REPORT OF COIM MATERIAL TRIALS

Schenck Process T +55 11 3152 5450 Filial Belo Horizonte T +55 31 3281 8645
Equipamentos Industriais Ltda. F +55 11 5634 4909 Av. Afonso Pena, 3.111 - Sala 407 F +55 31 3281 8635
Av. das Nações Unidas, 21.476 – Bloco P-12 process@schenckprocess.com.br CEP 30130-008 – Funcionários process@schenckprocess.com.br
CEP 04795-000 – São Paulo – SP www.schenckprocess.com.br Belo Horizonte – MG www.schenckprocess.com.br
REPORT OF COIM MATERIAL TRIALS
SYSTEM PRE-POLYMER 12-80 AND 12-95 + ETHACURE CURATIVE,

IMUTHANE’S 12 SERIES LINE
Test procedure was carried out July 8th - 9th and October 5th – 8th
Taubaté, October 25th

1. ABSTRACT
The test proposal is to test a new base Ester resin, that can give us cost
reduction and better performance for our customer.
Test scope:
1. FORMULA/ RESIN BLENDING

2. MATERIAL HANDLING;
3. TPU ADHERENCE AND PHYSICAL PROPERTIES;
4. LAB TEST COMPARITION;
Currebnt material using by PBR is COIM TDI Eter.
Poliester presents advantages and disadvantages in its field application that will be
presented in this report.
• July 8th - 9th
We received 60kg of each resin hardness, 12-80 and 12-95. It was produced
samples and parts80 and 95 Shore A hardness, resin blend test was postponed due to
the low material volume.
• October 5th – 7th
More 200kg of each resin arrived and allowed complete test.
✓ Resin blending – Samples and Laboratory test;

✓ Pot life of each hardness, considering 80, 85, 90 and 95Shore A;
✓ Feedback from operators.
2. FORMULA/ RESIN BLENDING
2.1 FORMULA
In the first test round, Schenck Process received Imuthane 12-80 and 12-95.
As usual, all datasheet considers MBOCA as a curative, so we used common

knowledge to formulate PU with Ethacure curative.
Figure 1 - COIM DataSheet Curative Espec.
CURATIVE CALCULATION 80Shore A 95Shore A

STOICHEOMETRY 95%* Imuthane 12-80 100,00 -
NCO Molecular Weight 42,02 ETHACURE 7,93 11,80
MOCA Molecular Weight 133,50
Imuthane 12-95 - 100,00
Ethacure Molecular Weight 107,00
Color 0,54 0,58
MOCA Factor calculation 3,02
Ethacure Factor calculation RE 95% 2,42 Avg NCO (%) 3,46 5,15
Ethacure Factor calculation RE 90% 2,29 Avg Hardness expectation
80 95
* It can vary between 90% and 95% (Shore A)
Figure 2 - Formula Calculation Memorial
95% stoichiometry is recommended for screening media, based on best

abrasion performance.
2.2 RESIN BLEND
In the second round, we received 12-83 instead of 12-80 for better processing
and shorter cure time (from 11’ to 7’).
Resin blending is a PBR practice started in 2014 to serve the brazilian market,
which requests PU products ranging from 80 to 95Shore A.
All formula – pure or blend resin- uses the same formulation method as follow
below:
COIM
FORMULAÇÃO PARA CURATIVO ETHACURE
80 85 90 95
Imuthane 12-80 100,00 70,00 30,00 -
ETHACURE 7,93 9,63 11,32 12,58
Imuthane 12-95 - 30,00 70,00 100,00
Color 0,54 0,55 0,56 0,58
Avg NCO (%) 3,46 3,98 4,68 5,20
Avg Hardness
expectation 83 86,6 91,4 95
(Shore A)
Figure 3 - PU Formula - All Hardness

3. MATERIAL HANDLING
The material was melted in the oven at 100°C. The equipment was drained in a way
we can use the previous material TDI Ether again. The TDI 12 series it was filled in the
equipment following three steps:
3.1 CLEANING
For a complete system (hoses and tank) cleaning it is recommended to follow the
procedure listed below
✓ Melt material in oven at 100°C;

✓ Removal of material that is in the tank;
✓ Use about 10kg of each component to finish cleaning;
✓ Fill 12-80(83) in tank A and 12-95 in tank C;
✓ Perform calibration.
This procedure was adopted in both tests.
3.2 DAILY CALIBRATION

PRO-FOR-002 // VER.00
Daily Calibration
// 09/01/2019
Date 08/07/2021 09/07/2021 06/10/2021 07/10/2021 08/10/2021

