Patent Application
20180142063
The instant disclosure generally relates to a wetting composition and to a process for increasing the wetting rate of hydrophobic media with the wetting composition.
The availability of fresh water is a rising concern in many industries. Therefore, the minimization of water use is an important consideration for many applications, especially in the agricultural, landscaping, and construction industries. As one example, in the agricultural industry, the availability of fresh water to successfully grow and maintain crops and landscaping is a rising concern. Irrigation methods in the agricultural and landscaping industries generally have poor efficiency because the growing media (e.g. soil, sand, peat) is hydrophobic and, thus, contributes to loss of water through runoff and evaporation. Accordingly, it is desirable to maximize water uptake and minimize evaporation to increase the availability of irrigation water and “naturally sourced” water, such as rain and dew, for uptake by botanical articles, such as agricultural crops, grass, and decorative plants. As another example, in the construction industry, airborne dust is often annoying and can cause health problems or damage to machinery. Water is often used for dust control at construction sites or on dirt roads, both of which often comprise hard packed, hydrophobic media. However, atmospheric dust may become a problem upon drying of wetted surfaces such that it is desirable to maximize the uptake and minimize the evaporation of the water to lengthen the time period over which dust control treatment is effective.
Accordingly, there remains an opportunity to provide a method for increasing the wetting rate of hydrophobic media.
The present disclosure provides a process for increasing the wetting rate of hydrophobic media with a wetting composition. The process includes the steps of combining water and a heteric polyol to form the wetting composition, aging the wetting composition for an amount of time sufficient to increase the cloud point of the wetting composition to greater than 23° C., and applying the wetting composition to the hydrophobic media. The heteric polyol has a number average molecular weight (Mn) of from 1,000 to 6,000, an HLB value of from 2 to 6, and a hydroxyl functionality of two or greater. Further, the heteric polyol has the following formula:
X[Y(CH2CH2O)a(CH2CHCH3O)bH]c
wherein X is an organic core derived from an initiator having at least two hydroxyl groups; Y is a heteric copolymer comprising at least two different alkyleneoxy units selected from the group of ethyleneoxy units, propyleneoxy units, and butyleneoxy units; the subscripts a and b are independently zero or a positive integer and at least one of a or b must be a positive integer; and the subscript c is an integer of two or greater.
In the process, the wetting composition quickly infiltrates hydrophobic media without runoff. Once treated, the water loss of hydrophobic media due to runoff is decreased and the moisture retention level of the hydrophobic media is increased.
Other advantages of the present disclosure will be readily appreciated, as the same becomes better understood by reference to the following detailed description when considered in connection with the accompanying drawings wherein:
A process for increasing the wetting rate of hydrophobic media with a wetting composition is provided. Also provided is a wetting composition including a heteric polyol, which increases the wetting rate and water retention of hydrophobic media.
In certain embodiments, the heteric polyol has the following formula:
X[Y(CH2CH2O)a(CH2CHCH3O)bH]c
wherein
X is an organic core derived from an initiator having at least 2 hydroxyl groups, alternatively at least 3 hydroxyl groups, alternatively 3 hydroxyl groups;
Y is a heteric copolymer comprising at least two different alkyleneoxy units selected from the group of ethyleneoxy units, propyleneoxy units, and butyleneoxy units;
the subscripts a and b are independently zero or a positive integer and at least one of a or b must be a positive integer; and
the subscript c is an integer of 2 or greater, alternatively 3 or greater, alternatively 3.
As set forth above, the initiator reacts to form the organic core (X) of the heteric polyol. In certain embodiments, X may be derived from a monofunctional alcohol (i.e., an organic compound having one reactive hydroxyl group), a difunctional alcohol (i.e., an organic reactive alcohol having two reactive hydroxyl groups), or a higher functional alcohol (i.e., an organic reactive alcohol having three or more reactive hydroxyl groups). In certain embodiments, X is derived from a saturated alcohol, but in certain other embodiments may be derived from an unsaturated alcohol or derived from a combination of saturated and unsaturated alcohols.
