|
Navigation
Sponsored Links
|
Antibacterial Powder Coatings
R. Siva
Marpol Pvt Ltd
Margao, Goa
siva@marpolind.com
Abstract
This article provides basic information about antibacterial powder coatings
and its importance. Potential applications for antibacterial powder and
selection criteria for suitable antibacterial agent are described. Mechanism
of silver technology and the advantageous of silver additive are briefly
described. Guidelines for designing antibacterial powder and factors which
need to be considered while formulating and manufacturing antibacterial
powder coatings are discussed.
Introduction
Powder coatings has gained widespread acceptance in the coatings industry
for its performance characteristics which is equal to liquid coatings and
the environmental benefits (free of VOCs) of powder make it far superior and
user friendly. However there are increasing demands for new product
developments and the major driving force for new product developments come
from the market requirements combined with environmental compliance. End
users are more concern to know about the technological improvements and
about the value added products. Marpol is continuously striving to offer
value added products to the customers. One of such requirement is
Antibacterial powder coatings. End users are more concern about the coatings
surface which inhibits the bacterial growth so coatings that repel
microorganism are always in demand. Antibacterial powder coatings fulfill
these needs.
Why Antibacterial powder coatings?
Antibacterial and anti mould properties are required when powder coatings
are used to such applications that coated objects are contacted with number
of people and in the fields of foods, medical care and sanitation etc.
Antibacterial powder helps to fight against disease and infection; the
system also stops the growth of bacteria and fungi. The advantages of this
technology are
a. It doesn’t require any additional capital investment and the conventional
extrusion and dry blending operation can be followed.
b. The cured film exhibits enhanced resistance to bacteria and fungi growth.
c. The cured film provides excellent mechanical properties, corrosion
resistance with good flow and leveling properties.
There are bright scopes for antibacterial powder coatings in the following
segments
1. Domestic appliances: Interior of refrigerators and air blown humidifiers
can be powder coated with AB Powder coatings where humidity welcomes the
growth of bacteria and fungi.
Refrigerators, Washing machines and Air conditioners etc. can be powder
coated successfully.
2. Medical care: Hospitals and clinics are looking into using antibacterial
powder coated objects (e.g.) Instrument trays, sterilization equipments,
lighting fixture, cabinets and cots etc.
3. Sanitation: Kitchenware, bathroom wears, dish washers and shopping carts
etc.
4. Food equipments: Mixing bowls, serving trays, sinks, cooler, display
cases, food processing equipments, and storage bins etc.
5. Steel furniture industry: Steel shelving, storage cabinets and trays
(used in shopping malls) etc.
6. General industry: Escalators and elevators etc
This article describes about the manufacturing of antibacterial powder
coatings using silver additives and important factors which need to be
considered while designing the formulation, manufacturing and during the
application stage.
Selection of Antibacterial agent
Number of antibacterial agents and fungicides are available for
antibacterial coatings. However it can be broadly classified into three
types, each type of additive has its own advantages and some disadvantages.
Natural antibacterial agent: They are difficult to handle as they posses
relatively low boiling point.
Organic antibacterial agent: Though these additives are compatible with the
resins they have a problem of low stability so that their efficiency is lost
during the melting stage.
Inorganic antibacterial agent: It has high heat stability but shows poor
solubility in the binder and some discoloration into water. It depends on
the type of additive.
So while selecting the appropriate antibacterial agent for antibacterial
powder the following points can be considered;
1. Efficiency at low dosage level
2. Solubility/compatibility with the binder
3. Antimicrobial effect against wide range of microbes such as bacteria,
mold & fungi etc.
4. Rate of discoloration
5. Particle size of antibacterial agent (it plays an important role in
migration of additive to the top surface of the coatings also it plays an
important role in gloss reduction of the coatings)
6. Stability of antibacterial agent during processing & sustainability
7. AB agent should not produce visible bubbles in the coatings (indication
of volatilizing of the active element)
8. Price/performance ratio
9. Environmental compliance & Regulatory guidance
Mechanism of silver technology
For the present study inorganic antibacterial agent silver type is used.
