Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://etd.cput.ac.za/handle/20.500.11838/733
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.advisorVan der Walt, T.N., Profen_US
dc.contributor.authorPhala, Adeela Colyneen_US
dc.date.accessioned2014-04-16T07:37:57Z-
dc.date.accessioned2016-01-26T09:05:22Z-
dc.date.available2014-04-16T07:37:57Z-
dc.date.available2016-01-26T09:05:22Z-
dc.date.issued2011-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11838/733-
dc.descriptionThesis (MTech (Chemistry))--Cape Peninsula University of Technology, 2011en_US
dc.description.abstractIt is important to quantify polymeric components in a coating because they greatly influence the performance of a coating. The difficulty associated with analysis of polymers by Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) analysis’s is that colinearities arise from similar or overlapping spectral features. A quantitative FTIR method with attenuated total reflectance coupled to multivariate/ chemometric analysis is presented. It allows for simultaneous quantification of 3 polymeric components; a rheology modifier, organic opacifier and styrene acrylic binder, with no prior extraction or separation from the paint. The factor based methods partial least squares (PLS) and principle component regression (PCR) permit colinearities by decomposing the spectral data into smaller matrices with principle scores and loading vectors. For model building spectral information from calibrators and validation samples at different analysis regions were incorporated. PCR and PLS were used to inspect the variation within the sample set. The PLS algorithms were found to predict the polymeric components the best. The concentrations of the polymeric components in a coating were predicted with the calibration model. Three PLS models each with different analysis regions yielded a coefficient of correlation R2 close to 1 for each of the components. The root mean square error of calibration (RMSEC) and root mean square error of prediction (RMSEP) was less than 5%. The best out-put was obtained where spectral features of water was included (Trial 3). The prediction residual values for the three models ranged from 2 to -2 and 10 to -10. The method allows paint samples to be analysed in pure form and opens many opportunities for other coating components to be analysed in the same way.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherCape Peninsula University of Technologyen_US
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/za/-
dc.subjectPainten_US
dc.subjectProtective coatingsen_US
dc.subjectFourier transform infrared spectroscopyen_US
dc.subjectFourier transform spectroscopyen_US
dc.subjectInfrared spectroscopyen_US
dc.subjectMultivariate analysisen_US
dc.subjectRegression analysisen_US
dc.subjectDissertations, Academicen_US
dc.subjectPolymers and polymerization -- Analysisen_US
dc.subjectPartial least squares (PLS)en_US
dc.subjectPrinciple component regression (PCR)en_US
dc.subjectMTechen_US
dc.subjectTheses, dissertations, etc.en_US
dc.subjectNavTechen_US
dc.subjectCape Peninsula University of Technology. Department of Chemistryen_US
dc.titleApplication of multivariate regression techniques to paint: for the quantitive FTIR spectroscopic analysis of polymeric componentsen_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
Appears in Collections:Chemistry - Masters Degrees
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
199113416_Phala_AC_2011.pdfThesis922.62 kBAdobe PDFThumbnail
View/Open
Show simple item record

Page view(s)

948
Last Week
754
Last month
754
checked on Feb 16, 2022

Download(s)

323
checked on Feb 16, 2022

Google ScholarTM

Check


This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons