ACCU DYNE TEST ™ Bibliography
Provided as an information service by Diversified Enterprises.
showing result page 68 of 76, ordered by
2647. Willes, B., “Treating the surface: Options for all surface types,” Plastics Decorating, 14-16, (Apr 2016).
2962. Williams, D.L., and T.M. O'Bryon, “Cleanliness verification on large surfaces: Instilling confidence in contact angle techniques,” in Developments in Surface Contamination and Cleaning: Methods of Cleaning and Cleanliness Verification, R. Kohli and K.L. Mittal, eds., 163-181, Elsevier, 2013.
The sessile drop contact angle measurement is a useful and reliable method for surface energy determination and cleanliness verification. A review of the available methods, commercial instruments, patents, and literature describing the state of the art in contact angle measurement is followed by a description of contact angle measurement techniques that have been modified for use on large surfaces. The negative effects of these changes on accuracy and precision are discussed, and remedies are proposed including the use of standard reference objects that mimic the size and shape of sessile drops. The combination of these validation tools and the modified contact angle measuring techniques fills a need for robust, production-line capable cleanliness verification methods.
1566. Williams, K., and B. Bauman, “New technology for enhancing wood-plastic composites,” JCT CoatingsTech, 4, 52-57, (Aug 2007).
2388. Williams, R.L., “Apparatus for plasma treatment of interior surfaces of hollow plastic objects,” U.S. Patent 5176924, Jan 1993.
2390. Williams, R.L., and C.A. Mueller, “Apparatus and method for treating the interior surfaces of hollow plastic objects for improving adhesive properties,” U.S. Patent 5290489, Mar 1994.
2515. Williams, T.S., H. Yu, and R.F. Hicks, “Atmospheric pressure plasma activation of polymers and composites for adhesive bonding: A critical review,” Rev. Adhesion and Adhesives, 1, 46-84, (Feb 2013).
A review is presented on the surface preparation of polymers and composites using atmospheric pressure plasmas. This is a promising technique for replacing traditional methods of surface preparation by abrasion. With sufficient exposure to the plasma afterglow, polymer and composite surfaces are fully activated such that when bonded and cured with epoxy adhesives, they undergo 100% cohesive failure in the adhesive. Depending on the material, the lap shear strength and crack delamination resistance (GIC) can be increased several fold over that achieved by either solvent wiping or abrasion. In some cases, a plasma-responsive layer must be incorporated into the top resin layer of the composite to achieve maximum bond strength to the adhesive. Adhesion does not correlate well with water contact angle or surface roughness. Instead it correlates with the fraction of the polymer surface sites that are oxidized and converted into active functional groups, as determined by x-ray photoelectron spectroscopy and infrared spectroscopy.
2703. Williams, T.S., H. Yu, and R.F. Hicks, “Atmospheric pressure activation as a surface pre-treatment for the adhesive bonding of aluminum 2024,” J. Adhesion Science and Technology, 28, 653-674, (2014).
A low-temperature, atmospheric pressure helium and oxygen plasma has been used for the surface preparation of aluminum 2024 prior to adhesive bonding. The plasma converted the aluminum from a water contact angle (WCA) of 79° to down to 38° within 5 s of exposure, while sanding reduced the WCA to only 51°. Characterization of the aluminum surface by X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy revealed a decrease in carbon contamination from 70 to 36% and an increase in the oxygen content from 22 to 50% following plasma treatment. Similar trends were observed for sanded surfaces. Lap shear results demonstrated bond strengths of 30 ± 2 MPa for the sanded aluminum vs. 33 ± 1 MPa for plasma-treated aluminum, where sol gel and primer coatings were added to the surface preparation. Following seven days of aging, wedge crack extension tests revealed cohesive failure percentages of 86, 92, and 96% for sanded, plasma-treated, and sanded/plasma-treated aluminum, respectively. These results indicate that atmospheric pressure plasmas are an attractive alternative to acid treatment or abrasion techniques for surface preparation prior to bonding.
