Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-hgkh8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-28T18:55:36.711Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Effects of Pigment Type and Dispersion on Photodegradation of Epoxy and Acrylic Urethane Films

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 February 2011

Stephanie Watson
Affiliation:
stephanie.watson@nist.gov, NIST, BFRL, 100 Bureau Drive, Stop 8615, Gaithersburg, MD, 20899, United States, 301-975-6448
Amanda Forster
Affiliation:
amanda.forster@nist.gov, NIST, Gaithersburg, MD, 20899, United States
I-Hsiang Tseng
Affiliation:
ihsiang.tseng@nist.gov, NIST, Gaithersburg, MD, 20899, United States
Li-Piin Sung
Affiliation:
lipiin.sung@nist.gov, NIST, Gaithersburg, MD, 20899, United States
Justin Lucas
Affiliation:
justin.lucas@nist.gov, NIST, Gaithersburg, MD, 20899, United States
Aaron Forster
Affiliation:
aaron.forster@nist.gov, NIST, Gaithersburg, MD, 20899, United States
Get access

Abstract

The effects of surface treatment, particle size, and concentration of titanium dioxide (TiO2) and its dispersion on the photodegradation of two resin systems, epoxy and acrylic urethane, were examined. A suite of techniques, including laser scanning confocal microscopy (LSCM) and attenuated total reflectance -Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (ATR-FTIR), was used to follow the degradation process of TiO2/polymer films as a function UV exposure. LSCM was used to show that both pigment dispersion and durability of the polymer matrix influenced the generation of pits/holes in pigmented polymer film. The type of pigment had a greater influence on the more durable polymer matrix, the acrylic urethane system. The epoxy system showed the greatest extent of degradation regardless of the TiO2 choice. The LCSM results were supported by the ATR-FTIR data.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Balfour, J.G., JOCCA-Surface Coatings International, 12, 478 (1990).Google Scholar
2.U. Gesenhues, Double Liaison: Physique, Chimie et Economie des Peintures et Adhesifs, 479-480, X(1996).Google Scholar
3.L.A. Simpson, Australian OCCA Proceeding and News, May, 6, (1983).Google Scholar
4. Kaempf, G., Papenroth, W., Holm, R., J. Paint Tech. 46, 56 (1974).Google Scholar
5. George, G.A., Mater. Forum, 19, 145 (1995).Google Scholar
6. Martin, J.W., Chin, J.W., Byrd, W.E. et al. , Polymer Degradation and Stability 63, 297 (1999).Google Scholar
7.M.P. Diebold, R.H. Staley, Paints and Coatings Industry, October, 1 (2005),Google Scholar
8. Corle, T.R., Kino, G.S., Confocal Scanning Optical Microscopy and Related Imaging Systems,(Academic Press, 1996), pp 3739.Google Scholar
9. Sung, L., Jasmin, J., Gu, X., Nguyen, T., Martin, J.W., JCT Res., 1, 267 (2004).Google Scholar
10. Faucheu, J., Sung, L., Martin, J.W., Wood, K.A., JCT Res., 3, 29 (2006).Google Scholar
11. Siddle, G.R., Paint Tech. 35, 7 (1971).Google Scholar
12. Allen, N.S., Edge, M., Ortega, A. et al. , Polymer Degradation and Stability 85, 927 (2004).Google Scholar
13. Bauer, D.R., Dean, M.J., Gerlock, J.L., Ind.Eng.Chem. Res. 27, 65, (1988).Google Scholar