In certain embodiments, X is derived from a mixture of at least two organic alcohols having a different number of reactive functional hydroxyl groups.
Representative monofunctional alcohols include simple primary alcohols having the general formula RCH2OH, secondary alcohols having the general formula RR′CHOH, or tertiary alcohols having the general formula RR′R″COH, where R, R′, and R″ represent alkyl groups.
Representative simple difunctional alcohols, or diols include simple chemical compounds containing two hydroxyl groups, such as ethylene glycol, 1,4 butanediol, propylene 1,3 diol, and the like.
Representative simple higher functional alcohols, such as triols, tetraols and higher functional alcohols, include glycerol, pentaerythritol, and the like. In a preferred embodiment, the initiator comprises or is glycerine/glycerol.
As set forth above, the alkylene oxide is reacted with the initiator to form the heteric copolymer portion (Y) of the heteric polyol. Y is a heteric copolymer comprising at least two different alkyleneoxy units/groups selected from the group of ethyleneoxy units, propyleneoxy units, and butyleneoxy units. For purposes of the subject disclosure the word “heteric” describes polymers (e.g. the heteric polyol) as including or comprising at least two different alkyleneoxy units which are polymerized in a random distribution. The word “heteric” may describe a given portion of a polymer, a branch or branches of a polymer, or the entire polymer excluding its core.
Y can comprise heteric and uniform blocks of alkyleneoxy units. For example, Y can comprise a random combination of ethyleneoxy units and propyleneoxy units. As another example, Y can comprise a blocked combination of ethyleneoxy units and propyleneoxy units. As another example, Y can comprise a blocked combination (blocks) of ethyleneoxy units and propyleneoxy units, so long as one of the blocks is heteric. As yet another example, Y can comprise a segment comprising a random combination of ethyleneoxy units and propyleneoxy units and also blocks of ethyleneoxy units and propyleneoxy units.
In various embodiments, Y comprises ethyleneoxy units and propyleneoxy units. In this embodiment Y comprises ethyleneoxy units in an amount of from about 2 to about 80, alternatively from about 2 to about 60, alternatively from about 2 to about 40, alternatively from about 2 to about 35, alternatively from about 2 to about 30, alternatively from about 2 to about 25, alternatively from about 2 to about 20, alternatively from about 2 to about 18, alternatively from about 2 to about 16, alternatively from about 2 to about 14, alternatively from about 4 to about 14, alternatively from about 6 to about 14, alternatively from about 8 to about 14, alternatively from about 4 to about 10, percent by weight, based on 100 parts by weight of the reactants reacted to form the heteric polyol. Of course, Y also comprises the remaining propyleneoxy units in an amount such that the total percent by weight alkyleneoxy units add up to 100%, based on 100 parts by weight of the reactants reacted to form the heteric polyol.
The segment —(CH2CH2O)a(CH2CHCH3O)bH of the heteric polyol represents the end capping of the heteric polyol. In various embodiments, the subscript b is zero and subscript a is a positive integer. That is, the heteric polyol is end capped with ethyleneoxy units which are derived from the alkoxylation reaction of ethylene oxide (EO).
In various embodiments, the subscript a is zero and subscript b is a positive integer. That is, the heteric polyol is end capped with propyleneoxy units which are derived from the alkoxylation reaction of propylene oxide (PO). In certain embodiments, (CH2CHCH3O)b comprises less than about 20, alternatively less than about 18, alternatively less than about 16, alternatively less than about 14, alternatively less than about 12, alternatively less than about 10, alternatively less than about 8, alternatively less than about 6, alternatively less than about 4, percent by weight, based on 100 parts by weight of the reactants reacted to form the heteric polyol. Stated another way, in certain embodiments, the polyol composition is end capped with the amounts set forth above of (CH2CHCH3O) units which are derived from the alkoxylation reaction of propylene oxide.
In various embodiments, the heteric polyol comprises ethyleneoxy units and propyleneoxy units in a molar ratio of from about 1:25 to about 1:4, alternatively from about 1:11 to about 2:5.
