FIELD
The disclosure relates to hot-melt, curl-free compositions, structures, and methods.
BACKGROUND
Three major types of adhesive in pressure-sensitive (“PS”) labeling are hot-melt, solvent-based and water-based adhesives. Hot-melt coating is the fastest growing adhesive system used in the pressure-sensitive adhesive (“PSA”) industry. PSA, self-adhesive, or self-stick adhesive is an adhesive, which forms bond when pressure is applied to unite the adhesive with the adherend. These PSA are not considered as adhesives that are activable by solvent, water, heat or any other way.
In hot-melt scenarios, PSAs may have a high coating weight, such as 50 g/m2 for critical applications like polyethylene (“PE”) oil drums, rough surfaces, or labels that need to adhere for long period. When oriented polypropylene (“OPP”) films for pressure-sensitive label (“PSL”) applications are used with hot-melt PSAs, OPPs generally exhibit a behavior of curling and swelling. This behavior, without being bound to this theory, is believed to be due to migratory additives in the hot-melt that permeate into the OPP film and cause the swelling and curling away from the adhesive. Consequently, this behavior sometimes results in de-labeling.
De-labeling or other weakening in labeling adhesion may be critical in some applications, e.g., where heavy hot-melt layers have to be applied to give good adhesion, but which then result in a curling effect that weakens the adhesive bond, or when a label is applied to warm containers. Swelling/curling depends on both the quantity of hot melt and the time of contact with the support. Specific migratory-additive-free, hot-melt PSLs do exist, but such make the label more expensive. There is, therefore, a market interest and/or need to have specific curl-free or reduced-curl products that could work with a wide range of standard hot-melt adhesives. In addition, a film compliant with food safety regulation is also a breakthrough.
SUMMARY
In one example embodiment, disclosed are hot-melt, curl-free structures and compositions. One embodiment provides an optionally oriented base film having a first side and a second side, wherein the optionally oriented base film base film is transparent or opaque. Further included is a water-based primer applied to the first side. Further still, the structure and composition includes a water-based coating applied to the first side having the water-based primer disposed thereon, wherein the water-based coating has a weight of at least 0.1 g/m2 through at least 0.8 g/m2, wherein the composition is curl-free and has a barrier to one or more migratory additives and components in a hot-melt adhesive on the first side.
In another example embodiment, disclosed are methods for hot-melt, curl-free compositions and structures. The method may include priming, with a water-based coating, an optionally oriented base film having a first side and a second side, wherein the optionally oriented base film is transparent or opaque. Further, the method may include coating, with a water-based coating subsequent to the priming, the optionally oriented base film, wherein the water-based coating has a weight of at least 0.1 g/m2 through at least 0.8 g/m2, herein the composition is curl-free and has a barrier to one or more migratory additives and components in a hot-melt adhesive on the first side.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
So that the manner in which the above recited features, advantages and objects of this disclosure are attained and may be understood in detail, a more particular description, briefly summarized above, may be had by reference to the embodiments thereof which are illustrated in the appended drawings.
It is to be noted, however, that the appended drawings illustrate only typical embodiments of this disclosure and are therefore not to be considered limiting of its scope, for the disclosure may admit to other equally effective embodiments.
FIG. 1 is a summary of evaluations for example curl-resistance compositions in accordance with this disclosure.
FIG. 2 provides example test protocols for disclosed compositions and methods in accordance with this disclosure.
FIG. 3 provides a legend for observations made in FIG. 2.
FIG. 4 provides details about testing protocols for the data in FIG. 2.
FIG. 5 shows data and setting parameters, respectively, for adhesion properties of different hot melts observed on two example film structures and compositions in accordance with this disclosure.
FIG. 6 is a table that includes measured properties for two structures (i.e., lead candidate 1 and lead candidate 2) having the same adhesive receptive-layer formulation, but with two different food-contact compliant printable coatings. The third roll is the same as the second roll (i.e., lead candidate 2), but the third roll also includes ˜0.1% Tergitol®.
