Polyurethane Non-Silicone Surfactant designed for waterborne PU dispersion stability

Polyurethane Non-Silicone Surfactant: Enhancing Waterborne PU Dispersion Stability

Introduction

Waterborne polyurethane (PU) dispersions have gained significant traction as environmentally friendly alternatives to solvent-based PU coatings, adhesives, and elastomers. The inherent versatility of PU chemistry allows for the creation of materials with a wide range of properties, including flexibility, durability, and chemical resistance. However, the stability of these dispersions is crucial for their performance and longevity. One key factor influencing stability is the effective use of surfactants. While silicone surfactants are commonly employed, they can sometimes lead to undesirable effects like surface defects and reduced recoatability. This article focuses on non-silicone surfactants specifically designed for waterborne PU dispersions, highlighting their role in enhancing dispersion stability, their advantages, mechanisms of action, and application considerations.

1. What is a Waterborne Polyurethane Dispersion?

A waterborne PU dispersion, also known as a water-based polyurethane, is a colloidal system where polyurethane polymer particles are dispersed in water. These dispersions are typically synthesized via a multi-step process:

1. Prepolymer Formation: A diisocyanate is reacted with a polyol to form a prepolymer containing isocyanate (NCO) end-groups.
2. Chain Extension: A chain extender, usually a diamine or diol, reacts with the NCO groups to increase the molecular weight of the polymer.
3. Neutralization (Optional): A neutralizing agent, such as a tertiary amine, is added to ionize carboxylic acid groups incorporated into the PU chain, rendering the polymer hydrophilic.
4. Dispersion: Water is added to the neutralized prepolymer under high shear, causing the polymer to disperse into fine particles.

The resulting dispersion consists of PU particles stabilized in water, typically with the aid of surfactants. The particle size distribution, stability, and rheological properties of the dispersion significantly impact the final product’s performance characteristics.

2. The Importance of Surfactants in Waterborne PU Dispersions

Surfactants, short for surface-active agents, play a critical role in stabilizing waterborne PU dispersions. They function by:

• Reducing Surface Tension: Lowering the interfacial tension between the PU particles and the water, facilitating dispersion.
• Preventing Aggregation: Adsorbing onto the surface of the PU particles and creating a repulsive force (electrostatic, steric, or both) that prevents them from agglomerating and precipitating out of the dispersion.
• Improving Wetting: Enhancing the wetting of the substrate during application, leading to better film formation and adhesion.
• Enhancing Freeze-Thaw Stability: Preventing the dispersion from destabilizing upon repeated freeze-thaw cycles.

3. Limitations of Silicone Surfactants in Waterborne PU Dispersions

While silicone surfactants are widely used due to their excellent surface tension reduction capabilities, they can also introduce several drawbacks:

• Surface Defects: Silicone surfactants can migrate to the coating surface, causing surface defects like crawling, orange peel, and cratering.
• Reduced Recoatability: The presence of silicone on the surface can hinder the adhesion of subsequent coats.
• Foam Stabilization: Some silicone surfactants can stabilize foam, making it difficult to achieve a smooth, defect-free coating.
• Environmental Concerns: Certain silicone surfactants may raise environmental concerns due to their potential for bioaccumulation.
• Cost: Silicone surfactants can be more expensive than non-silicone alternatives.

4. Non-Silicone Surfactants: A Viable Alternative

Non-silicone surfactants offer a compelling alternative for stabilizing waterborne PU dispersions, mitigating the limitations associated with silicone-based options. These surfactants are generally based on hydrocarbon or fluorocarbon backbones with hydrophilic groups attached.

