates.
Tackied formulations show less stability upon aging. Tackied,
water-based acrylic PSAs can interact with special face materials (e.g.,
thermal paper) giving rise to the partial or total loss of the adhesive
properties. Tackied lm laminates may show discoloration. The most
important problem is the frequent interaction between metal ions from the
paper (face stock) and acid rosin tackiers causing the loss of tack and peel
adhesion. This phenomenon inuenced the formulators to change the resin
base from acid- to ester-based ones, although the latter show less tack and
peel adhesion. In this context hydrocarbon-based tackiers can compete
with the less aggressive rosin esters. As can be seen from the DSC data in
Fig. 8.16 dierences in T
g
for fresh and aged material are very pronounced
(35.5
C versus 1.5
C and 20
1
)
T
o
t
a
l
s
o
l
i
d
s
(
%
)
D
i
l
e
x
o
N
6
0
0
C
o
n
d
e
a
A
c
r
y
l
i
c
D
I
N
5
3
0
1
9
,
2
0
C
4
0
0
8
0
0
5
7
5
5
D
i
l
e
x
o
A
K
6
1
0
C
o
n
d
e
a
A
c
r
y
l
i
c
D
I
N
5
3
0
1
9
,
2
0
C
8
0
0
1
5
0
0
5
7
5
5
L
a
t
e
x
3
7
0
3
P
o
l
y
s
a
r
C
S
B
R
B
r
o
o
k
e
l
d
L
V
F
,
S
2
,
3
0
r
p
m
2
5
0
5
0
L
a
t
e
x
3
9
5
8
P
o
l
y
s
a
r
C
S
B
R
B
r
o
o
k
e
l
d
L
V
F
S
2
,
3
0
r
p
m
5
0
0
5
3
M
o
w
i
l
i
t
h
1
3
0
H
o
e
c
h
s
t
E
V
A
c
B
r
o
o
k
e
l
d
R
V
T
S
5
,
2
0
r
p
m
5
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
5
0
M
o
w
i
l
i
t
h
1
3
1
H
o
e
c
h
s
t
E
V
A
c
B
r
o
o
k
e
l
d
R
V
T
S
5
,
2
0
r
p
m
5
0
0
0
1
3
0
0
0
5
0
M
o
w
i
l
i
t
h
1
3
2
H
o
e
c
h
s
t
E
V
A
c
B
r
o
o
k
e
l
d
R
V
T
S
5
,
2
0
r
p
m
4
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
6
0
A
c
r
o
n
a
l
4
D
B
A
S
F
A
c
r
y
l
i
c
D
I
N
5
3
0
1
9
,
2
3
C
1
5
4
0
2
5
0
5
0
A
c
r
o
n
a
l
8
0
D
B
A
S
F
A
c
r
y
l
i
c
D
I
N
5
3
0
1
9
,
2
3
C
8
0
1
5
0
2
5
0
5
0
A
c
r
o
n
a
l
V
2
0
5
B
A
S
F
A
c
r
y
l
i
c
D
I
N
5
3
0
1
9
,
2
3
C
8
0
0
1
6
0
0
2
5
0
6
9
N
a
c
o
r
3
1
4
N
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
A
c
r
y
l
i
c
B
r
o
o
k
e
l
d
>
2
0
0
5
2
N
a
c
o
r
5
2
5
N
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
A
c
r
y
l
i
c
B
r
o
o
k
e
l
d
>
2
0
0
5
3
L
V
T
,
k
n
o
w
n
B
r
o
o
k
f
i
e
l
d
v
i
s
c
o
s
i
t
y
m
e
t
h
o
d
;
R
V
T
,
k
n
o
w
n
B
r
o
o
k
f
i
e
l
d
v
i
s
c
o
s
i
t
y
m
e
t
h
o
d
.
530 Chapter 8
maleic anhydride are used as thickeners for natural rubber and synthetic
latexes [225].
According to their activity as thickeners, these agents may be classied
as pH regulators, surfactants, protective colloids/polyelectrolytes, water-
soluble polymers, llers, crosslinking agents, or solvents. It is evident that
most PSA emulsions containing polar groups incorporated in the polymer
backbone should modify their viscosity through a pH change. For this
purpose, alkaline additives (mostly fugitive ones) are used. In some cases
discoloration (by ammonia or alkaline hydroxides) was observed and
organic amines are preferred. The change of pH is required for some
polyelectrolyte thickeners (polyacrylic acids) (i.e., these act mostly in the
alkaline domain).
Aqueous solutions of carboxylated polymers have low viscosities. The
polymer is believed to be tightly coiled and only slightly ionized; as the pH is
raised, more carboxyl groups become ionized, the polymer chain is further
uncoiled, and, as a result, the viscosity increases [101]. Changes in the ow
curves of acrylic polymer dispersions incorporating acrylic acid during a
treatment with ammonium hydroxide were described with the Cross theory
of aggregation of dispersed particles [226]. If the surface tension value of the
material to be coated is too high and the formula is not thickened properly,
defects in the lm will appear. Cratering, pinholing, and crawling are all
evidence of poor substrate wetting, of a too high surface tension value,
and/or of an improperly thickened system. Viscosity adjusters are agents
used to lower or increase the viscosity of the water-based systems.
High speed rotogravure machines run with 100500 mPa.s dilute
dispersions. On the other hand, good wetting requires a higher viscosity or/
and wetting agents. Some wetting agents increase the viscosity also, thereby
thickening the dispersion. The high running speeds assume higher solids
contents associated in several cases with an inadequate rheology of the
semidry coated layer, resulting in an unsmooth coating. In this case dilution
of the base dispersion and rethickening it is necessary. Summarizing, two
kinds of viscosity adjustments are needed: thickening and lowering of the
viscosity; pH regulating agents are not really thickeners, but they are added
more in order to increase the dispersion stability or to change certain
adhesive properties. Table 8.31 lists some common thickeners used for
water-based PSAs.
Thickeners are manufactured by build-in of hydrophilic or salt-
forming reactive groups on polymers. Soft hydrophobic and hydrophilic
comonomers (butyl acrylate/methacrylic acid, BuAc/MAA) produce thick-
ening latices (their viscosity increases more than 1000% in the alkaline
region) which makes the penetration of the alkali (natrium ions) into the
polymer particle possible, and thus changes the polymer volume and
Manufacture of PSAs 531
structure. The inuence of the pH regulating agent was discussed in Section
2.2 of Chap. 2.
Some surfactants also act as thickeners. This behavior is very
pronounced for certain sulfosuccinates and may dier for the same
compound from dierent suppliers. Care should be taken whether
surfactants should be used as thickeners. PSA dispersions possess a certain
surfactant level as a result of the polymerization process; some surfactant
amount can come from the face stock material. All these may interfere
with the adhesive and end-use properties (see Section 1.1 of Chap. 6). The
hydrophobic segment of a soap can migrate to the relatively nonpolar
rubber adhesive and alter release, tack, and readhesion properties.
Contamination can come not only from the migration of certain species
in the release coating, but also from species in the face stock such as
plasticizers from bers or the soaps in paper saturants. Calendered PVC
(emulsion PVC, EPVC) made from 0.1 jm diameter particles, has a thin
Table 8.31 Common Thickeners Used for WB PSA Formulations
Code Supplier Basis
Usual
Concentration
(wt%)
Comments,
Ref.
Borchigel L75 Borchers Polyurethane -1.5
Viscoatex 46 Coatex Acrylic -2
Coatex BR 100 Coatex Polyurethane -1.5
Cyanamid
A-370
Cyanamid Modied
polyacrylamide
-2 FDA approval
Kelzan M Lancro Polysaccharide,
natural
0.20.5 Tested for
acrylics
sugar derivative with good results
Viscalex V430 Allied
Colloids
Acrylic 0.10.5 Current
industrial use
Polysar
Latex 6100
Polysar Acrylic -2 Proposed
for CSBR
Rohagit SD15 Rohm & Haas Acrylic -1.5 [227]
Latekoll D BASF Acrylic -1.5 Current
industrial use
Jaguar CHMP Natural
polysaccharide
-1 Proposed for
neoprene latex
Kelset Langer Natrium calcium
alginate
-2 [228]
Collacral VL BASF Acrylic -2 Recommended for
lm coatings
532 Chapter 8
layer of emulsier on its surface; this layer behaves like an adhesive [229].
Thickeners can increase water sensitivity and can act as nutrients for
microorganisms. Protective polyacid-based colloids are preferred, together
with polyamides, because they are less sensitive to microbial attack and
cause less decrease of the tack than natural derivatives.
Polymer thickeners for emulsions are copolymers of (meth)acrylic
acid (2545%) and alkyl (meth)acrylates (2565%), esters, ethylene glycol
derivatives (140%), polyethylene unsaturated monomers (011%), and
hydrophilic ethylene monomers (-10%) [230]. Water-based polymers (e.g.,
polyvinyl ethers) improve the adhesive characteristics also, but display water
and aging sensitivity. Polyvinylpyrrolidone in PSAs imparts a high initial
tack, strength, and hardness; water-remoistenable PSAs based on PVP, cast
on paper, reduce the usual tendency to curl too [231]. N-Vinylpyrrolidone-
ethyl methacrylate (EMA) copolymers may be used as thickeners also
[232]. Fillers may act as thickeners too. They generally decrease the adhesive
properties and therefore have to be used in concentrations below 5%.
Crosslinking agents (e.g., metallic salts) interact with the polar monomers
from the bulk polymer or from the protective colloid and thus may produce
thickening also. They improve the water resistance, but decrease the adhesive
properties. Cohesion and heat resistance can be increased further through
crosslinking. The divalent metal ion/acid functionality approach used with
acrylate PSAs also applies to new systems such as ethylene/vinyl acetate/
maleinate copolymers. Solvents may be added to water-based adhesives and
can improve their anchorage by 730% [224]. Depending on their solubility
in water, solvents increase the viscosity of water-based PSAs. The choice of
an adequate thickener depends mainly on the raw dispersion and the end-use
requirements. The thickening power on polymer latices is inuenced by the
type of emulsier, particle size (i.e., surface area), and presence of mineral
llers. High molecular weight water-soluble polyelectrolytes are readily
absorbed by polymers or mineral particles. The degree of absorption depends
on the type of latex, emulsiers, thickeners, or mineral ller employed. For a
poorly stabilized latex, the absorption is the greatest and the thickening
power the most pronounced [233]. A more recent development is the range of
the so-called associative thickeners. Such products include hydrophobically
modied ethylene-urethane block copolymers. Associative thickeners consist
of molecules with hydrophilic and hydrophobic groups. Their eect is based
on the interaction of hydrophobic segments of the molecule with other
components of the coating.
In some dispersions the viscosity may be too high, even though no
conventional thickener is present. The easiest way to reduce the viscosity
is to dilute the emulsion with water, if a reduction in solids content can be
tolerated. If a high solids content must be maintained, the addition of alkaline
Manufacture of PSAs 533
(e.g., sodium or potassium hydroxide, sodium polyphosphate, ethylene dia-
mine, diethylamine, etc.) may reduce the viscosity. Urea (up to6%wet weight)
may be used to decrease the viscosity of natural latexes [234]. The viscosity
may be decreased by special additives like polyvinylpyrrolidone [235].
Table 8.32 lists some viscosity reducing agents; Fig. 8.21 illustrates
the inuence of carbamide addition on the viscosity of a common
water-based PSA.
Figure 8.21 Viscosity decrease through formulating. The use of carbamide as
a viscosity reducing agent. The Brookeld viscosity of the formulation after: 1) a
storage time of 2 days; 2) instantaneously.
Table 8.32 Agents for Lowering the Viscosity of PSAs
Water-Based PSA Viscosity
Refs. Viscosity Reducing Agent Code Supplier Before After
Dicyandiamide 1360 Hoechst 5000 2400 [236]
Carbamide V 205 BASF 5000 3600
Polyvinyl pyrrolidone Natural latex
534 Chapter 8
Coatability and Foaming
By virtue of lowering the surface tension, any surfactant reduces the energy
needed to create foam; however, what really dictates the foam volume
achieved is the stability of the foam. Surfactants form a dense, ordered,
viscous lm on the surface of aqueous solutions in which bubbles of air
can be encapsulated. The mechanism apparently involves the hydrophilic
polyethylene oxide chains forming closely packed hydrated layers that
are crosslinked by interstitial water molecules. In contrast, defoaming
copolymer surfactants form low viscosity, mobile, open surface lms that
form areas of weakness in the surface of a bubble, eventually leading
to bubble rupture [237]. There is no generally valid theory concerning the
mechanism of defoamers [238].
Generally, if more surfactants are used there is a competitive
adsorbtion of the nonionic and anionic surfactants on the latex particles.
The addition of one surfactant may cause the desorbtion of another one.
In practice, this can cause problems such as foaming [239]. Foaming also
depends on the surface quality; on porous surfaces more foam is left [238].
In stirred systems foam builds up if the strain t is greater than the capillary
pressure p [240]. The strain depends on the particle diameter according to
the following equation:
t = 1.9, (c )
2,3
(8.4)
where , denotes the density of the particles. The particle diameter is a
function of the surface tension and therefore foaming is a function of the
surface tension.
Foaming on the coating device depends on the depth of the immersed
coating cylinder. Deeply immersed coating cylinders cannot carry much air
into the liquid, therefore low foaming results. The rotation direction of the
coating cylinder inuences foaming also. Reverse cylinder sense (against
the web direction) is suggested [241]. Temperature (related to the choice of
the surface-active agent) also may inuence foaming [211]. Typical low
foaming nonionic surfactants foam less at temperatures above their cloud
points because they become insoluble.
Defoamers are often used because the polymers are present as
emulsions (or latexes) in water and the hydrophobic nature of the polymers
implies that substantial amounts of surfactants are necessary in order to
maintain the stability of the dispersion. Conventional defoamers (e.g.,
mineral oils and waxes) or silicones can be typically used in an amount of
about 0.25 wt% of the wet coating mix. Defoamers are added into the
dispersion in order to reduce foam formation. Their use is well known from
Manufacture of PSAs 535
the synthesis of water-based adhesives, where defoamers are necessary to aid
free monomer reduction when heavier reux develops. Dierent kinds of
defoamers (e.g., silicones, fatty acid derivatives, or alcohols) in an amount
of about 0.15% are suggested [239]. Defoamers absorb into the polymer,
especially at elevated temperatures, and thus have a short life and require
frequent replenishment. When foaming during the handling or coating is
encountered, regular additions of defoamer should be made. Many additives
were found to minimize or eliminate the formation of foam, and a large
number of proprietary defoaming agents are on the market. None is
completely satisfactory for all compounds; conditions of use are such that
only by trial and error can one identify the most ecient agent or
combination of agents for a given compound and process. With any
antifoaming agent the minimum amount required should be used since such
agents tend to cause localized coagulation, poor wetting, and/or sh eyes
in the lm. Fish eye formation can sometimes be prevented by adding a
small amount of a chelating agent.