FIG. 7 shows summarized results printed by ultraviolet flexography (“UV-flexo”) for excellent ink adhesion for the first two structures in FIG. 6 in accordance with this disclosure.
FIG. 8 shows summarized results printed by UV-flexography and cold-foil stamping techniques for excellent ink adhesion, as measured by FIG. 16, for the first two structures in FIG. 6.
FIG. 9 shows summarized results printed by UV-screen printing for excellent ink adhesion, as measured by FIG. 16, for at least the first two structures in FIG. 6 in accordance with this disclosure.
FIG. 10 shows summarized results printed by UV-flexography technique for excellent ink adhesion, as measured by FIG. 16, for at least the first two structures in FIG. 6 in accordance with this disclosure
FIG. 11 provides setting parameters used for the data collected at FIGS. 8-10.
FIG. 12 provides a table showing the effects of Sylobloc® (i.e., silica particles) and PTFE particles in an acrylic-coated base film on blocking tendency using a FL780-based (i.e., acrylic) print side of the base film.
FIG. 13 provides a table showing the effects of several candidates as backsides, i.e., first sides, for hot-melt, curl-resistant pressure-sensitive labels (PSL's).
FIG. 14 provides for the compositions in FIG. 13 a first graph showing blocking averages in grams/25 mm.
FIG. 15 provides for the compositions in FIG. 13 a graph showing tearability on a scale of 0-3.
FIG. 16 provides for the method for determining ink adhesion in accordance with this disclosure.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION
This disclosure generally relates to methods, applications, compositions, structures, labels, and so forth associated with a film that may be whitish or white opaque and may have a barrier to migratory additives from hot-melt adhesives in order to ensure that the film remains free from swelling and curling. Not limited to barrier coatings with hot-melt additives, this disclosure further discloses a unique label structure that combines enhanced printability on one side with various printing technologies, including, e.g., and without limitation, ultraviolet (“UV”) flexo, UV-offset, UV-letter press, hot/cold foil stamping, thermal transfer, combinations thereof, and so forth, and remarkable hot-melt, adhesive adhesions combined with a barrier effect that prevents the label from swelling and curling. In one example embodiment, a label structure is designed to avoid any significant blocking tendency in reel, i.e., the tendency of layers to stick among themselves. A slight (or no) blocking tendency allows the unwinding of the label reel without any significant problems.
Furthermore, the disclosed compositions, structures, labels, and so forth comply with the legal requirements or recommendations in the EU-framework regulations on materials and articles intended for food contact, including Reg. (EC) No 1935/2004, as well as good manufacturing practices for materials and articles intended for food contact, including Reg. (EC) 2023/2006.
Research and development has occurred to evaluate the curl-resistance of several types of water-based primers and coatings on various optionally oriented base film structures that use Jindal Films'® film types and base films. A summary of such curl-resistance evaluation is shown in FIG. 1. Example test protocols are described in FIG. 2. Acrylic coatings were formulated with colloidal silica on Jindal Films® 50MH647 first primed with polyethylenimine (“PEI”) based primer(s), or without colloidal silica on Jindal Films® 52XR647 first primed with epoxy based primer(s), cf. U.S. Pat. No. 4,214,039), wherein both of which primed coatings induced remarkable, curl-resistance performances. In the same way, polyvinylidene chloride (“PVDC”) and clay coating, such as Mobil® White 183 when coated on top of epoxy primers, were also found to be good candidates. Other clay or acrylic-based coatings, however, such as Neocryl® XK90/FL780 (i.e., an acrylic-based polymer) from DSM®, were not good barrier coatings for hot-melt components/additives. The best results were generally obtained with epoxy primers. Interesting routes were identified to design curl-free labels, wherein “curl-free” means at least a decreased amount of curl as compared to non-coated hot-melt receptive films. Several coating types combined with different primer types were found to induce improved resistance to curling and swelling with either transparent or whitish films.
