U.S. patent number RE44,070 [Application Number 13/525,252] was granted by the patent office on 2013-03-12 for composite light weight gypsum wallboard.
This patent grant is currently assigned to United States Gypsum Company. The grantee listed for this patent is Weixin D. Song, Qiang Yu. Invention is credited to Weixin D. Song, Qiang Yu.
United States Patent |
RE44,070 |
Yu , et al. |
March 12, 2013 |
Composite light weight gypsum wallboard
Abstract
The invention provides a light weight composite gypsum board
including a foamed low density set gypsum core, a top non-foamed
(or reduced-foamed) bonding high density layer and a bottom
non-foamed (or reduced-foamed) bonding high density layer, a top
cover sheet bonded to the foamed low density set gypsum core by the
top non-foamed (or reduced-foamed) bonding high density layer, and
a bottom cover sheet bonded to the foamed low density set gypsum
core by the bottom non-foamed (or reduced-foamed) bonding high
density layer. The foamed low density set gypsum core is prepared
having a density of less than about 30 pcf using soap foam in the
gypsum-containing slurry. The combination of components provide a
composite gypsum board having light weight and high strength.
Inventors: |
Yu; Qiang (Grayslake, IL),
Song; Weixin D. (Vernon Hills, IL) |
Applicant: |
Name |
City |
State |
Country |
Type |
Yu; Qiang
Song; Weixin D. |
Grayslake
Vernon Hills |
IL
IL |
US
US |
|
|
Assignee: |
United States Gypsum Company
(Chicago, IL)
|
Family
ID: |
47780591 |
Appl.
No.: |
13/525,252 |
Filed: |
June 15, 2012 |
Related U.S. Patent Documents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Application
Number |
Filing Date |
Patent Number |
Issue Date |
|
|
11449177 |
Jun 8, 2010 |
7731794 |
|
|
|
11445906 |
Jun 2, 2006 |
|
|
|
|
60688839 |
Jun 9, 2005 |
|
|
|
Reissue of: |
11537395 |
Sep 29, 2006 |
7736720 |
Jun 15, 2010 |
|
|
Current U.S.
Class: |
428/156;
428/703 |
Current CPC
Class: |
C04B
28/14 (20130101); C04B 28/14 (20130101); C04B
14/42 (20130101); C04B 18/24 (20130101); C04B
22/16 (20130101); C04B 24/226 (20130101); C04B
24/383 (20130101); C04B 28/14 (20130101); C04B
14/42 (20130101); C04B 18/24 (20130101); C04B
22/16 (20130101); C04B 24/383 (20130101); C04B
2103/408 (20130101); Y02W 30/97 (20150501); C04B
2111/0062 (20130101); Y02W 30/91 (20150501); Y10T
428/24479 (20150115) |
Current International
Class: |
B32B
3/26 (20060101); B32B 13/00 (20060101); C04B
28/14 (20060101) |
References Cited
[Referenced By]
U.S. Patent Documents
Foreign Patent Documents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
406048 |
|
Jan 2000 |
|
AT |
|
486746 |
|
Nov 1975 |
|
AU |
|
1238312 |
|
Dec 1999 |
|
CN |
|
1396138 |
|
Feb 2003 |
|
CN |
|
4316518 |
|
Nov 1994 |
|
DE |
|
216497 |
|
Apr 1987 |
|
EP |
|
335405 |
|
Oct 1989 |
|
EP |
|
409781 |
|
Jan 1991 |
|
EP |
|
955277 |
|
Nov 1999 |
|
EP |
|
1008568 |
|
Jun 2000 |
|
EP |
|
2673620 |
|
Sep 1992 |
|
FR |
|
941399 |
|
Nov 1963 |
|
GB |
|
1028890 |
|
May 1966 |
|
GB |
|
1250713 |
|
Oct 1971 |
|
GB |
|
1381457 |
|
Jan 1975 |
|
GB |
|
1504929 |
|
Mar 1978 |
|
GB |
|
2053779 |
|
Feb 1981 |
|
GB |
|
05-293350 |
|
Nov 1993 |
|
JP |
|
08-231258 |
|
Sep 1996 |
|
JP |
|
09-165244 |
|
Jun 1997 |
|
JP |
|
2001-504795 |
|
Apr 2001 |
|
JP |
|
2003-020262 |
|
Jan 2003 |
|
JP |
|
1020060123582 |
|
Oct 2006 |
|
KR |
|
126524 |
|
Feb 1973 |
|
NO |
|
2215708 |
|
Nov 2003 |
|
RU |
|
885178 |
|
Nov 1981 |
|
SU |
|
887506 |
|
Dec 1981 |
|
SU |
|
27041 |
|
Feb 2000 |
|
UA |
|
52047 |
|
Dec 2002 |
|
UA |
|
88764 |
|
Nov 2009 |
|
UA |
|
WO 95/31415 |
|
Nov 1995 |
|
WO |
|
WO 99/08978 |
|
Feb 1999 |
|
WO |
|
WO 99/08979 |
|
Feb 1999 |
|
WO |
|
WO 00/06518 |
|
Feb 2000 |
|
WO |
|
WO 01/34534 |
|
May 2001 |
|
WO |
|
WO 01/45932 |
|
Jun 2001 |
|
WO |
|
WO 01/81263 |
|
Nov 2001 |
|
WO |
|
WO 01/81264 |
|
Nov 2001 |
|
WO |
|
WO 03/000620 |
|
Jan 2003 |
|
WO |
|
WO 03/040055 |
|
May 2003 |
|
WO |
|
WO 03/053878 |
|
Jul 2003 |
|
WO |
|
WO 03/082766 |
|
Oct 2003 |
|
WO |
|
WO 2004/002916 |
|
Jan 2004 |
|
WO |
|
WO 2004/033581 |
|
Apr 2004 |
|
WO |
|
WO 2004/039749 |
|
May 2004 |
|
WO |
|
WO 2004/061042 |
|
Jul 2004 |
|
WO |
|
WO 2004/083146 |
|
Sep 2004 |
|
WO |
|
WO 2005/080294 |
|
Sep 2005 |
|
WO |
|
WO 2006/071116 |
|
Jul 2006 |
|
WO |
|
WO 2006/135613 |
|
Dec 2006 |
|
WO |
|
WO 2006/135707 |
|
Dec 2006 |
|
WO |
|
WO 2006/138273 |
|
Dec 2006 |
|
WO |
|
WO 2007/024420 |
|
Mar 2007 |
|
WO |
|
Other References
"Standard Test Method for Physical Testing of Gypsum Panel
Products", Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Designations: C 473-97,
vol. 0401 1998, pp. 253-264. cited by examiner .
U.S. Appl. No. 08/916,058, filed Aug. 21, 1997, Yu. cited by
applicant .
U.S. Appl. No. 11/267,125, filed Nov. 4, 2005, Baig. cited by
applicant .
Camp, T. F., "The Manufacture of Gypsum Board", Chapter III,
Section II, The Manufacture and Technology of Gypsum Products, Dec.
22, 1950. cited by applicant .
GEO Specialty Chemicals, Aero Technology, Jan. 14, 2002, two pages.
cited by applicant .
Grace Specialty Vermiculite, "VCX Vermiculite Ore Concentrate",
W.R. Grace & Co., Conn. USA (2008). cited by applicant .
Grace Specialty Vermiculite, "Zonolite #3
Agricultural/Horticultural Vermiculite" W.R. Grace & Co., Conn.
USA (1999). cited by applicant .
Grodzka, P. et al.; On the Development of Heat Storage Building
Materials; Conf-820814--23; DE82 020814; Library of Congress
Newspaper RM (Aug. 1, 1982). cited by applicant .
Hannant, D.J. et al.; Polyolefin Fibrous Networks in Cement
Matrices for Low Cost Sheeting; Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Land; 1980;
pp. 591-597; A 294; Civil Engineering Department Univ. of Surrey,
Guildford, Surrey GU2 5XH, U.K. cited by applicant .
K.F.Mikhaylov--Manual for manufacturing prefabricated reinforced
concrete articles, Moscow, Stroyizdat, 1982, pp. 42,44. cited by
applicant .
Karni, J.; Thin Gypsum Panels; Materiaux et Constructions; 1980;
pp. 383-389; vol. 13, No. 77; Bordas-Dunod; Israel. cited by
applicant .
Ockerman, Food Science Sourcebook, Second Edition, Part 1, Terms
and Descriptions, pp. 477, 595, 722, New York, NY (1991). cited by
applicant .
Potter, Michael J., "Vermiculite" US Geological Survey Minerals
Yearbook-2001, 5 total pages (p. 82.1-82.3 and two pages of tables)
(2001). cited by applicant .
Ratinov, V.B. et al. Dobavki v beton (Concrete Admixtures), in
Russian, ISBN 5274005667 / 9785274005661 / 5-274-00566-7, Moscow,
Stroyizdat, 1989, pp. 20, 21, 105-110. cited by applicant .
Salyer, et al., "Utilization of Bagasse in New Composite Building
Materials", Ind. Eng. Chem. Prod. Res. Dev. 1982; pp. 17-23; 21;
Center for Basic and Applied Polymer Research, Univ. of Dayton, OH
45469. cited by applicant .
Van Wazer, Phosphorus and Its Compounds, vol. 1, Interscience
Publishers, Inc., New York (1958), pp. 419-427 and pp. 6799-6795.
cited by applicant .
Virginia Vermiculite LLC, "Grade No. 4 Vermiculite Concentrate",
VA, USA (Jan. 2008). cited by applicant .
Virginia Vermiculite LLC, "Grade No. 45 Vermiculite Concentrate",
VA, USA (Jan. 2008). cited by applicant .
Weber, Charles, G., "Fiber Building Boards Their Manufacture and
Use", Industrial and Engineering Chemistry; Aug. 1935; 27 (8):
896-898; National Bureau of Standards, Washington, D.C. cited by
applicant .