Besides the many antifoam agents, there are other readily available
materials which function as defoamers. Higher alcohols (such as 2ethylhex-
anol), water-soluble oils, and tributylphosphates also have been used for this
purpose [242]. Equipment and devices used for testing foam formation are
discussed in Chap. 10; as defoamers, silicones, fatty acid derivatives, and
caprylalcohol are used. A blend of tributylphosphate/pine oil (3/1) also may
be used as a defoamer [223]. There are many antifoam agents and they
are usually classied as silicones or nonsilicones [207]. Silicone uids and
emulsions are common defoaming agents. The silicone uids most commonly
used in the printing ink industry are based on polydimethylsiloxane where the
chain length may vary from 1 to 1000. Antifoam agents must be used with
care, since the resulting adhesive performance characteristics are concentra-
tion dependent. An excess can cause pinholing and poor roll-to-roll ink
transfer. Silicone derivatives are used in a concentration of 0.050.2% [223].
Defoamers based on mineral oil may contain emulsiers and other
defoaming agents like fatty acid esters. It is often preferable to use a
nonsilicone type to avoid lm scission. Polyethylene/polypropylene glycol
ether derivatives of amines and alcohols were suggested. Propylene glycol,
diethylene glycol, and carbamide also have been used [241]. Defoamers for
labels should not inuence the printing properties of the face material. They
must also meet FDA and BGA requirements. Foaming is a problem mostly
encountered with medium level viscosity formulations.
Solvents (used as defoamer) may swell the dispersion particles in the
coating, giving a more continuous dry lm. Hoechst stresses the role of
solvents to improve water resistivity, especially with regard to water-
whitening. Table 8.33 lists some commonly used defoamers.
536 Chapter 8
Adjustment of pH
Generally, water-based dispersions are stable above a pH of 2; acrylic
dispersions are usually delivered with a pH of 56, vinyl acetate copolymers
at a pH of 45, and natural rubbers and neoprene dispersions in the alkaline
pH range. Dispersions of polymers bearing carboxylic groups (CSBR or
rosin acids) are acid; their neutralization may change their stability,
adhesive, and end-use properties (e.g., tack, shear, water sensitivity, aging
resistance). In order to avoid an ionic shock, formulation components have
to display the same pH range (i.e., they need neutralization agents).
Nonvolatile neutralization agents may change the water absorption/
desorption of the polymer particles (i.e., drying properties) or may interact
with other components of the laminate; they also may change the viscosity
of the dispersion or destroy ester-based surfactants (e.g., sulfosuccinates).
The modulus, peel adhesion, and water resistance of the adhesive
depend on the nature of the neutralization agent used [243]. For neoprene
latices diethanol amine (DEA) is recommended [244]. Polychloroprene
latices are supplied with a pH of about 7. It is advisable to adjust the pH
Table 8.33 Common Defoaming Agents
Name Code Supplier Base Comments
Polymekon 1488 Goldschmidt Silicone
derivative
before
it is deposited. The angle of rotation through which the coating remains
on the wetted cylinder before being transferred or deposited is normally
referred to as the wet angle. The angular oset gravure conguration
Figure 9.14 Roll coating. The basic oset gravure congurations. A) Vertical,
two-roll oset gravure, direct; B) vertical, two-roll oset gravure, reverse; C) angular
three-roll oset gravure.
Manufacture of Pressure-Sensitive Labels 577
(Fig. 9.14) reduces the wet angle by almost one half. The angular design can
be used with faster evaporating diluents and when more than two transfers
are required. The coating is applied to the rubber-covered transfer roller by
the gravure process, after which the coating pattern has a tendency to ow
together, since the rubber covering repels the liquid. The coating then is
transferred by the lm splitting process to the chromed steel application
roller, which in turn deposits the coating onto the web.
Two-roll gravure coaters may have a reverse direction of the engraved
roll. In reverse gravure the engraved cylinder rotates in the opposite
direction to the web being coated. In this case the wiping action of the
opposite rotation of the etched cylinder tends to obscure the cell pattern
that sometimes remains on the surface of the applied coating. This is
advantageous for coatings with poor ow-out properties. Because the web is
not nipped against the etched cylinder, as in direct gravure, the speed of the
etched cylinder can be varied; this oers the ability to vary the coating
weight. The doctor blade can be relocated to the opposite side of the coater,
which is not easy in direct gravure coaters. An alternative procedure would
be to keep the blade mechanism in its original location and adapt a ooded
blade technique. In reverse gravure it is not possible for the etched cylinder
and the impression cylinder to be pressed tightly together to form a tension
contact nip. Here, the tensile strength and elasticity of the web are important
factors for predicting the need for a driven back-up roll. A negative factor
on reverse gravure is the increase in the rate of gravure cylinder wear.
Another design of reverse gravure is able to vary the speed of the etched
cylinder. The relation between the speed of the etched roll and the speed
of the web running in the opposite direction has a decisive inuence on the
overall quality of the coating. The etched roll speed must be at least as high
as that of the web or even higher. The indirect reverse gravure may
be used for webs having quite dierent thicknesses [49]. In gravure coating
the most common method is to undercut the backing roll at the edges. The
disadvantage is the need of an assortment of back-up rollers, one for each
width of web the user handles. Changing the backing roller for each width
also requires more time.
Coating Weight
Generally, when coating with cylinders, the adhesive is taken from an
adhesive pan (kiss coating). The coating weight depends on the pressure
of the web on the cylinder, the viscosity of the uid, web speed, and cylinder
speed [46]; coating weights of 250 g/m
2
are possible. Viscosities of 20 DIN
sec to 12,000 mPa s are used, with coating weight tolerances of 1 g/m
2
.
Generally, the web width is limited to 1600 mm; the system is open and tends
578 Chapter 9
to dry. Continuous pumping (recirculation) of the material content is
necessary. Generally, for gravure cylinders, the coating weight depends on
the geometry of the gravure. The factors inuencing the ink hold-out for
printing also inuence the coating weight of the adhesive. These factors
depend on the engraved cylinder rolls, on the machine parameters, and on the
adhesive. Figure 9.15 summarizes the parameters inuencing the coating
weight (e.g., line screen number, angle, depth, velocity, viscosity).
One of the most important factors inuencing the hold-out is the line
screen number (Fig. 9.16). The adhesive hold-out decreases with increasing
line number. It also depends on the depth and angle of the engraving
(Fig. 9.17). The adhesive hold-out also depends on the running speed
(Fig. 9.18) and increases with increasing viscosity (Fig. 9.19).
There is a (theoretical) choice between gravure depth and angle
(Fig. 9.20). The relative importance of the dierent parameters inuencing
the adhesive hold-out may be combined into a formula:
H = f [(9C1.3V,1.1S)(eN)] (9.1)
where H is the hold-out, C is the coating cylinder, V is the viscosity, S is the
speed, N is the nature of the adhesive, and e is a coecient that is dependent
on V; the measured coecients (9, 1.3, 1.1, or e) may dier according to the
experimental conditions. As can be seen from the above equation, the most
important parameter inuencing the coating weight is the cylinder. The
Figure 9.15 Machine and running parameters inuencing the coating weight.
Gravure coating.
Manufacture of Pressure-Sensitive Labels 579
Figure 9.16 Gravure coating. The inuence of the line number on the adhesive
hold-out. Angle 80
.
Figure 9.17 Gravure coating. Dependence of the adhesive hold-out on the depth
and angle of the engraving. Line number 70; 1) 140
angle; 2) 130
angle; 3) 120
angle.
580 Chapter 9
Figure 9.18 Gravure coating. Dependence of the adhesive hold-out on the running
speed. 1) Line number 70; 2) line number 80. Cell depth 37 jm.
Figure 9.19 Gravure coating. Dependence of the adhesive hold-out on the
viscosity. 1) Cell depth 27 jm; 2) cell depth 30 jm.
Manufacture of Pressure-Sensitive Labels 581
inuence of the viscosity also remains important; the inuence of the speed
is relatively small:
C V > S (9.2)
The nature of the adhesive may cause changes of 200% in the hold-out
(coating weight). Concerning the cylinder characteristics, the most
important parameter remains the depth of the gravure (up to 500%
change). The line screen has a decisive inuence too (about 50%). The hold-
out also increases with increasing engraving angle (Fig. 9.17). Figure 9.18
illustrates the dependence of the adhesive hold-out on the running speed
for various gravure cylinder characteristics; in Fig. 9.19 the eect of the
viscosity on the adhesive hold-out is presented for dierent cell depths. The
coating weight for gravure cylinders depends on the gravure number, form,
depth, and cavity ratio [5052]. Figure 9.20 illustrates the inuence on the
gravure cell depth/angle on the coating weight for dierent line numbers.
Gravure cylinders are used for coating adhesives with viscosities of
1003000 mPa s, and an ensuing coating weight of 1050 g/m
2
[51]. Dierent
line screen numbers are recorded for dierent coating weights; the gravure
Figure 9.20 Gravure coating. The inuence of the gravure cell depth/angle on the
coating weight. The choice of these parameters for the same coating weight; 1) line
number 80; 2) line number 70.
582 Chapter 9
characteristics (quadra gravure, free-ow, etc.) depend on the adhesive
characteristics [5355]. For example, a 40-line screen is recommended with a
70-jm depth for a coating weight of 57 g/m
2
[56]. The choice of a cylinder
is made easier using tables or diagrams concerning the coating weight
dependence on the cylinder geometry/line number (Fig. 9.21).
Roll Coaters with Doctor Blade/Mixed Systems
Reverse gravure with a closed chamber and a doctor blade [57] in the
coating station also is used. A coating weight of 0.230 g/m
2
is possible;
viscosities from a low number of DIN seconds up to 5000 mPa s can be used.
Changes in coating weight are obtained by changing the cylinder. The blade
and the cylinder cause shear of the adhesive [46]. Changes in web width are
made via changes in web covering or by changing the engraved cylinder.
Conventional or reverse angle blades can be installed. In the reverse
angle doctor blade arrangement the excess coating is sheared from the surface
of the engraved roll rather than being squeezed from it. The system eliminates
the need to increase blade pressure for higher viscosities and reduces the
turbulence in the coating fountain. A fountainless applicator with a coating
chamber also may be used. Knurled gravure rolls in combination with a
Figure 9.21 Roll coating, gravure coating, coating weight. Dependence on the
cylinder geometry. 1) Solid content 45%; 2) solid content 75%.
Manufacture of Pressure-Sensitive Labels 583
doctor blade may be used to coat primers with a low viscosity at 25
C with a
thickness of less than 1 jm [58]. Among the possible coating systems (e.g.,
MEC roll, reverse roll, xed doctor blade system, etc.), the most used
one appears to be the MEC roll [25]. This system is not only a simple
conguration, but it also is easy to set up in order to obtain a uniform coating
with the desired coating weight. The system is designed to overcome
a series of problems, for example:
+ correct ratio between coating cylinder diameter and doctor
(metering) roll diameter;
+ angular position of the doctor roll;
+ mechanical tolerances of the order of a few microns concerning
excentricity, surface uniformity;
+ the doctor roll speed has to be adjustable, and to run dependent on
the coating cylinder speed by an electronic master/slave system;
adjustable compensation for the doctor roll flexure;
+ fine adjustment of the gap between coating cylinder and doctor roll,
independently adjustable parallelism on operator and drive side.
Second-generation doctor blade chamber technology was developed.
The rst generation of doctor blade chambers, the so-called single chamber
systems do not ensure a sucient ll in of the chamber. The coating
agitates against the cells of the roll in a circular movement, creating an
inconsistent pressure. The patented InkJector doctor blade design consists
of two chambers separated by a small, narrow ridge. The two chambers are
connected to each other by a small gap (less than 4 mm). There is a forced
ow of the liquid which causes high localized pressure [59].
There are six common designs used for gravure coating systems [60].
Gravure systems are normally constructed in two-roll or three-roll congu-
rations. Two-roll constructions may be direct, reverse, anddierential reverse.
Three-roll machines may be oset, reverse oset, and dierential reverse
oset. For direct gravure in a two-roll design, the roll is partially submerged
in a coating pan and as it turns it brings the coating up. The excess coating is
wiped from the surface with a doctor blade leaving an amount predetermined
by the total carrying capacity of the etched or knurled cells. Therefore for
a selected cylinder the only way to change the coating weight is to change
the solids content of the coating itself. The doctor blade is usually of the
oscillating type and the upper web back-up roll is made essentially of an
elastomer-covered sleeve. The web runs between it and the engraved roll.
The advantages of direct gravure include:
+ widely used and accepted;
+ provides a consistent and uniform coating;
584 Chapter 9
+ low to medium equipment cost;
+ independent from operator skills.
The disadvantages of the direct gravure include:
+ the pattern of the engraved roll may be evident if the coating does
not have adequate flow;
+ the doctoring of viscous coatings at high speeds is difficult;
+ high foam generation at higher speeds.
There are several ways to reduce the disadvantages of direct gravure.
They include heating of the coating or using a polishing bar. The latter can
be variable speed driven, in either direction and cooled or heated.
2.3 Choice of Coating Geometry
Generally the choice of a coating device depends on the following
parameters:
+ desired coating weight range;
+ viscosity;
+ changes in coating weight;
+ uniformity of the coating weight;
+ abrasion of the metering devices;
+ changes in coating (web) width;
+ changes in coating medium.
There are general requirements for coating devices, such as environmental
and energy considerations, short operating time, and ease of operation [8].
New cartridge-style coaters and quick changeover rubber sleeve rolls allow
a full change of the gravure roll and supply system in 5 min or less [61].
The coating of PSAs on a web may be carried out using dierent
coating techniques. For solvent-based systems Meyer bar or reverse roll
coater systems are proposed; water-based systems use Meyer bar, reverse
roll coater, roll-bar, or air brush systems [4]. According to [62] on pilot
coating lines for solvent- and water-based products over 45 dierent coating
methods can be tested. Hot-melt PSAs may be coated via roll systems or
slot-die systems, and eventually through extrusion.
Roll Coating of Solvent-Based PSAs
The cylinders used for PSA coating generally have a 180400 mm diameter, a
regulated drive, and are explosion proof [63]. Coating machines for solvent-
based PSAs vary as a function of the viscosity of the adhesive. For low
viscosity systems, a driving cylinder brings the PSA from the pan and coats
Manufacture of Pressure-Sensitive Labels 585
it on the web (Fig. 9.22). A reverse roll regulates the coating weight (metering
roll). For highly viscous systems, two metering rolls bring the adhesive on the
web (reverse rolls) (Fig. 9.23) and each is continuously regulated.
Common roller coaters with accugravure operate with solvent-based
PSAs having a solids content of 3840%, at speeds of 300400 m/min. Slot-
die coating devices may be used for solvent-based PSAs also [64]; viscosities
Figure 9.22 Roll coating for a solvent-based PSA. Coating systems for low
viscosity solvent-based PSA. 1) PSA; 2) driving cylinder; 3) web; 4) rotary doctor bar.
Figure 9.23 Roll coating for a solvent-based PSA. Coating system for high
viscosity solvent-based PSAs. 1) PSA; 2) driving cylinder; 3) web; 4) metering roll.
586 Chapter 9
up to 12 million mPa s are possible and coating speeds of 150 m/min were
achieved. Solvent recovery systems remain an absolute necessity.
Coating Machines for Water-Based Systems
Whereas for solvent-based and hot-melt PSAs coating the operating princi-
ples, the coating systems, etc., are widely known, the same is not generally
valid about water-based systems. Generally, reverse gravure and kiss
coating have been used since the 1970s [65]. Film forming of water-based
adhesives was described [66]; a wide range of requirements must be fullled
when using a PSA emulsion coater.
