- All
- Product Name
- Product Keyword
- Product Model
- Product Summary
- Product Description
- Multi Field Search
Specialized in PE, PVC, TPE, TPU and Low Smoke Zero Halogen (LSZH) wire and cable compound and materials.
In high-rise buildings, subway tunnels, new energy power stations and industrial complex scenarios, the fire safety of wires and cables is directly related to life and property and system reliability.
YINSU Flame Retardant Company provides customized flame retardant solutions for global customers, covering PE (polyethylene), PVC (polyvinyl chloride), TPE (thermoplastic elastomer), TPU (thermoplastic polyurethane) and LSZH (low smoke and halogen free) wire and cable systems to meet all safety requirements, ranging from UL94 V-0 flame retardant certification to EN 45545 fire protection for rail transportation and IEC 60754 low smoke and halogen free toxicity. All-round safety requirements.
Material Common Use Typical FR Type YINSU Flame Retardant Item No.
PE HDPE, LDPE, LLDPE, Red phosphorus, halogen free FR, PRP-950X, PE-XT-20, YS-F22B, MCA-B
Cross-linked PE cables, Bromine antimony masterbatch MDH, ATH
Plastic insulated cables.
PVC PVC &Plastic insulated power cables, T3 / ATO alternatives T3, T30
Aluminum stranded wires,
Prefabricated branch cables.
TPE Insulated wires, flexible cables Organic phosphorus YS-F22B, YS-9003
Shielded insulated cables
TPU Special purpose cables Organic phosphorus YS-F22B, YS-9003
Power cables for frequency converters.
Others Welcome to consult more details.
When it comes to flame retardancy in thin-walled parts, adding too much reduces flow and prevents proper filling, while adding too little fails to meet V0 standards. How can we solve this dilemma? By combining phosphorus-based synergists with ultra-fine particles, we can reliably pass the V0 test even at low loading levels—while actually maintaining flow and impact strength. Don’t just pile on the additives; the key lies in proper formulation.
Blooming issues often lie in the mismatch between formulation and processing. This article explains in depth — from mechanism to practical operation — how to match suitable red phosphorus flame retardants with processing conditions, so that anti-blooming performance no longer depends on luck.
Having trouble matching the right flame retardant? Whether it’s MCA agglomeration, ADP yellowing, or red phosphorus surface roughness — advanced coating technology can solve these problems, transforming off-the-shelf products into tailor-made solutions.
Just because a formulation works in the lab doesn’t mean it can be stably mass-produced on the line. The real threshold in flame retardant preparation lies in the transition from craftsmanship to engineering—and modified coating technology is precisely the bridge across that gap.
Flame retardant failure is rarely caused by a single factor, but rather results from the interplay of formulation design, process control, and application environment. This article systematically reviews common causes of flame retardant failure from perspectives such as compatibility between the flame retardant and the polymer matrix, dispersion uniformity, processing methods, and environmental aging. It also proposes countermeasures including optimizing formulation from the source, rational compounding, and precise process control. This piece is intended for professionals in material R&D, formulation design, and production management, helping them understand the underlying logic of flame retardant failure and enhance the systematic and reliable development of flame-retardant materials.
For the production and application of phosphorus-based flame retardants, the price of yellow phosphorus, as an upstream raw material, serves as a critical cost indicator. The post-holiday rise in yellow phosphorus costs may soon be passed on to flame retardant products.