Additional research and development occurred to evaluate several parameters that may affect the curl-resistance, and, therefore, the barrier properties to hot-melt additives/components. References made on industrial coaters have been compared to other samples prepared on a pilot coater. FIG. 2 summarizes evaluations made according to several variables:
- Base film type: white opaque Jindal Films® 60LH242 and Jindal Films® 50MH242; transparent Jindal Films® 50MB210
- Film density: 0.72 g/cm3 (white) and 0.91 g/cm3 (clear)
- Primer types: one or more primer layers of PEI, polyurethane (“PU”), XK90/FL780, etc.
- Coating types: different acrylics/acrylates emulsions, PVDC, polyvinyl alcohol (“PVOH”), clay-based coatings, or combinations thereof, etc.
- Additive types/amounts: waxes; antiblock particles; e.g., Sylobloc® (i.e., silica), talc, polymethyl methacrylate (“PMMA”), or combinations thereof, etc.; crosslinkers, e.g., ammonium zirconium carbonate (“AZC”), cymel melamine formaldehyde, etc.
- Coating weight: primarily investigated with PVDC and acrylic coatings
- Adhesive type: permanent; removable; permanent strong bond deep freeze; UV permanent; UV repositionable supplied by Avery®, MacTac® or Colano™
Details about these evaluations are shown in FIG. 2-4, wherein FIG. 3 provides a legend regarding FIG. 2, and FIG. 4 provides details about testing protocols for the data in FIG. 2. However, FIG. 2 represents merely example film densities. Film densities in other example embodiments may range from 0.54 to 0.94 if other polyolefin base films are used that are clear, white, and/or contain a higher concentration and/or denser particles. For example, the optionally oriented base film may include homopolymers, copolymers or terpolymers of ethylene, propylene, butene, or combinations thereof. By further example, a non-polyolefin base film, such as polyester having a density of 1.4 g/cm3, may be primed and coated for curl-resistant, hot-melt structures and compositions that may include the added functionalities of printability, etc. as discussed in this disclosure.
For reasons such as food compliance with the EU regulation requirements, the need for low volatile organic compound (“VOC”) emissions and for some film resistance to humidity, research and development were focused mainly on PU primers, even though other types, e.g., PEI, epoxys, acrylates based primers, etc., may be considered to be good candidates. See FIG. 1. The effect of the coating weight on the curl-resistance was evaluated mainly with PVDC coatings, i.e., B206-type from Solvin®. Coating weights of films, e.g., Jindal Films® 60LH538, Jindal Films® 60LL344-A, Jindal Films® 50MH647, were close to their specifications' requirements. Coating weight of acrylic-based coatings were generally around 0.8 g/m2. The amounts of monomer and co-monomer types used to manufacture acrylic polymer or copolymer solutions or emulsions (e.g., methylmethacrylates, methyl acrylates, acrylic acid, acrylic/styrene based copolymers, etc.) might significantly vary from one version/vendor to another (e.g., DSM®, BASF®, Dyflex®, . . . ). Some additional components, including, e.g., cross-linkers, anti-block particles or anti-slip additives, may be used to optimize the film design to obtain the desired structures and be compliant with the label-market requirements, e.g., coefficient of friction, no sticking/blocking effect during reel unwinding, controlled hot melt adhesive adhesion, optimal printability, etc.
