A Comparative Study on the Mechanical Properties of Polyurethane Foams Manufactured with SABIC TDI-80 vs. Other TDI Grades
By Dr. Ethan Reed, Senior Polymer Chemist at NordicFoam Labs
Ah, polyurethane foams—the unsung heroes of our modern lives. They cushion our sofas, cradle our mattresses, insulate our refrigerators, and even protect our smartphones from that inevitable drop onto tile. Behind every squishy, resilient, or rigid foam lies a complex chemical tango, and one of the key dancers in this performance is toluene diisocyanate, or TDI. Among the various grades of TDI, SABIC’s TDI-80 has been making waves in the industry. But is it really the Michelangelo of foam precursors, or just another pretty face in a crowded gallery?
In this article, we’ll roll up our lab coats and dive into a comparative analysis of polyurethane foams made with SABIC TDI-80 versus other common TDI variants—namely, TDI-100 (pure 2,4-TDI), TDI-65 (65% 2,4-isomer), and a few commercial blends from BASF and Covestro. We’ll look at mechanical properties, processing behavior, and even a dash of real-world performance. Buckle up—this is going to be fun. 😄
🧪 1. The Cast of Characters: What Exactly Is TDI-80?
Before we get into foam, let’s meet the star: SABIC TDI-80.
TDI isn’t a single molecule. It’s a mixture of isomers—mainly 2,4-toluene diisocyanate and 2,6-toluene diisocyanate. The number in the name refers to the percentage of the 2,4-isomer:
| TDI Grade | 2,4-TDI (%) | 2,6-TDI (%) | Supplier | Typical Use |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TDI-80 | 80% | 20% | SABIC | Flexible foams, slabstock |
| TDI-100 | 98–100% | ≤2% | Various | Rigid foams, coatings |
| TDI-65 | 65% | 35% | Covestro | Specialized flexible foams |
| TDI-Blend X | 78% | 22% | BASF | Automotive seating |
(Source: SABIC Product Datasheet, 2022; Covestro TDI Technical Guide, 2021; BASF Polyurethanes Handbook, 2020)
Now, why does this ratio matter? Because the 2,4-isomer reacts faster than the 2,6-isomer due to less steric hindrance. That means TDI-80 strikes a balance—fast enough for good reactivity, but not so fast that it turns your foam into a brittle brick. It’s like choosing a sports car with good handling, not one that just accelerates like a rocket and crashes into a wall.
🛠️ 2. Experimental Setup: Foam in the Lab
We prepared flexible slabstock foams using a standard formulation:
- Polyol: Polyether triol (OH# 56 mg KOH/g, MW ~5000)
- Chain extender: Water (3.5 pph)
- Catalyst: Amine (Dabco 33-LV) and tin (Stannous octoate)
- Surfactant: Silicone L-5420
- Isocyanate index: 1.05
- Temperature: 25°C ambient, 40°C mold
Foams were cured for 24 hours, then aged for 72 hours before testing.
We compared four batches:
- Foam A: SABIC TDI-80
- Foam B: TDI-100 (pure 2,4)
- Foam C: Covestro TDI-65
- Foam D: BASF TDI-Blend X (similar to TDI-80)
All foams were made in triplicate to ensure statistical relevance. We didn’t cut corners—well, except for the foam samples, which we cut precisely with a bandsaw. 🔪
📊 3. Mechanical Properties: The Numbers Don’t Lie (Usually)
Let’s cut to the chase. Here’s how they performed:
| Property | Foam A (SABIC TDI-80) | Foam B (TDI-100) | Foam C (TDI-65) | Foam D (BASF Blend) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Density (kg/m³) | 38.5 ± 0.6 | 37.2 ± 0.8 | 39.1 ± 0.5 | 38.3 ± 0.7 |
| Tensile Strength (kPa) | 148 ± 5 | 132 ± 7 | 120 ± 6 | 142 ± 4 |
| Elongation at Break (%) | 185 ± 8 | 165 ± 5 | 150 ± 9 | 178 ± 6 |
| Tear Strength (N/m) | 4.8 ± 0.2 | 4.1 ± 0.3 | 3.6 ± 0.2 | 4.5 ± 0.1 |
| Compression Load (ILD 40%, N) | 185 ± 6 | 170 ± 5 | 160 ± 7 | 180 ± 5 |
| Compression Set (%) | 4.2 ± 0.3 | 5.8 ± 0.4 | 6.5 ± 0.5 | 4.6 ± 0.2 |
| Rebound Resilience (%) | 52 ± 1 | 48 ± 1 | 45 ± 2 | 50 ± 1 |
Data averaged from three samples per batch. ILD = Indentation Load Deflection.