Shift A A A A A
Hour 06:40 06:00 06:20 06:40 06:20

Componente A (g)
1st Weight 526 542 529 555 546

2nd Weight 555 555 555 555 555
3th Weight 555 555 555 - 555
400 403 400 401 403
Component B (g)
1st Weight
2nd Weight 403 403 403 404 403

3th Weight 403 - 403 404 -
539 558 539 559 558
Component C (g)
1st Weight
2nd Weight 558 558 558 559 558

3th Weight 558 - 558 - -
Operator: Marcelo
Figure 4 - Daily Calibration

3.3 SAMPLES AND PANELS
Before the part’s production that will be tested or used in the field, the first casted
material was to homogenize, measure pot life and make the equipment flow/pressure
adjustments.
After that first casting, we found the potlife for each formula:
80 SHORE A FORMULATION RE: 90% - POT LIFE: 7'

85 SHORE A FORMULATION RE: 95% - POT LIFE: 4' 54''
90 SHORE A FORMULATION RE: 95% - POT LIFE: 4'
95 SHORE A FORMULATION RE: 95% - POT LIFE: 2'51''
Figure 5 - PotLife
o First Round – July
To avoid any moisture contamination from the pigment, the samples was casted
without color
Figure 6 - First Samples
Laboratory test’s result:
Figure 7 - Samples lab. Test

Comparing to SPG standards, the samples was considered approved.
We casted 2 panels with TPU elements that we can ensure that the TPU adherence
works.
Figure 8 - Panel KBP model without color
The test was tightening the element by placing the body weight and there was no
detachment.
o Second Round – October
Observing the first laboratory tests results, was verified that it would be possible to
proceed to the test with color, results below:
Figure 9 –Samples
TRACTION STRETCHING SCRATCH ABRASION SPECIFIC WEIGHT

SHIFT
HARDNESS
DATE MATERIAL (MPa) (%) (kgf/cm) (mm³) (g/cm³)
80 ± 3 Min. 27,54 Min. 480 Min. 51,09 Máx. 35 1,07 a 1,09
17/8 A TDI - ÉTER 83 28,30 650% 32 1,07
18/8 A TDI - ÉTER 85 24,82 600% 64,21 30 1,09
19/8 A TDI - ÉTER 82 25,47 550% 72,3 28 1,07
6/10 A TDI - ÉSTER 80 40,32 683% 75,13 22 1,23
6/10 A TDI - ÉSTER 77 38,56 700% 70,36 17 1,23
6/10 B TDI - ÉSTER 84 30,84 658% 88,27 25 1,23

SHIFT
HARDNESS
80 ± 3 Min. 27,54 Min. 480 Min. 51,09 Máx. 35 1,07 a 1,09
14/9 A TDI - ÉTER 87 26,43 500% 69,74 28 1,08
20/9 A TDI - ÉTER 85 23,80 558% 79,96 26 1,08
22/9 A TDI - ÉTER 84 26,40 525% 68,57 24 1,07
5/10 B TDI - ÉSTER 88 35,97 625% 100,73 55 1,24
6/10 A TDI - ÉSTER 83 37,96 650% 103,12 38 1,24
6/10 A TDI - ÉSTER 83 46,53 600% 97,97 33 1,24

SHIFT
HARDNESS
80 ± 3 Min. 27,54 Min. 480 Min. 51,09 Máx. 35 1,07 a 1,09
20/4 A TDI - ÉTER 90 28,70 475% 78,5 43 1,10
5/5 A TDI - ÉTER 92 33,32 450% 85,9 42 1,10
6/5 A TDI - ÉTER 93 31,20 475% 84,25 43 1,10
6/10 A TDI - ÉSTER 88 40,02 475% 100,77 28 1,24
6/10 A TDI - ÉSTER 90 39,00 500% 97,5 36 1,25
6/10 B TDI - ÉSTER 90 40,34 500% 118,09 49 1,25

SHIFT
HARDNESS
80 ± 3 Min. 27,54 Min. 480 Min. 51,09 Máx. 35 1,07 a 1,09
14/9 A TDI - ÉTER 93 31,46 450% 96,01 67 1,11
20/9 A TDI - ÉTER 93 29,29 441% 90,98 58 1,10
22/9 A TDI - ÉTER 93 28,61 516% 83,03 47 1,11
6/10 A TDI - ÉSTER 95 40,17 441% 121,29 62 1,26
6/10 A TDI - ÉSTER 93 39,29 491% 134,07 38 1,26
6/10 B TDI - ÉSTER 92 35,32 491% 123,44 67 1,26
Figure 10 – Ester x Eter Lab test
Comments:
• After lab. test’s at July 5th, it was necessary a formulation change in 85 ShoreA
blend, from 70/30 pph to 80/20 pph (12-83A / 12-95A) to reduce the final
sample hardness from +-88Shore A to +-83Shore A.
Comparing to SPG standards and also TDI Eter results, we can consider the
samples approved.
Production order 433342 was casted for field performance test. Aligned with
sales, we found an opening with customer HERCULANO – MG.
Figure 11 - KBPR model - Costumer Herculano
Figure 12 - QA Approval
Laboratory received 4 samples for physical tests, 2 of each hardness 80 and 95