599. Willows, R.S., and E. Hatschek, Surface Tension and Surface Energy and Their Influence on Chemical Phenomena, J. & A. Churchill, 1915.
2317. Winder, R.P.H., “Method and apparatus for treating plastic coated paper,” U.S. Patent 3281347, Oct 1966.
387. Winters, H.F., R.P.H. Chang, C.J. Mogab, J. Evans, J.A. Thornton, and H. Yasuda, “Coatings and surface modification using low pressure non-equilibrium plasmas,” Materials Science and Engineering, 70, 53-77, (1985).
858. Wolf, B.A., “Interfacial tension between polymer-containing liquids - predictability and influences of additives,” in Macromolecular Symposia 139: Macromolecules at Interfaces, Kahovec, J., ed., 87-92, Wiley-VCH, Aug 1999.
The first part of the contribution deals with the interfacial tension, σ, of phase‐separated polymer solutions in single or mixed solvents and of binary polymer blends as a function of the relative distance to the critical temperature of the system, special attention being paid to the possibilities of theoretical prediction. Two methods are discussed in more detail. One is based on a realistic description of the Gibbs energy of mixing as a function of composition, the second correlates σ with the length of the measured tie line. The second part is devoted to another aspect, namely the effects of additives on the interfacial tension between the coexisting phases of demixed polymer solutions and between highly incompatible polymers. In the former case, it is demonstrated that an addition of a thermodynamically good solvent is normally associated with a reduction in σ; however, adding a high‐molecular‐weight compound which is incompatible with the dissolved polymer leads to an increase in σ. The interfacial tension between incompatible homopolymers is efficiently reduced by block copolymers consisting of monomeric units which are either identical with or different from those of the homopolymers; in contrast to theoretical expectation, the molecular architecture of the additives seems to be of minor importance only. Random copolymers which are insoluble in the homopolymers can also efficiently reduce the interfacial tension.
388. Wolf, R.A., “Corona treating & the printing process,” Flexo, 26, 58-59, (Jun 2001).
696. Wolf, R.A., “Atmospheric plasma: The new functional treatment for nonwovens,” in 2002 PLACE Conference Proceedings, TAPPI Press, Sep 2002.
923. Wolf, R.A., “Pouch material surface treatment,” Presented at TAPPI Stand-up Pouch Making Workshop, Jun 2017.
1157. Wolf, R.A., “Surface treating substrates: Atmospheric plasma technology benefits flexible packaging print adhesion,” Flexo, 30, 26-27, (Oct 2005).
1164. Wolf, R.A., “Atmospheric plasma: a new surface treatment technology for promoting flexographic printing adhesions',” in 2005 FFTA Forum, Flexographic Technical Association, Mar 2005.
1328. Wolf, R.A., “Corona treatment: a process overview,” http://www.idspackaging.com/Common/Paper/Paper_177, 0.
1388. Wolf, R.A., “Atmospheric plasma - The new functional treatment for extrusion coating and lamination processes,” http://www.idspackaging.com/Common/Paper/Paper_173, 0.
1415. Wolf, R.A., “Unique atmospheric plasma surface pre-treatment approach for improving adhesion,” Plastics Decorating, 13-17, (Oct 2006).
1494. Wolf, R.A., “Comparison of flame vs. plasma treatment,” http://www.vacuumcoatingblog.co.uk, Aug 2006.
1501. Wolf, R.A., “New approach to surface treatment,” Converting, 24, 34-37, (Dec 2006).
1503. Wolf, R.A., “New atmospheric plasma and photografting approach for permanent surface tension and coating adhesion,” in AIMCAL 2006 Fall Technical Conference, AIMCAL, Oct 2006.