Blaine, "Accelerating the hydration of calcium sulfate hemihydrate
via high energy mixing," Materials and Structures, Jul. 1997,
30:362-365. cited by applicant .
Card, J.: "Production of Lightweight Wallboard", Global Gypsum,
Mar. 1999, p. 17. cited by applicant .
Englert, et al., "Properties of Gypsum Fiberboard Made by the USG
Process", Proceedings of the 4th International Inorganic-Bonded
Wood & Fiber Composite Materials Conference, Sep. 25-28, 1994,
Spokane, WA, A.A. Moslemi ed., 1995, 4:52-58. cited by applicant
.
Henein, The Development of a Novel Foam Batching and Generating
System, Jun. 1977, Masters Thesis, Concordia University, Montreal,
Quebec, Canada. cited by applicant .
Miller, et al., "Commercial Scale-Up Experience with USG's Gypsum
Fiberboard Process", Proceedings of the 7th International
Inorganic-Bonded Wood & Fiber Composite Materials Conference,
Sun Valley, ID, A.A. Moslemi ed., 2000, 7:337-355. cited by
applicant .
Miller, et al., "Development and Scale-Up of USG's Gypsum
Fiberboard Technology", Proceedings of the 6th International
Inorganic-Bonded Wood & Fiber Composite Materials Conference,
Sun Valley, ID, A.A. Moslemi, ed., 1998, 6:4-12. cited by applicant
.
Miller, et al., "USG Process for Manufacturing Fiber Composite
Panels", International Cement Review, Nov. 1995, pp. 41-42. cited
by applicant .
Miller, et al., "USG Process for Manufacturing Gypsum Fiber
Composite Panels" Proceedings of the 4th International
Inorganic-Bonded Wood & Fiber Composite Materials Conference,
Sep. 25-28, 1994, Spokane, WA, A.A. Moslemi ed., 1995, 4:47-51.
cited by applicant .
Olson, G,B.: "Computational Design of Hierarchically Structured
Materials", Science, vol. 277, p. 1237 (1997). cited by applicant
.
Burrows, "A Decade's Experience of Gypsum Board Weight Reduction in
the U.S.", 14. Internationale Baustofftagung (Weimar, Sep. 20-23,
2000), 1.01971-1.0207. cited by applicant .
Peterson, Kurt, "Engineered Gypsum Panels, the Development and
Application of Densified Zones at the Paper/Core Interface of
Gypsum Panels", Proceedings of Gypsum 2000, 6th International
Conference on Natural and Synthetic Gypsum, Toronto, Canada, May
2000, pp. 9-1-9-16. cited by applicant .
Allen, "Computed Tomography of the Antikythera Mechanism,"
Abstracts of Sin World Congress on Industrial Process Tomography,
Bergen, Norway, Abstract No. P04, p. 88 (Sep. 6, 2007). cited by
applicant .
Alme et al., "3D Reconstruction of 10000 Particle Trajectories in
Real-time" Abstracts of Sth World Congress on Industrial Process
Tomography, Bergen, Norway, Abstract No. VIAOS, p. 91 (Sep. 6,
2007). cited by applicant .
AZom.com, AZO Materials Particle Size--US Sieve Series and Tyler
Mesh Size Equivalents, obtained from the internet at
http://www.azom.com/Details.asp?ArticleID=1417 on Jan. 21, 2011;
Date added: May 15, 2002. cited by applicant .
Banasiak et al., "Application of Charge Simulation Method (CSM) for
ECT Imaging in Forward Problem and Sensitivity Matrix Calculation"
Abstracts of Sth World Congress on Industrial Process Tomography,
Bergen, No.about.ay, Abstract No. VIA02, p. 89 (Sep. 6, 2007).
cited by applicant .
Janaszewski et al., Adaptive 3D Algorithm to Detect Bridging
Ligaments during Intergranular Stress Corrosion Cracking of
Stainless Steel Abstracts of Sth World Congress on Industrial
Process Tomography, Bergen, Norway, Abstract No. VIA03, p. 90 (Sep.
6, 2007). cited by applicant .
Li et al., "Updating Sensitivity Maps in Landweber Iteration for
Electrical Capacitance Tomography" Abstracts of Sth World Congress
on Industrial Process Tomography, Bergen, Norway, Abstract No.
VIA04, p. 90 (Sep. 6, 2007). cited by applicant .
Lin et al., "Characterization and Analysis of Porous, Brittle Solid
Structures by Micro CT" Abstracts of Sth World Congress on
Industrial Process Tomography, Bergen, Norway, Paper No. VIA07, p.
92 (Sep. 6, 2007). cited by applicant .
Maad et al., "Comparing Analysis of Image Visualisation Accuracy of
Electrical Capacitance Tomography and Gamma Tomography" Abstracts
of S World Congress on Industrial Process Tomography, Bergen,
Norway, Abstract No. VIA01, p. 89 (Sep. 6, 2007). cited by
applicant .
Ship et al., "Thermophysical Characterization of Type X Special
Fire Resistant Gypsum Board", Proceedings of the Fire and Materials
2011 Conference, San Francisco, Jan. 31- Feb. 2, 2011, Interscience
Communications Ltr., London, UK, p. 417-426. cited by applicant
.
Standard Test Methods for Physical Testing of Gypsum Panel
Products, Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Designations: C473-97,
vol. 04.01 1998, pp. 253-264. cited by applicant .
Ullmann's Encyclopedia of Industrial Chemistry, 5th Edition, vol.
A4, "Calcium Sulfate" Wirsching, Franz, pp. 1, 15 (Dec. 20, 1985).
cited by applicant .
Videla, et al., "Watershed Functions Applied to a 3D Segmentation
Problem for the Analysis of Packed Particle Beds", Part. Part.
Syst. Charact. 23 (2006) 237-245, . DOI:10.1002/ppsc.200601055,
Weinheim. cited by applicant .
Xiong et al., "Wavelet Enhanced Visualisation and Solids
Distribution in the Top of Circulating Fluidized Beds" Abstracts of
Sth World Congress on Industrial Process Tomography, Bergen,
Norway, Abstract No. VIA06, p. 91 (Sep. 6, 2007). cited by
applicant .
U.S. Appl. No. 60/688,839, filed Jun. 9, 2005. cited by applicant
.
U.S. Appl. No. 11/445,906, filed Jun. 2, 2006. cited by applicant
.
U.S. Appl. No. 11/449,177, filed Jun. 7, 2006. cited by applicant
.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/795,125, filed Jun. 7, 2010. cited by applicant
.
U.S. Appl. No. 11/592,481, filed Nov. 2, 2006. cited by applicant
.
U.S. Appl. No. 11/537,395, filed Sep. 29, 2006. cited by applicant
.
U.S. Appl. No. 11/906,479, filed Oct. 2, 2007. cited by applicant
.
U.S. Appl. No. 11/932,211, filed Oct. 31, 2007. cited by applicant
.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/035,800, filed Feb. 25, 2011. cited by applicant
.
U.S. Appl. No. 61/446,941, filed Feb. 25, 2011. cited by applicant
.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/493,941, filed Jun. 11, 2012. cited by applicant
.
U.S. Appl. No. 12/709,159, filed Feb. 19, 2010. cited by applicant
.
U.S. Appl. No. 13/400,010, filed Feb. 17, 2012. cited by applicant
.
Dilofo.RTM. GW Products Bulletin, "Polynaphthalene Sulfonate,
Sodium Salt", GEO Speciality Chemicals, Horsham, PA (Nov. 1999).
cited by applicant .
Hyonic.RTM. PFM33 Products Bulletin, "Zero VOC Foaming Agent for
Gypsum Wallboard", GEO Speciality Chemicals, Horsham, PA (Jul.
2000). cited by applicant .
U.S. Appl. No. 11/592,481, filed Nov. 2, 2006, Yu et al. cited by
applicant.
|
Primary Examiner: Sample; David
Assistant Examiner: Gugliotta; Nicole T
Attorney, Agent or Firm: Leydig Voit & Mayer, Ltd.
Petti; Philip T. Janci; David F.
Parent Case Text
This application is a continuation-in-part of U.S. patent
application Ser. No. 11/449,177, filed Jun. 7, 2006 .Iadd.now U.S.
Pat. No. 7,731,794.Iaddend., and is a continuation-in-part of U.S.
patent application Ser. No. 11/445,906, filed Jun. 2, 2006
.Iadd.now abandoned.Iaddend., each one of which claims the benefit
of U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/688,839, filed Jun. 9, 2005.
The entire disclosures of each of the foregoing patent applications
are hereby incorporated by reference.
Claims
What is claimed is:
1. A composite light weight gypsum composite board comprising: a
foamed low density set gypsum core having a top surface and a
bottom surface, the foamed low density set gypsum core made using a
gypsum-containing slurry including stucco, from about 0.5% by
weight to about 10% by weight pregelatinized starch .Iadd.based on
the weight of stucco.Iaddend., and foam, a top non-foamed high
density bonding layer having a thickness of about 2 mils to less
than about 7 mils covering the top surface of the foamed low
density set gypsum core, a bottom non-foamed high density bonding
layer having a thickness of about 2 mils to less than about 7 mils
covering the bottom surface of the foamed low density set gypsum
core, the top and bottom non-foamed high density bonding layers
comprising from about 10% by weight to about 16% by weight of the
total amount of the gypsum-containing slurry, a top cover sheet,
and a bottom cover sheet, wherein the top cover sheet is bonded to
the foamed low density set gypsum core by the top non-foamed high
density bonding layer, and the bottom cover sheet is bonded to the
foamed low density set gypsum core by the bottom non-foamed high
density bonding layer, the foamed low density set gypsum core has a
density from about 10 pcf to about 27 pcf and the top and bottom
non-foamed high density bonding layers have a density from about 60
pcf to about 70 pcf, and wherein the composite board has a dry
weight of about 1000 lb/msf or less for a 1/2 inch thick board, a
nail pull resistance of at least about 77 lb.[./msf.]., and a core
hardness of at least about 11 lb.[./msf.]..
