Patent Application
20140272389
The present invention relates to a pigmented paper coating with improved brightness.
Titanium dioxide (TiO2) is used as a pigment in paperboard coatings on darker substrates such as recycled board and unbleached Kraft board to improve the optical properties such as brightness, opacity and appearance. In addition, TiO2 is used in lightweight coated paper to improve opacity, or in premium coated paper grades to improve the brightness and appearance. Motivated by the high cost of TiO2, papermakers are looking for ways to either reduce its usage or improve its efficiency or both.
In the absence of modifiers such as dispersants, TiO2 particles will crowd, leading to inefficient hiding. However, even with well dispersed TiO2 there can be crowding of TiO2 particles as the level of TiO2 is increased. Furthermore, it is known, for example, (2001 TAPPI Coating Conference Paper by Imerys on “Optimum Dispersion In Blade Coating Operations;” also, Chapter 3 on “Inorganic Salt Dispersants” in Practical Dispersion: A Guide to Understanding and Formulating Slurries by R. F. Conley, Wiley Press) that over-dispersing of a coating will cause pigment particles to flocculate, which can lead to an improvement in coating brightness on the order of 0.5 to 1.5 points. This improvement in brightness, however, is attributed to an increase in the porosity of the coating, which increases the amount of light scattering from air voids, and not to the increased efficiency of TiO2 dispersion in the coating. Furthermore, the brightness advantage realized from using high levels of dispersants is greatly reduced after calendaring to less than 1 point because the voids created upon the addition of the dispersant are removed during the calendaring process.
U.S. Pat. No. 8,043,476 discloses a paper or paperboard coating formulation with improved viscosity stability comprising a phosphate or phosphonate functionalized acrylic polymer binder, TiO2, and a polyphosphate dispersant. Although the phosphate or phosphonate functionality is known to enhance adsorptivity of the binder to the TiO2, thereby improving the efficiency of its usage, the presence of phosphates or phosphonates often adversely affect viscosity stability of the binder and water sensitivity of the coating. Moreover, latexes prepared with the commonly used phosphate monomer, phosphoethyl methacrylate (PEM), invariably contain impurities that are of concern to governmental regulatory agencies (e.g., the FDA) that regulate products that may come in contact with food. Accordingly, it would be an advance in the art of paper and paperboard coating formulations to design a formulation that overcomes the disadvantages of phosphate and phosphonate functionalized binders, while still achieving the benefits of enhanced brightness.
The present invention addresses a need in the art by providing a composition comprising an aqueous dispersion of a) from 3 to 25 weight percent polymeric binder particles containing a substantial absence of phosphate and phosphonate groups; b) from 5 to 35 weight percent rutile TiO2 having a purity of at least 98% and a substantial absence of inorganic silica; c) from 0.1 to 2 weight percent of a dispersant which is tetrasodium pyrophosphate, tetrapotassium pyrophosphate, sodium tripolyphosphate, potassium tripolyphosphate, or sodium hexametaphosphate; wherein the polymeric binder particles comprise vinyl acetate, vinyl-acrylic, styrene-acrylic, or styrene-butadiene polymer particles; and wherein the weight percentages are all based on the weight of total solids of the composition. The composition of the present invention addresses a need in the art by providing a more uniform distribution of TiO2 in a final dry coating, which allows for the removal of about 20% to 40% of the TiO2 without a loss in optical properties.
The present invention addresses a need in the art by providing a composition comprising an aqueous dispersion of a) from 3 to 25 weight percent polymeric binder particles containing a substantial absence of phosphate and phosphonate groups; b) from 5 to 35 weight percent rutile TiO2 having a purity of at least 98% and a substantial absence of inorganic silica; c) from 0.1 to 2 weight percent of a dispersant which is tetrasodium pyrophosphate, tetrapotassium pyrophosphate, sodium tripolyphosphate, potassium tripolyphosphate, or sodium hexametaphosphate; wherein the polymeric binder particles comprise vinyl acetate, vinyl-acrylic, styrene-acrylic, or styrene-butadiene polymer particles; and wherein the weight percentages are all based on the weight of total solids of the composition.