1542. Wolf, R.A., “Surface activation systems for optimizing adhesion to polymers,” in SPE Decorating and Assembly Div. Topcon, Society of Plastics Engineers, Jun 2004 (also in 2005 PLACE Conference Proceedings, TAPPI Press, 2005, and Plastics Decorating, p. 7-10, Apr 2009).
Many experiments have been performed globally to investigate ways of improving adhesion to polymers. This paper discusses current atmospheric surface activation systems, appropriate measurements of wettability and adhesion, over-treatment effects and surface analysis techniques relative to optimizing the adhesion of inks, paints, coatings and adhesives to polymer surfaces. Recommendations for improved activation by substrate and application are discussed.
1557. Wolf, R.A., “Advances in adhesion with CO2-based atmospheric plasma surface modification,” in ANTEC 2007, Society of Plastics Engineers, May 2007.
The use of gas and/or liquid-phase carbon dioxide (CO2) with atmospheric plasma discharge surface pretreatment technology can remove micron and submicron particulates and hydrocarbon-based contaminations on plastics and metals. The cleaning process is based upon the expansion of either liquid or gaseous carbon dioxide through an orifice. The paper provides an understanding of the basic removal mechanism and provides experimental evidence of remarkable adhesion improvements relative to a broad range of applications in electrical, medical, and automotive manufacturing communities.
1619. Wolf, R.A., “Response to question on corona treatment of metallized CPP film,” http://www.webcoatingblog.com, Oct 2007.
1624. Wolf, R.A., “Response to question on modes of measuring or characterizing plasma treatment efficiency on Kapton,” http://www.webcoatingblog.com, Sep 2007.
1771. Wolf, R.A., “How to determine optimal treatment levels for plastic films,” Flexo, 34, 34-36, (Jan 2009).
2168. Wolf, R.A., “Surface treating for solar-cell converting,” Converting, 27, 30-31, (Jan 2010).
2189. Wolf, R.A., “Plasma power,” http://pffc-online.com/surface_prep/corona_flame_plasma/paper-plasma-power-0509, May 2009.
2195. Wolf, R.A., “Atmospheric plasma,” Paper Film & Foil Converter, 77, 44+, (Feb 2003).
2207. Wolf, R.A., “Effect of the electrical conductivities of corona discharge ground rolls on surface treatment,” in 2016 PLACE Conference Proceedings, TAPPI Press, 2016.
2211. Wolf, R.A., “Comparison of atmospheric plasma and corona treatments in promoting seal strength,” Converting Quarterly, 6, 72-78, (Aug 2018).
2213. Wolf, R.A., Plastic Surface Modification: Surface Treatment and Adhesion, Hanser Publications, Feb 2010.
2214. Wolf, R.A., “Substrate secrets: New printing adhesion improvements using Atmospheric Plasma Glow Discharge technology,” in 2005 PLACE Conference Proceedings, 667-670, TAPPI Press, Sep 2005.
2229. Wolf, R.A., “Novel atmospheric-plasma process for roll-to-roll processing of solar cells,” Converting Quarterly, 1, 34-37, (Feb 2011).
2295. Wolf, R.A., “How do you get inks, coatings and adhesives to stick to polymers?,” http://plasticsdecorationgblog.com/?p=116, Oct 2011.
2341. Wolf, R.A., “UV flexo ink composition and surface treatment effects on adhesion to flexible packaging,” Presented at 13th TAPPI European PLACE Conference, 2011.
2434. Wolf, R.A., “Game-changing surface pre-treatment technology,” Converting Quarterly, 2, 46-50, (Feb 2012).
2439. Wolf, R.A., “Testing surface treatment IQ,” Flexo, 37, 40-47, (May 2012).
2445. Wolf, R.A., “Adhesion techniques for high performance materials and composites,” http://plasticsdecoratingblog.com/?p=317, Jul 2012.
<-- Previous | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 | 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | 69 | 70 | 71 | 72 | 73 | 74 | 75 | 76 | Next-->