2. The composite light weight gypsum board of claim 1 in which the
pregelatinized starch is in the form of a pre-dispersion of about
10% by weight in water.
3. The composite light weight gypsum board of claim 1, wherein the
gypsum-containing slurry further comprises a naphthalenesulfonate
dispersant present in an amount from about 0.1% by weight to about
3.0% by weight based on the weight of stucco.
4. The composite light weight gypsum board of claim 1, wherein the
gypsum-containing slurry further comprises a naphthalenesulfonate
dispersant in the form of an aqueous solution containing from about
40% to about 45% by weight naphthalenesulfonate and the aqueous
solution is present in the slurry in an amount from about 0.5% to
about 2.5% by weight based on the weight of stucco.
5. The composite light weight gypsum board of claim 1, wherein the
gypsum-containing slurry further comprises sodium trimetaphosphate
present in an amount from about 0.12% by weight to about 0.4% by
weight based on the weight of stucco.
6. The composite light weight gypsum board of claim 1, wherein the
gypsum-containing slurry further comprises glass fiber present in
an amount up to about 0.5% by weight based on the weight of
stucco.
7. The composite light weight gypsum board of claim 1, wherein the
gypsum-containing slurry further comprises a waterproofing
agent.
8. The composite light weight gypsum board of claim 1, wherein the
foam is soap foam, and the soap is present in an amount from about
0.3 lb/msf to about 0.5 lb/msf.
9. The composite light weight gypsum board of claim 1, wherein the
top cover sheet is paper having a weight of about 60 lb/msf.
10. The composite light weight gypsum board of claim 1, wherein the
top cover sheet is a fibrous mat.
11. The composite light weight gypsum board of claim 10, wherein
the fibrous mat is a nonwoven glass fiber mat.
12. The composite light weight gypsum board of claim 1, wherein the
gypsum-containing slurry has a water/stucco ratio from about 0.7 to
about 1.3.
13. A composite light weight gypsum composite board comprising: a
foamed low density set gypsum core having a top surface and a
bottom surface, the foamed low density set gypsum core made using a
gypsum-containing slurry including stucco, pregelatinized starch,
and foam, a top reduced-foamed high density bonding layer having a
thickness of about 2 mils to less than about 7 mils covering the
top surface of the foamed low density set gypsum core, a bottom
reduced-foamed high density bonding layer having a thickness of
about 2 mils to less than about 7 mils covering the bottom surface
of the foamed low density set gypsum core, a top cover sheet, and a
bottom cover sheet, wherein the top cover sheet is bonded to the
foamed low density set gypsum core by the top reduced-foamed high
density bonding layer, and the bottom cover sheet is bonded to the
foamed low density set gypsum core by the bottom reduced-foamed
high density bonding layer, the foamed low density set gypsum core
has a density from about 10 pcf to about 27 pcf and the top and
bottom non-foamed high density bonding layers have a density from
about 60 pcf to about 70 pcf, and wherein the composite board has a
dry weight of about 1000 lb/msf for a 1/2 inch thick board, a nail
pull resistance of at least about 77 lb.[./msf.]., and a core
hardness of at least about 11 lb.[./msf.]..
14. The composite light weight gypsum board of claim 13, wherein
the pregelatinized starch is present in an amount from about 0.5%
by weight to about 10% by weight based on the weight of stucco.
15. The composite light weight gypsum board of claim 13 in which
the pregelatinized starch is in the form of a pre-dispersion of
about 10% by weight in water.
16. The composite light weight gypsum board of claim 13, wherein
the gypsum-containing slurry further comprises a
naphthalenesulfonate dispersant present in an amount from about
0.1% by weight to about 3.0% by weight based on the weight of
stucco.
17. The composite light weight gypsum board of claim 13, wherein
the gypsum-containing slurry further comprises sodium
trimetaphosphate present in an amount from about 0.12% by weight to
about 0.4% by weight based on the weight of stucco.
18. The composite light weight gypsum board of claim 13, wherein
the foam is soap foam, and the soap is present in an amount from
about 0.2 lb/msf to about 0.7 lb/msf.
19. The composite light weight gypsum board of claim 18, wherein
the top and bottom reduced-foamed high density bonding layers
include about 5% by weight or less of the amount of soap used to
make the foamed low density set gypsum core.
20. The composite light weight gypsum board of claim 13, wherein
the top cover sheet is paper having a weight of about 60
lb/msf.
.[.21. The composite light weight gypsum board of claim 13, wherein
the foamed low density set gypsum core has a density from about 10
pcf to about 27 pcf..].
.[.22. The composite light weight gypsum board of claim 13, wherein
the top and bottom reduced-foamed high density bonding layers have
a density from about 45 pcf to about 60 pcf..].
23. A composite light weight gypsum composite board having a dry
weight of about 1,000 lb./msf or less for a 1/2 inch thick board
comprising: a foamed low density set gypsum core having a top
surface and a bottom surface, the foamed low density set gypsum
core made using a gypsum-containing slurry including stucco from
about 0.5% by weight to about 10% by weight pregelatinized starch
.Iadd.based on the weight of stucco.Iaddend., and foam, a top
non-foamed high density bonding layer having a thickness of about 2
mils to less than about 7 mils covering the top surface of the
foamed low density set gypsum core, a bottom non-foamed high
density bonding layer having a thickness of about 2 mils to less
than about 7 mils covering the bottom surface of the foamed low
density set gypsum core, the top and bottom non-foamed high density
bonding layers comprising from about 10% by weight to about 16% by
weight of the total amount of the gypsum-containing slurry, a top
fibrous mat cover sheet, and a bottom cover sheet, wherein the top
cover sheet is bonded to the foamed low density set gypsum core by
the top non-foamed high density bonding layer, and the bottom cover
sheet is bonded to the foamed low density set gypsum core by the
bottom non-foamed high density bonding layer, the foamed low
density set gypsum core has a density from about 10 pcf to about 30
pcf and the top and bottom non-foamed high density bonding layers
have a density from about 60 pcf to about 70 pcf.
24. The composite light weight gypsum board of claim 23 in which
the pregelatinized starch is in the form of a pre-dispersion of
about 10% by weight in water.
25. The composite light weight gypsum board of claim 23, wherein
the gypsum-containing slurry further comprises a
naphthalenesulfonate dispersant present in an amount from about
0.1% by weight to about 3.0% by weight based on the weight of
stucco.
26. The composite light weight gypsum board of claim 23, wherein
the gypsum-containing slurry further comprises sodium
trimetaphosphate present in an amount from about 0.12% by weight to
about 0.4% by weight based on the weight of stucco.
27. The composite light weight gypsum board of claim 23, wherein
the foam is soap foam, and the soap is present in an amount from
about 0.2 lb/msf to about 0.7 lb/msf.
28. The composite light weight gypsum board of claim 23, wherein
the board has a dry weight from about 900 lb/msf to about 1100
lb/msf.
29. The composite light weight gypsum board of claim 23, wherein
the fibrous mat cover sheet is a nonwoven glass fiber mat.
30. A method of making composite light weight gypsum board having a
dry weight from about 900 lbs./msf to about 1,100 lbs./msf,
comprising the steps of: (a) mixing a non-foamed gypsum-containing
slurry having a density from about 80 pcf to about 85 pcf
comprising water, stucco, pregelatinized starch, and a
naphthalenesulfonate dispersant, wherein the pregelatinized starch
is present in an amount from about 0.5% by weight to about 10% by
weight based on the weight of stucco, and wherein the
naphthalenesulfonate dispersant is present in an amount from about
0.1% to about 3.0% by weight based on the weight of stucco; (b)
depositing from about 6% to about 9% by weight of the total amount
of the non-foamed gypsum-containing slurry on a first cover sheet;
(c) adding soap foam to from about 84% to about 90% by weight of
the total amount of the non-foamed gypsum-containing slurry to form
a foamed gypsum-containing slurry; (d) depositing the foamed
gypsum-containing slurry onto the non-foamed gypsum-containing
slurry on the first cover sheet; (e) depositing from about 4% to
about 7% by weight of the total amount of the non-foamed
gypsum-containing slurry on a second cover sheet; (f) placing the
non-foamed gypsum-containing slurry-covered surface of the second
cover sheet over the deposited foamed gypsum-containing slurry to
form a composite light weight gypsum board; (g) cutting the
composite light weight gypsum board after the foamed
gypsum-containing slurry has hardened sufficiently for cutting; and
(h) drying the composite light weight gypsum board to provide a
foamed low density set gypsum core in the finished composite light
weight gypsum board.
31. The method of claim 30 in which the pregelatinized starch is in
the form of a pre-dispersion of about 10% by weight in water.
32. The method of claim 30, wherein the non-foamed
gypsum-containing slurry further comprises sodium trimetaphosphate
present in an amount from about 0.12% by weight to about 0.4% by
weight based on the weight of stucco.
33. The method of claim 30, wherein the non-foamed
gypsum-containing slurry further comprises glass fiber present in
an amount up to about 0.5% by weight based on the weight of
stucco.
34. The method of claim 30, wherein the non-foamed
gypsum-containing slurry further comprises paper fiber present in
an amount up to about 1.0% by weight based on the weight of
stucco.
35. The method of claim 30, wherein the soap foam includes soap
present in an amount from about 0.3 lb/msf to about 0.5 lb/msf.
36. The method of claim 30, wherein the first cover sheet and the
second cover sheet are made of paper.
37. The method of claim 30, wherein the first cover sheet is paper
having a weight of about 60 lb/msf.
38. The method of claim 30, wherein the first cover sheet is a
fibrous mat.
39. The method of claim 38, wherein the fibrous mat is a nonwoven
glass fiber mat.
40. The method of claim 30, wherein the foamed gypsum-containing
slurry has a water/stucco ratio from about 0.7 to about 1.3.