5. Classification of Non-Silicone Surfactants for Waterborne PU Dispersions

Non-silicone surfactants can be classified based on their ionic charge:

• Anionic Surfactants: These surfactants possess a negatively charged hydrophilic head. Common examples include:

  • Alkyl sulfates (e.g., sodium lauryl sulfate, SLS)
  • Alkyl ether sulfates (e.g., sodium lauryl ether sulfate, SLES)
  • Sulfonates (e.g., alkyl benzene sulfonates)
  • Phosphates (e.g., alkyl phosphates)
  • Carboxylates (e.g., fatty acid soaps)

  Anionic surfactants provide good electrostatic stabilization to the PU particles.

• Cationic Surfactants: These surfactants possess a positively charged hydrophilic head. Common examples include:

  • Quaternary ammonium compounds (e.g., cetyltrimethylammonium bromide, CTAB)
  • Amine salts

  Cationic surfactants are less commonly used in PU dispersions due to potential incompatibility with anionic ingredients.

• Nonionic Surfactants: These surfactants possess a neutral hydrophilic head, typically based on polyethylene oxide (PEO) chains. Common examples include:

  • Alcohol ethoxylates (e.g., nonylphenol ethoxylates, octylphenol ethoxylates)
  • Alkylphenol ethoxylates
  • Fatty acid ethoxylates
  • Block copolymers (e.g., ethylene oxide/propylene oxide block copolymers)

  Nonionic surfactants provide steric stabilization through the PEO chains, which extend into the aqueous phase and prevent particle aggregation. They are often preferred due to their compatibility with a wide range of formulation components and their insensitivity to pH and electrolyte concentration.

• Amphoteric (Zwitterionic) Surfactants: These surfactants possess both positive and negative charges in their molecule. The net charge depends on the pH of the solution. Common examples include:

  • Betaines (e.g., cocamidopropyl betaine)
  • Sulfobetaines

  Amphoteric surfactants offer a combination of electrostatic and steric stabilization.

6. Mechanisms of Action of Non-Silicone Surfactants in Waterborne PU Dispersions

The stabilization mechanisms of non-silicone surfactants depend on their ionic charge and chemical structure.

• Electrostatic Stabilization: Anionic and cationic surfactants stabilize PU particles by creating an electrical double layer around the particles. The charged surfactant molecules adsorbed on the particle surface repel each other, preventing aggregation. The effectiveness of electrostatic stabilization depends on the ionic strength of the dispersion, as high salt concentrations can screen the charges and reduce the repulsive forces.

• Steric Stabilization: Nonionic surfactants, particularly those containing PEO chains, provide steric stabilization. The PEO chains extend into the aqueous phase, creating a physical barrier that prevents the particles from approaching each other closely enough to aggregate. The effectiveness of steric stabilization depends on the length and density of the PEO chains, as well as the solvency of the chains in the aqueous phase.

• Electrosteric Stabilization: Amphoteric surfactants can provide a combination of electrostatic and steric stabilization, depending on the pH of the dispersion.

7. Key Properties of Non-Silicone Surfactants for Waterborne PU Dispersions

Selecting the appropriate non-silicone surfactant for a waterborne PU dispersion requires consideration of several key properties:

• Hydrophilic-Lipophilic Balance (HLB): The HLB value indicates the relative hydrophilicity and lipophilicity of a surfactant. A suitable HLB value is crucial for effective stabilization. Generally, higher HLB values are preferred for water-based systems.
• Critical Micelle Concentration (CMC): The CMC is the concentration above which the surfactant molecules start to form micelles in solution. Effective surfactants should have low CMC values, indicating their ability to adsorb onto the particle surface at low concentrations.
• Surface Tension Reduction: The surfactant should be capable of significantly reducing the surface tension of water, facilitating dispersion and wetting.
• Foaming Properties: Some surfactants can generate excessive foam, which can be detrimental to the application and appearance of the coating or adhesive. Low-foaming surfactants are often preferred.
• Compatibility with other Components: The surfactant should be compatible with other components in the formulation, such as coalescents, thickeners, and pigments.
• Stability: The surfactant should be stable under the processing and storage conditions of the dispersion.
• Biodegradability: Environmentally friendly surfactants are increasingly preferred due to growing environmental concerns.

