Flame Retardant Thermoplastic Elastomer for Wire Insulation

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current thermoplastic elastomers (TPEs) made from polyphenylene ether (PPE) do not meet the requirements of the UL 62 test, specifically in terms of tensile elongation before and after thermal aging, wire and cable deformation, and flame retardancy, particularly lacking sufficient elongation and retention of properties in high-temperature and humid conditions.

Innovation Solution

A unique combination of ingredients including polyphenylene ether, hydrogenated styrenic block copolymer, solid non-halogen flame retardants such as organo-phosphinate and melamine polyphosphate, and nucleated olefinic polymer, which together provide a TPE that is flexible, flame retardant, and maintains mechanical properties even in the presence of water, while passing the UL 62 test requirements.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If conventional TPE formulations are used, then processing properties and elastomeric benefits are achieved, but tensile elongation and retention after thermal aging do not meet UL 62 requirements

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetensile elongation retention after agingVSAvoidformulation complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSEase of manufacture

Solution Approach 1:

The patent uses a composite formulation combining polyphenylene ether (PPE) with hydrogenated styrenic block copolymer and specific flame retardants. This composite approach allows the material to simultaneously achieve high tensile elongation (>200% before aging, >75% retention after aging), flame retardancy (VW-1 rating), and thermal stability, resolving the contradiction between reliability and ease of manufacture by integrating multiple functions into a single formulated system.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #40Composite materials

Solution Approach 2:

The patent optimizes specific parameter ranges: PPE content (40-70 wt%), hydrogenated styrenic block copolymer (30-60 wt%), and flame retardant (5-20 wt%). By precisely controlling these compositional parameters, the formulation achieves UL 62 compliance while maintaining processability, demonstrating how parameter optimization resolves the contradiction between enhanced reliability and manufacturing simplicity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

2Object-affected harmful factors

If flame retardant additives are incorporated, then flame retardancy is improved, but mechanical properties and elasticity may deteriorate

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveflame retardancyVSAvoidmechanical properties
Core Design Contradiction:
Object-affected harmful factorsVSStrength

Solution Approach 1:

The hydrogenated styrenic block copolymer acts as an intermediary between PPE and flame retardant additives. It provides a compatible matrix that disperses the flame retardant uniformly while maintaining elastomeric properties and mechanical strength. This mediator approach allows achieving VW-1 flame retardancy without sacrificing the >200% tensile elongation required by UL 62.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent optimizes flame retardant concentration at 5-20 wt%, which is sufficient to achieve VW-1 rating while maintaining mechanical properties. This parameter control ensures that flame retardancy is improved without excessive additive loading that would deteriorate elasticity and strength.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Object-affected harmful factors

If non-halogenated flame retardants are used, then environmental safety is improved, but flame retardant effectiveness may be reduced

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveflame retardant effectivenessVSAvoidhalogen content
Core Design Contradiction:
Object-affected harmful factorsVSObject-generated harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The patent converts the potential disadvantage of non-halogenated flame retardants into a benefit by using organo-phosphinate and melamine polyphosphate in combination with PPE and hydrogenated styrenic block copolymer. This formulation achieves VW-1 flame retardancy without halogens, eliminating harmful halogenated combustion products while maintaining effective flame suppression. The synergistic interaction between components compensates for the lower inherent effectiveness of non-halogenated additives.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #22Blessing in disguise (Convert harm into benefit)

4Reliability

If solid particle flame retardants are used, then underwater resistivity is improved, but processing speed may be affected

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveunderwater resistivityVSAvoidextrusion speed
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent uses solid particle flame retardants (organo-phosphinate and melamine polyphosphate) at optimized concentrations of 5-20 wt%. This parameter control ensures sufficient flame retardancy and underwater resistivity while maintaining extrusion speeds comparable to PVC production using standard screw designs, thus resolving the contradiction between reliability and productivity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Data Source

PatentUS9558867B2Flame retardant thermoplastic elastomers
Publication Date: 2017.01.31 AVIENT CORP

AI summary

A flame-retardant thermoplastic elastomer compound is disclosed having polyphenylene ether, a hydrogenated styrene block copolymer, at least one solid non-halogenated phosphorus containing flame retardant, and a nucleated olefinic polymer. The compound has a before-aging tensile elongation of >200% and an after-aging tensile elongation residual of at least 75%, according to the UL 62 test, which makes it useful as an insulation layer, a jacketing layer, or both for protected electrical lines such as alternating current wire and cable products, accessory cables, and variety of injection molded electrical or electronic parts.