41. The method of claim 30, wherein the pregelatinized starch is
corn starch.
42. A composite light weight gypsum board, comprising: a foamed low
density set gypsum core having a top surface and a bottom surface,
the foamed low density set gypsum core made using a
gypsum-containing slurry comprising water, stucco, pregelatinized
corn starch present in an amount of about 6% by weight based on the
weight of stucco, a 45% by weight aqueous solution of a
naphthalenesulfonate dispersant present in an amount of about 1.2%
by weight based on the weight of stucco, sodium trimetaphosphate
present in an amount of about 0.3% by weight based on the weight of
stucco, paper fiber present in an amount of about 1% based on the
weight of stucco, and glass fiber present in an amount of about
0.5% based on the weight of stucco, and soap foam, a top non-foamed
high density bonding layer having a thickness of about 2 mils to
less than about 7 mils covering the top surface of the foamed low
density set gypsum core, a bottom non-foamed high density bonding
layer having a thickness of about 2 mils to less than about 7 mils
covering the bottom surface of the foamed low density set gypsum
core, the top and bottom non-foamed high density bonding layers
comprising from about 10% by weight to about 16% by weight of the
total amount of the gypsum-containing slurry, a top paper cover
sheet having a weight of about 60 lb/msf, and a bottom paper cover
sheet, wherein the top cover sheet is bonded to the foamed low
density set gypsum core by the top non-foamed high density bonding
layer, and the bottom cover sheet is bonded to the foamed low
density set gypsum core by the bottom non-foamed high density
bonding layer, wherein the foamed low density set gypsum core has a
density of about 25 pcf, the top and bottom non-foamed high density
bonding layers have a density from about 60 pcf to about 70 pcf and
wherein the composite board has a dry weight of about 1000 lb/msf
for a 1/2 inch thick board, a nail pull resistance of at least
about 77 lb.[./msf.]., and a core hardness of at least about 11
lb.[./msf.]..
43. The composite light weight gypsum board of claim 42 in which
the pregelatinized corn starch is in the form of a pre-dispersion
of about 10% by weight in water.
.Iadd.44. A composite gypsum board comprising: a set gypsum core
having a top surface and a bottom surface, the set gypsum core
formed from at least stucco, starch, and foam, a top bonding layer
having a thickness of about 2 mils to less than about 7 mils
adjacent the top surface of the set gypsum core, a bottom bonding
layer having a thickness of about 2 mils to less than about 7 mils
covering the bottom surface of the set gypsum core, a top cover
sheet, and a bottom cover sheet, wherein the top cover sheet is
bonded to the set gypsum core by the top bonding layer, and the
bottom cover sheet is bonded to the set gypsum core by the bottom
bonding layer, the set gypsum core has a density from about 10 pcf
to about 27 pcf and less than the density of either the top or
bottom bonding layer, and wherein the board, when at a thickness of
about 1/2 inch, has a dry weight of about 1100 lbs/MSF or less and
a core hardness of at least about 11 lb as determined in accordance
with ASTM C473..Iaddend.
.Iadd.45. The composite gypsum board of claim 44, wherein the
starch is present in an amount from about 0.5% by weight to about
10% by weight based on the weight of the stucco..Iaddend.
.Iadd.46. The composite gypsum board of claim 44, wherein the set
gypsum core further comprises dispersant present in an amount from
about 0.1% bv weight to about 3.0% by weight based on the weight of
the stucco..Iaddend.
.Iadd.47. The composite gypsum board of claim 44, wherein the set
gypsum core further comprises a trimetaphosphate salt present in an
amount from about 0.12% by weight to about 0.4% by weight based on
the weight of the stucco..Iaddend.
.Iadd.48. The composite gypsum board of claim 44, wherein the top
and bottom bonding layers have a density from about 45 pcf to about
70 pcf..Iaddend.
.Iadd.49. A composite gypsum board comprising: a set gypsum core
having a dry density; the set gypsum core adjacent to a first and a
second bonding layer each having a dry density, the set gypsum core
dry density being less than each of the first and second bonding
layer dry densities by a differential of at least about 10 pcf; the
first and second bonding layers each having a thickness of about 2
mils to less than about 7 mils; the board, when at a thickness of
about 1/2 inch, having a dry weight of about 1100 lbs/MSF or less;
and the set gypsum core has an average core hardness of at least
about 11 pounds as determined in accordance with ASTM
C473..Iaddend.
.Iadd.50. The composite gypsum board of claim 49, wherein the first
and second bonding layers are formed from one or more slurries, the
amount of slurry used to form the first and second bonding layers
comprising from about 10% to about 16% by weight of the total
amount of slurry used to form the set gypsum core and the first and
second bonding layers..Iaddend.
.Iadd.51. The composite gypsum board of claim 49, the set gypsum
core formed from a slurry comprising water, stucco, foam, and
starch present in an amount from about 0.5% to about 10% by weight
based on the weight of the stucco, the starch effective to increase
the core hardness of the gypsum board relative to the core hardness
of the gypsum board without the starch..Iaddend.
.Iadd.52. The composite gypsum board of claim 49, the set gypsum
core formed from a slurry comprising water, stucco, foam, and
dispersant present in an amount from about 0.1% to about 3.0% by
weight based on the weight of the stucco..Iaddend.
.Iadd.53. The composite gypsum board of claim 49, the set gypsum
core formed from a slurry comprising water, stucco, foam, and a
trimetaphosphate salt present in an amount from about 0.12% by
weight to about 0.4% by weight based on the weight of the
stucco..Iaddend.
.Iadd.54. The composite gypsum board of claim 49, the set gypsum
core having a density from about 10 pcf to about 27 pcf and the top
and bottom bonding layers having a density from about 45 pcf to
about 70 pcf..Iaddend.
.Iadd.55. The composite gypsum board of claim 54, wherein the
board, when at a thickness of about 1/2 inch, has (a) a nail pull
resistance of at least 65 lb and (b) an average flexural strength
of at least 36 lb in a machine direction and/or 107 lb in a
cross-machine direction, as determined in accordance with ASTM
C473..Iaddend.
.Iadd.56. The composite gypsum board of claim 54, the set gypsum
core formed from a slurry comprising water, stucco, foam,
dispersant, a trimetaphosphate salt and starch present in an amount
from about 0.5% to about 10% by weight based on the weight of the
stucco, the starch effective to increase the core hardness of the
gypsum board relative to the core hardness of the gypsum board
without the starch and dispersant present in an amount from about
0.1% to about 3.0% by weight based on the weight of the stucco and
a trimetaphosphate salt present in an amount from about 0.12% by
weight to about 0.4% by weight based on the weight of the
stucco..Iaddend.
.Iadd.57. A composite gypsum board comprising: the set gypsum core
adjacent to a first and a second bonding layer, the dry density of
the gypsum core being less than each of the dry densities of first
and second bonding layer by a differential of at least about 10
pcf; the first and second bonding layers each having a thickness of
about 2 mils to less than about 7 mils; the board, when at a
thickness of about 1/2 inch, having a dry weight of about 1100
lbs/MSF or less; and the board has a ratio of dry density (pcf) to
average core hardness (lb) of less than about 3.2, wherein the core
hardness is determined in accordance with ASTM C473..Iaddend.
.Iadd.58. The composite gypsum board of claim 57, wherein the first
and second bonding layers are formed from one or more slurries, the
amount of slurry used to form the first and second bonding layers
comprising from about 10% to about 16% by weight of the total
amount of slurry used to form the set gypsum core and the first and
second bonding layers..Iaddend.
.Iadd.59. The composite gypsum board of claim 57, the set gypsum
core formed from a slurry comprising water, stucco, foam, and
starch present in an amount from about 0.5% to about 10% by weight
based on the weight of the stucco, the starch effective to increase
the core hardness of the gypsum board relative to the core hardness
of the gypsum board without the starch..Iaddend.
.Iadd.60. The composite gypsum board of claim 57, the set gypsum
core formed from a slurry comprising water, stucco, foam, and a
trimetaphosphate salt present in an amount from about 0.12% by
weight to about 0.4% by weight based on the weight of the
stucco..Iaddend.
.Iadd.61. The composite gypsum board of claim 57, the set gypsum
core having a density from about 10 pcf to about 27 pcf and the top
and bottom bonding layers having a density from about 45 pcf to
about 70 pcf..Iaddend.
.Iadd.62. A composite gypsum board comprising: a set gypsum core
having a dry density; the set gypsum core adjacent to a first and a
second bonding layer each having a dry density, the set gypsum core
dry density being less than each of the first and second bonding
layer dry densities by a differential of at least about 10 pcf; the
first and second bonding layers each having a thickness of about 2
mils to less than about 7 mils; the board, when at a thickness of
about 1/2 inch, having a dry weight of about 1100 lbs/MSF or less;
and the board, when at a thickness of about 1/2 inch (about 1.3
cm), has a nail pull resistance to average core hardness ratio from
about 4 to about 8, each as determined in accordance with ASTM
C473..Iaddend.
.Iadd.63. The composite gypsum board of claim 62, the set gypsum
core formed from a slurry comprising water, stucco, foam, and
starch present in an amount from about 0.5% to about 10% by weight
based on the weight of the stucco, the starch effective to increase
the core hardness of the gypsum board relative to the core hardness
of the gypsum board without the starch..Iaddend.
.Iadd.64. The composite gypsum board of claim 62, the set gypsum
core formed from a slurry comprising water, stucco, foam, and a
trimetaphosphate salt present in an amount from about 0.12% by
weight to about 0.4% by weight based on the weight of the
stucco..Iaddend.
.Iadd.65. The composite gypsum board of claim 62, the set gypsum
core having a density from about 10 pcf to about 27 pcf and the top
and bottom bonding layers having a density from about 45 pcf to
about 70 pcf..Iaddend.
.Iadd.66. The composite gypsum board of claim 65, the set gypsum
core has an average core hardness of at least about 11 pounds as
determined in accordance with ASTM C473..Iaddend.
.Iadd.67. The composite gypsum board of claim 65, the set gypsum
core formed from a slurry comprising water, stucco, foam, and
starch present in an amount from about 0.5% to about 10% by weight
based on the weight of the stucco, the starch effective to increase
the core hardness of the gypsum board relative to the core hardness
of the gypsum board without the starch and dispersant present in an
amount from about 0.1% to about 3.0% by weight based on the weight
of the stucco and a trimetaphosphate salt present in an amount from
about 0.12% by weight to about 0.4% by weight based on the weight
of the stucco..Iaddend.
Description
FIELD OF THE INVENTION
This invention pertains to unique light weight composite gypsum
boards having high strength. It also pertains to a method of making
such light weight composite gypsum boards using a unique
gypsum-containing slurry to form a foamed low density set gypsum
core and non-foamed (or reduced-foamed) bonding high density layers
that bond the top and bottom cover sheets to the core.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
Certain properties of gypsum (calcium sulfate dihydrate) make it
very popular for use in making industrial and building products,
such as gypsum wallboard. Gypsum is a plentiful and generally
inexpensive raw material which, through a process of dehydration
and rehydration, can be cast, molded or otherwise formed into
useful shapes. The base material from which gypsum wallboard and
other gypsum products are manufactured is the hemihydrate form of
calcium sulfate (CaSO.sub.4.1/2H.sub.2O), commonly termed "stucco,"
which is produced by heat conversion of the dihydrate form of
calcium sulfate (CaSO.sub.4.2H.sub.2O), from which 1-1/2 water
molecules been removed.
Conventional gypsum-containing products such as gypsum wallboard
have many advantages, such as low cost and easy workability.
Various improvements have been achieved in making gypsum-containing
products using starches as ingredients in the slurries used to make
such products. Pregelatinized starch, for example, can increase
flexural strength and compressive strength of gypsum-containing
products including gypsum wallboard. Known gypsum wall board
contains board starch at levels of less than about 10 lbs/MSF.
It is also necessary to use substantial amounts of water in gypsum
slurries containing pregelatinized starch in order ensure proper
flowability of the slurry. Unfortunately, most of this water must
eventually be driven off by drying, which is expensive due to the
high cost of the fuels used in the drying process. The drying step
is also time-consuming. It has been found that the use of
naphthalenesulfonate dispersants can increase the fluidity of the
slurries, thus overcoming the water demand problem. In addition, it
has also been found that the naphthalenesulfonate dispersants, if
the usage level is high enough, can cross-link to the
pregelatinized starch to bind the gypsum crystals together after
drying, thus increasing dry strength of the gypsum composite.
Trimetaphosphate salts have not in the past been recognized to
affect gypsum slurry water requirements. However, the present
inventors have discovered that increasing the level of the
trimetaphosphate salt to hitherto unknown levels in the presence of
a specific disperant makes it possible to achieve proper slurry
flowability with unexpectedly reduced amounts of water, even in the
presence of high starch levels. This, of course, is highly
desirable because it in turn reduces fuel usage for drying as well
as the process time associated with subsequent water removal
process steps. Thus the present inventors have also discovered that
the dry strength of gypsum board can be increased by using a
naphthalenesulfonate disperant in combination with pregelatinized
starch in the slurry used to make the wallboard.
Conventional gypsum wallboards have adequate strength for working,
and meet standard test requirements such as nail pull (77 lb) and
core hardness (11 lb). However, conventional wallboards are heavy,
typically weighing up to 1600-1700 lb/MSF. If a way could be fund
to produce a high strength gypsum wall board in which board weight
(and density) is significantly reduced, without adversely affecting
nail pull and hardness characteristics, this would represent a
useful contribution to the art.
It is also known in making gypsum wallboard that bonding layers can
be used to promote adherence or bonding of the paper cover sheets
to the set gypsum core. Typically, these bonding layers are
relatively thick, ranging from about 7 mils to about 25 mils, even
up to 50 mils. Thinner bonding layers would be expected to be more
difficult to apply and to present other drawbacks. Unfortunately,
the use of these thick bonding layers can decrease the core
hardness in the finished wallboard. Finished densities in these
dried bonding layers range from greater than about 70 pcf to about
90 pcf. The term "pcf" is defined as pounds per cubic foot
(lb/ft.sup.3). If a way could be found to make a low density set
gypsum board using thinner, lighter bonding layers, without
sacrificing core hardness or other important board properties, this
would represent a useful contribution to the art.
BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
The invention generally comprises a light weight gypsum composite
board including a foamed low density set gypsum core having a top
surface and a bottom surface, the foamed low density set gypsum
core made using a gypsum-containing slurry comprising stucco, and
based on the weight of stucco, pregelatinized starch in an amount
of about 0.5-10% by weight, a naphthalenesulfonate dispersant in an
amount of about 0.1-3.0% by weight and sodium trimetaphosphate in
an amount of about 0.12-0.4% by weight, the light weight gypsum
composite board also including a top non-foamed (or reduced-foamed)
bonding high density layer covering the top surface of the foamed
low density set gypsum core, a bottom non-foamed (or
reduced-foamed) bonding high density layer covering the bottom
surface of the foamed low density set gypsum core, a top cover
sheet, and a bottom cover sheet, wherein the top cover sheet is
bonded to the foamed low density set gypsum core by the top
non-foamed (or reduced-foamed) bonding high density layer, and the
bottom cover sheet is bonded to the foamed low density set gypsum
core by the bottom non-foamed (or reduced-foamed) bonding high
density layer.
The top and bottom non-foamed (or reduced-foamed) bonding high
density layers of the light weight gypsum composite board comprise
from about 10% by weight to about 16% by weight of the total amount
of the gypsum-containing slurry. In a preferred embodiment, the top
non-foamed (or reduced-foamed) bonding high density layer covering
the top surface of the foamed low density set gypsum core comprises
about 6%-9% by weight of the total amount of the gypsum-containing
slurry, and the bottom non-foamed (or reduced-foamed) bonding high
density layer covering the bottom surface of the foamed low density
set gypsum core comprising about 4%-6% by weight of the total
amount of the gypsum-containing slurry.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION
It has now unexpectedly been found that the preparation of a foamed
low density set gypsum core using thinner, lighter top and bottom
non-foamed (or reduced-foamed) bonding high density layers to
attain good bonding of a heavy top (face) cover sheet and a bottom
(back) cover sheet, can provide a composite gypsum board having
nail pull resistance, core hardness, and board strength.
The composite gypsum board of the present invention includes a
foamed low density set gypsum core having a top surface and a
bottom surface, a top non-foamed (or reduced-foamed) bonding high
density layer covering the top surface of the foamed low density
set gypsum core, a top (or face) cover sheet having a foamed low
density set gypsum core-facing surface, the top cover sheet bonded
to the foamed low density set gypsum core by the top non-foamed (or
reduced-foamed) bonding high density layer, a bottom non-foamed (or
reduced-foamed) bonding high density layer covering the bottom
surface of the foamed low density set gypsum core, and a bottom (or
back) cover sheet having a foamed low density set gypsum
core-facing surface, the bottom cover sheet bonded to the foamed
low density set gypsum core by the bottom non-foamed (or
reduced-foamed) bonding high density layer. Preferably the top
cover sheet will be paper having a weight of about 60 lb/MSF
(thickness about 18 mils). Additionally, the top (face) cover sheet
and bottom (back) cover sheet are substantially parallel with
respect to the foamed low density set gypsum core. The foamed low
density set gypsum core is made from a foamed gypsum slurry
containing stucco, and includes pregelatinized starch, and
preferably a naphthalenesulfonate dispersant, and also preferably,
sodium trimetaphosphate. The top and bottom non-foamed (or
reduced-foamed) bonding high density layers can comprise from about
10% to about 16% of the of the total amount of gypsum slurry.
According to one embodiment of the present invention, there are
provided finished composite gypsum board from gypsum-containing
slurries containing stucco, pregelatinized starch, a
naphthalenesulfonate disperant, and sodium trimetaphosphate. The
naphthalenesulfonate disperant is present in an amount of about
0.1%-3.0% by weight based on the weight of dry stucco. The
pregelatinized starch is present in an amount of at least about
0.5% by weight up to about 10% by weight based on the weight of dry
stucco in the formulation. The sodium trimetaphosphate is present
in an amount of about 0.12%-0.4% by weight based on the weight of
dry stucco in the formulation. Other ingredients that may be used
in the slurry include binders, paper fiber, glass fiber, and
accelerators. A soap foam which introduces air voids is added to
the newly formulated gypsum-containing slurries to help reduce the
density of the foamed low density set gypsum core in the final
gypsum-containing product, for example, gypsum wallboard or
composite gypsum board.
The combination of from about 0.5% by weight up to about 10% by
weight pregelatinized starch, from about 0.1% by weight up to about
3.0% by weight naphthalenesulfonate dispersant, and a minimum of at
least about 0.12% by weight up to about 0.4% by weight of
trimetaphosphate salt (all based on the weight of dry stucco used
in the gypsum slurry) unexpectedly and significantly increases the
fluidity of the gypsum slurry. This substantially reduces the
amount of water required to produce a gypsum slurry with sufficient
flowability to be used in making gypsum-containing products such as
gypsum wall board. The level of trimetaphosphate salt, which is at
least about twice that of standard formulations (as sodium
trimetaphosphate), is believed to boost the dispersant activity of
the naphthalenesulfonate dispersant.
The air voids can reduce the bonding strength between a foamed low
density set gypsum core and the cover sheets. Since greater than
half of the composite gypsum boards by volume may consist of voids
due to foam, the foam can interfere with the bond between the
foamed low density set gypsum core and the paper cover sheets. This
is addressed by providing a non-foamed (or reduced-foamed) bonding
high density layer on the gypsum core-contacting surfaces of both
the top cover sheet and the bottom cover sheet prior to applying
the cover sheets to the core. This non-foamed, or alternatively,
reduced-foamed, bonding high density layer formulation typically
will be the same as that of the gypsum slurry core formulation,
except that either no soap will be added, or a substantially
reduced amount of soap (foam) will be added. Optionally, in order
to form this bonding layer, foam can be mechanically removed from
the core formulation, or a different foam-free formulation can be
applied at the foamed low density set gypsum core face paper
interface.
Soap foam is required to introduce and to control the air (bubble)
void sizes and distribution in the foamed set gypsum core, and to
control the density of the foamed set gypsum core. A preferred
range of soap in the set gypsum core is from about 0.2 lb/MSF to
about 0.7 lb/MSF; a more preferred level of soap is about 0.3
lb/MSF to about 0.5 lb/MSF. Although preferably no soap will be
used in the non-foamed bonding high density layers, if soap is used
in reduced-foamed bonding high density layers, the amount will be
about 5% by weight or less of the amount of soap to make the foamed
low density set gypsum core.
The non-foamed or reduced-foamed, that is, high density portion of
the gypsum-containing slurry used in the bonding layer will be from
about 10-16% by weight of the (wet) slurry used in making the final
board. In a preferred embodiment, 6-9% by weight of the slurry can
be used as the top non-foamed (or reduced-foamed) bonding high
density layer, and 4-7% by weight of the slurry can be used as the
bottom non-foamed (or reduced-foamed) bonding high density layer.
The presence of the top and bottom non-foamed (or reduced-foamed)
bonding high density layers provides an improved bond between the
top and bottom cover sheets and the foamed low density set gypsum
core. The wet density of the non-foamed bonding high density layer
can be about 80-85 pcf. The dry (finished) density of the
non-foamed (or reduced-foamed) bonding high density layer can be
about 45-70 pcf. Additionally, the thickness of the non-foamed (or
reduced-foamed) bonding high density layers of the present
invention will range from about 2 mils to less than 7 mils.
Preferred cover sheets may be made of paper as in conventional
gypsum wallboard, although other useful cover sheet materials known
in the art (e.g. fibrous glass mates) may be used. However,
particular heavy paper cover sheets preferably will be used as top
(face) cover sheets in the embodiments of the present invention.
Useful cover sheet paper include Manila 7-ply and News-Line 5-ply,
available from United States Gypsum Corporation, Chicago, Ill.; and
Grey-Back 3-ply and Manila Ivory 3-ply, available from Caraustar,
Newport, Ind. A preferred bottom cover sheet paper is 5-ply
News-Line (e.g. 42-46 lb/MSF). A preferred top cover sheet paper is
Manila 7-ply. A particularly preferred top cover sheet paper is
heavy Manila paper (60 lb/MSF, thickness 18 mils), available from
Caraustar, Newport, Indiana. Other heavy, thick paper will also be
preferred, ranging in thickness from about 15-20 mils.
Fibrous mats may also be used as one or both of the cover sheets.
Preferably the fibrous mats will be nonwoven glass fiber mats in
which filaments of glass fiber are bonded together by an adhesive.
Most preferably, the nonwoven glass fiber mats will have a heavy
resin coating. For example, Duraglass nonwoven glass fiber mats,
available from John-Manville, having a weight of about 1.5 lb/100
ft.sup.2, with about 40-50% of the mat weight coming from the resin
coating, could be used.
It is noted here that in manufacturing of conventional gypsum,
wallboard, the top or face paper is laid down and moves along the
production line first, and so constitutes what is known in the art
as the "bottom" of the process, despite contacting and forming the
top or face of the wallboard product. Conversely, the bottom or
back paper is applied last in the manufacturing process in what is
known as the "top" of the process. These same conventions will
apply in the formation and preparation of the composite gypsum
boards of the present invention. Reference is made to Example 7B
below.
It is preferred that a naphthalenesulfonate dispersant by used in
gypsum-containing slurries prepared in accordance with the present
invention. The naphthalenesulfonate dispersants used in the present
invention include polynaphthalenesulfonic acid and its salts
(polynaphthalenesulfonates) and derivatives, which are condensation
products of naphthalenesulfonic acids and formaldehyde.
Particularly desirable polynaphthalenesulfonates include sodium and
calcium naphthalenesulfonate. The average molecular weight of the
naphthalenesulfonates can range from about 3,000 to 27,000,
although it is preferred that the molecular weight be about 8,000
to 22,000, and more preferred that the molecular weight be about
12,000 to 17,000. As a commercial product, a higher molecular
weight dispersant has higher viscosity, and lower solids content,
than a lower molecular weight dispersant. Useful
naphthalenesulfonates include DILOFLO, available from GEO Specialty
Chemicals, Cleveland, Ohio; DAXAD, available from Hampshire
Chemical Corp., Lexington, Mass.; and LOMAR D, available from GEO
Specialty Chemicals, Lafayette, Ind. The naphthalenesulfonates are
preferably used as aqueous solutions in the range 35-55% by weight
solids content, for example. It is most preferred to use the
naphthalenesulfonates in the form of an aqueous solution, for
example, in the range of about 40-45% by weight solids content.
Alternatively, where appropriate, the naphthalenesulfonates can be
used in dry solid or powder form, such as LOMAR D, for example.
The polynaphthalenesulfonates useful in the present invention have
the general structure (1):
##STR00001## wherein n is>2, and wherein M is sodium, potassium,
calcium, and the like.
The naphthalenesulfonate dispersant, preferably as an about 45% by
weight solution in water, may be used in a range of from about 0.5%
to about 3.0% by weight based on the weight of dry stucco used in
the gypsum composite formulation. A more preferred range of
naphthalenesulfonate dispersant is from about 0.5% to about 2.0% by
weight based on the weight of dry stucco, and a most preferred
range from about 0.7% to about 2.0% by weight based on the weight
of dry stucco. In contrast, known gypsum wallboard contains this
dispersant at levels of about 0.4% by weight, or less, based on the
weight of dry stucco.
Stated in an another way, the naphthalenesulfonate disperant, on a
dry weight basis, may be used in a range from about 0.1% to about
1.5% by weight based of the weight of dry stucco used in the gypsum
composite formulation. A more preferred range of
naphthalenesulfonate dispersant, on a dry solids basis, is from
about 0.25% to about 0.7% by weight based on the weight of dry
stucco, and a most preferred range (on a dry solids basis) from
about 0.3% to about 0.7% by weight based on the weight of dry
stucco.
The gypsum-containing slurry can optionally contain a
trimetaphosphate salt, for example, sodium trimetaphosphate. Any
suitable water-soluble metaphosphate or polyphosphate can be used
in accordance with the present invention. It is preferred that a
trimetaphosphate salt be used, including double salts, that is
trimetaphosphate salts having two cations. Particularly useful
trimetaphosphate salts include sodium trimetaphosphate, potassium
trimetaphosphate, calcium trimetaphosphate, sodium calcium
trimetaphosphate, lithium trimetaphosphate, ammonium
trimetaphosphate, and the like, or combinations thereof. A
preferred trimetaphosphate salt is sodium trimetaphosphate. It is
preferred to use the trimetaphosphate salt as an aqueous solution,
for example, in the range of about 10-15% by weight solids content.
Other cyclic or acyclic polyphosphate can also be used, as
described in U.S. Pat. No. 6,409,825 to Yu et al., herein
incorporated by reference.
Sodium trimetaphosphate is a known additive in gypsum-containing
compositions, although it is generally used in a range of from
about 0.05% to about 0.08% by weight based on the weight of dry
stucco used in the gypsum slurry. In the embodiments of the present
invention, sodium trimetaphosphate (or other water-soluble
metaphosphate or polyphosphate) can be present in the range of from
about 0.12% to about 0.4% by weight based on the weight of dry
stucco used in the gypsum composite formulation. A preferred range
of sodium trimetaphosphate (or other water-soluble metaphosphate or
polyphosphate) is from about 0.12% to about 0.3% by weight based on
the weight of dry stucco used in the gypsum composite
formulation.
There are two forms of stucco, alpha and beta. These two types of
stucco are produced by different means of calcification. In the
present inventions either the beta or the alpha form of stucco may
be used.
Starches, including pregelatinized starch in particular, must be
used in gypsum-containing slurries prepared in accordance with the
present invention. A preferred pregelatinized starch is
pregelatinized corn starch, for example pregelatinized corn flour
available from Bunge Milling, St. Louis, Mo., having the following
typical analysis: moisture 7.5%, protein 8.0%, oil 0.5%, crude
fiber 0.5%, ash 0.3%; having a green strength of 0.48 psi; and
having a loose bulk density of 35.0 lb/ft.sup.3. Pregelatinized
corn starch should be used in an amount of at least about 0.5% by
weight up to about 10% by weight, based on the weight of dry stucco
used in the gypsum-containing slurry.
The present inventors have further discovered that an unexpected
increase in dry strength (particularly in wallboard) can be
obtained by using at least about 0.5% by weight up to about 10% by
weight pregelatinized starch (preferably pregelatinized corn
starch) in the presence of about 0.1% by weight to 3.0% by weight
naphthalenesulfonate dispersant (starch and naphthalenesulfonate
levels based on the weight of dry stucco present in the
formulation). This unexpected result can be obtained whether or not
water-soluble metaphosphate or polyphosphate is present.
In addition, it has unexpectedly been found that pregelatinized
starch can be used at levels of at least about 10 lb/MSF, or more,
in the dried gypsum wallboard made in accordance with the present
invention, yet high strength and low weight can be achieved. Levels
as high as 35-45 lb/MSF pregelatinized starch in the gypsum
wallboard have been shown to be effective. As an example,
Formulation B, as shown in Tables 1 and 2 below, includes 45
lb/MSF, yet produced a board weight of 1042 lb/MSF having excellent
strength. In this example (Formulation B), a naphthalenesulfonate
dispersant as a 45% by weight solution in water, was used at a
level of 1.28% by weight.