The results summarized in FIG. 2 show that acrylic coatings LP 1011-4 (Dyflex), HSL 700 (BASF), Epotal A816 (BASF) and BT 36 (DSM) overcome the effect of hot melt adhesives and prevent the label from curling and swelling. Mixtures of acrylic emulsions or acrylic/styrene copolymer dispersions (e.g., respectively Neocryl XK90/FL780 and A-1094) and PVDC coatings also appear as good receptive layers for hot melts adhesives, whatever the coating weight evaluated (from 1.5 to 4 gr/m2). However, in the case of Jindal Films® 60LL344, the effect may be due to the epoxy primer more than the topcoat, itself. Indeed, when used as major component or together with clay-based coatings on other primer types, these coatings did not demonstrate curl-resistance properties. For instance, a cross-linked Neocryl A-1095 based coating or Jindal Films® 60LH538 (clay-based coating) exhibits significant levels of curl after a few minutes at 60° C. with several permanent and removable hot melts. This shows that curl-resistance may result from both the effects of the primer and the topcoat. Receptive layers made from polyvinyl alcohol (“PVOH”) solution or clay-based coatings do not seem appropriate either, even when cross-linked with a melamine formaldehyde based cross-linker. The PVOH-coated sample curls in the opposite direction of what was observed with the other candidates. When the film is removed from the oven, the curl comes back to −2. Without being bound to any theory, this curling may be due to humidity absorption by the coating.
Other samples were made at the pilot coater to evaluate the curl-resistance induced by the PU primer and the impact of the acrylic coating weight. PU primer (R610) did not induce curl-resistance at all or to any significant extent. On the contrary, 0.1 g/m2 of acrylic coating did seem sufficient to generate curl-resistance.
These evaluations highlighted that all the tested rubber-based adhesives induced curl with some inadequate film structures, except the UV adhesives. Without being bound to any theory, it is believed that the UV rubber-based adhesives, which have no or a lower amount of migrating additives/components, are not generating curl as the hot-melt is cross-linked and likely formulated differently as compared to standard hot melts. Migration of additives/components, if any, from the hot melt to the film is significantly decreased or fully stopped.
Film Structure for Hot Melt Curl Free PSL Applications
The developed film design for hot-melt, curl-free applications offers an adhesive-receptive layer with specific surface properties that ensure a high level of the hot-melt adhesive's adhesion and unique properties in order to prevent the label from curling after hot-melt applications. In addition, these remarkable properties are also combined with excellent printability properties on the base film's second side (i.e., non-adhesive side) with various inks and printing technologies, including, e.g., UV-flexo, UV offset, UV letter press, UV screen, hot/cold foil stamping or thermal transfer ribbon (“TTR”). Printed ink adhesion percentages on the second side are illustrated in example embodiments in FIGS. 8-10. The base film's first side (i.e., adhesive side), as well as the second side, may be printed with solvent-based inks. Furthermore, coatings on both sides of the film were designed and formulated to adapt the affinity of their highly functionalized surfaces in order to avoid any tendency of layers of the reels to stick against themselves and facilitate the unwinding of the reel at high speed.
Hot-Melt Adhesion Properties
FIG. 5 show data and setting parameters, respectively, for adhesion properties of different hot melts observed on two film structures. The first one in FIG. 5, i.e., Jindal Films® 60LH538, is a commercial film for PSL applications that proved not to be fully satisfactory when using hot-melt adhesive since the raw materials used in the adhesive-receptive layer do not prevent the film from curling. The second one is a proprietary acrylic coating manufactured by Dyflex® and formulated with carnauba wax and talc. FIG. 5 data, at least in part, supports the asserted conclusion or fact that the investigated acrylic-based coating exhibits both peeling strength and failure modes that are within expectations, except when using the hot melt L3-927 (permanent—Strong Bond Deep Freeze −40° C./° F.) after 24 hours of aging and with UV hot melts after 20 minutes. However, in the first case, the peeling strength remains very high, and, in the second, the purpose of such a structure is to avoid UV hot-melt adhesives, which are much more expensive.