In various embodiments, the heteric polyol has a number average molecular weight (Mn) of from about 1,000 to about 6,000, alternatively from about 2,700 to about 3,300, alternatively from about 2,700 to about 3,100, alternatively from about 2,800 to about 6,000, alternatively from about 2,800 to about 3,000, g/mol. In various embodiments, the heteric polyol has a number average molecular weight (Mn) of about 1,000, alternatively about 1,500, alternatively about 2,000, alternatively about 2,500, alternatively about 2,800, alternatively about 3,000, alternatively about 4,100, alternatively about 6,000, g/mol. Molecular weight as used herein is the number average molecular weight (Mn) which is defined as the statistical average molecular weight of all the polymer chains in the sample, and is defined with the formula Mn=ΣNiMi/ΣNi where Mi is the molecular weight of a chain and is the number of chains of that molecular weight. Mn can be predicted by polymerization mechanisms and is measured by methods that determine the number of molecules in a sample of a given weight; for example, colligative methods such as end-group assay. There are equal numbers of molecules on either side of Mn in the distribution. Further, all molecular weights set forth herein are in g/mol.
In various embodiments, the heteric polyol has an HLB value of from about 2 to about 6, alternatively from about 2.5 to about 4.0, alternatively from about 2.5 to about 3.5, alternatively from about 2.5 to about 3.1, alternatively from about 2.5 to about 3.0. In various embodiments, the heteric polyol has an HLB value of about 1.8, alternatively about 2.5, alternatively about 2.6, alternatively about 2.85, alternatively about 3.0. HLB value as used herein is calculated based on William C. Griffin's formula for non-ionic surfactants. William C. Griffin's HLB formula is the percent of total hydrophile divided by 5 to standardize the value against a scale of 20. The percent hydrophile in EO/PO copolymers is defined as the total sum of percent EO and the percent of polyhydric alcohols (i.e. glycerol).
In various embodiments, the heteric polyol has a hydroxyl functionality of two or greater, alternatively from about 2.5 or greater, alternatively about 2.8 or greater, alternatively about 3.0 or greater, alternatively about 3.5 or greater, alternatively from about 2.5 to about 3.1. In various embodiments, the heteric polyol has a hydroxyl functionality of about 2.5, alternatively about 2.6, alternatively about 2.9, alternatively about 3.0. The hydroxyl functionality as used herein is the number of hydroxy groups on a molecule. An average functionality of the molecules included in a sample of the Heteric Polyol is used herein and calculated with the following formula: Average Functionality=Total Moles OH/Total Moles Polyol. As such, the hydroxyl functionality of the heteric polyol does not have to be a whole number and is, in many cases, reported as a number including a fraction such as 2.85.
One exemplary, non-limiting heteric polyol comprises the reaction product of (i) about 1.5 to about 5% by weight of glycerine, (ii) about 10 to about 15% by weight of ethylene oxide, and (iii) about 82 to about 97% by weight of propylene oxide, wherein the % by weight of components (i)-(iii) is based on 100 parts by weight of the reactants reacted to form the heteric polyol. In certain embodiments, this heteric polyol is capped with about 10% by weight (e.g. from about 8 to about 15% by weight of propylene oxide, has a hydroxyl functionality of about 3 (e.g. from about 2.6 to about 3.2), and has a number average molecular weight (Mn) of about 3000 g/mol (e.g. from about 2500 to about 3500 g/mol).
Another exemplary, non-limiting heteric polyol comprises the reaction product of (i) about 1.5 to about 3.5% by weight of glycerine, (ii) about 9 to about 15% by weight of ethylene oxide, and (iii) about 82 to about 88% by weight of propylene oxide, wherein the % by weight of components (i)-(iii) is based on 100 parts by weight of the reactants reacted to form the heteric polyol. In certain embodiments, this heteric polyol is uncapped, has a hydroxyl functionality of about 2.85 (e.g. from about 2.6 to about 3.2), and has a number average molecular weight (Mn) of about 2800 g/mol (e.g. from about 2300 to about 3300 g/mol).