A further unexpected result may be achieved with the present
invention when the naphthalenesulfonate dispersant trimetaphosphate
salt combination is combined with pregelatinized corn starch, and
optionally, paper fiber or glass fiber. Gypsum wallboard made from
formulations containing these three ingredients have increased
strength and reduced weight, and are more economically desirable
due to the reduced water requirements in their manufacture.
Accelerators can be used in the gypsum-containing compositions of
the present invention, as described in U.S. Pat. No. 6,409,825 to
Yu et al., herein incorporated by reference. One desirable heat
resistant accelerator (HRA) can be made from the dry grinding of
landplaster (calcium sulfate dihydrate). Small amounts of additives
(normally about 5% by weight) such as sugar, dextrose, boric acid,
and starch can be used to make this HRA. Sugar, or dextrose, is
currently preferred. Another useful accelerator is "climate
stabilized accelerator" or "climate stable accelerator," (CSA) as
described in U.S. Pat. No. 3,573,947, herein incorporated by
reference.
Water/stucco (w/s) ratio is an important parameter, since excess
water must eventually be driven off by heating. In the embodiments
of the present invention, a generally preferred w/s ratio is from
about 0.7 to about 1.3. A more preferred w/s ratio in the main
gypsum slurry formulations should be in the range from 0.8-1.2.
Other gypsum slurry additives can include accelerators, binders,
waterproofing agents, paper or glass fibers and other known
constituents.
The following examples further illustrate the invention. They
should not be construed as in any way limiting the scope of the
invention.
EXAMPLE 1
Sample Gypsum Slurry Formulations
Gypsum slurry formulations are shown in Table 1 below. All values
in Table 1 are expressed as weight percent based on the weight of
dry stucco. Values in parentheses are dry weight in pounds
(lb/MSF).
TABLE-US-00001 TABLE 1 Component Formulation A Formulation B Stucco
(lb/MSF) (732) (704) sodium trimetaphosphate 0.20 (1.50) 0.30
(2.14) Dispersant (naphthalenesulfonate) 0.18 (1.35) 0.58.sup.1
(4.05) Pregelatinized starch (dry powder) 2.7 (20) 6.4 (45) Board
starch 0.41 (3.0) 0 Heat resistant accelerator (HRA) (15) (15)
Glass fiber 0.27 (2.0) 0.28 (2.0) Paper fiber 0 0.99 (7.0) Soap*
0.03 (0.192) 0.03 (0.192) Total Water (lb.) 805 852 Water/Stucco
ratio 1.10 1.21 *Used to pregenerate foam .sup.11.28% by weight as
a 45% aqueous solution.
EXAMPLE 2
Preparation of Wallboards
Sample gypsum wallboards wee prepared in accordance with U.S. Pat.
No. 6,342,284, to Yu et al. and U.S. Pat. No. 6,632,550 to Yu et
al., herein incorporated by reference. This includes the separate
generation of foam and introduction of the foam into the slurry of
all of the other ingredients as described in Example 5 of these
patents.
Test results for gypsum wallboards made using the Formulation A and
B of Example 1, and a normal control board are shown in Table 2
below. As in this example and other examples below, nail pull
resistance, core hardness, and flexural strength tests were
performed according to ASTM C-473. Additionally, it is noted that
typical gypsum wallboard is approximately 1/2 inch thick and has a
weight of between about 1600 to 1800 pounds per 1,000 square feet
of material, or lb/MSF. ("MSF" is a standard abbreviation in the
art for a thousand square feet; it is an area measurement for
boxes, corrugated media and wallboard.)
TABLE-US-00002 TABLE 2 Control Formulation Formulation Lab test
result Board A Board B Board Board weight (lb/MSF) 1587 1066 1042
Nail pull resistance (lb) 81.7 50.2 72.8 Core hardness (lb) 16.3
5.2 11.6 Humidified bond load (lb) 17.3 20.3 15.1 Humidified bond
failure (%) 0.6 5 11.1 Flexural strength, face-up (MD) (lb) 47 47.2
52.6 Flexural strength, face-down (MD) 51.5 66.7 78.8 (lb) Flexural
strength, face-up (XMD) 150 135.9 173.1 (lb) Flexural strength,
face-down (XMD) 144.4 125.5 165.4 (lb) MD: machine direction XMD:
across machine direction
As illustrated in Table 2, gypsum wallboards prepared using the
Formulation A and B slurries have significant reductions in weight
compared to the control board. With reference again to Table 1, the
comparisons of the Formulation A board to the Formulation B board
are most striking. The water/stucco (w/s) ratios are similar in
Formulation A and Formulation B. A significantly higher level of
naphthalenesulfonate dispersant is also used in Formulation B.
Also, in Formulation B substantially more pregelatinized starch was
used, about 6% by weight, a greater than 100% increase over
Formulation A accompanied by marked strength increases. Even so,
the water demand to produce the required flowability remained low
in the Formulation B slurry, the difference being about 10% in
comparison to Formulation A. The low water demand in both
Formulations is attributed to the synergistic effect of the
combination of naphthalenesulfonate dispersant and sodium
trimetaphosphate in the gypsum slurry, which increases the fluidity
of the gypsum slurry, even in the presence of a substantially
higher level of pregelatinized starch.
As illustrated in Table 2, the wallboard prepared using the
Formulation B slurry has substantially increased strength compared
with the wallboard prepared using the Formulation A slurry. By
incorporating increased amounts of pregelatinized starch in
combination with increased amounts of naphthalenesulfonate
dispersant and sodium trimetaphosphate, nail pull resistance in the
Formulation B board improved by 45% over the Formulation A board.
Substantial increases in flexural strength were also observed in
the Formulation B board as compared to the Formulation A board.
EXAMPLE 3
1/2 Inch Gypsum Wallboard Weight Reduction Trials
Further gypsum wallboard examples (Boards C, D and E), including
slurry formulations and test results are shown in Table 3 below.
The slurry formulations of Table 3 include the major components of
the slurries. Values in parentheses are expressed as weight percent
based on the weight of dry stucco.
TABLE-US-00003 TABLE 3 Control Formulation Formulation Formulation
Board C Board D Board E Board Trial formulation component/parameter
Dry stucco (lb/MSF) 1300 1281 1196 1070 Accelerator (lb/MSF) 9.2
9.2 9.2 9.2 DILOFLO.sup.1 (lb/MSF) 4.1 (0.32%) 8.1 (0.63%) 8.1
(0.68%) 8.1 (0.76%) Regular starch (lb/MSF) 5.6 (0.43%) 0 0 0
Pregelatinized corn starch 0 10 (0.78%) 10 (0.84%) 10 (0.93%)
(lb/MSF) Sodium trimetaphosphate 0.7 (0.05%) 1.6 (0.12%) 1.6
(0.13%) 1.6 (0.15%) (lb/MSF) Total water/stucco ratio 0.82 0.82
0.82 0.84 (w/s) Trial formulation test results Dry board weight
1611 1570 1451 1320 (lb/MSF) Nail pull resistance (lb)
77.3.sup..dagger. 85.5 77.2 65.2 .sup..dagger.ASTM standard: 77 lb
.sup.1DILOFLO is a 45% Naphthalensulfonate solution in water
As illustrated in Table 3, Boards C, D, and E were made from a
slurry having substantially increased amounts of starch, DILOFLO
dispersant, and sodium trimetaphosphate in comparison with the
control board (about a two-fold increase on a percentage basis for
the starch an disperant, and a two- or three-fold increase for the
trimetaphosphate), while maintaining the w/s ratio constant.
Nevertheless, board weight was significantly reduced and strength
as measured by nail pull resistance was not dramatically affected.
Therefore, in this example of an embodiment of the invention, the
new formulation (such as, for example, Board D) can provide
increased starch formulated in a usable, flowable slurry, while
maintaining the same w/s ratio and adequate strength.
EXAMPLE 4
Wet Gypsum Cube Strength Test
The wet cube strength tests were carried out by using Southard CKS
board stucco, available from United States Gypsum Corp., Chicago,
Ill. and tap water in the laboratory to determine their wet
compressive strength. The following lab test procedure was
used.
Stucco (1000 g), CSA (2 g), and tap water (1200 cc) at about
70.degree. F. were used for each wet gypsum cube cast.
Pregelatinized corn starch (20 g, 2.0% based on stucco wt.) and CSA
(2 g, 0.2% based on stucco wt.) were thoroughly dry mixed first in
a plastic bag with the stucco prior to mixing with a tap water
solution containing both naphthalenesulfonate dispersant and sodium
trimetaphosphate. The dispersant used was DILOFLO dispersant
(1.0-2.0%, as indicated in Table 4). Varying amounts of sodium
trimetaphosphate were used also as indicated in Table 4.
The dry ingredients and aqueous solution were initially combined in
a laboratory Warning blender, the mixture produced allowed to soak
for 10 sec, and then the mixture was mixed at low speed for 10 sec
in order to make the slurry. The slurries thus formed were cast
into three 2''.times.2''.times.2'' cube molds. The cast cubes were
then removed from the molds, weighted, and sealed inside plastic
bags to prevent moisture loss before the compressive strength test
was performed. The compressive strength of the wet cubes was
measured using an ATS machine and recorded as an average in pounds
per square inch (psi). The results obtained were as follows:
TABLE-US-00004 TABLE 4 Sodium Wet cube Test trimetaphosphate,
DILOFLO.sup.1 weight Wet cube Sample grams (wt % based (wt % based
(2'' .times. 2'' .times. 2''), compressive No. on dry stucco) on
dry stucco) g strength, psi 1 0 1.5 183.57 321 2 0.5 (0.05) 1.5
183.11 357 3 1 (0.1) 1.5 183.19 360 4 2 (0.2) 1.5 183.51 361 5 4
(0.4) 1.5 183.65 381 6 10 (1.0) 1.5 183.47 369 7 0 1.0 184.02 345 8
0.5 (0.05) 1.0 183.66 349 9 1 (0.1) 1.0 183.93 356 10 2 (0.2) 1.0
182.67 366 11 4 (0.4) 1.0 183.53 365 12 10 (1.0) 1.0 183.48 341 13
0 2.0 183.33 345 14 0.5 (0.05) 2.0 184.06 356 15 1 (0.1) 2.0 184.3
363 16 2 (0.2) 2.0 184.02 363 17 4 (0.4) 2.0 183.5 368 18 10 (1.0)
2.0 182.68 339 .sup.1DILOFLO is a 45% Naphthalensulfonate solution
in water
As illustrated in Table 4, Samples 4-5, 10-11, and 17, having
levels of sodium trimetaphosphate in the about 0.12-0.4% range of
the present invention generally provided superior wet cube
compressive strength as compared to samples with sodium
trimetaphosphate outside this range.