Five different types of silver additives are tried. The silver additives
used for the present study is a composite of active silver ions, sodium ions
and other ions
(e.g. Zn). In some additives silver is embedded into a base material such as
zeolite & glass matrix etc.
Silver ion is a natural inorganic antibacterial agent which is effective in
fighting against bacteria, fungi& moulds. Silver ion is generally preferred
for its
a. Bacterial resistance
b. Environmental compatibility/ compliance
c. Thermal stability
d. Effective life expectancy
e. It can be used for both indoor and outdoor applications.
Silver ion inhibits the process of cell division by which the bacteria
replicates. The action of silver additive is based on the slow and
continuous leaching of super fine silver ions that interact with the
metabolism of the microorganisms in various ways. Moisture in the air
accelerates the property of ion exchange process by which silver is released
at a continuous rate and maintaining an antibacterial surface. In presence
of moisture the zeolite pumps out silver ions in exchange for sodium ions
from the environment. As the environment becomes more humid bacterial growth
would be more, the zeolite discharges more silver ions thereby long term
protection is ensured. Antimicrobial action of silver comes from the
chemical properties of its ionized form Ag+. When microbes come in contact
with antimicrobial treated coatings surface, Ag+ is released accordingly to
the surface of the treated product to inhibit the bacterial growth.
Characterization of the additives
Table 1
|
Properties |
XT (Embedded in glass matrix) |
A1 |
A1 Z
(Embedded in zeolite
Finer grade) |
L1 |
L1 Z
(Embedded in zeolite
Coarser grade) |
|
Mean Diameter (v,0.5)microns |
1.66 |
2.52 |
2.62 |
7.83 |
7.65 |
|
Specific gravity |
2.199 |
1.824 |
1.735 |
1.423 |
1.546 |
Antibacterial powder can be prepared by conventional manufacturing method.
In method 1¸ the antibacterial agent can be homogeneously mixed with powder
composition during the premixing stage and this homogeneous premix is
extruded and pulverized into a fine particles.
Method 2 is, base powder is prepared separately and the antibacterial agent
is dry blended with the base powder.
Method 3, Antibacterial agent can be bonded with pre-formed powder
particles. Formulations 1 to 3 were cured at 180°C/15min and all the
formulations show good mechanical and corrosion properties.
For antimicrobial activity test, samples were prepared with different dosage
of silver additive along with blank samples (containing no silver
additive).The influence of light on effectiveness of silver additive can be
tested by weatherometer. As continuous washing can reduce the performance of
the coated film leaching test can be performed to understand the
effectiveness.
Formulation 1: Polyester Clear Glossy
Table 2
|
Materials |
Quantity |
|
Polyester(AV 25-32) |
91.600 |
|
TEPIC-G |
6.840 |
|
Benzoin |
0.500 |
|
Flow agent |
1.000 |
|
Violet Blue(MB) |
0.06 |
|
Total |
100.000 |
Addition of Antibacterial Agent in formulation 1 by dry blending method
|
Sample A |
Sample B |
|
0.5% A1 Z |
0.7% A1 |
Formulation 2: Hybrid Silver Metallic
Table 3
|
Materials |
Quantity |
|
Polyester (AV70-80) |
49.200 |
|
Araldite GT6084 |
49.200 |
|
Benzoin |
0.400 |
|
Flow agent |
1.200 |
|
Total |
100.000 |
Addition of Antibacterial Agent along with metallic pigments in formulation
2 by dry blending method
|
Sample C |
Sample D |
Sample E |
Sample F |
1% Metallic Pigment
+
0.5 % XT |
1% Metallic Pigment
+
1.0 % XT |
1% Metallic Pigment
+
1.5 % L1 |
1% Metallic Pigment
+
(1.0 % L1 +
1.0% L1 Z)
|
Formulation 3: Hybrid White Glossy
Table 4
Material |
3A |
3B |
3C |
|
Polyester (AV 70-80) |
35.000 |
35.000 |
35.000 |
|
Araldite GT 7004 0 |
35.000 |
35.000 |
35.00 |
|
Benzoin |
0.800 |
0.800 |
0.800 |
|
Flow agent |
1.500 |
1.500 |
1.500 |
|
TiO2 |
24.400 |
24.500 |
24.500 |
|
Violet Blue(MB) |
0.200 |
0.200 |
0.200 |
|
Blancfixe |
3.100 |
1.000 |
1.000 |
|
A1 |
- |
2.000 |
- |
|
XT |
- |
2.000 |
|
|
Total |
100.000 |
100.000 |
100.000 |
Note: “In formulation 3B and 3C silver additive is incorporated during
the premixing stage. The dosage of silver additive incorporated in
formulation 2&3 is high and optimum dosage level can be decided by way of
conducting experiments with different dosage level.”