The process optionally includes the step of preparing the heteric polyol according to the formula X[Y(CH2CH2O)a(CH2CHCH3O)bH]c. In this step, an initiator having at least two hydroxyl groups is introduced into a reactor. To make the Y (the heteric copolymer portion) of the molecule, at least two of ethylene oxide (EO), propylene oxide (PO), and butylene oxide (BO) are introduced into the reactor at the same time or at different times and in different sequences, at the desired inclusion rates of each one individually. These molecules will react via an alkoxylation reaction to produce a larger molecule with reactive OH units. Once this molecule is formed, EO or PO may be introduced into the reactor (but not at the same time) to produce a molecule that now has a block of repeating EO or PO units. That is, the heteric copolymer portion may be capped with EO and/or PO units.
Further, the process includes the steps of combining water and the heteric polyol to form the wetting composition, aging the wetting composition for an amount of time sufficient to increase the cloud point of the wetting composition to greater than about 23° C., and applying the wetting composition to the hydrophobic media.
In various embodiments, the step of combining water and the heteric polyol to form the wetting composition is further defined as combining the water in an amount of from about 2,000 to about 8,000 ppm, alternatively from about 2,000 to about 6,000 ppm, alternatively from about 2,000 to about 4,000 ppm, with a ppm basis of parts by weight of the heteric polyol per 1 part by weight of the wetting composition.
Of course, various embodiments of the wetting composition can further include additional components and additives (e.g. surfactants, colorants, antifoaming agents, additives, etc.). However, various embodiments of the wetting composition may consist of, or consist essentially of, the heteric polyol and water. As used herein, “consisting essentially of” is meant to exclude any element or combination of elements, as well as any amount of any element or combination of elements, that would alter the basic and novel characteristics of the wetting composition.
Once the water and heteric polyol are combined to form the wetting composition, the wetting composition is aged for an amount of time sufficient to increase the cloud point of the wetting composition to greater than about 23° C. In various embodiments, the step of aging the wetting composition for an amount of time sufficient to increase the cloud point of the wetting composition to greater than about 23° C. is further defined as aging the wetting composition at least about 4, alternatively at least about 8, alternatively at least about 12, alternatively at least about 16, alternatively at least about 20, alternatively at least about 24, alternatively at least about 48, alternatively at least about 72, alternatively at least about 96, alternatively at least about 120, alternatively at least about 144, alternatively at least about 168, alternatively at least about 192, alternatively at least about 216, hours. It is believed that the performance of the wetting composition (e.g. infiltration time reduction) is improved by aging the wetting composition before the step of applying the wetting composition to the hydrophobic media. Without being bound by theory, it is believed that aging the wetting composition for an amount of time sufficient to increase the cloud point of the wetting composition to greater than about 23° C. significantly improves the wetting composition performance (infiltration time). It is observed that the wetting composition, which includes the heteric polyol and water, changes visibly overtime. Specifically, the opacity or visible clouding of the wetting composition including the heteric polyol and water increases or decreases after preparation of the wetting composition. Without being bound by theory, it is believed that the inherent solubility of the heteric polyol in water gradually increases with extended water-heteric polyol interaction time. The optimal time between sample preparation and sample application is a minimum of about 4 to about 24 hours; contingent upon variations with molecular weight and heteric polyol type. This relationship is described in the Examples below.
The process also includes the step of applying the wetting composition to the hydrophobic media. The hydrophobic media is generally defined as any media which exhibits any resistance to wetting with water. That is, any media that does not absorb water in any amounts. The hydrophobic media typically includes varying amounts and types of soil, sand, and peat. Various soils include soil types found in various locations in the United States, such as Dinuba soil, Los Banos soil, Lubbock soil, and Nebraska soil. In one embodiment, the hydrophobic media includes soil, sand, peat, and combinations thereof.