Printability
Two rolls were produced on an industrial coating machine according the following structures:
50XC 002 Version 1
|
TC1
acrylic coating type-0.75 g/m2
|
PC1
PU R610 primer 0.10 g/m2
|
60LH242
|
PC2
no primer
|
TC2
printable coating type 1
|
|
50XC 002 Version 2
|
TC1
acrylic coating type-0.75 g/m2
|
PC1
PU R610 primer 0.10 g/m2
|
60LH242
|
PC2
no primer
|
TC2
printable coating type 2
|
|
- Humidity resistant Acrylic coating based on LP1011-4 from Dyflex®+Carnauba Wax from Michelman+talc LUZENAC 50 EC G from IMCD Benelux BV®
- PU primer: Neorez® R610 from DSM® Neoresins
A third roll was made using Tergitol® 15S9 from Univar Benelux® to improve wettability. Some properties were measured at the quality control lab and reported in FIG. 6. Two rolls were made respectively according to version 1 and 2, i.e., the name of the above-shown shown structures. These structures have the same adhesive receptive-layer formulation, but two different food contact compliant printable coatings. The third roll was made according to the version 2, but using ˜0.1% Tergitol® 15S9 (versus the total weight of the batch) in the HRAC coating. Curl resistance was remarkable on the first two rolls (S2045N hot melt adhesive from Avery Dennison). Tergitol® 15S9, however, seemed to degrade the curl-resistance.
Tests performed on samples from the two lead candidates (i.e., Lead candidate 1 & 2), printed in UV-flexo in an analytical lab and at a label converter showed excellent ink adhesion, as shown by the results summarized in FIG. 7. Other selected printing technologies, including e.g., TTR, UV Letterpress, hot and cold foil stamping, were also found to work well with the new film designs as shown in FIG. 8-10, wherein FIG. 11 provides setting parameters used for the data collected at FIGS. 8-10.
Printability was not affected after reels storage in tropical conditions, i.e., simulating any cross-contamination from the backside to the printable side.
Blocking Properties
Slit rolls were made from a mill roll produced during a manufacturing run on an industrial coater. The slitting machine ran at 500 m/min without any issue (e.g., web break due to blocking). Layers very close to the core were barely sticking. Performances, therefore, were in line with our expectations. These slit rolls (320 mm) were stored for one week under tropical conditions (38° C./90% RH), and then unwound at 400 m/min. No severe blocking tendency was noticed even under these severe testing conditions.
Some formulation modifications have also been evaluated at the pilot coater and quality control lab in order to further improve the blocking properties if, for instance, such is needed in a later development stage. The results, in FIG. 12, showed that adding Sylobloc® S45 silica (Grace Davison®) instead of talc (similar or higher amount) improved blocking values. Very low amounts of polytetrafluoroethylene (“PTFE”) particles (Shamrock®), e.g., 0.1 phr, also have a significant impact on blocking reduction. Generally, however, antiblocking agents to one or more surfaces of the first side, second side, or both may be organic, inorganic, or combinations thereof. Moreover, even though a polyurethane primer was used in these example embodiments, other primers, such as those discussed in this disclosure, could have been used without departing from the results.
Further research and development on blocking properties occurred in order to highlight differences between acrylic and PVDC based coatings (B206 from Solvay®). The tests were performed using two different printable coatings, i.e., Jindal Films® 60LH538 print face and the version designed for the new PSL food contact compliant, hot-melt, curl-resistance. The results summarized in FIGS. 13-15 show that the acrylic-based versions show much lower blocking values, wherein quality control tests were performed in line with the general description found at paragraph [0042] herein. As a general rule, the higher the wax and talc levels in acrylic-based coatings, the lower the blocking values and ability to tear, i.e., “tearability.” Higher printable coating weights induce a positive influence also. PVDC, which is curl-resistant, generates much higher blocking values versus acrylics, no matter what coating weights are used. The best values were observed on low PVDC coating weight combined with a high printable coating weight (e.g., #12 in FIG. 13). The Jindal Films® 60LH538 printable coating has a positive influence on tearability, despite high PVDC blocking values. Acrylic-based solutions also offer the advantage to be chlorine free.
Research and development identified several candidates and potential formulations based on several coating and primer types that may be used on many different, optionally oriented base films for PSAs where a resistance to curl and swelling is desired or required. Lead candidates were based on specific acrylic coatings on the adhesive receptive layer combined with a printable coating, i.e., printable face. Both coating types were formulated to comply with manufacturing requirements and customers' expectations.