Addition of Antibacterial Agent in formulation 3A by dry blending method
|
Sample G |
Sample H |
1.5 % A1 Z
+
1.0% L1 Z |
1.5 % A1
+
1.0% L1 |
Test for antimicrobial activity
Antimicrobial activity of the powder coatings is tested as per
JIS Z2801:2000 -Test for antimicrobial activity& efficacy.
Japanese industrial standard JIS Z 2801 was designed to quantitatively
measure the ability of an antimicrobial surface to kill or inhibits the
growth of microorganism. This method tests for both bacteriostatic
(growth-inhibiting) and bactericidal (bacteria-killing) properties.
Microbial concentrations are standardized and bacteria are provided with the
nutrients during the incubation period, which provides them with ample
opportunity to grow if surfaces aren’t sufficiently antimicrobial. The test
microorganism is prepared usually by growth in a liquid culture medium. The
suspension of test micro organism is standardized by dilution in a nutritive
broth. Control test surface are inoculated with microorganisms and the
microbial inoculum is covered with thin sterile film. Inoculated, covered
control and antimicrobial test surfaces are allowed to incubate undisturbed
in a humid environment for 24 hours. After incubation, microbial
concentrations on are determined.
Reduction of microorganisms relative to initial concentrations and the
control surface is calculated. Each test sample is inoculated with a
suspension of the test organism i.e. Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus
aureus (NBRC 12732) &
Escherichia coli-E coli (NBRC 3972)
Test procedure
Standard: JIS Z2801
Inoculating solution: Bacterial suspension initial count of 105 CFU/ml with
a
1/500 Nutrient broth
Inoculating volume: 0.4 ml
Storing temperature: 35 degree C
Storing humidity : > 90%
Storing time : 24 hrs
Antimicrobial activity criteria
Difference in the number of survived bacterium is expressed by a logarithm
of an inverse number of a ratio of a number of bacterium in a film
containing antibacterial agent and to a number of bacterium in a film
containing no antibacterial agent. Therefore higher value shows higher
efficiency.
A: Bacterial viable cells immediately after inoculation of the control
B: Bacterial viable cells of the control after 24 hrs
C: Bacterial viable cells of the untreated test piece (Blank)
D: Bacterial viable cells of the antimicrobial test piece
Log C/D >= 2.0
An antimicrobial effect is accepted when the above conditions are passed.
Performance of samples against Staphylococcus aureus & E-Coli
Table 5 (Ref: Antibacterial test result of Formulation 1)
|
Test Sample |
Staphylococcus aureus |
E-Coli |
CFU Count
0 hrs |
CFU Count 24 hrs |
Log(c/d) |
CFU Count
0 hrs |
CFU Count 24 hrs |
Log(c/d) |
|
Polyethylene Film(Control) |
1.9 E5 |
1.4 E5 |
n/a |
2.6 E5 |
1.2 E7 |
n/a |
|
Blank Sample |
1.9 E5 |
1.4 E5 |
n/a |
2.6 E5 |
2.0 E7 |
n/a |
|
Sample A (0.5% A1 Z) |
1.9 E5 |
<10 |
> 4.14 |
2.6 E5 |
<10 |
> 5.80 |
Sample B
( 0.7% A1) |
1.9 E5 |
<10 |
> 4.14 |
2.6 E5 |
<10 |
> 5.80 |
Note: CFU-Colony forming unit is a measure of viable bacterial numbers. The
results are given as CFU/ml colony forming units per milliliter
Table 6 (Ref: Antibacterial test result of Formulation 2)
|
Test Sample |
Staphylococcus aureus |
E-Coli |
|
CFU Count 0 hrs |
CFU Count 24 hrs |
Log(c/d) |
CFU Count
0 hrs |
CFU Count 24 hrs |
Log(c/d) |
Polyethylene
Film(Control) |