Of course, the step of applying the wetting composition to the hydrophobic media can be conducted for purposes including, but not limited to, dust abatement, hydration, and inhibition of solidification of liquid and/or semi-solid compositions (e.g., through extended hydration).
Once applied, the wetting composition functions to increase the infiltration time of the composition and water thereafter, and also to slow the rate of evaporation or loss of water from the hydrophobic media. Upon application, the wetting composition modifies the surface character of the hydrophobic media such that the hydrophobic character of the media is masked and the overall hydrophilicity of the media is improved. Even after evaporation or loss of water, the residual heteric polyol remains in the hydrophobic media. As such, the residual heteric polyol remaining in the hydrophobic media can allow absorption and retention of water subsequently applied to the hydrophobic media. Accordingly, the wetting composition is ideal for applications in which it would be desirable to slow evaporation or loss of polar liquids from soil samples, such as in the agricultural, botanical, and construction industries.
In the agricultural industry, the availability of fresh water in order to successfully grow and maintain crops is a rising concern. The wetting composition described herein significantly reduces the hydrophobicity of soils, peats, and sands. When used in agricultural applications, the step of applying the wetting composition to the hydrophobic media can be further defined as applying the heteric polyol in an amount of from about 50 to about 500, alternatively from about 50 to about 200, alternatively from about 80 to about 116, Oz./acre. At these application amounts, appreciable improvement to the overall efficacy of water infiltration is observed. Advantageously, the wetting composition allows for more effective and uniform irrigation at reduced water application rates to promote improved plant health and economic sustainability.
Infiltration rate as used herein is measured with “a modified straw test”. In this test method, 3 mL syringes fitted with 23 G1 hypodermic needles are employed. Each syringe holds a disc of Whatman 542 filter paper and houses 35 mm of hydrophobic sand. The sand's water repellant character is determined by treatment with trichloro octadecyl silane according to Bauters, et al., 1998 Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 62:1185-1190. The efficacy of the prepared sand is verified by measuring the infiltration time of deionized water. Without the heteric polyol, deionized water does not wet or penetrate the hydrophobic sand within 9 days of the initial application. In this method, the infiltration time is measured as the time lapsed from the initial sample application, through the wetting of 35 mm of sand, and to the moment when one drop of sample solution first eludes the prepared syringe needle. Various wetting compositions including the heteric polyol in the concentrations and ranges described above are aged for at least 24 hours and tested. A 1 mL sample of the wetting composition is applied to the surface of the prepared syringes or columns. Deionized water is used as the control/standard for comparison. Each wetting composition is tested 4 times—the infiltration times set forth below are an average of the four measurements. In various embodiments, the wetting composition has a hydrophobic media infiltration rate of less than about 5, alternatively less than about 4, alternatively less than about 3, alternatively less than about 2, alternatively less than about 1, alternatively less than about 0.5, minutes, at concentrations of less than about 8,000 ppm, alternatively less than about 7,000 ppm, alternatively less than about 6,000 ppm, alternatively less than about 5,000 ppm, alternatively less than about 4,000 ppm, alternatively less than about 3,000 ppm, alternatively less than about 2,000 ppm, or at concentrations of about 8,000 ppm, alternatively about 7,000 ppm, alternatively about 6,000 ppm, alternatively about 5,000 ppm, alternatively about 4,000 ppm, alternatively about 3,000 ppm, alternatively about 2,000 ppm, with a ppm basis of parts by weight heteric polyol per 1 part by weight of the wetting composition.