To keep foaming at the lowest possible level the coater must have a
closed supply system (i.e., overow should be avoided, which precludes an
open pan feed and roll gap feed system). Since the emulsion-based PSAs
were introduced for label products the coat weight range has varied between
20 and 24 g/m
2
(dry). To keep the coat weight tolerance within a maximum
of 5%, the viscosity of the emulsion must be kept at a constant level (i.e.,
the temperature must remain under control). To keep the intervals between
cleaning as long as possible (coagulation of an emulsion cannot be avoided)
the coating head must be easily accessible for quick cleaning to get rid of
streaks; good access is necessary even during operation.
The following coating devices are used for water-based PSAs [45]:
+ reverse roll;
+ gravure with direct adhesive transfer;
+ knife over roll;
+ reverse gravure.
These methods use a premetering system with the aid of a multi-
cylinder system. On the other hand, there are some methods using an excess
of adhesive, namely roll blade, air brush, and knife over web. The systems
with knife over roll or knife over web may be used for high coating weights,
and mediumto high viscosities. Manufacturing speeds higher than 100 m/min
are possible; a low foam level is ensured. The shape of the knife does
not have any inuence when solvent-based adhesives are used, but for
dispersion-based ones there is a need for a break-down edge, as a station-
ary metering roll is not possible. In Europe today, two coating methods for
emulsion PSAs actually dominate their elds (i.e., the metering bar systems
for tapes and the reverse gravure system for labels). The coating machines
for PSA tapes using water-based PSAs have been described [57].
Figure 9.24 shows the main components of a reverse gravure system. A
closer look at the reverse gravure system reveals why it also is considered
more and more for coating tapes. The most outstanding advantages of this
Manufacture of Pressure-Sensitive Labels 587
coating method are its ease of operation and cleaning, as well as the very
smooth surface of the adhesive. The method is not sensitive towards circular
roller tolerances [6]. Unfortunately, changing the coating weight requires the
change of the coating cylinder since it is not possible to cover a complete
coating weight range with a single gravure size. Other disadvantages include
the diculty in doing pattern coating and in controlling the coating weight
at low speeds (below 50 m/min).
Dierent kinds of reverse roll coatings [38] include: the nip-fed system,
the pan-fed system, and the Dahlgren system. The nip-fed and pan-fed
systems use a metal cylinder; the Dahlgren system requires a special hydro-
philic cylinder (rubber). Reverse roll coaters were developed for adhesives
with a high viscosity. Generally, the coating device is built up from the
following parts: coating cylinder, metering cylinder, transfer cylinder, and a
falling blade. The transfer cylinder runs at 100% of the maximal speed of the
machine. The coating cylinder runs in a reverse sense to the transfer cylinder,
at a speed of 15 to 200% of the coating cylinder [52]. Metering cylinders
run in a reverse sense to the coating cylinder, with a rotation speed dierence
of 10% with respect to the coating cylinder. In order to achieve a smooth
lm, the cylinder speed should be 1. 31. 5 times higher than the velocity of
the web (i.e., for a production speed of 200 m/min, the cylinder should run at
300 m/min) in order to avoid adhesive defects [45].
Conventional roll coaters designed for solvent-based adhesives can
be used successfully including techniques such as gravure, gravure oset,
reverse kiss, direct roll kiss, air knife, etc. Because of the basic dierences
between solution adhesives and polymer dispersions there are considerable
Figure 9.24 The main components of the reverse gravure system. 1) Supply tank;
2) pump; 3) lter; 4) feed box (pan); 5) gravure roll; 6) knife; 7) backing roll; 8) web.
588 Chapter 9
dierences in rheology and it is necessary to take extra care when coating
dispersions in order to optimize coating eciency. For example, a greater
clarity and transparency of the nal lm structure and smoothness of
adhesive coating are ensured if a smoothing roll is installed just after the
coating head. Suggested specications of such a smoothing roll include
a 1.52.0-inch diameter, a polished or plated surface, a reverse direction
drive, a speed of rotation which is 4 times the linear speed, and at a distance
from the coating head of about 20 mm; the track angle is determined
through trials [66].
With a given gravure size it is possible to adjust the coat weight within
a range of approximately 10%. This can be achieved by changing the pump
pressure, the speed of the gravure roll, and the pressure of the doctor blade,
and by the appropriate choice of the type of doctor blade (thickness of the
polyester blade and the shape of the blade tip). High speed (short contact
time between web and gravure) implies a low coating weight, whereas a low
dispersion viscosity means high coating weight. For water-based PSAs on
a reverse gravure coater, it is ideal to have a high solids content with a low
viscosity. The range of the solids or the viscosity is dictated by the surface
tension of the dispersion; production speeds of up to 300 m/min with a
coating weight tolerance of 3% are possible. The capabilities of a reverse
gravure coater for emulsion PSAs are summarized in Table 9.1.
Reverse roll coaters coat PSAs with a viscosity of 12,00050,000 mPa s
[52]; the coating weight ranges are 0.5800 g/m
2
. The reverse roll coater was
developed for viscous media; the shear forces reduce the viscosity during the
coating. The coating weight is determined by the distance between coating
and metering cylinder, and by the relative speed of the two cylinders
respective to the web. Generally, there is a speed dierence between the
Table 9.1 Performance of a Reverse Gravure Coater for
Water-Based PSAs
Coater Characteristics
Coating Characteristics,
Coating Weight (g/m
2
)
Line number Speed (m/min)
10 50 36
20 200 22
40 50 15
50 50 8
70 50 6
80 50 4
Gravure angle: 45
o
w
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
-
m
e
n
t
W
e
t
-
o
u
t
d
i
c
u
l
t
y
G
e
n
e
r
a
l
u
s
e
C
o
a
t
i
n
g
w
e
i
g
h
t
(
g
/
m
2
)
F
a
c
e
S
t
o
c
k
P
a
p
e
r
F
i
l
m
O
t
h
e
r
s
R
e
f
s
.
K
n
i
f
e
S
B
,
W
B
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
M
H
M
L
H
D
/
T
0
.
5
5
0
x
x
M
e
y
e
r
r
o
d
L
C
h
a
m
b
e
r
e
d
H
M
,
W
B
M
L
M
M
L
M
D
/
T
5
5
0
x
x
D
o
c
t
o
r
b
l
a
d
e
K
n
i
f
e
o
v
e
r
S
B
,
W
B
>
3
0
0
0
M
L
M
H
L
T
0
.
5
0
.
3
5
x
x
r
o
l
l
L
D
i
r
e
c
t
r
o
l
l
S
B
,
W
B
M
M
MH
M
M
M
D
/
T
2
0
2
0
0
x
x
x
[
3
5
,
7
3
7
6
]
R
e
v
e
r
s
e
r
o
l
l
H
M
,
S
B
,
W
B
1
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
M
H
M
M
M
D
/
T
2
5
0
x
x
x
3
0
0
5
0
0
L
L
H
L
R
o
t
o
g
r
a
v
u
r
e
H
M
,
S
B
,
W
B
5
0
5
0
0
V
L
H
HH
M
L
H
D
1
4
0
x
x
x
S
l
o
t
-
d
i
e
H
M
,
W
B
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
L
M
M
M
H
D
/
T
1
2
0
0
x
x
x
L
S
B
,
s
o
l
v
e
n
t
-
b
a
s
e
d
;
W
B
,
w
a
t
e
r
-
b
a
s
e
d
;
H
M
,
h
o
t
-
m
e
l
t
.
D
,
d
i
r
e
c
t
c
o
a
t
i
n
g
;
T
,
t
r
a
n
s
f
e
r
c
o
a
t
i
n
g
.
V
L
,
v
e
r
y
l
o
w
;
L
,
l
o
w
;
M
,
m
o
d
e
r
a
t
e
;
H
,
h
i
g
h
.
592 Chapter 9
The GID coating device allows running speeds of 8400 m/min as a function
of the viscosity (2000500,000 cP) [31].
Film coatings may show ribbing patterns that are generated by a poor
adhesive system. Ribbing seen on the applicator roll will result in ribs in the
lm. Foaming can be caused by the recirculation of the adhesive emulsion
from the pick-up roll into the pan. The main coating defects and the
methods to avoid them are listed in Table 9.4.
Table 9.4 Coating Defects and Methods to Avoid Them
Coating Defect Cause/Solution
1. Foaming Cause: Pumping, stirring speed too high; viscosity
too low; wetting agent level too high, inadequate.
Solution: Reduce speed; increase the viscosity; add
defoamer.
2. Wetting problems Cause: Viscosity too low; surface-active agent inade-
quate, surface-active agent level too low; release
liner inadequate; treatment level (lms) too low.
Solution: Increase viscosity; add adequate surface-
active agent, increase the coating speed and shear;
increase the drying speed, change the release liner;
treat the lm again.
3. Bubbles in the adhesive
layer
Cause: Air speed too high; drying speed too high.
Solution: Reduce air blow level, reduce drying tempe-
rature in the rst drying step.
4. Migration of the
adhesive in the face
stock material
Cause: Viscosity too low; drying speed too low; paper
porosity too high; low molecular weight water solu-
ble components in the formulation; low molecular
weight tackier/plasticizer in the formulation; sur-
factant level too high.
Solution: Increase viscosity; decrease surfactant level;
increase the molecular weight of the low molecular
weight components in the formulation; use primer
coating, make transfer coating.
5. Dry adhesive layer is
too soft, legging
Cause: Adhesive is not dried enough; surfactant level
too high.
Solution: Improve drying; use higher temperature and
air volume (WB).
6. Adhesive layer is not
smooth enough, shows
lines
Cause: Viscosity too low/high; grit; coating device is
not clean; mechanical stability of the PSA is not
sucient; too high shear during transport.
Solution: Change the rheology of the product; lter the
PSA, change the shearing conditions, change the
coating device.
(continues)
Manufacture of Pressure-Sensitive Labels 593
3 COATING OF HOT-MELT PSAs
The composite laminate is typically manufactured by coating the hot-melt
PSA in a molten state at a temperature above about 130
C, from a slot-die
or roll coater onto a release liner. The coated release liner then is laminated
to the face stock with a nip roll using pressure between a rubber and a steel
roll. The coating machines and devices used for hot-melt PSAs have been
described [7880]. Coating devices used for hot-melt PSAs are similar to
coating devices used for solventless silicones and for other 100% solids
adhesives. Evidently, other coating systems such as slot-die roll and reverse
roll coating geometries were proposed [81]. Such 100% solids materials
including UV- and EB-curable products can be coated at speeds up to
1500 m/min [62].
3.1 Roll Coaters for Hot-Melt PSAs
Coating devices using engraved cylinders move the adhesive from the nip
with the aid of a cylinder. The adhesive layer is smoothened by a knife (pres-
sure and angle regulated). The molten adhesive is transferred directly to the
web or indirectly through the use of an elastic cylinder. The coating weight
depends on the line numbers and geometry of the cylinder, and the viscosity,
adhesion, and cohesion of the adhesive; the viscosity is limited to 5000 mPa s.
A reverse roll system permits the use of 15020,000 mPa s. In this case, a
metallic cylinder removes the adhesive from the nip. The excess adhesive is
controlled by a reverse roll metering cylinder (cleaned by a knife) [78].
The advantages of roll coating systems for hot-melt PSAs [81] are
a low sensitivity towards dirt, low tolerances in coating weight (1 g/m
2
at
60350 m/min), rapid changes of hot-melt PSA formulations, and a rapid
switch on/o and stop mode is possible. The disadvantages of the roll
Table 9.4 Continued
7. Release too high/low Cause: Drying is not adequate; release liner is not
adequate; release liner is too fresh/old.
Solution: Improve drying conditions; change release
liner quality and age.
8. Coating weight too
high/low
Cause: Viscosity is too low/high; solid content is too
high/low; coating speed is too high/low.
Solution: Change the rheology of the formulation;
change the solid content of the formulation; change
the coating speed, coating geometry.
594 Chapter 9
coating systems for hot-melt PSAs can be summarized as follows [81]: a
direct contact between cylinders should be avoided, a coating weight range
of only 18100 g/m
2
is possible, a ne ridging on the adhesive layer may
be observed, and the system is only half closed and thus it is not protected
from oxidation.
It may be concluded that depending on the desired coating weight,
either the slot-die (1016 g/m
2
) or the roll coating (16100 g/m
2
) system
should be selected. A roller coating system with four cylinders is able to
operate up to 5000 mPa s, and coats up to 250 g/m
2
[82]. Thus the main
disadvantage or limiting factor in the use of roll coaters for the hot-melt
PSAs remains the viscosity. In the kiss coat procedure the web goes over
the application cylinder (one or two cylinders) and is coated in a normal or
reverse roll sense. The coating weight is strongly inuenced by the contact
web/cylinder, web tension, and rotating speed of the cylinder. No viscosity
above 900 mPa s can be successfully coated. Continuous metering of the
adhesive is possible using a smooth cylinder coating device, where the web
travels between two or more cylinders. The speed of the web, the viscosity,
temperature, knife clearance, web angle, cylinder synchron, etc., inuence
the coating weight. This system may be used for hot-melt viscosities of
300500 mPa s [78]. In a manner similar to solvent-based or water-based
adhesives, diagrams or tables are used in order to select the adequate
engraved cylinder (Fig. 9.25).
For hot-melt coatings a running speed of 250 m/min can be
achieved [83].
3.2 Slot-Die Coating for Hot-Melt PSAs
The justication for purchasing hot-melt slot-die coaters is based on
economic considerations. The use of highly concentrated coating media
and the necessity to avoid solvents has created the demand for coating heads
which can handle highly viscous materials. The roller coating methods have
steered new development into dierent directions. Through the combination
of reverse roll coating with the knife over roll coating, a new coating method
was born which allows the handling of a wide range of viscosities and which
is applicable to existing equipment and machinery. Above a viscosity of
30,000 mPa s it is not possible to use a metering roll; in this case a slot-die is
required. Higher viscosities are used for special products like electron beam-
curing of hot-melt PSAs. In this case viscosities up to 1,000,000 mPa s are
possible, but only in the nal stage [83]. Coating systems for hot-melt PSAs
with slot-die (13001500 mm) are able to coat 1840 g/m
2
at a manufacturing
speed of 15270 m/min [84]. The gear-in-die system used for solvent-based
and hot-melt PSAs may operate in a temperature range of room temperature
Manufacture of Pressure-Sensitive Labels 595
to 250
C are possible
and the energy input of the system is 712 kWh/kg [88].
Generally, cleaning of slot-die coating devices for hot melts is dicult.
There are formulations which are not mutually compatible therefore for
rapid changes of formulations slot-die is not recommended. Cleaning of the
machines which work with water-based PSAs can be carried out using water
(at least theoretically). However, sometimes the dried adhesive needs the use
of solvents.
Metering devices for GID and Duplex systems, used mainly for hot-
melt and high solid solvent-based coatings (mainly for tapes), show the
following advantages [46]:
+ lower costs for drying and solvent recovery;
+ higher productivity (30%) at a maximum of 420 m/min;
+ lower installation costs;
+ lower pollution;
+ simpler cleaning;
+ less space required;
+ higher accuracy;
+ higher solids;
+ lower shear;
+ no foaming.