The binder particles preferably have a volume average particle size in the range of from 50 nm, more preferably from 80 nm, to 500 nm, more preferably to 300 nm. Preferably the weight percent of binder, based on the weight of total solids of the composition, is from 5 to 25 weight percent. The binder particles comprise a substantial absence of phosphate or phosphonate groups. As used herein, the term “substantial absence of phosphate or phosphonate groups” means that the binder particles contain, based on the weight of the binder, less than 0.05 weight percent, preferably less than 0.01 weight percent, more preferably less than 0.001 weight percent, and most preferably 0 weight percent phosphate and phosphonate groups.
The aqueous composition preferably comprises from 5 to 25 weight percent rutile TiO2, based on the weight of total solids of the composition; the TiO2 preferably has an optical density of from 1.05 to 1.15, a refractive index of from 2.70 to 2.75, and a particle size distribution with a geometric standard deviation of 1.45 to 1.50 as measured using a HORIBA LA-900 particle analyzer. A commercially available TiO2 is RPS Vantage TiO2. The TiO2 useful in the composition of the present invention is untreated with inorganic silica; therefore, it is peculiarly useful in paper coating applications as opposed to paint formulations, which require TiO2 treated with inorganic silica.
The dispersant is preferably present in the composition at 0.2 to 0.6 weight percent, based on total solids of the composition.
The composition of the present invention advantageously includes other additives including auxiliary pigments, such as clays and calcium carbonate; rheology modifiers; natural binders, such as proteins and starch; optical brightening agents; lubricants; antifoamers; crosslinkers; and other dispersants, such as polyacrylic acid based dispersant. The particle size of auxiliary pigments useful for the composition of the present invention is preferably finer than 2 μm, more preferably 80% to 100% by weight finer than 2 μm, as measured using Sedigraph. This preferred size range is considerably smaller than what is typically used in paint formulations.
The composition is useful as a coating for coated or uncoated paper or paperboard and can be applied in a single or multiple coats to a final film thickness preferably in the range of from 5 μm, more preferably from 10 μm, to 35 μm, more preferably to 20 μm, which is about one-third to one-tenth the film thickness of typical paint coatings. Thus, in another aspect, the present invention is a laminate comprising coated or uncoated paper or paperboard; and a 5- to 35-μm thick layer of a film adhered to the paper or paperboard; wherein the film comprises the residuum of the composition of the present invention after removal of water.
It has surprisingly been discovered that the composition of the present invention gives paper or paperboard coatings with improved brightness, without additional loadings of TiO2, and using binder that contains a substantial absence or complete absence of phosphate and phosphonate groups.
While not bound by theory, it is believed that the TiO2 typically used in paper coatings, which has a purity of at least 98% and a substantial absence of inorganic silica, forms agglomerates in the wet state in the presence of other coating components. These agglomerates produce crowding of TiO2 in paper coatings, thereby reducing the efficiency of the TiO2 performance, even at low levels of TiO2 where crowding is not expected to occur. It is believed that the use of low molecular weight polyphosphate dispersants reverses the agglomeration of TiO2 in the wet state, resulting in a more uniform distribution of TiO2 in final dry coating. Conversely, it is believed that higher molecular weight polyacrylic acid polymeric dispersants, which are commonly used in paper coatings, are not able to diffuse into the wet agglomerates to redisperse the TiO2 and therefore are not effective. The following examples demonstrate this effect.
In the following examples 1-6 and comparative examples 1 and 2, the formulations include 25 parts RPS TiO2 and 75 parts Clay, based on the weight of Clay and RPS TiO2 solids.
RPS TiO2 (52.61 g, 71.28% solids) was added to Clay (168.44 g, 66.79% solids), 3103NP (59.44 g, 50.47% solids), then RM-232D (0.79 g, 28.32% solids), then DI water (110.22 g). The percent solids was 45.31%.
RPS TiO2 (52.61 g, 71.28% solids) was added to Clay (168.44 g, 66.79% solids), followed by addition of a mixture of SHMP (18.00 g, 5% solids) and 3103NP (59.44 g, 50.47% solids), then RM-232D (0.79 g, 28.32% solids), then DI water (108.55 g). The percent solids was 44.82%.