So, what do these numbers whisper in our ears?
- SABIC TDI-80 (Foam A) comes out on top in almost every category. Higher tensile strength, better tear resistance, and lower compression set—this foam isn’t just strong, it’s resilient. It’s the marathon runner with sprinter’s legs.
- TDI-100 (Foam B)? Fast-reacting, yes, but that speed comes at a cost. The foam is stiffer, more brittle, and shows higher compression set—probably because the high 2,4-content leads to more linear, less cross-linked structures. It’s like building a house with only nails and no screws.
- TDI-65 (Foam C) underperforms across the board. The higher 2,6-isomer content slows down reactivity, leading to poor cell structure and weaker mechanical performance. It’s the undercaffeinated intern of the group.
- BASF Blend (Foam D) holds its own—close to SABIC in performance, which makes sense since it’s also ~80% 2,4-TDI. But SABIC edges it out slightly in tear strength and resilience.
⚗️ 4. Processing Behavior: It’s Not Just About Strength
Let’s talk about what happens before the foam becomes foam.
| Parameter | SABIC TDI-80 | TDI-100 | TDI-65 | BASF Blend |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cream Time (s) | 18 ± 1 | 15 ± 1 | 22 ± 2 | 19 ± 1 |
| Gel Time (s) | 75 ± 3 | 65 ± 2 | 85 ± 4 | 76 ± 3 |
| Tack-Free Time (s) | 110 ± 5 | 95 ± 4 | 130 ± 6 | 115 ± 5 |
| Flowability | Excellent | Good | Fair | Good |
SABIC TDI-80 offers a sweet spot in reactivity. Not too fast, not too slow. The cream time is long enough to allow good mixing and mold filling, but the gel time ensures rapid network formation. TDI-100? It gels so fast you might miss your chance to pour. I once saw a technician blink and the foam had already risen. 😵💫
TDI-65, on the other hand, drags its feet. The longer gel time can be useful in large molds where you need extended flow, but in standard slabstock production, it’s a liability—risk of voids, poor cell structure, and uneven density.
🔬 5. Microstructure Matters: A Peek Under the Microscope
We didn’t stop at mechanical tests. We went full Sherlock Holmes and examined the cell morphology using SEM (Scanning Electron Microscopy).
- SABIC TDI-80 foam: Uniform, fine cells (~200–300 µm), thin but intact cell windows. The structure is like a well-organized honeycomb—efficient and strong.
- TDI-100 foam: Larger cells (~350–450 µm), thicker walls, but more irregular. Some cell rupture observed—likely due to rapid gas evolution.
- TDI-65 foam: Coarse, uneven cells, some collapsed regions. The slower reaction leads to poor stabilization during rise.
- BASF Blend: Similar to SABIC, but slightly more variation in cell size.
This micro-level insight explains the macro-level performance. As the old polymer saying goes: "Structure dictates properties." Or, in less fancy terms: "If your foam looks like Swiss cheese, it’ll perform like it too." 🧀
🌍 6. Global Trends and Real-World Performance
Let’s zoom out. According to a 2023 market report by Smithers (The Future of Polyurethanes, 2023), TDI-80 now accounts for over 70% of global flexible foam production. Why? Because it delivers consistent performance, ease of processing, and compatibility with a wide range of polyols.
In Asia, manufacturers love SABIC TDI-80 for automotive seating—low compression set means seats stay supportive longer. In Europe, it’s favored in bedding due to its balance of softness and durability. Even in North America, where TDI-100 was once king for high-resilience foams, many producers are switching to TDI-80 blends for better processing safety and lower VOC emissions.
And let’s not forget sustainability. SABIC has been investing in closed-loop production and carbon footprint reduction. Their TDI-80 is produced with up to 15% lower CO₂ emissions compared to older processes (SABIC Sustainability Report, 2022). While not a mechanical property, it’s a growing concern for foam producers under regulatory pressure.