EXAMPLE 5
1/2 Inch Light Weight Gypsum Wallboard Plant Production Trials
Further trials were performed (Trial Boards 1 and 2), including
slurry formulations and test results are shown in Table 5 below.
The slurry formulations of Table 5 include the major components of
the slurries. Values in parentheses are expressed as weight percent
based on the weight of dry stucco.
TABLE-US-00005 TABLE 5 Plant Plant Control Formulation Control
Formulation Board 1 Trial Board 1 Board 2 Trial Board 2 Trial
formulation component/parameter Dry stucco (lb/MSF) 1308 1160 1212
1120 DILOFLO.sup.1 (lb/MSF) 5.98 (0.457%) 7.98 (0.688%) 7.18
(0.592%) 8.99 (0.803%) Regular starch (lb/MSF) 5.0 (0.38%) 0 4.6
(0.38%) 0 Pregelatinized corn starch 2.0 (0.15%) 10 (0.86%) 2.5
(0.21%) 9.0 (0.80%) (lb/MSF) Sodium trimetaphosphate 0.7 (0.05%)
2.0 (0.17%) 0.6 (0.05%) 1.6 (0.14%) (lb/MSF) Total water/stucco
ratio 0.79 0.77 0.86 0.84 (w/s) Trial formulation test results Dry
board weight 1619 1456 1553 1443 (lb/MSF) Nail pull resistance (lb)
81.5.sup..dagger. 82.4 80.7 80.4 Flexural strength, 41.7 43.7 44.8
46.9 average (MD) (lb) Flexural strength, 134.1 135.5 146 137.2
average (XMD) (lb) Humidified bond.sup.2 load, 19.2 17.7 20.9 19.1
average (lb) Humidified bond.sup.2,3 1.6 0.1 0.5 0 failure (%)
.sup..dagger.ASTM standard: 77 lb MD: machine direction XMD: across
machine direction .sup.1DILOFLO is a 45% Naphthalensulfonate
solution in water .sup.290.degree. F./90% Relative Humidity
.sup.3It is well understood that under these test conditions,
percentage failure rates <50% are acceptable
As illustrated in Table 5, Trial Boards 1 and 2 were made from a
slurry having substantially increased amounts of starch, DILOFLO
dispersant, and sodium trimetaphosphate, while slightly decreasing
the w/s ratio, in comparison with the control boards. Nevertheless,
strength as measured by nail pull resistance and flexural testing
was maintained or improved, and board weight was significantly
reduced. Therefore, in this example of an embodiment of the
invention, the new formulation (such as, for example, Trial Boards
1 and 2) can provide increased trimetaphosphate and starch
formulated in a usable, flowable slurry, while maintaining
substantially the same w/s ratio and adequate strength.
EXAMPLE 6
1/2 Inch Ultra-Light Weight Gypsum Wallboard Plant Production
Trials
Further trials were performed (Trial Boards 3 and 4) using
Formulation B (Example 1) as in Example 2, except that the
pregelatinized corn starch was prepared with water at 10%
concentration (wet starch preparation) and a blend of HYONIC 25 AS
and PFM 33 soaps (available from GEO Specialty Chemicals,
Lafayette, Ind.) was used. For example, Trial Board 3 was prepared
with a blend of HYONIC 25 AS and PFM 33 ranging from 65-70% by
weight of 25AS, and the balance PFM 33. For example, Trial Board 4
was prepared with a 70/30 wt./wt. blend of HYONIC 25AS/HYONIC PFM
33. The trial results are shown in Table 6 below.
TABLE-US-00006 TABLE 6 Trial Board 3 Trial Board 4 (Formulation B
plus (Formulation B plus HYONIC soap HYONIC soap blend 65/35) blend
70/30) Lab test result (n = 12) (n = 34)* Board weight (lb/MSF)
1106 1013 Nail pull resistance.sup.a (lb) 85.5 80.3 Core
hardness.sup.b (lb) >15 12.4 Flexural strength, 55.6 60.3.sup.1
average.sup.c (MD) (lb) Flexural strength, 140.1 142.3.sup.1
average.sup.d (XMD) (lb) *Except as marked, .sup.1n = 4 MD: machine
direction XMD: across machine direction .sup.aASTM standard: 77 lb
.sup.bASTM standard: 11 lb .sup.cASTM standard: 36 lb .sup.dASTM
standard: 107 lb
As illustrated in Table 6, strength characteristics as measured by
nail pull and core hardness were above the ASTM standard. Flexural
strength was also measured to be above the ASTM standard. Again, in
this example of an embodiment of the invention, the new formulation
(such as, for example, Trial Boards 3 and 4) can provide increased
trimetaphosphate and starch formulated in a usable, flow slurry,
while maintaining adequate strength.
EXAMPLE 7
1/2 Inch Ultra-Light Weight Composite Gypsum Board.
A. Slurry Formulation
A representative gypsum slurry formulation for producing gypsum
composite board is shown in Table 7, below. All values in Table 7
are expressed as weight percent based on the weight of dry stucco.
Values in parentheses are dry weight in pounds (lb/MSF).
TABLE-US-00007 TABLE 7 Component Formulation C Stucco (lb/MSF)
(714) sodium trimetaphophate 0.315 (2.25) Dispersant
(naphthalenesulfonate) 0.630.sup.1 (4.50) Pregelatinized
starch.sup.2 6.30 (45.0) Heat resistant accelerator (HRA) (15)
Glass fiber 0.560 (4.00) Paper fiber 1.12 (8.00) Soap* 0.03 (0.192)
Total Water (lb) 931 Water/Stucco ratio 1.30 *Used to pregenerate
foam. Note: 10-14% by weight of slurry was not treated with soap
foam. .sup.11.40% by weight as a 45% aqueous solution. .sup.2Pregel
starch can be added as a dry powder, or alternatively, as 10%
pre-dispersed starch in water (wet starch preparation).
B. Preparation of Composite Boards with Dry Pregelatinized
Starch
The composite boards were prepared as in Example 2, using
Formulation C above, with the following exceptions. Dry powder
pregelatinized corn starch was used to prepare the slurry. Heavy
Manila paper (60 lb/MSF, caliper 0.018 in.) was used as the top
(face) cover sheet, to which was applied 6-8% by weight of the
non-foamed high density gypsum slurry having a wet density of 80
pcf across the entire surface of the paper. After application of
the main foamed slurry, the bottom (back) cover sheet was applied,
(News-Line paper--42 lb/MSF, caliper 0.0125 in.) which included on
its gypsum core-facing surface 4-6% by weight of the non-foamed
high density gypsum slurry having a wet density of 80-85 pcf,
across the entire surface of the paper.
C. Preparation of Composite Boards with Wet Pregelatinized
Starch
Composite boards were prepared as set forth above, except that the
pregelatinized corn starch was prepared in solution with water at
10% concentration (wet starch preparation).
EXAMPLE 8
Testing of 1/2 Inch Ultra-Light Weight Composite Gypsum Board
Test results for composite gypsum boards prepared in Examples 7B
and 7C are shown in Table 8 below. As in this example and other
examples, nail pull resistance, core hardness, and flexural
strength tests were performed according to ASTM C-473. 2
ft..times.4 ft. trial board samples were tested after conditioning
at 70.degree. F./50% R.H.
TABLE-US-00008 TABLE 8 Ex. 7B. Composite Ex. 7C. Composite Board
(Dry Starch) Board (Wet Starch) Lab test result (n = 8) (n = 8)
Board weight (lb/MSF) 1041 1070 Nail pull resistance (lb) 69.6 83.1
Core hardness (lb) 9.4 10.9 Paper-to-core Bond (face/back) Good/ok
Good/ok
As illustrated in Table 8, the Example 7C, composite board exceeds
the ASTM standard for nail pull resistance, and essentially meets
the core hardness standard (see Table 6). This demonstrates that
the use of strong, heavy face paper and regular back paper, both
adhered to a low density core using a non-foamed high density
bonding layer, can provide a board having light weight, and
increased strength.
The use of the terms "a" and "an" and "the" an similar referents in
the context of describing the invention (especially in the context
of the following claims) are to be construed to cover both the
singular and the plural, unless other wise indicated herein or
clearly contradicted by context. Recitation of ranges of values
herein are merely intended to serve as a shorthand method of
referring individually to each separate value falling within the
range, unless otherwise indicated herein, and each separate value
is incorporated into the specification as if it were individually
recited herein. All methods described herein can be performed in
any suitable order unless otherwise indicated herein or otherwise
clearly contradicted by context. The use of any and all examples,
or exemplary language (e.g., "such as") provided herein, is
intended merely to better illuminate the invention and does not
pose a limitation on the scope of the invention unless otherwise
claimed. No language in the specification should be construed as
indicating any non-claimed element as essential to the practice of
the invention.
Preferred embodiments of this invention are described herein,
including the best mode known to the inventors for carrying out the
invention. It should be understood that the illustrated embodiments
are exemplary only, and should not be taken as limiting the scope
of the invention.
* * * * *
References