alo T ng a , blBeD7DP gi Oveaslosnogm , e FR-polypropylene using t #1, using only CFR, at a3n0d % awchoim ch biinsa1 ti 9 o . n 5 % ofhtahleogBernhaendchC lo lrfilna ated flame retardant (CFR) mm. Use of DBDPO at a 23.5% loading level which giisveas ls aoU 19 L m -e 94reV ta -r 0daanttbso . th F3o . r2maunld at i1o . n6tohtahterbu fo m rm s, u ( l NC) .5 halogen, gives a material also gives a U at L io -n . sIanre this case, Cl is 94 V-0aa ls to3 . g2ivaenndu1s .6 inmgod re if feefrfe ic nitenrt than Br as a flame retardant. Several (Formulation #4). mm. A3:1raattiiooooffBBrr : C an ldwC as l . on A ly 1 a :1 V r -a ltiaoto3. f2Bmr/ m C . l

ABSTRACT

Table 7 gives some FR-polypropylene using the chlorinated flame retardant (CFR) along, BDDPO along, and a combination of the Br and Cl flame retardants. Formulation #1, using only CFR, at 30% which is 19.5% halogen gives a UL-94 V-0 at both 3.2 and 1.6 mm. Use of DBDPO at a 23.5% loading level which is also 19.5 halogen, gives a material that bums, (NC). In this case, Cl is more efficient than Br as a flame retardant. Several other formulations are also given using different ratio of Br and Cl. A 1:1 ratio of Br/Cl also gives a UL-94 V-0 at 3.2 and 1.6 mm. A 3:1 ratio of Br:Cl was only a V-l at 3.2 mm. (Formulation #4). Table 7. FR-Polypropylene Formulations