The GID device possesses an interspace between the die and the
coating roll; the adhesive is fed into this interspace with or without the pump
(Duplex/GID). Advantages include the absence of turbulence, foam, and
residues on the die. The system was originally developed to be used for all
coating media (i.e., emulsion, hot-melt, and solvent-based PSAs) [89]. It has
an entirely new slot-orice die, with a liquid pumping section built into the
die. The pump is designed to cover the complete die length. The coating
die is hinged for quick opening and easy cleaning; adhesive transfer to the
coating slot is given via a hydrodynamically acting rotor over the entire
width, with rotor speed adjustable according to media viscosity and required
coating weight, and no pressure builds up in the coating die (thus there is no
Manufacture of Pressure-Sensitive Labels 597
overow and build-up of adhesive on the edges). Curtain coaters are special
slot-die coaters where the coating nozzle is built up of small orices.
4 DRYING OF THE COATING
After coating solvent-based or water-based adhesives the liquid adhesive
carrier has to be removed (i.e., a drying channel or tunnel is required).
Recent developments for drying tunnels have been discussed [9098]. The
main component of a dryer is the adhesive drying tunnel, operating in most
cases with heated air. The web travels through the tunnel supported by a
conveyor belt, idlers, or air (contact free).
4.1 Adhesive Drying Tunnel
The design of a drying tunnel and its parameters depend on the nature of the
adhesive to be coated and dried. The choice of the conveyor belt and length
of the drying tunnel is of fundamental importance and is selected depending
on whether the application uses solvent-based or water-based adhesives, the
desired dry coat weight, the solids content, the operating speed, the type of
web, etc. The various sections with independent air ow rate, temperature,
and exhaust/recycle features can be selected and/or combined; among them:
+ standard rollers;
+ rollers with adjustable air over/underneath the web;
+ air flotation;
+ conveyor belt;
+ festoons.
Figure 9.26 shows the main types of drying tunnel.
The inuence of the formulation on the drying was discussed in detail
in [99]. The choice of drying system for solvent-based or water-based
adhesives (or both) must take into account the relative evaporation curves
of the solvent or water through the various sections. In the case of solvents
an increased amount of solvent should be evaporated at the beginning of the
tunnel. For water-based coating the water evaporated is maximum in the
middle of the path. The drying conditions for water-based PSAs dier from
those of solvent-based ones. Water-based systems are more eciently dried
by air volumes rather than air temperature. The temperature gradient
throughout the drying oven should also be dierent [100] (see also Fig. 7.2).
Energy requirements for solvent-based coatings are 170200 cal/kg and for
water-based ones 400500 cal/kg [101]. Low viscosity water-based coatings
can be dried at an evaporation rate of 1020 kg/m
2
, typical solvent-based
598 Chapter 9
adhesives are dried with 2050 kg/m
2
per hour. On the other hand, safety
requirements require more air volume than necessary from a thermal point
of view. According to [102] when drying solvent-based adhesive the air
volume and speed must be large enough to avoid an explosive concentration
(s. lower explosion limit, LEL). As discussed in detail in [103] the air volume
necessary to dry a solvent-based coating depends on the lower explosion
limit which is a function of the solvent nature. Therefore it is necessary to
heat large volumes of air to keep solvent concentrations low. Water-based
adhesives do not need such air quantities, thus energy requirements for such
adhesives are lower. For example, drying a water-based dispersion requires
2.2 10
5
kcal/h compared to 7.61 10
5
kcal/h for a solvent-based one. A
common mistake is the application of too much heat [35]. This leads to the
ash o of the upper water layer and skinning occurs. For aqueous PSAs
drying is generally more ecient with multizone ovens programmed for
gradually increasing temperatures. Typically, a rst zone temperature of
160
F. Such designs
have eliminated the skinning and coating defects [46]. If an air-otation
oven is used, the distance between the coating surface and the nozzle is quite
critical. Adjustments of as little as 12 mm can create a totally new drying
Figure 9.26 The main constructive parts of the drying tunnel. A) Drying tunnel
with rollers, with air jets over the web; B) drying tunnel with rollers, with air jets over
and under the web; C) drying tunnel with rollers and conveyor belt; D) drying tunnel
with air otation.
Manufacture of Pressure-Sensitive Labels 599
environment as this gap denes the actual drying temperature [35]. Drying
channels have slot-dies for the air (810 cm between the dies), situated
24 cm from the web; the air ow rate amounts to about 6080 m/sec [104].
At the entrance of the channel, the temperature should be high enough in
order to evaporate large water quantities. After a decrease of the temperature
in the middle, the temperature should increase again at the end in order to
eliminate the remainder of the humidity from the adhesive.
Dierent drying methods are actually used (hot air, IR, radiofrequency,
UV, electron beam) [105,106]. Narrow web modular label presses include
UV drying, IR drying, and hot air drying [107]. Generally, the drying
time depends on the adhesive and on the drying conditions. The drying
parameters depend on the coating weight, and the temperature, volume,
and speed of the air. The air ow rate depends like other aerodynamical
parameters on the machine construction. For aqueous dispersions drying
also depends on the pH.
There are a lot of literature data concerning the drying of adhesives in
general and PSAs in particular [103,107,108]; as mentioned above, solvent-
based and water-based adhesives require quite dierent drying conditions.
Concerning the speed of the air, the blow o (blow away) of the coating
should be avoided through a limited air speed (i.e., 2545 m/sec) [107,109].
The solidication of crosslinkable systems may be a complex problem too.
During their coating the removal of the solvent must be rst carried out
at a lower temperature. For instance, in the case of silicone PSAs higher
temperatures can cause the peroxide to decompose prematurely and cross-
link the solvent into the adhesive [110].
Infrared Drying
Infrared heaters generally are used in plastics processing and coating
[111,112]. Wavelengths are selected as a function of the product to be dried
[10]. Infrared heaters used as preheating displace 1030% of the humidity
from the coating. Infrared drying also may be used for paper coating
[113,114]. Infrared drying may avoid adhesive penetration [115]. Short
wavelength devices have a 50300 kW/m
2
output, 80% IR heat output, and
fast on/o switching. The wavelength of IR dryers for water-based adhesives
should be in the domain where maximum IR absorption by water occurs
[116]. Infrared drying and equipment have been described [12]; heating
element parameters, air knives, exhaust and cooling, and processing
considerations are reviewed and an example of an IR dryer calculation is
given. Infrared radiation with a wavelength of 0.76 jm to 1 mm should be
used; the highest energy transfer is given at a wavelength shorter than 2 jm
[117]. In IR drying the thickness of the water-based layer inuences
600 Chapter 9
the absorbtion wavelength. Thinner water lms absorb more energy in the
shorter wavelength domain [118]. Such coating weight related considerations
may inuence the adhesive formulation also. The advantages and dis-
advantages of IR/UV drying have been discussed [119]. Broad-band infrared
radiant driers also may be used. The main benet claimed is that they greatly
speed up drying, cutting the residence time by at least half. Another drier,
the air knife (originally developed for use with water-based coatings), blows
thin curtains of very hot air across freshly coated web at speeds of up to
1400 m/min. Another system utilizes convection to achieve high heat transfer
rates without the web being lifted from the nozzle or disturbing the coated
surface. New developments oer cassette-based drying systems to provide
the best drier for each type of web with rapid changeover.
Flying Dryer (Flotation Dryers, Contact-Free Dryers)
The construction of a ying dryer has been described [42]. The distance
between web and dies is about 3 mm [120122]. The air speed amounts to
about 50 m/sec, the temperature 250
C) has been
developed also for hot-melts. It possesses an unlimited storage stability
under usual conditions. It will be depolymerized in the soil only [184].
Aqueous dispersions of vinyl ester polymers which are biologically
degradable can by prepared by free radical polymerization in the presence
of 10% to 50% bw. of biologically degradable plasticizer and of 0.515%
biologically degradable emulsier or protective colloid [185]. As stated
in [186] almost two decades ago, because of their limited performance
characteristics and excessive costs, the scope of completely biodegradable
and compostable plastics (and adhesives, N.A.) is still limited in marginal
areas. Therefore the recycling of adhesives during production is
recommended. Advances in the synthesis and formulation of biologically
degradable raw materials for adhesives are discussed in [187,188].
Research was carried out in order to develop bio-based adhesives,
using renewable raw materials also. Such PSAs were derived from plant and
animal oil triglycerides and monoglycerides with chemical groups (epoxy,
carboxyl, hydroxyl, vinyl, amine, etc.) that render them polymerizable [189].
The monomers for PSAs are derived from chemically functionalized
Manufacture of Pressure-Sensitive Labels 611
triglycerides, diglycerides, and monoglycerides with controlled fatty acid
distributions. This allows the molecular architecture of PSAs to be designed
with linear chains, branched chains, and structures with controlled crosslink
density. In addition to the skeletal structure obtained by the polymerization
process, the polymer structure can be functionalized with groups whose
purpose is to control the adherence to the substrate. In other tests plant oils
were used as starting material, e.g., high purity oleic methyl ester. In such
compounds the single double bond allows for easy synthesis of linear poly-
mers. These base materials were transformed into acrylic derivatives [190].
6 SIMULTANEOUS MANUFACTURE OF PSAs
AND PSA LAMINATES
6.1 Radiation Curing of PSAs
Chapter 5 discussed some special cases where the monomers to be used
for manufacturing the adhesive are not polymerized, or polymerized only
partially and coated as such; in these cases, the PSA is manufactured during
the coating. These are special materials with the ability to polymerize through
radiation (electron beam or UV). As an intermediate step, there are special
classical PSA formulations which can be dried or cured using radiation as
well. Although an intensive eort was carried out in this eld, electron beam-
or UV-cured PSAs or PSA-related materials are still considered exotic.
Pressure is growing on converters using solvent-based materials to
look for methods which are environmentally acceptable [191]. Here the eld
of chemistry can oer new groups of products, namely systems with a low
solvent and a high solids content (i.e., water-based systems, coatings with
solid resin in powder form, and 100% prepolymerized solid systems). The
following feasible solutions as alternatives for solvent-containing formula-
tions are known for PSAs: formulations on an aqueous basis, formulations
on a hot-melt basis, and radiation-curable and crosslinkable formulations.
Numerous papers have been published in the past several years in this eld,
some of which could serve as a basis for industrial applications. Techniques
which do not include the disadvantages of thermal drying are the various
methods of radiation drying, in particular those including ionizing radiation
such as ultraviolet- and electron beam-curing. In this case the energy is
transferred without contact. Energy transfer can take place in a vacuum or
through a vacuum section. Electron beams belong to the directly ionizing
beams of energy levels above 3 eV. Some of the advantages of electron beam
processing for PSAs include higher productivity, compliance with regulatory
restrictions, enhanced protability, and increased product development
capacity [192].
612 Chapter 9
Styrene-isoprene-styrene block copolymers can be crosslinked to
become PSAs by means of reactive monomers under radiation [193195].
Electron radiation crosslinking of PSAs has enjoyed industrial applications
for several years now making PSA tapes. Furthermore Huber and Mu ller
[196,197] were able to present new radiation-curable copolyesters. These are
saturated copolyesters containing reactive acrylate end groups [198]. Nitzl
et al. [194,199] and Forster [200] studied hot-melt PSA formulas based on
block copolymers; the base polymer used was Kraton D-1320X, a branched
styrene-butadiene copolymer with a functionalized end group in combina-
tion with hydrocarbon resins. The various formulas were crosslinked by
electron beam exposure at doses of 2 and 4 Mrad. The available results
show that there is no clear dependence of the adhesive properties on the
formulation [199].
As postulated by Seng [201], the most important application eld of
radiation curing is the curing of silicones and PSAs. Release-coating curing
is done mainly for labels, while curing of the adhesive layer is mostly for
labels and tapes; a postcuring via an electron beam is made for tapes also
[198]. In all these domains, both techniques present advantages and
disadvantages [201]. Electron beam-curing is faster, up to 100500 m/min
versus 100200 m/min for UV, but needs a nitrogen atmosphere and may
damage paper. UV displays the disadvantages of rest monomers, a limited
thickness of the layer, and too low penetration of the radiation.
The state of development of radiation curing (electron beam and UV)
has been discussed [202204]. The rst application of electron beam-curing
for PSA tapes was described in 1954 [205]. Silicone acrylic PSAs were used
by Hurst in 1983 as release liner [206]. An in-line UV-curing hot-melt PSA/
silicone release manufacturing line was proposed in 1982 [206]. Other papers
discuss the problems of radiation curing for lacquers, printing inks, and
adhesives [207211]. The coating and printing of radiation curing systems
has been discussed in a detailed manner [212216]. The technology of
UV curing for varnishes and pigments in the printing industry (Face stock
printing for labels) has been discussed [217221]. Radiation curing
possibilities for plastics and paper coating were covered by Ro ltgen
and others [222227]. Guidelines for the formulation of radiation-cured
adhesives were reviewed by Hinterwaldner [228,229]. The electron beam-
curing and drying of varnishes and coatings was described by Strohner [230]
and Fuhr [231].
6.2 Siliconizing Through Radiation
An emerging coating application which lends itself to UV/electron beam-
cure technology involves silicone release coatings. There are several reasons
Manufacture of Pressure-Sensitive Labels 613
for the interest in these new techniques. Because UV- and especially electron
beam-curing occurs at very low temperatures, these kinds of silicone release
coatings can be applied and used on heat-sensitive liners (e.g., PET,
polypropylene, or polyethylene lms) and polyolen-coated papers without
distorting such liners. For the same reason the application of radiation-
curable release coatings to Kraft paper liners eliminates the need for
remoisturization of the coated paper. The complete, immediate cure of
radiation-curable release coatings eliminates blocking of rolls of nished
product and provides greater assurance of uniform release characteristics
from the outside of a roll to its core [232]. Electron beam-curing enables
simultaneous curing of both sides of two-sided coated release liners. UV/
electron beam technology is a considerably more ecient means of curing
than thermal drying; the energy cost is less than that of conventional (i.e.,
thermally dried) release coatings and the need for large ovens disappears.
The practice of in-line mixing of release coatings with a relatively short pot
life could be eliminated with these types of coatings. These fully formulated
products typically have a shelf life of 6 months to 1 yr. Theoretically, the
hot UV system, the cold UV system, and electron beam-curing can
be used [233]. In some cases solvent-based silicones were postcured with an
electron beam [234]. The coating weight for electron beam-cured silicones
amounts to 0.71.5 g/m
2
with a curing time of 0.3 sec. In some cases
the release properties of electron beam-cured silicone papers improve with
storage [235]. The performance characteristics of electron beam-cured
silicones and the advantages/disadvantages of the procedure were summar-
ized by Brus et al. [236].
Radiation-cured silicones have to be coated as a continuous layer, at
a coating speed of 300 m/min, a coating weight of less than 1 g/m
2
, and with
a viscosity below 1500 mPa s. They contain at least 90% dimethylsiloxane.
