However, as for products made using
vinyl chloride sols, there has been the problem that when they are incinerated,
hydrogen chloride gas is generated to seriously damage incinerators.
Moreover, recently, there are problems of
acid rain and, furthermore, adverse effects on human bodies and earth environment of the highly toxic dioxin generated upon
incineration.
However, for the production of these materials, the existing productive facilities for vinyl
chloride sols cannot be utilized, and, thus, an enormous facility investment is required for
industrial utilization of these materials.
Moreover, one-pack type urethane materials have many problems such as insufficient storage stability due to increase of
viscosity,
toxicity and high cost.
The
epoxy materials also have problems of high cost and considerably inferior properties to vinyl
chloride sols.
The
silicone materials are also high in cost and cannot be a substitute material for vinyl chloride sols from the points of their properties.
Therefore, it is considerably difficult to substitute these materials for vinyl chloride sols.
However, these plastisols containing essentially a vinyl chloride polymer still produce toxic gases upon
incineration like the conventional vinyl chloride sols.
Therefore, the above-mentioned environmental problems have not yet been solved.
The polymer used in this patent publication comprises particles of uniform structure, and in the case of the
acrylic polymer, storage stability of
plastisol and
plasticizer retainability of the coating film cannot be realized with particles of uniform structure, and, hence, the storage stability of or properties of the coating film formed from the plastisol proposed in the above patent publication tend to be extremely deteriorated.
This is because unlike vinyl chloride polymers, acrylic polymers only have weak van der Waals cohesive force between molecules, and, hence, when a composition high in compatibility with plasticizer is used, the plasticizer readily penetrates between the molecules to cause plasticization, namely, gelation, which lead to deteriorated storage stability.
However, a polymer low in compatibility with plasticizer has good storage stability, nevertheless, the coating film obtained by application and heating of the
sol (hereinafter referred to as "gelling film") has considerably low retainability of plasticizer resulting in bleed out of plasticizer from the gelling film with lapse of time.
As explained above, in the case of an acrylic
sol prepared using
acrylic polymer fine particles, the storage stability and the plasticizer retainability are contrary to each other and polymer particles of uniform structure cannot retain both of them.
However, since the polymer proposed in the patent publication is low in compatibility with plasticizer, and, especially, copolymerization ratio of
methyl methacrylate in the shell portion is high, its plasticizing state becomes inferior and it fails to form good coating films when a plasticizer with low polarity such as a phthalic ester plasticizer is used.
Accordingly, the effect of improving storage stability, which is expected as a role of the shell portion, is very low.
Furthermore, the shell portion introduced by the alkali
hydrolysis has much increased
acid value and very low compatibility with the plasticizer to cause considerable deterioration of film-
formability.
Moreover, since such shell portion with high
acid value contributes for polymer particles in the plastisol to form structural
viscosity, there is the problem of deterioration in
operability due to an increased
viscosity of the plastisol.
The shell having very low compatibility is advantageous for storage stability, nevertheless, has the tendency of becoming inferior in various performances such as film-
formability of
sol, and strength, elongation, transparency, adhesion to substrate, sound insulation and vibration-damping properties of the resulting coating film.
Especially, since the plastisol is inferior in retention of plasticizers, it tend to cause bleed out of the plasticizers and thus not practical.
However, since extremely excellent properties of a polymer are demanded for putting it to practical use, the polymers proposed in the above patent publications, in this respect, are not optimized in balancing of compatibility with plasticizers and are at low levels in both the storage stability and the plasticizer retainability and, therefore, unsuitable for industrial practical use.