Water loss due to runoff as used herein is measured with a 12 inch PVC column packed with a mixture of 95% sand and 5% screened sphagnum peat. At a depth of 1 to 2 inches from the top of the column, a layer of 100% sphagnum peat is packed while the top inch of the column is packed with a the sand/peat mixture described above. Once prepared, the wetting composition (at the prescribed concentration) is applied to the column in an amount of 100 mL solutions of deionized water, where the tested wetting agent is prepared to 0.1% active ingredient. Of course, an untreated control, i.e., deionized water is also typically tested for comparative purposes. Wetting efficacy is determined by the measured depth of infiltration throughout the column and the percent of total soil water measured at each layer of the column. Percent of total soil water is calculated gravimetrically for each layer by measuring the pre- and post-treated weight of each layer disassembled. Water loss due to runoff is determined by the average percent of water absent from the total moisture of the column given the total weight of the treated solution. In various embodiments, the wetting composition has a water runoff percentage of less than about 15, alternatively less than about 10, alternatively less than about 5, alternatively less than about 4, alternatively less than about 3, alternatively less than about 2, alternatively less than about 1, alternatively less than about 0.5, %, at concentrations of less than about 8,000 ppm, alternatively less than about 7,000 ppm, alternatively less than about 6,000 ppm, alternatively less than about 5,000 ppm, alternatively less than about 4,000 ppm, alternatively less than about 3,000 ppm, alternatively less than about 2,000 ppm, or at concentrations of about 8,000 ppm, alternatively about 7,000 ppm, alternatively about 6,000 ppm, alternatively about 5,000 ppm, alternatively about 4,000 ppm, alternatively about 3,000 ppm, alternatively about 2,000 ppm, with a ppm basis of parts by weight heteric polyol per 1 part by weight of the wetting composition.
The following examples are intended to illustrate the invention and are not to be viewed as limiting to the invention.
X[Y(CH2CH2O)a(CH2CHCH3O)bH]c
In general, the method for preparing the heteric polyol according to the formula X[Y(CH2CH2O)a(CH2CHCH3O)bH]c is as follows. First, an initiator having at least two hydroxyl groups is introduced into a reactor. To make the Y (the heteric copolymer portion) of the new molecule, at least two of ethylene oxide (EO), propylene oxide (PO), and butylene oxide (BO) are introduced into the reactor at the same time (or at different times and in different sequences, at the desired inclusion rates of each one individually). These molecules will react in order via an alkoxylation reaction to produce a larger molecule with reactive OH units. Once this molecule is formed, EO or PO may be introduced into the reactor (but not at the same time) to produce a molecule that now has a block of repeating EO or PO units. That is, the heteric copolymer portion may be capped with EO and/or PO units.
Once formed, the heteric polyol is combined with water at the amount required to form Examples having the desired ppm. Examples 1-7 are set forth in Table 1 below. Table 1 includes HLB value, hydroxyl functionality, molecular weight, and structural characteristics of each respective Heteric Polyol as well as an infiltration time of various wetting compositions is described in Table 1.
HLB value is calculated based on William C. Griffin's formula for non-ionic surfactants. William C. Griffin's HLB formula is the percent of total hydrophile divided by 5 to standardize the value against a scale of 20. The percent hydrophile in EO/PO copolymers is defined as the total sum of percent EO and the percent of polyhydric alcohols (i.e. glycerol).
The hydroxyl functionality is the number of hydroxy groups on a molecule. An average functionality of the molecules included in a sample of the Heteric Polyol is used herein and calculated with the following formula: Average Functionality=Total Moles OH/Total Moles polyol.
Molecular weight is number average molecular weight (Mn) which is defined as the statistical average molecular weight of all the polymer chains in the sample, and is defined by Mn=ΣNiMi/ΣNi where Mi is the molecular weight of a chain and Ni is the number of chains of that molecular weight. Mn can be predicted by polymerization mechanisms and is measured by methods that determine the number of molecules in a sample of a given weight; for example, colligative methods such as end-group assay. There are equal numbers of molecules on either side of Mn in the distribution. Further, all molecular weights set forth herein are in g/mol.
