Comparing Light Stabilizer UV-622 with other polymeric HALS for long-term outdoor performance

Comparing Light Stabilizer UV-622 with Other Polymeric HALS for Long-Term Outdoor Performance

When it comes to protecting plastics from the relentless wrath of sunlight, not all heroes wear capes—some come in the form of chemical compounds. Among them, Light Stabilizer UV-622 and other polymeric hindered amine light stabilizers (HALS) have earned their place as unsung protectors of polymers exposed to outdoor conditions.

But like choosing between different types of sunscreen for your skin, picking the right HALS for a polymer formulation is no small task. In this article, we’ll take a deep dive into UV-622, how it stacks up against other polymeric HALS like Tinuvin 622LD, Chimassorb 944, LS-292, LS-1114, and more—and why one might be better suited than another depending on the application.

Let’s shed some light on the matter. 🌞

The Sun: A Beautiful Menace

Before we get into the nitty-gritty of stabilizers, let’s first understand the enemy: ultraviolet radiation.

Sunlight, particularly its UV-A component (315–400 nm), wreaks havoc on polymers through a process called photooxidation. This leads to chain scission, crosslinking, discoloration, loss of mechanical strength, and ultimately, material failure.

Enter HALS—the bodyguards of polymers. These compounds don’t absorb UV light directly but act as radical scavengers, interrupting the oxidative degradation cycle. Their efficiency, durability, and compatibility with various resins make them indispensable in long-term outdoor applications.

What Is UV-622?

UV-622, also known by trade names such as Hostavin N30 or Sanduvor 3058, is a polymeric hindered amine light stabilizer based on the bis(2,2,6,6-tetramethyl-4-piperidyl) sebacate backbone.

It belongs to the second generation of HALS and is widely used due to its excellent balance of performance, thermal stability, and low volatility.

Key Features of UV-622:

  • High molecular weight (around 1,000 g/mol)
  • Low volatility
  • Good compatibility with polyolefins, especially polyethylene (PE)
  • Excellent resistance to extraction
  • Non-discoloring properties

How Do HALS Work? A Quick Recap

Hindered Amine Light Stabilizers operate via a nitroxyl-radical mechanism. Under UV exposure, polymers generate alkyl radicals, which react with oxygen to form peroxyl radicals—initiating a destructive chain reaction.

HALS intercept these radicals, forming stable nitroxyl species that terminate the reaction. Think of HALS as the firefighters of the polymer world—they don’t prevent the fire, but they sure know how to put it out before it spreads.

Comparative Overview: UV-622 vs. Other Polymeric HALS

To evaluate UV-622’s performance, we’ll compare it with several other popular polymeric HALS:

HALS Type Chemical Structure Molecular Weight (g/mol) Volatility Extraction Resistance Compatibility Typical Applications
UV-622 Bis(2,2,6,6-tetramethylpiperidyl) sebacate ~1000 Low High Moderate PE films, agricultural films, packaging
Tinuvin 622LD Same as UV-622 ~1000 Low High Moderate PE, PP, TPO, automotive parts
Chimassorb 944 Poly[[[6-(1,1,3,3-tetramethylbutyl)amino]-1,3,5-triazine-2,4-diyl][(2,2,6,6-tetramethyl-4-piperidyl)imino]hexamethylene[(2,2,6,6-tetramethyl-4-piperidyl)imino]] ~2500 Very Low Very High Lower Engineering plastics, automotive, industrial coatings
LS-292 Tetramethylpiperidine ester ~2900 Very Low Very High Lower Automotive, industrial films
LS-1114 Hydroxyphenyl benzotriazole + HALS hybrid Hybrid system Medium Medium Good Multi-layer films, UV-curable systems

UV-622 vs. Tinuvin 622LD – Twins Separated at Birth?

In reality, UV-622 and Tinuvin 622LD are chemically identical. Both are based on the same bis(piperidyl) sebacate structure. However, differences may arise from manufacturing processes, additives, or carrier oils used in commercial formulations.

From a performance standpoint, both offer similar UV protection in polyolefins. The choice often comes down to supplier relationships, cost, and availability.

UV-622 vs. Chimassorb 944 – Battle of the Titans

Now, here’s where things get interesting.

Chimassorb 944, with its higher molecular weight and triazine-based polymeric structure, offers superior thermal stability and longer-lasting protection compared to UV-622. It’s less likely to migrate or volatilize, making it ideal for high-temperature processing and long-term outdoor use.

However, this power comes at a price—literally and figuratively. Chimassorb 944 has poorer compatibility with some resins, especially lower-density polyethylenes, and can cause hazing or blooming if not properly dispersed.

Feature UV-622 Chimassorb 944
Molecular Weight ~1000 ~2500
Volatility Low Very Low
Migration Resistance Good Excellent
Cost Moderate High
Processing Ease Easier More Challenging
Film Clarity Better May Cause Haze
Long-Term Protection Good Superior

So while UV-622 is like a trusty sidekick—reliable and easygoing—Chimassorb 944 is the seasoned warrior who needs a bit more prep time before battle.

UV-622 vs. LS-292 – Stability vs. Simplicity

LS-292, another polymeric HALS, is even more massive than Chimassorb 944, with a molecular weight hovering around 2900 g/mol. Its high molecular weight grants it exceptional migration and extraction resistance, perfect for applications requiring extreme durability.

However, LS-292’s Achilles’ heel is its low compatibility with many common polymers. It tends to bloom on surfaces and requires careful compounding. For industries like automotive interiors or industrial tarpaulins, where longevity trumps clarity, LS-292 might be the go-to choice.

UV-622 vs. LS-1114 – When You Need a Little Bit of Everything

LS-1114 is a unique case—it’s a hybrid stabilizer, combining a benzotriazole UV absorber with a HALS functionality. This dual-action approach provides both UV absorption and radical scavenging, offering broader protection.

While UV-622 focuses solely on the latter, LS-1114 tries to do it all. However, this versatility sometimes comes with trade-offs in efficiency, especially under intense UV exposure. It’s best suited for multi-layer films, UV-curable coatings, or situations where space-saving multifunctionality is key.

Real-World Performance Data

Let’s back this up with some real-world data. Several studies have been published comparing the effectiveness of various HALS under accelerated weathering conditions.

A study by Zhang et al. (2017) evaluated the performance of UV-622, Chimassorb 944, and LS-292 in linear low-density polyethylene (LLDPE) films subjected to QUV accelerated weathering for 2000 hours.

HALS Type Tensile Strength Retention (%) Elongation Retention (%) Visual Discoloration
Control (No HALS) <20% <10% Severe yellowing
UV-622 78% 65% Slight yellowing
Chimassorb 944 85% 72% Minimal change
LS-292 82% 68% Slight haze

Source: Zhang, Y., Li, X., & Wang, J. (2017). Performance Evaluation of Polymeric HALS in LLDPE Films under Accelerated Weathering Conditions. Journal of Polymer Science and Technology, 45(3), 123–132.

Another comparative test conducted by BASF (2015) focused on HDPE pipes used in irrigation systems. The results showed that UV-622 offered sufficient protection for up to 10 years under moderate outdoor conditions, while Chimassorb 944 extended service life to over 15 years.

Factors Influencing HALS Performance

Choosing the right HALS isn’t just about chemistry—it’s about context. Here are some key factors to consider:

1. Polymer Type

Some HALS work better in certain matrices. For example, UV-622 blends well with polyethylene, while Chimassorb 944 prefers engineering thermoplastics like nylon or polyurethane.

2. Processing Conditions

High-temperature extrusion or injection molding can degrade or volatilize some HALS. UV-622 holds up well under typical polyolefin processing, but LS-292 and Chimassorb 944 need careful handling.

3. Additive Synergies

HALS often perform better when combined with antioxidants (like phosphites or phenolics) or UV absorbers. For instance, pairing UV-622 with a UV absorber like Tinuvin 328 can enhance overall protection.

4. Exposure Environment

Coastal areas with high salt content, urban zones with pollution, or tropical climates with high humidity—each poses unique challenges. HALS must be chosen accordingly.

Dosage and Application Guidelines

The recommended dosage for UV-622 typically ranges from 0.1% to 0.5%, depending on the resin type and expected exposure severity.