1.7 E5 |
6.4 E5 |
n/a |
1.3 E5 |
1.4 E7 |
n/a |
|
Blank Sample |
1.7 E5 |
3.2 E5 |
n/a |
1.3 E5 |
1.5 E7 |
n/a |
Sample C
( 0.5% XT ) |
1.7 E5 |
4.1 E2 |
> 2.8 |
1.3 E5 |
<10 |
> 5.80 |
Sample D
( 1.0% XT ) |
1.7 E5 |
1.2 E2 |
> 3.4 |
1.3 E5 |
2.0 E2 |
> 4.6 |
Sample E
( 1.5% L1) |
1.7 E5 |
<10 |
> 4.4 |
1.3 E5 |
1.9 E5 |
> 1.89 |
Sample F
( 1.0% L1 +
1.0% L1 Z) |
1.7 E5 |
<10 |
> 4.4 |
1.3 E5 |
<10 |
>5.80
|
Table 7 (Ref: Antibacterial test result of Formulation 3)
|
Test Sample |
Staphylococcus aureus |
E-Coli |
|
CFU Count 0 hrs |
CFU Count 24 hrs |
Log(c/d) |
CFU Count
0 hrs |
CFU Count 24 hrs |
Log(c/d) |
Polyethylene
Film(Control) |
1.7 E5 |
6.4 E5 |
n/a |
2.0 E5 |
1.2 E7 |
n/a |
|
Blank Sample |
1.7 E5 |
2.4 E5 |
n/a |
2.0 E5 |
1.8 E7 |
n/a |
|
Sample G ( 1.5% A1 Z + 1.0% L1 Z)
|
1.7 E5 |
<10 |
> 4.0 |
2.0 E5 |
<10 |
> 6.0 |
Sample H
( 1.5% A1 + 1.0% L1) |
1.7 E5 |
<10 |
> 4.0 |
2.0 E5 |
<10 |
> 6.0 |
Sample 3B
(Pre blended) |
1.7 E5 |
<10 |
> 4.0 |
2.0 E5 |
<10 |
> 6.0 |
Sample 3C
(Pre blended) |
1.7 E5 |
<10 |
> 4.0 |
2.0 E5 |
<10 |
> 6.0 |
Key factors
Though silver additives exhibit excellent antimicrobial activity, the
performance of the final product depends on many parameters and some of them
are discussed here. Combination of all will give the best result.
Dry film thickness of coatings
Silver additive is necessary to expose appropriately on the top surface of
the coated components for better antibacterial performance. Migration of
antibacterial agent to the surface of the coatings is most important to
achieve the best antibacterial protection. However this migration depends on
number of factors such as thickness of the coatings, binder content, recipe
of formulation, dosage level of antibacterial agent, degree of cross
linking, cross reaction of antibacterial agent with other ingredients(i.e.
disturbance caused by other ingredients present in the formulation) etc.
In general lower dry film thickness is preferred to achieve good
antibacterial performance. Migration of silver additive is easier at low
thickness and as per our experiments we suggest 40-55 micron thickness for
better antibacterial performance. However better migration of antibacterial
agent can also be achieved by selecting appropriate particle size of silver
additive, recipe of formulation etc. Extrudable grade version of
antibacterial powder shows good performance even at higher thickness.
Dosage level of silver additive
Higher dosage level of silver additive improves the performance of coatings.
However it has some adverse effect on the other properties of the coatings.
So optimum dosage level to be decided based on the results of experiments
and the optimum dosage level also depends on the recipe of formulation.
Clear powder requires less dosage whereas highly pigmented versions may need
higher dose of additives.
a. Higher dose of silver additive leads to gloss reduction. Clarity of the
coatings (DOI) is less at higher concentration level of silver additive.
Haze would be severe if the particle size of the additive is coarser and its
proportion in the formulation is high.
b. Speckle type appearance can be noticed at higher dosage level. This
effect would be severe if the particles size of silver additive is coarser
and its proportion is very high in the formulation. Entrapment of moisture
in the silver additive can also lead to speckle type appearance.