8. Selection Criteria for Non-Silicone Surfactants

The selection of an appropriate non-silicone surfactant for a specific waterborne PU dispersion depends on several factors, including:

• PU Polymer Chemistry: The chemical composition of the PU polymer influences the surface properties of the particles and their interactions with the surfactant.
• Desired Dispersion Properties: The desired particle size, stability, and rheological properties of the dispersion dictate the type and concentration of surfactant required.
• Application Requirements: The intended application of the PU dispersion (e.g., coating, adhesive, elastomer) influences the selection criteria, as different applications may require different properties.
• Regulatory Requirements: Environmental regulations may restrict the use of certain surfactants.

9. Commonly Used Non-Silicone Surfactants and their Characteristics

The following table summarizes some commonly used non-silicone surfactants in waterborne PU dispersions and their characteristics:

Surfactant Type	Example	HLB Range	Advantages	Disadvantages	Typical Usage Level (%)
Anionic	Sodium Lauryl Sulfate (SLS)	40	Excellent surface tension reduction, good emulsification	Can be sensitive to hard water, may cause foaming	0.1 – 1.0
Anionic	Sodium Dodecylbenzene Sulfonate (SDBS)	12	Good emulsification, cost-effective	Can be less biodegradable than other options, may cause foaming	0.1 – 1.0
Nonionic	Nonylphenol Ethoxylate (NPE-9)	13.5	Excellent emulsification, good stability over a wide pH range	Phased out in many regions due to environmental concerns (endocrine disruptor)	0.5 – 2.0
Nonionic	Alcohol Ethoxylate (e.g., C12-14 + 7EO)	12-15	Good emulsification, low foaming, biodegradable alternatives to NPEs	May be less effective at surface tension reduction than some anionic surfactants	0.5 – 2.0
Nonionic	Polyethylene Glycol (PEG)	>15	Water-soluble, good steric stabilizer, non-toxic	High molecular weight PEGs can increase the viscosity of the dispersion	1.0 – 5.0
Amphoteric (Zwitterionic)	Cocamidopropyl Betaine	N/A	Mild, good foaming properties, compatible with anionic surfactants, biodegradable	Can be more expensive than other options	0.5 – 2.0
Block Copolymer	EO/PO Block Copolymer	Varies	Excellent steric stabilization, low foaming, can provide freeze-thaw stability, can be tailored to specific needs by adjusting the EO/PO ratio	Performance can be sensitive to temperature and electrolyte concentration	0.5 – 3.0

Table 1: Properties and applications of non-silicone surfactants

10. Application Considerations

• Dosage Optimization: The optimal surfactant concentration needs to be determined experimentally. Insufficient surfactant leads to instability, while excessive surfactant can cause foaming or other undesirable effects.
• Addition Method: The surfactant can be added during the prepolymer synthesis, chain extension, or dispersion stage. The addition method can influence the effectiveness of the surfactant.
• Compatibility Testing: Thorough compatibility testing should be performed to ensure that the surfactant does not negatively interact with other formulation components.
• Process Conditions: The temperature, shear rate, and pH of the dispersion process can influence the performance of the surfactant.
• Monitoring Stability: The stability of the dispersion should be monitored over time to ensure that the surfactant is effectively preventing aggregation. Techniques such as particle size analysis, viscosity measurements, and visual inspection can be used.

11. Advanced Techniques for Surfactant Optimization

• Surface Tension Measurement: Measuring the surface tension of the dispersion can help to determine the effectiveness of the surfactant in reducing interfacial tension.
• Dynamic Light Scattering (DLS): DLS can be used to determine the particle size distribution and stability of the dispersion.
• Zeta Potential Measurement: Zeta potential measurement provides information about the surface charge of the particles and their electrostatic stability. Higher absolute values of zeta potential indicate greater stability.
• Rheological Characterization: Rheological measurements can provide information about the viscosity and flow behavior of the dispersion, which can be influenced by the surfactant.
• Microscopy: Techniques such as transmission electron microscopy (TEM) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) can be used to visualize the morphology of the PU particles and the adsorption of the surfactant on the particle surface.
• Computational Modeling: Molecular dynamics simulations can be used to predict the behavior of surfactants at the PU particle-water interface and to optimize surfactant design.