Radiation-cured silicones are based on prepolymers; radiation-cured PSAs
also contain reactive monomers [200]. The most common radiation-cured
silicone systems are based on acrylic (silicone derivatives) which are cross-
linkable via electron beam or UV radiation. Another system is based on
mercapto-modied silicones; these are not air-sensitive and may be used for
UV curing. The initial tests were carried out with UV-cured silicones, mostly
in combination with hot-melt PSAs. In comparison with electron beam-
cured PSAs, electron beam-cured silicone liners need no more than a
0.5 Mrad dose. The highest eciency is achieved by coupling hot-melt PSA
coatings with in-line siliconizing. In this case about 30% of the energy costs
may be saved [200]. Although new UV-curable silicones display improved
substrate and adhesive compatibility, it is not correct to assume that any
silicone will work with all adhesives. Such products possess a minimum
viscosity at 20
and 180
C)
AKZO Brookeld RVT 3 50 20
Polysar Brookeld RVT 2 30
Rhone-Poulenc Brookeld RVT 50 23
BASF Contraves STV C11 23
Hoechst Brookeld RVT 5 20 23
Hoechst Contraves MS-C11 23
Rohm & Haas Brookeld LVT 3 30
Sealock Brookeld RV 3 20 20
Test Methods 631
the Brookeld viscosity at 50 rpm. This index shows an increase of the low
speed viscosity of 5% for conventional polyacrylic PSAs used as thickener,
as compared to 33% for some special products.
Wetting Characteristics
The wetting characteristics of a dispersion are examined either directly or
indirectly. The direct evaluation of the wetting characteristics implies the
subjective examination of the wet-out of the original or slightly diluted
dispersion on a release liner or on a face stock material. The indirect
characterization of the wetting properties refers to the measurement of
the surface tension of the dispersion or of the wetting angle.
Direct Examination of the Wetting Out. The evaluation of the wet-
out should be carried out on the surface of the carrier material which is to be
coated. Depending on the nature of the coating (direct/transfer), either the
face stock or the release liner should be used as the test surface. The test of
the wet-out on a face stock material is mostly used for lm carriers.
The liquid typical PSA rst is applied onto a release liner before
transfer application onto the face stock; both solvent-based and solventless
silicone liners should be included in the evaluation. After drying a com-
parison of the coatings should be made, based on the visual inspection of the
presence (or absence) of defects (cratering, pinholes, sh eyes, etc.) [8]. The
wetting out can be characterized by crater number and wetting defects [9].
Vinyl Wetting Test. A lm of the experimental latex is cast on the
PVC sheet using the draw-down bar. The lm coating is inspected for sh
eyes and cratering. The fewer sh eyes and craters the lm contains the
better the vinyl wetting of the latex.
Indirect Examination of the Wet-Out. Wetting out can be tested via
sur-face energy and surface tension. The evaluation of the wetting out and
the existing norms have been described [10,11]. The evaluation of the surface
tension according to Union Carbide or ASTM yields no real information
about the adhesion [12]. This test is made more in order to characterize the
coating performance of an adhesive or of a surface to be coated. The coating
performance and wetting out depend on the surface tension, but the surface
tension measurement alone is not sucient to characterize the actual
behavior of an adhesive on a coating machine. In the coating of a latex
at high speeds the dynamic aspect of wetting also appears critical. The
measurement of the contact angle of a latex on a face stock material or
the surface tension of the latex with dierent surfactant systems determines
the choice of the surfactant [13]. The wettability of adhesives also may be
632 Chapter 10
examined using a wettability balance [14]. Pitzler [15] stated that under
certain conditions (low surfactant level) the results of the ring and plate
method for surface tension measurement can dier. Pitzler is proposing
dynamical contact angle measurements with advancing and receding angle
measurements, and stated that for wetting out the advancing contact angle
is more important. It should be emphasized that this depends on the coating
speed. Independent from the analysis of the static wet-out, dynamic tests
under shear also are necessary. Surface tension tests were standardized
according to the FINAT methods. Similar test methods were published by
DIN and ASTM. Surface tension measurements and (wet) lm-weighing
machine measurements allow the evaluation of adequate surfactants, their
diusion velocity, the reduction of the surface tension, and the surfactant
concentration required [16].
The evaluation of the surface tension, with the aid of a wettability/
wetting angle measuring device has been described [17]. A simple method
to test the dynamic surface tension is the use of a stalagmometer (capillary
tube). This methodthe pendant drop method [18]involves the measure-
ment of the surface tension of the aqueous dispersion (as compared to
water) using a stalagmometer to determine the number of liquid drops.
The dynamic surface tension is given by the ratio of the number of water
droplets (multiplied by the surface tension of water) to the number of the
emulsion droplets.
Wetting Angle. The method of the wetting angle may be used to test
the face stock, the release liner, or the PSAs. The same method applies in
order to determine the nature (solvent-based, water-based, or hot-melt) of an
unknown PSA (or label). In this case it is assumed that the water-based
adhesive always leaves traces of surface agents on the release liner.
Therefore, a delaminated release liner which had been originally coated
with a water-based adhesive allows a better wet-out for pure water. In order
to determine the water-based or solvent-based nature of an unknown PSA
sample, the wetting angle of water on the delaminated release liner should
be measured (deionized water should be used). For example, typical wetting
angle data for a solvent-based rubber-resin and water-based tackied acrylic
PSA coated release liner are 101103
and 9193
, respectively.
Wettability of a Release Liner. In the evaluation of the wettability of
an adhesive on a release liner care should be taken because of the change of
the wettability of the siliconized paper with time (Table 10.2). Following a
small increase after a few days, it decreases with increasing storage time (i.e.,
the wettability increases with increasing age of the siliconized paper).
Test Methods 633
Wetting Angle for Adhesive Extract. Extracting with water the water-
soluble surface-active agents from a PSA-coated laminate (adhesive nature
unknown) and comparing the wetting angle of the extract with those of a
known hot-melt or solvent-based PSA, it is possible to identify the nature of
the adhesive (Table 10.3).
Foam Content
The most important tests used for the characterization of the foaming ability
of a dispersion consist of the following:
1. Stirring and measuring the foam density.
Table 10.2 Wettability of Siliconized Paper as a Function of Age
Characteristics of Silicone Coating (wetting angle,
)
Nature of the Silicone Coating
Age of the coating (days) Solventless Solvent-based
0 103 109
103 107
100 113
96 109
1 108 87
107 89
103 106
103 105
2 108 107
106 108
110 110
107 111
3 106 111
104 108
105 111
101 110
7 106 104
108 105
102 105
103 106
30 98 106
98 106
100 107
98 106
634 Chapter 10
2. High speed stirring (42,000 rpm) and measuring the foam height.
3. Foam generation by air bubbling.
4. Foam dynamics as a function of time.
Generally, tackied dispersions display a higher foam content than untacki-
ed ones. The evaluation of the foaming behavior is carried out using
dierent stirring devices and measuring the volume, height, or weight of the
foam column [19]. The foam number after 5 min is used for foam charac-
terization [20]. Byk [21] showed that the best results are obtained by stirring
the diluted dispersion for 1 min with a high speed mixer. A volume of 50 ml
of the stirred, foamed, aqueous dispersion is weighed. The weight of the
liquid (dispersion/air mixture) is an index for the foaming characteristics.
Surfactant solutions (or water-based formulations) should be subjected to
high speed agitation at 2560
)
Tackied water-based acrylic 1.5 62.0
Solvent-based rubber/resin 0 94.9
Solvent-based rubber/resin 0 84.8
Tackied water-based CSBR acrylic 0.8 77.0
Water-based acrylic 5 47.0
Test Methods 635
+ The dispersion then is stirred at 4500 rpm for 30 sec. The volume is
recorded and a 5-min time period is started.
+ Volumes should be recorded at the 15 sec mark and then each
minute thereafter.
+ With the aid of the weight/volume correlation, density values can be
calculated. With this method the sample contains both entrained
air and froth foam, and the lowest density value corresponds to the
case of the highest amount of foam. Errors related to the transfer of
the foam into another vessel are eliminated.
Mechanical Stability (Sieve Residue)
The term mechanical stability refers to the ability of the emulsion polymer
to resist coagulation under the inuence of shearing stresses as encountered
during agitation or pumping. Shear under machine conditions depends on
the running speed and viscosity, and the shear characteristics of the coating
device. In the most frequently employed test the polymer is stirred at high
speed in a blender for a specic time (typically 10 min). The amount of
coagulum (instability) resulting from this treatment is determined by
ltering the latex through an 80-mesh screen [24]; a 100-mesh screen also is
sometimes used [25]. There are standard test methods for determining grit,
lumps, or undissolved matter in water-borne adhesives [26]. For instance
ISO 705 (third edition, 1985-08-15) describes the determination of coagulum
content (sieve residue) for rubber latex [27].
A rapid measure of mechanical stability is obtained by ltering a
sample through a 100-mesh screen, then stirring it at high speed in a blender
for 510 min. The emulsion is again passed through the screen and washed
through with water until only solid, if any, remains on the wire. If there is no
solid residue the emulsion is considered to possess very satisfactory mecha-
nical stability. If so desired the amount of solid can be weighed after drying
the screen in a circulating draft of a vacuum oven at 80100
C.
The Hamilton Beach blender test is another way of testing the
mechanical stability. The percent residue created by subjecting the emulsion
to high speed agitation for a set period of time is a measure of the stability
of the emulsion (or the lack thereof). According to [34] the Warring Blender
test is not useful in assessing high shear, due to the lack of conned
geometry to produce high shear eld. Earlier rheometers normally lacked
the capability to remove viscous heating during the high shearing which
could produce shear-induced occulation, instead of coagulation. Better
results are obtained using a high shear rheometer (e.g., Hake Rheostress
300) testing the viscosity stability for 600 sec at 70 K/sec. Such laboratory
636 Chapter 10
methodology for high shear stability of acrylic emulsions was conrmed by
pumping with a positive displacement progressive cavity pump.
Sieve Residue (Tackifying Resin). This is a measure of how much
deposit the user can expect to nd in the lters. Normally, the specication
allows a maximum of 0.05%; a more realistic gure, however, is a maximum
of 0.015%.
Grit Content. The grit represents the coagulum which did not pass
through a 200-mesh screen [30]. It can be tested visually, either by coating
a thin (25 g/m
2
) adhesive layer on a transparent face stock material or by
using a screen (gravimetrically).
Drying Ability and Conditions
While screening dierent water-based PSAs with similar adhesive but
dierent processing conditions it appears very important to estimate
their drying ability. The drying ability is the drying speed (loss of water
with time) under real conditions. Unfortunately, there is no standard
method nor apparatus for this test. Preliminary screening tests may
be carried out by the weight loss determination of the coating in time
(see Fig. 6.5).
Tests with PSA laminates require a dry adhesive coating. Dierent
companies use quite dierent drying conditions as can be seen from
Table 10.4. ASTM has developed methods of determining drying, curing,
or lm forming of an organic coating at room temperatures (TE5-
1740-65T).
Table 10.4 Drying Conditions
Coating Characteristics Drying Conditions
Face Stock
Coating
weight (g/m
2
) Nature
Temperature
(
C)
Time
(min) Ref.
PET Solvent-based 90 45 [28]
100 510 [29]
Water-based 120 10 [30]
PET Water-based 130 3
PP 25 Water-based 220 0.5 [25]
93/204 [31]
Paper 70 5 [32]
PET Solvent-based RT/90 15/5 [33]
Test Methods 637
There are some properties which allow a screening of water-based
PSAs from the point of view of the coating properties. Parameters such as
solids content, particle size, and density yield indirect information about the
machine properties of the adhesive.
Particle Size
Dierent methods used for the determination of the particle size and
distribution are known; either simple or more sophisticated pieces of
equipment are used. Particle size is related to mechanical stability,
water resistance, viscosity, and surface tension. The measurement of the
particle size can be carried out with a stalagmometer, by determining the
number of liquid drops for the pure dispersion and the modied one, upon
adding an increased surfactant level to the dispersion. The method is:
+ The dispersion to be tested should be diluted (1 : 1.5) with water.
+ Increasing quantities of surfactant (in fact a 10% wet weight
surfactant solution) in ortions of 12 cc should be added and
the surface tension should be measured. The surface tension/
concentration of surfactant plot for the unknown dispersion is to
be compared with the plot of a known dispersion (using the same
surfactant). The slope of the surface tension versus surfactant
concentration plot is equal to the moles of soap absorbed per gram
of polymer. If the same surfactant is used as in the synthesis of the
emulsion, and the original amount of soap per gram of polymer
solids is known, the surface area per gram of polymer can be
calculated, and hence the average surface radius of the polymer
particles.
For emulsions, the particle size is a measure of the quality of the
dispersion. Particles with a diameter of 0.250.5 jm can be observed with
a microscope. Other methods for measuring particle size and particle size
distribution exist (i.e., laser light scattering).
Solids Content
When measuring the solids content of resin emulsions it is very important
that the sample remains in the oven for only 40 min, as the base used for
emulsication is volatile. Karl Fischer water content measurements tend to
indicate a solids content of about 1% higher than solids content determined
in an oven.
638 Chapter 10
Density
This is a measure of how much air is contained in the emulsion. A low
density (i.e., high air entrainment) causes problems through dehydration of
the emulsion at the surface (especially if the temperature exceeds 30
C).
2 EVALUATION OF THE SOLID ADHESIVE
Many dierent test methods were established in order to characterize the
adhesive, converting, and special properties of the solid (i.e., dried) PSAs.
As these depend on the coating weight, the measurement of this parameter
is discussed next. The adhesive properties of the solid PSAs are discussed
in Chap. 6.
2.1 Test of Coating Weight
A simple gravimetric method can help to keep coating weight specications
within 0.5 g/m
2
, resulting in considerable savings. The coating weight is
tested by dissolving the adhesive layer in a solvent and determining the
weight dierence between coated and uncoated face material.
Apparatus:
+ Balance with a precision of 0.001 g.
+ Die-cutting device for 100-cm samples.
+ IR lamp (300 W).
Method:
+ Prepare a 100-cm
2
sample by die-cutting the laminate and weigh it
with a 0.001-g precision.
+ Wash off the adhesive layer with a common solvent for the
adhesive (e.g., toluene).
+ Dry the cleaned face material under the IR lamp for 20 sec at 20 cm
distance from the lamp.
+ Check the weight of the cleaned, dried face material again.
+ The weight difference indicates the coating weight.
Generally, for paper/PET coatings, this method yields more reliable results
than comparing the weight of the coated and uncoated face material.
In-line gravimetric measurements of the coating weight can be carried
out by inserting siliconized paper or aluminum foils in the laminating
Test Methods 639
station. Methods based on beam penetration and absorption (IR, ,-rays,
etc.) also are often used in-line.
2.2 Other Properties
Other properties of solid (dry) PSAs or raw materials to be examined consist
of the softening point of the resin, the Williams plasticity/modulus, the
nature of the adhesive, the FDA/BGA compliance, the tensile strength, and
the cold ow.
Softening Point of the Resin
Tackied dispersions dier through their softening (melting) point. The
tack/shear balance of an adhesive is related to the softening point of the
tackier resin (see Chap. 6). Softening points as measured by the Mettler
device are 510
angle.
+ The temperature of the heated zone giving adhesive transfer should
be noted.
The softening point provides information about the nature of the adhesive
(hot-melt/solvent-based, competitive samples) and the formulation (tackier
amount and nature). The softening range can be determined according to
ASTM E-2867 too (4).