The amounts described in Example 1 were used but the order of addition was changed. In this example, RPS TiO2 was added to a mixture of SHMP and 3103NP, followed by addition of Clay, then RM-232D, then DI water. The percent solids was 45.32%.
The preparation of Example 1 was followed except for the amounts of SHMP (24.00 g, 5% solids) and DI water (97.885 g). The percent solids was 45.35%.
The preparation of Example 1 was followed except that TSPP (18.00 g, 5% solids) was used as the dispersant instead of SHMP. The percent solids was 45.32%
The amounts described in Example 4 were used but the order of addition was changed. In this example, RPS TiO2 was added to a mixture of TSPP and 3103NP, followed by addition of Clay, then RM-232D, then DI water. The percent solids was 44.49%.
The preparation of Example 1 was followed except that KTPP (18.00 g, 5% solids) was used as the dispersant instead of SHMP. The percent solids was 45.37%.
The procedure of Example 1 was followed except that 9400 (2.12 g, 42.5% solids) was used as the dispersant instead of SHMP, and DI water (119.10 g) was used. The percent solids was 45.43%.
The coatings were applied to SUS paperboard using a mechanical draw down machine with a #10 wire rod. One coat was applied at 3.5 lbs/1000 ft2 and placed in an oven for 2 min at 82° C. The sheets were then calendered at 150° F., 500 psi and 85 ft/min. The gloss target was 35 to 40 at 75 deg gloss. The brightness was measured using Technidyne Brightmeter Model S4-M; average brightness (Bavg) for 25 readings of each of the coating formulations. The brightness data for Examples 1-6 and Comparative Examples 1 and 2 (C1, C2) are shown in Table 1:
The results show the dramatic difference in brightness (at least 3 brightness units) between formulations that include the dispersants SHMP (Examples 1-3), TSPP (Example 4-5) or KTPP (Example 6) and the formulations that are either absent of dispersant (C1) or contain a dispersant widely used in the paper coating industry, acrylic homopolymer (C2). The data also show that the order of addition is not critical.
For Example 7 and Comparative Examples 3-5, two grades of TiO2 were compared, RPS TiO2 (>98% purity, untreated with inorganic silica) and R-746 TiO2 (˜95% purity, surface treated with inorganic silica), with and without SHMP dispersant. The formulations include 15 parts RPS or R-746 TiO2 and 85 parts Clay, based on the weight Clay and RPS or R-746 TiO2 solids.
RPS TiO2 (54.95 g, 70.58% solids) was added to Clay (159.40 g, 66.79% solids), 3960 (60.24 g, 49.80% solids), followed by addition of a mixture of SHMP (24.00 g, 5% solids), then RM-232D (0.79 g, 28.32% solids), then DI water (100.62 g). The percent solids was 45.36%.
RPS TiO2 (54.95 g, 70.58% solids) was added to Clay (159.40 g, 66.79% solids), 3960 (60.24 g, 49.80% solids), then RM-232D (0.79 g, 28.32% solids), then DI water (124.54 g). The percent solids was 45.06%.
The preparation of Comparative Example 3 was followed except that R-746 TiO2 (48.82 g, 76.81% solids) was used instead of RPS TiO2 and for the amount of DI water (128.77 g). The percent solids was 45.23%.
The preparation of Example 7 was followed except that R-746 TiO2 (48.82 g, 76.81% solids) was used instead of RPS TiO2 and the amount of DI water (104.73 g) was different. The percent solids was 45.59%.
Table 2 illustrates the parts by weight of the components in the formulation and average brightness for these samples and differences in brightness (ΔBavg) between formulations with and without SHMP for the different grades of TiO2.
As the data show, the formulation containing R-746 and no SHMP gives higher brightness than the formulation containing RPS TiO2 and no SHMP (65.6 versus 64.7); although the addition of SHMP improves brightness somewhat for R-746 (ΔB=1.1), the improvement for RPS TiO2 is remarkable (ΔB=4.9). Thus, the high purity TiO2 that is untreated with inorganic silica shows a dramatic improvement over the lower purity TiO2 that is treated with inorganic silica.
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 61781136 | Mar 2013 | US |