“But the interesting thing is this type of effect won’t occur if the silver
additive is uniformly dispersed in the powder formulation during the
premixing stage .The clarity of the coating is excellent when silver
additive is mixed during the premixing stage and speckle type appearance not
noticed even with coarser grade additives.”
c. Higher dose of silver additive can lead to discoloration.
Optimum dosage level of silver additive depends on various parameters such
as type of silver additive, recipe of formulation etc. it is necessary to
conduct thorough experiments to decide about optimum dosage level.
Presence of other ingredients
Presence of some ingredients in the formulation may influence the
antibacterial performance of silver additives. Some antioxidants, imdidazole
derivatives and fillers like calcium carbonate may influence the
antibacterial performance of powder. One more suspect is barium sulphate
which might spoil the activity of silver because sulphur has a feature which
reacts with silver easily. As silver ions have a tendency to react with
atmosphere sulphur and exchange the ions it may have some impact. However
our present experiments show good performance with optimum proportion of
good grade barium sulphate. It may also depend on the dosage and purity of
the fillers. In some of the formulations the dosage of antibacterial agent
was increased but it didn’t yield the desired result. Scanning electron
microscope (SEM) observation had confirmed there were many impurities on the
coated panels. So it is necessary to ensure that there is no
cross-contamination or absence of contaminants otherwise which may lead to
poor antibacterial performance. Some pigments can have detrimental effect on
silver for e.g. pigment contains sulphur which will react with silver and
spoil its activity.
Recipe of formulation
Recipe of formulation plays a predominant role to get the desired result.
For an antibacterial powder to be effective requires that silver ions be
able to diffuse through the coating to the surface. Matching between a
silver additive and recipe of each powder is also important; coarser grade
silver additives produce haze and gloss reduction can be noticed. In general
it is better to maintain quite good amount of binder in the formulation.
There is a correlation between biocide concentration and cross linking
density of the powder. Higher cross linking may affect the migration of
silver ions to the top surface of the coatings. If the cross linking rate is
high then there could be a possibility for silver ions be covered or buried
under the coating film it can lead to poor antibacterial performance.
Degree of dispersion & method of incorporation
Good dispersion of the additives to be achieved to get better antibacterial
performance; it is necessary to uniformly disperse the silver additives in
the powder formulation and remember good dispersion ensures good
performance. Experiments show dry blending method is much better than
pre-blending method (extrudable version); however our present extrudable
version shows good antibacterial performance. A high contact area between
silver additives and resin is necessary to ensure sufficient silver ions are
liberated to diffuse to the surface.
Powder application
Good application practice helps to maximize the performance of the end
product. Silver additives are hygroscopic and will absorb a significant
amount of moisture if left exposed to the air and it makes difficult the
spraying process. It leads to poor powder deposition efficiency and some
time spurting type of phenomenon can be noticed during powder application.
Antibacterial powder should be stored in a cool dry environment. In general
end users apply powder at higher powder output rate in order to meet out
their productivity. As particle size and specific gravity of silver additive
and powder are different there could be a possibility for separation of
silver additives from the base powder (if silver additive is dry blended)
during application. It may lead to insufficient amount of silver ions on the
end components and there could be a possibility for inadequate antibacterial
performance. So it is necessary to ensure uniform fluidization, appropriate
virgin/recycle ratio and spraying conditions etc.
Summary
The compositions reported in this article gives antibacterial film which
exhibits good mechanical and corrosion properties. Silver additives based on
silver ions exhibit an excellent antimicrobial effect in different powder
chemistry such as pure polyester and epoxy-polyester etc. The optimum dosage
level required to achieve good antibacterial performance vary from 0.5% to
1.0% however as this depends on recipe of formulation and type of additive
thorough experiments need to be conducted to decide the optimum dosage
level. The adverse effect of antibacterial agent on paint surface such as
gloss reduction and haze can be reduced by way of selecting suitable
particle size of silver additives and through process & product optimization
etc.
References:
1.
www.antimicrobialtestlaboratories.com
2. www.pfonline.com
3. The Technology, Formulation and Application of Powder Coatings
By David M Howell- “David Howell Consultancy”.
|
|