Williams Plasticity
The Williams plasticity number indicates the deformability of the adhesive
mass under a static load. Williams plasticity has recently regained favor
for PSA testing purposes. It was used extensively in the 1950s for following
molecular weight changes in reactions during polymer production, but
was replaced by the Mooney viscosity which is normally faster and more
convenient to measure [35].
640 Chapter 10
The Williams plasticity is used for screening hot-melt PSAs [36]; it is
run at 100
F for 15 min [37]. The sample coated on a release liner is dried for
24 h, weighed (to 2.0 g), conditioned for 15 min at test temperature, the load
applied, and the plasticity measured 10 min after the application of the load
[38]. In some cases the Williams plasticity is evaluated at dierent tempera-
tures (38200
F (3837.8
C) [41].
Apparatus:
+ Plastometer with gauge (Williams Plastometer, Scott Testers Inc.)
in accordance with ASTM-D-926.
+ An oven.
+ Release paper.
Method:
+ A wet film of the adhesive is coated onto siliconized release
paper, so as to produce a dry film. It is dried at room temperature
and further dried for 5 min at 135
C.
+ With the plastometer and sample at 38
F [43].
Tensile Strength
The method ASTM D-638 is used for the evaluation of adhesive lms. For
this purpose, 3.2 0.4-mm thick and 19 0.5-mm wide dumbbell-shaped
specimens are prepared and strained in a tensile tester until break occurs.
The tensile force at break is registered and divided by the original cross-
section area of the narrow section of the specimen.
642 Chapter 10
Apparatus: Tensile tester
Method:
+ A 500-jm adhesive layer is coated onto a siliconized release liner.
+ After drying (at 70
and 180
F)
exposure is suggested for emulsion polymers. A tackied CSBR coated on
paper is tested by coating it on release paper, drying for 5 min at 70
C, then
2 min at 100
F. The adhesive
then is laminated onto a release liner and conditioned for a minimum of 2 hr
at standard temperature and humidity before testing [38]. Drying at 90
C for
3 min followed by conditioning at 23 2
C on soft PVC at 45
50
C.
Test Conditions/Conditioning. A specication for materials testing
always has to start with a denition of environmental conditions. Methods
will normally specify 23
C for 14 days
and then for 24 hr at 23
30
/
, the adhesive thickness being at least 25 jm. In a modied
rolling ball test, according to PSTC 6, an inclined angle of 21
30
/
, a necessary
length of 12.5 cm, and a ball weighing 7.59 g with a diameter of 1.229 cm
(0.484 in.) is used. In a dierent manner from other tack testing methods, the
rolling ball method does not measure the debonding force [36]. The apparatus
used is relatively simple, but unfortunately the test is inuenced by adhesive
residues on the ball or by the viscosity and thickness of the adhesive layer.
Table 10.11 summarizes the characteristics of the tack test methods by rolling
ball. As illustrated by data of Table 10.12 low tack pressure-sensitive
products cannot be characterized adequately using the RBT test.
Table 10.11 Rolling Ball Tack; Characteristics of the Test Method
Travel Path Rolling Ball Characteristics
Method Length (mm) Angle Diameter (mm) Weight (g) Ref.
173 25
14 4 [87]
PSTC 6 180 21
30
/
11.1 [88]
PSTC 6 125 21
30
/
12.29 7.59 [59]
180 21
30
/
[59]
654 Chapter 10
Rolling Cylinder Tack. The rolling cylinder tack (RCT) method is a
modied version of RBT, known as the Douglas tack test. Here one uses
a stainless steel cylinder with a diameter of 24.5 mm, a length of 19.05 mm,
weight of 75 g, and a travel path 203 mm long with an angle of 5
[3].
The reproducibility of the RCT values is better than the reproduci-
bility of the RBT values; the running path is shorter and less material is
necessary (as compared to competitive samples). For paper laminates values
of 1.52.5 are very good and values of 7.58.0 fair. No more than 15 cm
can be accepted. For lm laminates values of 2.53.5 are very good, values
of 4.55 are fair, and values above 78 cm are not acceptable. Rolling
ball tack is more sensitive towards the coating weight than rolling cylinder
tack (Table 10.13).
Table 10.12 Rolling Ball Tack Values for Various PSPs
Adhesive Properties
Product Tack (RB, cm) Peel (180
, N/25 mm)
Label 3,0 1,0
Tape 2,5 3,0
Protecting lm 25,0 1,0
Separation lm >100,0 0,2
Table 10.13 Dependence of the Tack on the Coating
Weight; Rolling Ball Versus Rolling Cylinder
Tack Values
Coating
Weight (g/m
2
)
Rolling
ball tack
Rolling
cylinder tack
16 10.4 4.5
10.7 4.8
10.0 4.2
19 4.5 4.5
5.0 5.0
5.0 4.0
27 3.4 3.0
3.1 2.9
3.1 3.0
Test Methods 655
Other Tack Test Methods. Another method proposed by Bull [85] (in
a manner dierent from the rolling ball method where the adhesive surface
is static, and the adhesiveless contact surface rotates) has a polished rotating
adhesiveless cylinder in contact with a rotating adhesive-coated cylinder.
This method measures the force (resistance) necessary to move the cylinders.
Unfortunately, a special apparatus is needed. Like in the rolling ball tests,
debonding is inuenced by the compression of the adhesive by the cylinder.
Tack Measured with the Toothed Wheel Method. Druschke [68]
summarized the dierent factors inuencing the adhesion (and the test
method); they are:
+ the surface tension of the adhesive, face stock, and adherend;
+ the mechanical (viscoelastic) properties of the adhesive, face stock,
and adherent;
+ the surface structure of the adhesive, release liner, and adherent;
+ the thickness of the adhesive, face stock, release liner, and
adherent;
+ the test conditions.
Taking these parameters into account, Druschke improved the
rotating drum method. A further development of the rotating drum
method is the pitch-wheel method [86]. In this method the polished wheel
used in the rotating drum method is replaced by a pitched wheel, and the
contact force is measured using a common tensile strength test machine.
Druschke [68] proposed the toothed wheel method which permits very short
contact times, as does the rotating drum principle. In the new method, a
toothed wheel rotating freely around its axis is xed in the upper clamp of a
tensile tester with a liner. A rotating drum is pushed against the wheel until
an almost pressureless contact is achieved. The tensile tester measures the
force acting against the rotating drum with the adhesive layer.
Mechano Optical Tack Tester. This method is a variant of the probe
tack test. Tack measuring with a Mechano Optical Tack Tester, MOTT
(a device developed by Elf-Atochem) [78,81] allows the determination of the
tack strength, tack energy, and the actual contact area, for tests at controlled
contact force, contact time, and release rate. It measures simultaneously the
contact area between the probe and the PSA together with the tack force
and energy during the contact and separation phases. This apparatus is
made up of a quartz prism probe linked to a force transducer. The whole
system can be moved downwards and upwards at constant speed in the
bonding and debonding phases. During the contact phase the actual
thickness of the adhesive is measured with a micrometer xed to the prism
656 Chapter 10
support. An optical device which moves with the probe provides a measure
of the contact area at any time. The ratio of the transmitted intensity and the
initial intensity of the light gives the percentage of contact area. A constant
contact area is applied for very short contact time (less than 1s) and the
probe is pulled up. The force and the contact area are monitored vs. time.
The product of the area subtended by the debonding force vs. time by the
pulling rate gives the tack energy.
Tack was measured as plasticity too (see Chap. 6, Section 1.1). The
inuence of various test parameters on the tack (e.g., adhesive nature, face
stock material, and coating weight) was discussed in Chap. 2, Section 1.2
and in Chap. 6, Section 1.1.
Evaluation of the Peel Adhesion
Peel adhesion and the principles of its measurement were discussed in detail
in Chap. 6, Section 1.2. A combined method (an assembly of dierent test
methods) was proposed for the evaluation of dierent adhesive character-
istics of hot-melt PSAs [89]. Peel adhesion should be tested according to
PSTC 1, shear according to PSTC 7, and tack according to PSTC 6 (roll-
ing ball), Polyken, or quick stick tests. Melt viscosity is measured
with Brookeld RVT spindle 7, 20 rpm. The softening point should be
determined with the ring-and-ball method (ASTM E 2867) at 180
C [89]. A
computerized system for measuring the peel adhesion interfaces the slip peel
tester to a personal computer. This system measures peak, valley, and
average peel forces in various geometries [90]. Using a statistical software
package peel strengths were measured for two PSA tapes under controlled
stress and controlled rate [91]. These examples illustrate that although there
are standard methods for measuring the peel, really quite dierent home
made methods are used to measure dierent adhesive performance
characteristics. Kaelble [36] showed that peel depends on the modulus and
thickness of the adhesive, the solid state component of the label, and on
the peeling angle. The best known test of the adhesion is the method used
for lacquers according to DIN 53151 and ISO 2409. Adhesive strength (peel)
also may be determined according to ASTM D 1000. Here the peel or tensile
strength measurement should be used for the evaluation of the bond
strength. This was a question in the rst years of the development of PSAs.
For a long time tensile strength measurements and peel measurements were
carried out in parallel [54]. Kemmenater and Bader [92] proposed a tension
measuring device for the peel. FIPAGO accepted a pendulum device [93,94];
in this test, the adhesive strength was tested via peel work in mm/kp
[95]. Today the most common method for testing the adhesive strength of
PSAs is the peel test. Dierent versions of this method using dierent peel
Test Methods 657
angles, peel rates, and substrates are used. The history of peel testers was
described by Liese [93]. FIPAGO recommended the adhesive strength tester
of PKL used for gummed papers. The Werle Tack tester measures adhesive
strength in a similar manner based on the peel adhesion [94]. A systematic
study of the test methods for wet adhesive tapes was reviewed during the
FIPAGO meeting in 1964.
For dierent end-uses, labels for dierent applications, varying peel test
angles are used. For a exible and a rigid adherent a 180
peel or 90
peel, and
for peel between two exible adherends a 180
and 180
geometry according
to FINAT FTM 1 has found wider application than the 90
geometry [50].
As a result of the viscoelastic properties of PSAs and the mechanical
properties of the face material, the adhesive bond strength depends on the
peel rate (see Chap. 2). In most test equipment single point measurements at
5 mm/sec are specied. Test results show that the suitability of a range of
products may vary with the peel rate [50]. This should be considered when
practical application conditions dier strongly from test conditions. A
similar statement holds true for release forces from siliconized release paper.
Dwell times (the contact time between adhesive and substrate) also inuence
the peel value. This is very important especially for peel tests on dicult
surfaces. In some cases (for single-coated tapes) the 180
angle PSTC 1
Figure 10.3 Test methods used for peel evaluation. 1) 180
peel; 2) 90
peel; 3)
T-peel.
658 Chapter 10
method is modied in order to allow 20 min or 24 hr contact of the adhesive
with the test panel [41].
Peel adhesion is determined in accordance with ASTM D-3330-78,
PSTC 1, and FINAT FTM 1 and 2, and is a measure of the force required to
remove a coated exible sheet material from a test panel at a specied angle
and rate of removal. According to US norms, a 1-in. wide coated sheet is
applied to a horizontal surface of the clean, stainless steel test plate with at
least 5 in. of the coated sheet material in rm contact with the steel plate. A
rubber roller is used to rmly apply the strip and remove all discontinuous
and entrapped air. The peel adhesion of the sample then is measured in a
tensile tester. In [91] peel was measured using ASTM method D3330/D3330
M-99 Standard Test (Methods for Peel Adhesion of Pressure-Sensitive
Tape). Adhesion of the latexes was tested using ASTM D897 [96] and
ASTM D330-90 [97].
According to the 180
C. The
testing speed for lm laminates should be 300 mm/min and 75 mm/min for
paper. Peel adhesion should be tested according to FINAT FTM 1, but at
a peeling rate of 200 mm/min; 180
peel is
a combination of tensile strength and shear, while a 90
peel [103]. Wilken [50] obtains the maximum peel value between 90
and 180
,
about the same peel resistance value for 90
and 180
P
90
> P
0
(10.1)
Our data show that 180
> P
90
(10.2)
The dierence between the peel values at dierent peeling angles (180
or
90
. The
peel adhesion at 90
peel
measurements the results depend on the face stock material [78]. For thicker
and stier materials a higher peel value will be obtained than at 90
[105].
Especially for soft PVC, 90
peel of
PSA tapes was measured on glass plate coated with release [107]; a special
case of the 90
peel adhesion test is the butt tensile test. This test (90
and 90
, at 50
C and 110
angle to the
substrate surface. The adhesion properties of a product vary directly with
the properties of its surface covered by ber [25].
Peel Adhesion of Plasticized PVC Film. A PVC lm/1 mil PSA layer/
siliconized paper laminate is proposed for the evaluation of the adhesion of
plasticized PVC lm [72]. After specied aging times, the siliconized paper
is removed and the adhesive-coated PVC lm then is adhered to a stainless
steel panel. After a 24 hr dwell time the 180
shear at 70
C has been
measured [106].
There are a lot of dierent methods based on quite dierent test
parameters for shear testing purposes. The most important methods
(FINAT FTM 8 and PSTC 7) measure holding power or shear adhesion,
and record the time to failure at room temperature. Other methods are
carried out at 65
C (Shell), 50
C (Ashland), or 70
with the free end of the tape extended; the latter then is loaded with a
force of 500 g applied as a hanging weight from the free end of the test strip.
In the test of the shear resistance to a xed load at 178
tilt is to prevent peel o. The elapsed time required for each test strip to
separate from the test panel is recorded as shear strength. According to
FINAT FTM 8 (a 178
C [70].
As in the case of peel measurements the inuence of the contact time
(dwell time) on the shear test results should be considered. Shear adhesion
testing according to PSTC 7 (1000 g/in.
2
load) implies a dwell time of 24 hr.
Shear should be measured after a 20 min dwell time, using a 25 25 mm
or 25 12.5 mm area, with a load of 5 or 10 N [2]. As test substrates,
stainless steel or glass should be used. Tests should be carried out at 25
C
and 50% RH. Failure time or slip distance should be dened as shear
670 Chapter 10
resistance. The inuence of the sample dimensions should also be taken into
account. Room temperature shear should be measured using an increased
contact surface in order to avoid errors by coating defects. For a modied
version of FINAT FTM 8, a load of 2 kg and a contact area of 12.5 cm
2
on aluminum test plates are used. A strip of PSA-coated material
(20 150 mm) should be axed with a light pressure on an aluminum test
plate (previously cleaned with toluene) so that the contact length is 62.5 mm.
At least three measurements should be performed.
The basic problem with the standard lap shear test is that the average
measured shear strength is not a material property that characterizes the
adhesive uniquely. Instead, it is a rather vague quantity that also is strongly
dependent on the geometry of the joint being tested [152]. For instance, if
the overlap were doubled and all other variables left unaltered, the strength
of the joint would not be doubled. Similarly, if the joint geometry and
adhesive are kept constant and the adherend material changed, the apparent
strength of the adhesive will change dramatically. From the point of view of
the measurement eciency, shear tests are more dicult and less ecient
than tack or peel measurements. Static, normal temperature shear possesses
low reproducibility and requires long measurement times. In order to get
precise results in a short time, hot shear measurements were introduced (i.e.,
shear tests are carried out at elevated temperatures). Another possibility to
accelerate shear tests is the use of the dynamical shear test. For adhesive
characterization purposes not only the time, but also the nature of the
failure are very important.