Testing protocols followed in the provision of data herein is summarized below.
UV Printing with the IGT F1 Equipment
- UV printing of plastic films is performed with the IGT F1 equipment.
- Laboratory UV inks: Flexocure Gemini Cyan Process (ref. UFG-0080-408). Other inks may be used.
- Film samples must be clean and exempt of finger marks, grease, dust, humidity, and so forth. The format of the samples was 630 mm×50 mm.
- Anilox disc force is set at the default value of 100 Newtons (N).
- Force of the impression cylinder is set at the default value of 150 Newtons (N).
- Printing speed is also set at the default value of 0.2 meter/second.
- Direct ink transfer from anilox disc to the flexo plate and to the samples.
- Anilox discs with 4 different ink weights are used: 7-9-11-16 ml/cm2.
Drying of UV Inks
- UV inks drying on plastic films is performed with a UV dryer from PRIMARC Minicure UV Technology
- Drying takes place just after UV inks are printed with the IGT F1 equipment
- Samples are maintained with tape on a rigid support to keep them flat during UV curing
- UV Lamps type: Standard Medium Pressure Mercury lamps PL1500-120 W/cm
- UV curing is set at maximum power (100%), but can be adapted upon request
- Conveyor speed is set at 30-32 meters/minute
Ink Adhesion on Films for Pressure-Sensitive Label Applications Using Tape
- The ink adhesion is estimated by the amount of ink that can be removed.
- UV inks are applied on filmic substrate with the IGT F1 equipment and dried using a UV dryer from PRIMARC Minicure UV Technology.
- Typical adhesive tape of high peel adhesion are used:
- Red Lithographic tape Lithotape 1129-25 mm width
- 3M Scotch® 810 Magic TM tape
- The adhesive tapes are applied on the samples without any air bubbles trapped under the tape.
- A standardized Finat Roller is rolled two times on the tape surface to have a calibrated force on the sample and improve the reproducibility of the tests.
- The tape is applied on a length of at least 20 cm.
- When using the 3M Scotch® 810 Magic TM tape, it is recommended to perform the peeling test 10 minutes after tape application.
- The sample is held to the surface with one hand. The tape is peeled back at an angle of approximately 120 to 150 degrees.
- Tape is lifted and pulled back with an even and moderate motion at typically 300 to 450 mm per second.
- The interpretation of the test results consist in ranking the anchorage behavior in 3 levels:
- Level 1 is equivalent to a severe removal of ink (30-60% or even more)
- Level 2 is equivalent to a moderate removal of ink (10 up to 30%)
- Level 3 is equivalent to a slight (<10%) or no removal of the ink
- In some cases, values can be recorded in percentage of ink removed from the surface.
Blocking Test Under Accelerated Conditions
- The blocking test is performed to simulate the tendency of film layers in a reel to stick to themselves.
- The equipment used to perform the blocking test is a laboratory press SPECAC 15.011 (plates diameter=10 cm/plates surface=78.5 cm2).
- 2 pieces of film approximately 2 cm wider and longer than the steel plates of the laboratory press are superposed and centered between the 2 steel plates of the press.
- Film samples are pressed against each other into the press under 53 kg/cm2 pressure during 60 minutes at 60° C.+/−3° C.
- 25 mm wide strips are cut at the center of the samples.
- Blocking measurements are performed using a Friction-Peel tester (Thwing-Albert model 225-1).
- One film layer is fastened on one end of the plate of the Friction-Peel tester and the other one to the measuring cell.
- A 90° angle between the sample and the surface of the Friction-Peel tester.
- Peeling speed is set at 15 cm/min and results are displayed in grams/25 mm.
While the foregoing is directed to example embodiments of the disclosed invention, other and further embodiments may be devised without departing from the basic scope thereof, wherein the scope of the disclosed applications, compositions, structures, labels, and so forth are determined by one or more claims of at least one subsequently filed, non-provisional patent application.
Patent Application
20190062512