Wetting composition performance is completed with “a modified straw test”. Instead of using household drinking straws, 3 mL syringes fitted with 23 G1 hypodermic needles are employed. Each syringe holds a disc of Whatman 542 filter paper and houses 35 mm of hydrophobic sand. The sand's water repellant character is achieved by treatment with trichloro octadecyl silane according to Bauters, et al., 1998 Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 62:1185-1190. The efficacy of the prepared sand is verified by measuring the infiltration time of deionized water. Without an active wetting agent, deionized water does not wet or penetrate the hydrophobic sand within 9 days of the initial application. In this method, the infiltration time is measured as the time lapsed from the initial sample application, through the wetting of 35 mm of sand, and to the moment when one drop of sample solution first eludes the prepared syringe needle. Various wetting compositions including the Heteric Polyols described above at concentrations of 2000, 5000, and 8000 ppm in deionized water are aged for at least 24 hours and tested. A 1 mL sample of each wetting composition is applied to the surface of the prepared syringes or columns. Deionized water is used as the control/standard for comparison. Each wetting composition is tested 4 times—the infiltration times set forth below are an average of the four measurements.
Referring now to Table 1, infiltration time is dependent on the HLB value and the HLB value or the ratio of ethylene oxide to the overall polymer composition in the Heteric Polyol. Above an HLB value of 4, the measured infiltration time generally decreases (the treated water solution infiltrates faster) as the HLB value lowers. However, below an HLB value of 4, the measured infiltration time generally increases as the HLB value approaches zero. This relationship is observed in the heteric, heteric capped polyols, and heteric block polyols, and heteric polyols described above. This relationship between HLB and infiltration time varies with structure (e.g. capped vs. not capped) and is exemplified at the lower concentration gradient.
As illustrated in Table 1, Heteric Polyols with the disclosed HLB ranges yield significantly improved infiltration times in comparison to untreated, deionized water; infiltration times go from days to seconds. In light of economic and phytotoxicity concerns where minute applications are desirable, the Wetting Compositions of Examples 1-7 are effective at markedly reduced concentrations, 2000 and 5000 ppm.
Referring now to Table 2, the infiltration time of polyether polyols correlates considerably with molecular weight. While maintaining a relatively constant HLB value, the measured infiltration time of the designed wetting agents decreases as the average molecular weight increases.
Referring now to Table 3, perhaps the most striking performance variable described in the subject disclosure is the relationship of Example wetting composition performance (infiltration time) to the date of Example dilution. That is, the infiltration time of compositions including the heteric polyol improves significantly upon aging. Without being bound by theory, it is believed that aging the wetting composition for an amount of time sufficient to increase the cloud point of the wetting composition to greater than 23° C. significantly improves the wetting composition performance (infiltration time). It is observed that the Example wetting compositions which include the heteric polyol in deionized water visibly change overtime. Specifically, the opacity or visible clouding of the wetting composition comprising the heteric polyol and deionized water subtly increase or decrease after initial Example preparation. It is observed that the infiltration time of the Example wetting compositions is dependent on the amount of time that the Example wetting compositions are aged. As the amount of time that the Example wetting compositions increases from day 1 to 8 days, the resultant infiltration time decreases. This relationship is described by the data of Table 3, where the effect is noted at 2000, 5000 and 8000 ppm concentrations yielding reduced infiltration times by an average factor of 6, 3, and 2 respectively. Without being bound by theory, it is believed that the inherent solubility of the heteric polyol in water gradually increases with extended water-heteric polyol interaction time. It is also believed that the optimal time between sample preparation and sample application is a minimum of 4 to 24 hours; contingent upon variations with molecular weight and heteric polyol type.