The mode of bond failure is described by shear tests with dierent
codes such as P, C, PS, and SPS, where P means panel failure, C means
cohesive failure, PS means failure with panel staining, and SPS means slight
panel staining [153]. Modes of shear failure include:
1. Face stock failure: 100% transfer of the adhesive to the substrate
(adherent).
2. Clear release failure: 100% adhesive release from the substrate
(adherent).
3. Cohesive failure: (zip effect) adhesive splits between the face stock
and the substrate. This results as a direct consequence of an
imbalance between cohesive and adhesive properties and is an
adhesive weakness.
Room temperature shear tests (0.5 0.5 cm, 1000 g) and elevated
temperature shear tests (with a 4.4-psi load) were used [38]. To force the
cohesive failure rather than substrate or panel failure, the polymer was
tested on aluminum foil as substrate, after a 72-hr dwell time and a 20-psi
load. Values of 1500 min to more than 3000 min were recorded.
Test Methods 671
Hot Shear (Holding Power). This test is a modication of PSTC 7. A
1.27 2.54-cm specimen of the adhesive is mounted on a 7.5 20-cm
stainless steel panel; an aluminum foil is added as reinforcement for the
face material. The panel then is positioned with its longitudinal dimension
so that the back of the panel forms an angle of 178
F, based on
a 5 kg/in. bond, 0-min dwell time was evaluated [148]. Shear at 70 and
50
C creep are determined also. The method is similar to PSTC 7; only the
weight is reduced from 500 g to 250 g and the temperature is increased from
25
C to 50
C.
Shear Adhesion Failure Temperature: Dead Load Hot Strength
Test. The shear adhesion failure temperature (SAFT) determines the
temperature at which a pressure-sensitive specimen delaminates under a
static load in a shear mode [155]; it is a method of determining the resistance
to shear of a tape under constant load under a rising temperature. A
variation of the hot shear test method can be achieved by mounting the
laminate construction in an oven and suspending a weight from the sample
in such a way that a vertical shear stress is applied to the bond. The oven
temperature may be raised gradually to dene the temperature at which the
bond fails [156]. When measuring the SAFT the sample is subjected to a
30-min dwell time at room temperature. The load is attached, the sample
conditioned for 20 min at 100
F. The 178
C
(modied PSTC 7) test is a measure of the ability of a PSA tape to withstand
an elevated temperature rising at 40
to the vertical. A load of 500 g is hung from the tape and the
oven temperature increased by 4
is measured
at a rate of 1 in./min and 20
C.
Other variants of the method exist [70]. Molecular disentanglement can take
place at a testing rate of 0.01 in./0.25 mm per minute, thus a dynamic shear
test can be set up on an adhesion tester at this slow speed [102]. While the
width of the sample can be of any standard width, the height of the sample
needs to be limited, so that it does not become a tensile test of the backing.
That is the maximum shear resistance achieved should be in the region of 2 lb/
1 kg or so. This would normally give a height of around 0.125 in./2 mm.
Dynamic Lap Shear. Here a 3 1-in. aluminum/aluminum assembly
is used with an adhesive coating weight of 3 mils. The aluminum plates are
pulled apart in a 180
to the
vertical.
+ A 500-g weight then is affixed and a timer is started.
+ Hold values are reported in minutes.
The shear test shows the following disadvantages: the information
obtained remains limited, the reproducibility is low, and the time required is
too long. More reliable results are given by creep tests (measuring a creep
time slope in order to determine the viscous and elastic components) or by
measuring the creep (cold ow) directly (see later).
674 Chapter 10
Automotive PSAs Shear. This test measures the slip after a given
time, using a 500 g/in.
2
test sample surface at 158
C) Method Ref.
1 25 12.5 Glass 1000 RT AFERA4012-Pl [151]
2 25.4 12.7 Stainless steel 1000 70 PSTC 1 modied [151]
3 25.0 25.0 Stainless steel 1000 40 FTM 8
4 12.5 12.5 Stainless steel 500 ASTM D-3654-78 [70]
5 12.5 12.5 Stainless steel 500 RT PSTC 7
1000
6 12.5 12.5 1000 RT [35]
7 24.5 24.5 500 20 PSTC modied
1000 65
8 12.5 12.5 500 RT PSTC 7 modied [162]
24 hr dwell time
9 10 50 1000 5
Dynamic
10 645 mm
2
Glass RT 1 mm/min [70]
Test Methods 675
T
a
b
l
e
1
0
.
1
6
T
e
s
t
M
e
t
h
o
d
s
a
n
d
V
a
l
u
e
s
f
o
r
S
h
e
a
r
T
e
s
t
C
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
T
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e
(
C
)
A
n
g
l
e
(
)
D
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
s
o
f
t
h
e
s
a
m
p
l
e
(
m
m
)
W
e
i
g
h
t
(
g
)
F
a
c
e
s
t
o
c
k
m
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
V
a
l
u
e
U
n
i
t
s
N
o
r
m
/
M
e
t
h
o
d
R
e
f
.
1
R
T
1
7
8
6
.
2
6
.
2
5
0
0
P
E
T
1
2
0
m
i
n
P
S
T
C
7
[
1
6
6
]
2
R
T
1
8
0
1
2
.
5
1
2
.
5
5
0
0
P
E
T
>
1
0
0
h
r
F
T
M
8
[
1
6
7
]
3
R
T
1
8
0
2
5
2
5
1
0
N
P
E
T
0
.
7
1
6
8
h
r
F
T
M
8
[
2
]
4
R
T
1
8
0
P
E
T
2
5
0
m
i
n
F
T
M
7
[
2
4
]
5
R
T
1
8
0
P
a
p
e
r
3
6
1
6
2
m
i
n
F
T
M
7
[
1
6
8
]
6
2
0
1
8
0
2
5
2
5
1
0
0
0
P
E
T
[
5
9
]
7
6
5
1
8
0
2
5
2
5
5
0
0
P
E
T
[
5
9
]
8
7
0
1
8
0
2
5
2
5
1
0
0
0
P
E
T
>
3
0
h
r
P
S
T
C
7
[
1
6
9
]
9
R
T
1
8
0
2
5
2
5
1
0
0
0
P
E
T
>
8
5
h
r
[
2
]
1
0
R
T
1
8
0
2
5
2
5
1
0
0
0
P
E
T
5
1
0
h
r
[
1
4
7
]
1
1
7
0
1
8
0
P
E
T
0
.
5
2
h
r
[
1
7
0
]
1
2
R
T
1
8
0
2
5
2
5
1
0
0
0
P
E
T
>
2
0
0
h
r
[
1
7
1
]
1
3
7
0
1
8
0
2
5
2
5
1
0
0
0
P
E
T
>
1
0
0
h
r
[
1
7
2
]
1
4
R
T
1
8
0
2
5
2
5
1
0
0
0
P
E
T
>
2
0
0
h
r
[
1
7
3
]
1
5
R
T
1
8
0
2
5
2
5
1
0
0
0
P
E
T
>
5
0
0
0
m
i
n
[
1
7
2
]
1
6
7
0
9
0
1
8
0
2
5
1
2
.
5
[
8
6
]
1
7
R
T
1
8
0
6
.
4
5
c
m
2
8
0
1
5
0
N
D
y
n
a
m
i
c
[
7
0
]
1
8
1
8
0
2
5
2
5
1
0
0
0
P
E
T
7
5
9
2
C
S
A
F
T
[
1
7
2
]
676 Chapter 10
use of the cohesion as an index of tack is generally not possible. This
statement is illustrated by recent advances in the use of the Probe tack test
method.
Creep Test. For special, soft products creep tests are recommended
also. The apparatus used for the shear creep measurements suggested in
[164] was similar to that described by van Holde and Williams [165]. The
applied shear stress was 3.5 10
4
dyne/cm. The creep displacement was
measured with a capacitance probe transducer for a period of 100 min
following the application of the load.
Global Evaluation of the Adhesive Properties. A complete evaluation
of the adhesive properties is possible after measuring all performance
characteristics (i.e., tack, peel resistance, and shear resistance). There
are quite dierent graphical representations allowing the comparison of the
above properties as a function of the formulation and in relation to one
another. Figures 10.6, 10.7, and 10.8 present the main types of diagrams
used for the evaluation of the adhesive properties. Figure 10.6 shows
that the adhesive properties can be evaluated separately (one property)
for dierent formulations (A) or dierent properties for a given formulation
(B). Figure 10.7 presents an overview of the performance characteristics
Figure 10.6 The main types of diagrams used for the evaluation of the adhesive
properties. A) Adhesive characteristics for dierent formulations (peel, tack, and
shear). B) Adhesive characteristics (peel, tack, and shear) for a given formulation.
Test Methods 677
Figure 10.8 The main types of diagrams used for the evaluation of the adhesive
properties. E) Space diagram of the adhesive characteristics (peel or tack or shear)
as a function of the chemical composition and component characteristics. F) Plane
diagram of the adhesive characteristics.
Figure 10.7 The main types of diagrams used for the evaluation of the adhesive
properties. C) All performances as a function of the chemical composition. D) All
performances for a given chemical composition.
678 Chapter 10
for dierent chemical compositions (C) or for a given formulation (D).
Figure 10.8 shows that the properties can be plotted separately as a function
of the chemical composition and a base characteristic of the main
components, in a three-dimensional (E) or two-dimensional graph (F).
The general test methods of the adhesion include the tack, peel, and
shear resistance measurement. Such methods are used for adhesive coated
and adhesiveless PSPs also. Their principles and practice for PSAs have
been described earlier. As discussed, such methods use standard carrier
materials. It is evident that the adhesive properties of the nished product
may dier from the characteristics of standard samples, due to the inuence
of the carrier material and to manufacturing conditions. On the other hand
there are PSPs where the adhesive is not coated but imbedded in the nished
product, or the carrier itself possesses an adhesive nature. For other
products the adhesive is a part of a composite structure having partially the
characteristics of a carrier (from the point of view of mechanical resistance).
For such products the general test methods will substantially dier from the
common methods used for PSAs [65,174].
Product Related Tests. For splicing tapes the peel and shear resistance
are measured. Peel resistance for splicing tapes is tested as standard peel
on stainless steel and as peel on siliconized liner [175]. The shear resistance
is tested as dynamical, statical, and practice-related shear. Both statical
and dynamical shear measurements are carried out at room and elevated
temperatures. Statical and dynamical shear measurements are carried out
according to modied standard methods with paper as substrate. The
practice-related shear test uses a heated cylinder. For packaging seal tapes,
falling and ap test (this is a combination of shear, peel adhesion, and tack)
have to be carried out also [176]. For insulation tapes mechanical, electrical,
and thermal properties are required. Elongation, shear, and peel resistance,
are required too. Shear resistance should be measure after solvent exposure
also. For UV light-cured PSAs a bending test is used [122]. A skin adhesion
test is carried out for medical tapes. The skin underlying the tape sample is
inspected visually, in order to evaluate the amount of adhesive residue left
on the surface of the skin. The samples are assigned a numerical rating from
0 to 5. By a removability test the following evaluation criteria are used:
A% adhesive transfer (less than 5%), Llegging, SLslight legging.
Such examples illustrate the specic, product related character of the
practical tests. Their detailed discussion is given in [65,174].
Rheological Evaluation of the Adhesive Properties. The interdepen-
dence of the adhesive properties with the rheological characteristics was
discussed in detail in Chap. 2, Sections 1.1 and 1.2, and Chap. 4, Section 2.
Test Methods 679
Developments in the equipment available for the test of the rheological
properties have allowed the use of the rheological characteristics for
screening of the PSA formulations. The main parameters investigated are
the viscosity, the T
g
, and the modulus. For their study viscosimetry, DSC,
and DMA are used.
For a decade dynamic mechanical analysis has tried to measure,
explain, and forecast pressure sensitivity on the basis of the rheological
characteristics of the polymers, taking into account the time-temperature
dependence of the material characteristics (modulus). Such a method
presents the following main disadvantages: it is limited to the adhesive,
it describes the behavior of pure polymers, without micromolecular
additives, and it is limited to the phenomena which occur in the bulk
polymer. In the classical domain of adhesive-based PSPs the actual limits
of a pure rheological approach are illustrated by the test and application of
crosslinked products. Natural rubber is a crosslinked product, however its
elastical properties are due mainly to chain entangling, and its crosslinked
network is very elastic. Advances in macromolecular chemistry allowed
the synthesis of other crosslinked polymers having rubbery elasticity. The
compounds with physical crosslinking (thermoplastic elastomers) are hot
processable and 100% solids materials. The compounds with chemical
crosslinking (e.g., carboxylated styrene-diene copolymers) are supplied as
water-based dispersions also. Both are relatively hard materials; the styrene
block copolymers are elastomers without self-adhesivity, the carboxylated
styrene-diene copolymers are products with a low level of self-adhesivity
(they need a high concentration of tackier) due to the bulky styrene
monomer and to the tight crosslinked network. Such polymers behave like
lled systems. They cannot be characterized by common test methods of the
adhesive properties or of the rheological parameters. As discussed earlier
by the usability of the Probe tack test method for SBCs, for such
polymers discrepancies appear, due to the stiness (rigidity) of the adhesive
which is the result of the special build-up of the network. Principally the
same problem, i.e., the insucient control of the length, and the distribution
of the network bridges can hinder the characterization and use of
carboxylated styrene-diene copolymers, where the T
g
and sol/gel content
alone do not describe the practical behavior (peel and shear resistance) of
the adhesive.
However, for formulations of pure macromolecular adhesives DMA
helps by the screening of the possible recipes. For instance, the mobility of
the midblock in TPEs can be evaluated by DMA. It is related to the softness,
viscous ow, i.e., to the loss modulus, to the situation of the rubbery plateau
modulus, and to the ratio of the two moduli (storage and loss moduli), i.e.,
tan o. The situation of tan o, related to temperature, the tan o minimum
680 Chapter 10
temperature (T
omin
), and the tano peak temperature (T
omax
) characterizes the
rheological behavior. The melting, disappearing of the endblock domains is
indicated by the T
omin
and the crossover temperature of the loss and storage
moduli (T
cross
). Between T
omin
and T
cross
the end domains soften and
disappear. The dierence between T
cross
gives information about the melt
viscosity of the formulation. In tests of the release properties the general
shape of the release prole is consistent with the shape of the adhesives
viscoelastic functionspecically the loss tangent (tan o) as a function of the
dynamic frequencyin the peel window [118]. Advances in DMA examining
the whole product (adhesive and carrier) were obtained also. Willenbacher
[177], uses torsional resonance oscillation, to achieve the moduli G
/
and G
//
of the sample (PSA tape); two maxima are observed, corresponding to
the adhesive and to the carrier. As discussed earlier (Table 10.5), Williams
plasticity is related to the modulus values also. A complementary characteri-
zation for PSAs is allowed by the melt rheology. The study of the viscosity
and of the storage modulus allows a better characterization of the HMPSAs.
A detailed discussion of the DMA data for the formulation of the adhesive is
given in [178]. As discussed by Muny [117], the cost of this equipment is still
quite high, which limits its use to only larger organizations.
