Tack properties and adhesion mechanism of two different crosslinked polyacrylic pressure‐sensitive adhesives

Tack properties of cross‐linked random poly(n‐butyl acrylate‐acrylic acid) (A) and poly(2‐ethylhexyl acrylate‐acrylic acid) (B) copolymers as pressure‐sensitive adhesives (PSAs) were compared by a probe tack test to know the optimal application in the industrial field. Tack increased remarkably with...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of applied polymer science Vol. 138; no. 31
Main Authors: Sasaki, Mariko, Kashihara, Yusuke, Urahama, Yoshiaki, Hirai, Tomoyasu, Fujii, Syuji, Nakamura, Yoshinobu
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: Hoboken, USA John Wiley & Sons, Inc 15-08-2021
Wiley Subscription Services, Inc
Subjects:
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Tack properties of cross‐linked random poly(n‐butyl acrylate‐acrylic acid) (A) and poly(2‐ethylhexyl acrylate‐acrylic acid) (B) copolymers as pressure‐sensitive adhesives (PSAs) were compared by a probe tack test to know the optimal application in the industrial field. Tack increased remarkably with temperature, reached a peak, then decreased. The peak of tack appeared at higher temperature for B. Tack increased with increasing contact time and decreasing crosslinking agent level. The fracture energy at higher temperature was higher for B than A. From the observation of debonding behavior, the fibrillation occurred at the edge of probe. The wettability and deformability of PSA were larger for B than A. From a dynamic mechanical analysis, the shear storage modulus (G') in the rubbery plateau region was lower for B than for A. The good wettability and deformability were improved as a result of its lower G'. The relaxation behaviors of PSAs and vulcanized isoprene rubber were measured by 1H pulsed nuclear magnetic resonance. This technique is found to be useful for estimating the degree of intermolecular interactions. The crosslinking degree hardly influenced. The intermolecular interaction was weaker for B. This was the reason of the lower G' for B.
ISSN:0021-8995
1097-4628
DOI:10.1002/app.50767