The wetting composition of Example 5 at 2000 ppm heteric polyol, which includes Heteric Polyol 5 and DI water, is aged for at least 24 hours and tested on a hydrophobic medium (soil) to determine its impact on the drought survival of Kentucky bluegrass cultivar ‘Kenblue’ compared to Comparative Example 1. The wetting composition of Example 5 significantly improved the following (all improvements are statistically significant):
To test the performance of Material and Methods, the wetting composition of Example 5, Comparative Example 1, and the Control Example, the following materials and methods were employed:
The wetting compositions of Examples 2 and 5 at 2000 ppm heteric polyol, which include Heteric Polyols 2 and 5 and DI water, are aged for at least 24 hours and tested on a hydrophobic medium (soil) to determine the impact on cotton yield. The test results, which are described in
Referring now to
The wetting compositions of Example 2 at concentrations of 2000, 4000, and 6000 are aged for at least 24 hours and tested on a hydrophobic medium (soil) to determine the infiltration time. Comparative Examples 2-8 are commercial agricultural wetting agents that are tested for comparative purposes. Referring now to
Referring now to
Referring now to
Water loss due to runoff as used herein is measured with a 12 inch PVC column packed with a mixture of 95% sand and 5% screened sphagnum peat. At a depth of 1 to 2 inches from the top of the column, a layer of 100% sphagnum peat is packed while the top inch of the column is packed with a the sand/peat mixture described above. Once prepared, the wetting composition (at the prescribed concentration) is applied to the column in an amount of 100 mL solutions of deionized water, where the tested wetting agent is prepared to 0.1% active ingredient. Of course, an untreated control, i.e., deionized water is also typically tested for comparative purposes. Wetting efficacy is determined by the measured depth of infiltration throughout the column and the percent of total soil water measured at each layer of the column. Percent of total soil water is calculated gravimetrically for each layer by measuring the pre- and post-treated weight of each layer disassembled. Water loss due to runoff is determined by the average percent of water absent from the total moisture of the column given the total weight of the treated solution.
Referring now to
Referring now to
Still referring to
It is to be understood that the appended claims are not limited to express any particular compounds, compositions, or methods described in the detailed description, which may vary between particular embodiments which fall within the scope of the appended claims. With respect to any Markush groups relied upon herein for describing particular features or aspects of various embodiments, it is to be appreciated that different, special, and/or unexpected results may be obtained from each member of the respective Markush group independent from all other Markush members. Each member of a Markush group may be relied upon individually and or in combination and provides adequate support for specific embodiments within the scope of the appended claims.
It is also to be understood that any ranges and subranges relied upon in describing various embodiments of the present disclosure independently and collectively fall within the scope of the appended claims, and are understood to describe and contemplate all ranges including whole and/or fractional values therein, even if such values are not expressly written herein. One of skill in the art readily recognizes that the enumerated ranges and subranges sufficiently describe and enable various embodiments of the present disclosure, and such ranges and subranges may be further delineated into relevant halves, thirds, quarters, fifths, and so on. As just one example, a range “of from 0.1 to 0.9” may be further delineated into a lower third, i.e., from 0.1 to 0.3, a middle third, i.e., from 0.4 to 0.6, and an upper third, i.e., from 0.7 to 0.9, which individually and collectively are within the scope of the appended claims, and may be relied upon individually and/or collectively and provide adequate support for specific embodiments within the scope of the appended claims. In addition, with respect to the language which defines or modifies a range, such as “at least,” “greater than,” “less than,” “no more than,” and the like, it is to be understood that such language includes subranges and/or an upper or lower limit. As another example, a range of “at least 10” inherently includes a subrange of from at least 10 to 35, a subrange of from at least 10 to 25, a subrange of from 25 to 35, and so on, and each subrange may be relied upon individually and/or collectively and provides adequate support for specific embodiments within the scope of the appended claims. Finally, an individual number within a disclosed range may be relied upon and provides adequate support for specific embodiments within the scope of the appended claims. For example, a range “of from 1 to 9” includes various individual integers, such as 3, as well as individual numbers including a decimal point (or fraction), such as 4.1, which may be relied upon and provide adequate support for specific embodiments within the scope of the appended claims.
The present disclosure has been described in an illustrative manner, and it is to be understood that the terminology which has been used is intended to be in the nature of words of description rather than of limitation. Obviously, many modifications and variations of the present disclosure are possible in light of the above teachings. It is, therefore, to be understood that within the scope of the appended claims, the present disclosure may be practiced otherwise than as specifically described.
| Filing Document | Filing Date | Country | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| PCT/US2016/031228 | 5/6/2016 | WO | 00 |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 62159003 | May 2015 | US |