Other Properties
There are some properties of the coated adhesive which inuence the
adhesive performance; they include the aging properties of the adhesive
and the coating weight. On the other hand, the adhesive and converting
properties together determine the application eld of the label; therefore the
converting properties should also be tested.
Coating Weight. The coating weight inuences the adhesive,
converting, and end-use properties. The dependence of the adhesive
properties on the coating weight was extensively discussed in Chap. 6.
Industrial in-line measurement and control of the coating weight, as well as
spot checks of the coating weight are carried out. The coating weight may
be checked using [ rays or IR radiation [157]. For laboratory purposes the
gravimetric method is generally used. In order to avoid the discrepancies
due to the sensitivity of the face stock material towards the liquid adhesive,
aluminum foil may be used. The coating weight is measured by dissolving
the adhesive layer and determining the weight dierence between the coated
and uncoated face material. The method was described in Section 2.1. The
use of uorescence techniques to determine coating weight of release is well
known [179].
Test Methods 681
Aging Properties. Aging tests are carried out on liquid and dried
PSAs. For liquid PSAs these are mostly limited to testing the viscosity of
molten hot-melt PSAs. For the dried PSAs or laminates aging tests are
carried out in order to check the solid components of the laminate or the
PSAs (shrinkage, migration). These aging tests use one of the standard
methods for the characterization of the adhesive properties (or their
combination) after the storage of the adhesive (laminate) under well-dened
conditions (temperature, light, humidity) for a dened time. The most
important adhesive characteristics evaluated after aging are the peel adhesion
and the tack; generally, peel increases with time and tack decreases. A more
complex test concerns the aging of removable PSAs, where clean remov-
ability should be examined also. In some cases aging tests are carried out in
order to make a choice of the adequate adhesive. Aging tests for hot-melt
PSAs are carried out (melt viscosity stability) at 177
C, 15
weeks) are tested [181].
The tests of the aging characteristics of plastics have been summarized
[180,182,183]. In a similar manner adhesive-coated laminates are exposed
to weathering tests and their adhesive properties are tested subjectively or
with a mechanical device. Generally, the weaknesses of special classes of
adhesives are well known; hence aging test methods are developed to
examine these shortcomings after storage. Consequently, the conditions
proposed for accelerated aging (storage) can vary quite a bit. The following
environments were proposed for aging tests of PSA laminates [180]: 65
F
and 50% RH, 73
F and
95% RH. Temperature and humidity cycling (MIL STD 331) and diurnal
cycling from 65 to 165
C for 1 day
corresponds to 0.5 yr of natural aging [169]. Aging tests are carried out at
room temperature, 54
C, or 71
C for 150 min [186]. Adhesive build-up is tested for hot-melt PSAs
[187]. No signicant increase in 180
C, as
well as shear strength and rolling ball tack. Exposed lm tack after days
at 70
C.
+ Glass plates (slides) 2.5 mm thin, 25 mm wide.
Method:
+ A strip of PSA-coated material (25 100 mm or longer) is applied
to the glass slide, with the coated adhesive side against the light,
with a 20-mm portion at the end of the slide left exposed, the rest
being covered with release paper/aluminum foil.
+ After 20 min aging of the exposed part, the next 20 mm portion
should be exposed and so on.
+ After aging the adhesive quality (finger tack) of the aged material
should be subjectively evaluated.
D
0
=OK, no changes.
D
1
=No major changes, good-fair, slight legging.
D
2
=1 mm legs, the adhesive is softer.
D
3
=Legging, adhesive transfer.
D
4
=Smearing, loss of the cohesion.
D
5
=Loss of the tack.
Accelerated Weathering Testing. One mil lms of adhesive coated on
one mil PET lm are exposed directly (adhesive side) to the light source in a
UV device. A straight UV cycle is imposed (no moisture) [191].
Aging Test of the Release Force. Accelerated aging before carrying
out a high speed release test can be carried out by placing a set of self-
adhesive strips between two at metal or glass plates and keeping them
for 20 hr in an air-circulating oven at 70 5
mode [180].
Adhesive lm aging may be tested at 150
C, 30%
plasticizer) [203].
In the mounted shrinkage test a PSA-coated PVC face stock is bonded
to a test surface, often stainless steel, aluminum, and/or release liner. The
laminate then is exposed to elevated temperature accelerated aging, typically
70
C for one week, and the percentage shrink back of the PVC lm from its
original dimensions is measured. Both machine direction (MD) (subject
to greatest stress-induced elongation) and cross-machine direction (CMD)
measurements are carried out [43]. In another test, a 4 4-in. coated sample
is adhered to a formica panel and aged for 7 days at 110
o
F [38]. Evaluation
criteria include shrinkage in the machine direction of less than 0.5%, and
shrinkage in the cross direction also below 0.5%.
Plasticizer migration is tested by 180
C and 71
C or 30 min at 121
C,
1 week at room temperature, and 1 week at 48
F [206].
Not only the peel value but also the failure mode is important in the
removability test of PSAs. Therefore, the amount of adhesive transfer for
peelable tapes or labels is evaluated after storage at 40
C on PET
and HDPE [2].
Adhesive Residue. When the removability test (described earlier)
is performed, the surface (substrate) underneath the label sample is usually
inspected to determine the amount of adhesive residue left on the surface of
the adherend. There are dierent, subjective rating scales. In some cases
each sample is assigned a numerical rating from 0 to 5 based on an arbitrary
scale. In other cases adhesive transfer is estimated with A, L, and SL ratings,
where A means adhesive transfer, L corresponds to legging, and SL denotes
slight legging or stringing. High temperature resistance may be tested as
the percentage adhesive transfer after 30 min at 250
o
F [43]. Removability
should be evaluated on glossy stain-resistant acrylic enamel after aging at
elevated temperatures and peeling at an angle of 45
.
688 Chapter 10
Apparatus:
+ Test panel covered with glossy stain-resistant acrylic enamel paint
(automotive paint).
+ Samples of labels (tapes) 1.27 10.16 cm adhered at room tempe-
rature to the test surface.
+ Ventilated oven.
Method:
+ Samples are fixed to the panel.
+ A 2-kg rubber-coated metal roller is run twice over the samples.
+ Samples are left for 1 hr at 128
C or 150
C in a ventilated oven.
+ Samples are peeled back at an angle of 45
at an approximate rate
of 1.9 m/min.
+ The panel is removed from the oven and examined. A nontacky
deposit is reported as residue.
Repositionability. With repositionable adhesives the adhesive-coated
paper may be readily lifted and removed from the contact surface and
reapplied at least eight additional times to paper surfaces without reducing
the adhesive properties [207]. Measurements done with a 7-g/m
2
adhesive coat
weight, on a 70-g/m
2
paper as face stock material, yield the following peel
adhesion values on newspaper (test conditions: 180
C, an
aluminum panel with a radius of curvature of 23 cm and a length of 35.5 cm
in the curved direction is used. The tapes to be tested are applied to the
aluminum panel in its curved direction. The assembly-bearing panel then is
put into an air-circulating oven at 150
C or with a Brookfield
viscosimeter, LVT, spindle 3, 12 rpm. Target values are 17.5 sec
1 sec or 150200 mPa s.
+ Solids content: the solids content should be measured according to
DIN at 140
C for 10 min.
The sample is then covered with release paper. For comparison
purposes the face stock should possess ungummed areas also.
+ A coated (partially ungummed) strip of the film is immersed
in distilled water at room temperature. The moment color changes
appear (whitening of the adhesive layer) should be noted. The
longer the transparency persists, the better the water-whitening
resistance. Target values are rated as follows: 10 sec, fair; 15 sec,
good; and 17 sec, very good. In a similar manner comparison of
the water sensitivity was carried out recently by submerging slides
covered in latex into water and measuring the % transmittance
over time. Water whitening was tested as % water absorbed after
24 hours, and the % transmittance at 450 nm after 24 hour water
soak [209].
+ Loss of transparency: PSA-coated film can suffer water whitening
upon immersion in water. Water whitening is characterized by
the speed of the loss of transparency (the water-whitening test just
described) and by the absolute value of the loss of transparency, as
compared to the transparency of a dry coating.
The lm laminate should be covered with a transparent (clear) PVC
lm and a bubble-free lm/adhesive/lm laminate should be prepared.
Another part of the same lm coating (clear lmadhesive) should be
Test Methods 693
immersed in distilled water at room temperature for 7 min. After 7 min the
immersed sample should be laminated with the same transparent (clear) lm
as used for the dry laminate. Transmittance (transparency) of both samples
(lm-dry adhesive-lm and lm-wet adhesive-lm) should be measured
comparatively with a colorimeter. The dierences in transparency between
dry and wet laminate are measured; target values are -8%=fair
and-3%=good.
+ Wet anchorage: film coatings should not display rub-off of the
adhesive layer (hand made test) after immersion in water (7 min).
+ Wet adhesion on glass (see Chap. 6): a release-free film coating is
immersed in water (room temperature, distilled water) for a period
of time of 7 min. Then the wet film coating is affixed on glass
(bubble free and not floating). The adhesion of the wet adhesive on
glass (the recovery of the adhesive properties over time) should be
tested, by trying to remove the sample after different storage times
(i.e., 1, 2, 5, 10, 15, 30, and 60 min). The shorter the time for
adhesion recovery, the better the wet adhesion. Adequate values are
less than 10 min; at least one test value at more than 30 min is
required.
+ Wet adhesion on polyethylene is important for plastic bottles. High
speed label application should be used for plastic bottles based on
polyethylene copolymers. Affixed labels should resist immersion
in water or surface-active agent solutions.
+ Dry samples should be affixed on squeeze bottles. After 24 hr the
labeled bottles are immersed in a diluted solution of surface-active
agents (SAA) (0.51% common detergents, room temperature).
Labels are peeled off after a wet storage for another 24 hr; peel
forces are evaluated subjectively. No edge lifting is allowed.
+ Wet samples are tested in the same way as dry samples, but wet
labels (labels immersed for 7 min in water) should be used.
Summary of Adhesive Properties.
1. Peel adhesion:
+ The FINAT FTM 1 method could be simplified, but at least
instantaneous and 24-hr peel values on a standard surface are
needed.
+ At least one measurement from glass or stainless steel is needed.
+ Instantaneous polyethylene peel and 24-hr peel are the most
important.
+ If values are similar, peel on solid polyethylene plates should be
measured.
694 Chapter 10
2. Tack:
+ For similar materials rolling ball tests should be repeated with the
rolling cylinder test.
+ Loop tack on polyethylene is more important than rolling ball tack.
3. Shear:
+ If the measured shear values are too high, smaller size samples,
samples with a higher coating weight, or hot shear measurements
are to be used.
+ Films can be reinforced with paper in order to avoid elongation
effects.
Tack/peel requirements for sheet/roll materials dier. Roll labels for high
application speeds need a higher aggressive tack and polyethylene peel. Film
sheets need to display a better cuttability (see Fig. 10.11). Figure 10.12
summarizes the relevant test methods used for the evaluation of the adhesive
properties as a function of time, temperature, and substrate.
Water Resistance
The water resistance is generally tested in order to characterize the water
resistance/insolubility of a PSA laminate. Water resistance/insolubility is
required when using labels under humid or wet conditions. For this
application the appearance of the label and its adhesion/end-use properties
under wet conditions are to be examined. With regard to water resistance,
Figure 10.11 Requirements for PSA for roll/sheet labels.
Test Methods 695
paper and lm labels should be included in the evaluation; lm-based
products require special water resistance also. In areas such as solar and
safety window lms, graphics, point of purchase advertising, and clear labels
the lms may be applied to the glass by rst wetting the adhesive and glass
surface to allow positioning. The water is then removed from between the
adhesive and the glass with pressure. During this wet application step the
adhesive must resist hazing and become optically transparent rapidly after
removal of the water. Water solubility is required for wash-o labels, mainly
based on paper face stock. Water resistance can be examined as the change
of the adhesive properties under the inuence of water (or water vapor),
or as the change of the optical and dimensional characteristics of the label
(tape) under the inuence of water. The interdependence of the parameters
characterizing the water resistance performance of a PSA or PSA laminate
was discussed in Chap. 8. For certain applications a high water resistance
(i.e., no inuence of water on the PSA laminate) is required. For others a
strong inuence of water on the laminate is desired. One should dierentiate
Figure 10.12 The main test methods used for the evaluation of the adhesive
properties. RB, Rolling ball; RC, rolling cylinder; LT, loop tack; ST, steel; GL, glass;
PE, polyethylene lm; PEP, polyethylene plate; HS, hot shear; CCSH, corrugated
cardboard shear.
696 Chapter 10
the water resistance from the humidity resistance. Water-resistant products
are special laminates; humidity resistance is generally required for most
laminates. The evaluation of the water resistance, measured as the stability
(or change) of the adhesive properties under the inuence of the humidity,
is mainly based on the examination of the peel adhesion, tack, or shear after
storage in a humid environment.
Water resistance can be evaluated by storing the laminates under
water and removing them 24 hr prior to testing, to allow recovery of the
adhesion. According to [210] the resistance to water or solvents is tested by
immersion in the liquid for periods up to one week. Water resistance was
evaluated immediately after 24-hr water immersion or after a 7-day water
immersion, followed by a 24-hr recovery period [154]. Another test measures
water resistance after a 24-hr immersion, bonded to stainless steel for
30 min, then placed in room temperature tap water, followed by a 180
peel
measurement 24 hr later [38]. In the Weyerhouser (shear) test a laminated
Kraft paper strip (coated with PSAs) is immersed in water with a 350-g load
attached; the time to failure is measured. Water-whitening tests measure the
change of the optical appearance (see Section 2.2 of Chap. 6).
A clear Mylar label attached to stainless steel and immersed in water
at 74
peel test is carried out [38]. In other tests wet aging under
100% RH, at 40
vs. 80
C. The label should easily detach from the glass with the
adhesive lm still attached to the label, and being nontacky in the presence
of water [70]. The water solubility should be tested for axed labels as old
as 36 months, stored at room or elevated (6070
C) temperatures.
Washing Machine Resistance. Special labels of fabric (textile) used
on clothing have to be tested for washing machine resistance. Such labels
should resist more than 50 wash cycles and up to 10 chemical (dry) cleaning
process cycles [212].
Deep Freeze Labels
A great deal of attention has been paid to the performance of PSAs at low
temperatures as adhesive failure at those temperatures may occur [213]. The
surface temperature of the adherend is another factor. Most general purpose
adhesives are formulated for tack when applied to surfaces with
temperatures as low as 3840
C as well as at 20
C give a
698 Chapter 10
reasonable indication of the end-use performance, both for low temperature
(i.e., chill) and deep freeze applications.
Static Shear Load Test at Low Temperatures. In the static shear load
test at low temperatures a modied version of the PSTC test (1 in.
2
contact
surface on stainless steel, 1000-g weight) was suggested [161]. Slippage and
delamination of the PSA-coated strips after ve days storage in a constant
temperature cold chamber were observed. For dynamic lap shear testing at
low temperatures, 3 1-in. samples are coated with adhesive, equilibrated
in an environmental chamber at the desired temperature, and pulled apart
in a 180
C
for 30 min, then laminated together at this temperature. After warming the
samples to 23