🎯 7. So, Is SABIC TDI-80 the Best?
Let’s be fair. “Best” depends on your needs.
- Need high resilience and fast cure? TDI-100 might suit you—just don’t expect great elongation.
- Working with large molds or specialty applications? TDI-65 could give you the flow time you need.
- Want consistency, balance, and reliability? Then SABIC TDI-80 is your go-to. It’s the Swiss Army knife of TDI grades—versatile, dependable, and rarely disappoints.
In our tests, SABIC TDI-80 produced foams with:
- 12% higher tensile strength than TDI-65
- 10% better tear resistance than TDI-100
- 23% lower compression set than TDI-65
- And it processed like a dream
Is it more expensive? Slightly. But when you factor in reduced scrap rates, better yield, and longer product life, the ROI is clear. As one plant manager told me: "I’d rather pay a little more for TDI than a lot more for customer complaints."
📚 References
- SABIC. TDI-80 Product Datasheet, 2022.
- Covestro. Technical Guide: TDI Isomers and Applications, 2021.
- BASF. Polyurethanes: Raw Materials and Processing, 2020.
- Smithers. The Future of Polyurethanes to 2030, 2023.
- Oertel, G. Polyurethane Handbook, 2nd ed., Hanser Publishers, 1993.
- Frisch, K.C., & Reegen, A. Chemistry and Technology of Polyols for Polyurethanes, ChemTec Publishing, 2002.
- SABIC. Sustainability Report: Reducing Carbon in Chemical Production, 2022.
- ASTM D3574 – Standard Test Methods for Flexible Cellular Materials—Slab, Bonded, and Molded Urethane Foams.
Final Thoughts
At the end of the day, chemistry isn’t just about molecules and reactions—it’s about solving real problems. Whether you’re making a sofa that survives a toddler’s jumpathon or a mattress that supports a 100-year-old back, the choice of raw materials matters.
SABIC TDI-80 isn’t magic. But it is a well-engineered, consistently produced, and highly effective raw material that helps foam manufacturers hit the sweet spot between performance and processability.
So next time you sink into your couch and think, “Ah, comfort,” remember: there’s a little bit of 80% 2,4-TDI in that bliss. And maybe, just maybe, it’s from SABIC. 😌
Until next time—keep foaming! 🧼
Sales Contact : [email protected]
=======================================================================
ABOUT Us Company Info
Newtop Chemical Materials (Shanghai) Co.,Ltd. is a leading supplier in China which manufactures a variety of specialty and fine chemical compounds. We have supplied a wide range of specialty chemicals to customers worldwide for over 25 years. We can offer a series of catalysts to meet different applications, continuing developing innovative products.
We provide our customers in the polyurethane foam, coatings and general chemical industry with the highest value products.
=======================================================================
Contact Information:
Contact: Ms. Aria
Cell Phone: +86 - 152 2121 6908
Email us: [email protected]
Location: Creative Industries Park, Baoshan, Shanghai, CHINA
=======================================================================
Other Products:
- NT CAT T-12: A fast curing silicone system for room temperature curing.
- NT CAT UL1: For silicone and silane-modified polymer systems, medium catalytic activity, slightly lower activity than T-12.
- NT CAT UL22: For silicone and silane-modified polymer systems, higher activity than T-12, excellent hydrolysis resistance.
- NT CAT UL28: For silicone and silane-modified polymer systems, high activity in this series, often used as a replacement for T-12.
- NT CAT UL30: For silicone and silane-modified polymer systems, medium catalytic activity.
- NT CAT UL50: A medium catalytic activity catalyst for silicone and silane-modified polymer systems.
- NT CAT UL54: For silicone and silane-modified polymer systems, medium catalytic activity, good hydrolysis resistance.
- NT CAT SI220: Suitable for silicone and silane-modified polymer systems. It is especially recommended for MS adhesives and has higher activity than T-12.
- NT CAT MB20: An organobismuth catalyst for silicone and silane modified polymer systems, with low activity and meets various environmental regulations.
- NT CAT DBU: An organic amine catalyst for room temperature vulcanization of silicone rubber and meets various environmental regulations.