Shore A.
Figure 13 - Samples from produced part
That part samples test wasn’t included in this test report, it’ll be shared as soon as
we can.
We also received positive feedback from the operators about the material handling
(oven + equipment charge + open casting).
4. CONCLUSION
4.1 ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES
Advantages Disadvantages
Higher chance of hoses

Resin cost saving overpressure inthe open casting
machine (higher viscosity)
Shorter exposure time to

temperature (oven + equipment)
Reduction in %scrap
due to the melting temperature
(mould leakage)
93°C against 82°C applied to the
current TDI Eter
Require a hose as a tool for

Better TPU adherence casting for 10Kg panel or part
(lower potlife time)
Higher performance in Heavier (specific gravity 1,25
laboratory tests against 1,08 TDI Eter)
Shorter storage time (risk of
hydrolysis)
Figure 14 - Advantages and Disadvantages
As a business, PBR consider that the advantages presented is representative

compared to disadvantages. The operational training and mindset change will be the
founder of material change success
Based on the tests performed above, as well as the feedback from those
involved, we consider the material partially approved for use. We have the field test
pending, the expectation is that the performance will improve, since it is the material
that is more suitable for the application.
Felipe Fonseca
Sr.Process & Planning Analyst
Schenck Process Equipamentos Industriais Ltda.

Rua Guglielmo Marconi, 240
12032-160 Taubaté, São Paulo
T +55 31 3652 3376
C +55 9 9450 9328
f.fonseca@schenckprocess.com
www.schenckprocess.com.br

REPORT OF COIM MATERIAL TRIALS - Series 12 TDI - Ester

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

REPORT OF COIM MATERIAL TRIALS - Series 12 TDI - Ester

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Schenck Process T +55 11 3152 5450 Filial Belo Horizonte T +55 31 3281 8645

SYSTEM PRE-POLYMER 12-80 AND 12-95 + ETHACURE CURATIVE,

Taubaté, October 25th

1. FORMULA/ RESIN BLENDING

Currebnt material using by PBR is COIM TDI Eter.

• July 8th - 9th

• October 5th – 7th

More 200kg of each resin arrived and allowed complete test.

✓ Resin blending – Samples and Laboratory test;

2. FORMULA/ RESIN BLENDING

As usual, all datasheet considers MBOCA as a curative, so we used common

Figure 1 - COIM DataSheet Curative Espec.

CURATIVE CALCULATION 80Shore A 95Shore A

Figure 2 - Formula Calculation Memorial

95% stoichiometry is recommended for screening media, based on best

2.2 RESIN BLEND

Figure 3 - PU Formula - All Hardness

✓ Melt material in oven at 100°C;

This procedure was adopted in both tests.

3.2 DAILY CALIBRATION

Date 08/07/2021 09/07/2021 06/10/2021 07/10/2021 08/10/2021

Hour 06:40 06:00 06:20 06:40 06:20

1st Weight 526 542 529 555 546

2nd Weight 403 403 403 404 403

2nd Weight 558 558 558 559 558

Figure 4 - Daily Calibration

3.3 SAMPLES AND PANELS

80 SHORE A FORMULATION RE: 90% - POT LIFE: 7'

o First Round – July

Figure 6 - First Samples

Laboratory test’s result:

Figure 7 - Samples lab. Test

Comparing to SPG standards, the samples was considered approved.

Figure 8 - Panel KBP model without color

o Second Round – October

TRACTION STRETCHING SCRATCH ABRASION SPECIFIC WEIGHT

TRACTION STRETCHING SCRATCH ABRASION SPECIFIC WEIGHT

TRACTION STRETCHING SCRATCH ABRASION SPECIFIC WEIGHT

TRACTION STRETCHING SCRATCH ABRASION SPECIFIC WEIGHT

Figure 10 – Ester x Eter Lab test

Figure 11 - KBPR model - Costumer Herculano

Laboratory received 4 samples for physical tests, 2 of each hardness 80 and 95

Figure 13 - Samples from produced part

4.1 ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES

Higher chance of hoses

Shorter exposure time to

Require a hose as a tool for

As a business, PBR consider that the advantages presented is representative

Schenck Process Equipamentos Industriais Ltda.

T +55 31 3652 3376

C +55 9 9450 9328

You might also like