12. Environmental Considerations

The environmental impact of surfactants is an important consideration. Selecting biodegradable and non-toxic surfactants is crucial for developing sustainable waterborne PU dispersions. Regulations regarding the use of certain surfactants are becoming increasingly stringent, so it is important to stay informed about the latest regulatory requirements.

13. Future Trends

Future trends in the development of non-silicone surfactants for waterborne PU dispersions include:

• Bio-based Surfactants: Surfactants derived from renewable resources, such as plant oils and sugars, are gaining increasing attention.
• Stimuli-Responsive Surfactants: Surfactants that respond to external stimuli, such as pH, temperature, or light, offer the potential for creating smart materials with tailored properties.
• Polymeric Surfactants: Polymeric surfactants with well-defined structures and properties offer improved control over dispersion stability and performance.
• Nanoparticle Surfactants: Nanoparticles functionalized with surfactant molecules can provide enhanced stabilization and functionality to waterborne PU dispersions.

14. Conclusion

Non-silicone surfactants represent a valuable alternative to silicone-based surfactants for stabilizing waterborne PU dispersions. By carefully selecting the appropriate surfactant type and optimizing its concentration and addition method, it is possible to achieve stable, high-performance dispersions with improved environmental profiles and reduced surface defects. Continued research and development in this area will lead to the creation of even more effective and sustainable surfactants for waterborne PU applications.

Literature References

1. Ashok K. Sharma, "Surface Chemistry of Surfactants: An Introduction," John Wiley & Sons, 2019.
2. Holmberg, K., Jonsson, B., Kronberg, B., & Lindman, B. (2003). Surfactants and polymers in aqueous solution. John Wiley & Sons.
3. Myers, D. (2006). Surfactant science and technology. John Wiley & Sons.
4. Tadros, T. F. (2005). Applied surfactants: principles and applications. John Wiley & Sons.
5. Schwartz, A. M., & Perry, J. W. (1958). Surface active agents: their chemistry and technology. Interscience Publishers.
6. Rosen, M. J. (2004). Surfactants and interfacial phenomena. John Wiley & Sons.
7. Satake, I., & Hayakawa, K. (2012). Surface and interfacial phenomena. Academic Press.
8. Porter, M. R. (1994). Handbook of surfactants. Springer Science & Business Media.
9. Utracki, L. A. (1991). Polymer alloys and blends: thermodynamics and morphology. Hanser Publishers.
10. Sperling, L. H. (2005). Introduction to physical polymer science. John Wiley & Sons.
11. Wicks, Z. W., Jones, F. N., & Pappas, S. P. (1999). Organic Coatings: Science and Technology. John Wiley & Sons.
12. Lambourne, R., & Strivens, T. A. (1999). Paint and surface coatings: theory and practice. Woodhead Publishing.
13. Randall, D., & Lee, S. (2003). The Polyurethanes Book. John Wiley & Sons.
14. Dieterich, D. (1981). Aqueous solutions and dispersions of polyurethanes and polyureas: Synthesis and properties. Progress in Organic Coatings, 9(3), 281-340.
15. Petry, R., & Glöckner, P. (2006). Waterborne coatings. Vincentz Network.

Disclaimer: This article provides general information and should not be considered as professional advice. The selection and use of surfactants should be based on specific formulation requirements and regulatory guidelines. Always consult with a qualified expert for specific application advice. 🧑‍🔬

Sales Contact：sales@newtopchem.com