Application Type Recommended UV-622 Level (%)
Agricultural Films 0.3–0.5
Packaging Films 0.1–0.3
HDPE Pipes 0.2–0.4
Automotive Exteriors 0.3–0.5
Rigid PVC Profiles 0.2–0.3

Overuse doesn’t always mean better performance—too much HALS can lead to bloom, reduced transparency, or even adverse interactions with other additives.

Case Studies: Success Stories with UV-622

Case Study 1: Greenhouse Films in Southern Spain

A Spanish manufacturer of greenhouse films incorporated UV-622 at 0.4% into their LLDPE formulation. After 5 years of continuous outdoor use, the film retained over 70% tensile strength and showed minimal brittleness. The grower reported a significant reduction in replacement costs compared to previous seasons without UV protection.

Case Study 2: HDPE Water Tanks in Australia

An Australian company producing water storage tanks added UV-622 along with Irganox 1010 (a phenolic antioxidant). After 10 years of sun exposure, tank samples showed no surface cracking or color fading, demonstrating the synergy between HALS and antioxidants.

Limitations and Considerations

Despite its advantages, UV-622 isn’t a miracle worker. Here are some caveats:

  • Not Suitable for Clear Coatings: UV-622 may cause slight yellowing over time.
  • Limited Use in High-Temperature Applications: While stable, it’s not as heat-resistant as Chimassorb 944.
  • Requires Proper Dispersion: Poor mixing can result in uneven stabilization and early failure points.

Conclusion: Finding the Right HALS for the Job

In the grand theater of polymer stabilization, UV-622 plays the role of a dependable, mid-tier performer—not flashy, not overly expensive, but consistently effective for a wide range of applications. It shines brightest in polyolefins, especially those used in agriculture, packaging, and basic infrastructure.

For applications demanding longer lifespans, higher thermal loads, or more aggressive environments, alternatives like Chimassorb 944 or LS-292 may offer superior protection—though at the cost of increased complexity and expense.

Ultimately, selecting the right HALS depends on understanding the material, the environment, and the economics involved. Whether you choose UV-622 or another polymeric HALS, remember: the goal isn’t to block the sun entirely, but to give your polymer a fighting chance to stand tall—even under the harshest rays.

After all, every plastic deserves to age gracefully. 😊

References

  1. Zhang, Y., Li, X., & Wang, J. (2017). Performance Evaluation of Polymeric HALS in LLDPE Films under Accelerated Weathering Conditions. Journal of Polymer Science and Technology, 45(3), 123–132.

  2. BASF Technical Bulletin (2015). Stabilization of HDPE Pipes for Long-Term Outdoor Use. Internal Publication.

  3. George, G.A., & O’Shea, M.S. (2001). The Role of Hindered Amine Light Stabilizers in Polymer Degradation and Stabilization. Polymer Degradation and Stability, 74(2), 245–255.

  4. Karlsson, D., & Wesslén, B. (2002). Thermal and Photo-Oxidative Degradation of Polyolefins in the Presence of HALS. Polymer Testing, 21(5), 543–552.

  5. Brede, C., & Jakob, K. (2006). Synergistic Effects Between HALS and UV Absorbers in Polypropylene Films. European Polymer Journal, 42(11), 2910–2918.

  6. ISO Standard 4892-3:2013. Plastics — Methods of Exposure to Laboratory Light Sources — Part 3: Fluorescent UV Lamps.

  7. ASTM G154-16. Standard Practice for Operating Fluorescent Ultraviolet (UV) Lamp Apparatus for Exposure of Nonmetallic Materials.

  8. Tang, W.C., & Mooney, D.J. (2004). Controlling the Surface Chemistry of Polymers Using Photostabilizers. Advanced Materials, 16(18), 1565–1571.

  9. Horikx, J. (2000). Long Term Stabilization of Polyolefins with Polymeric HALS. Polymer Degradation and Stability, 69(3), 255–261.

  10. Scott, G. (1995). Polymer Degradation and Stabilisation: Mechanisms and Prevention Strategies. Royal Society of Chemistry Publishing.

If you’re looking for practical advice on formulation or want to explore specific combinations of UV-622 with other additives, feel free to ask—I’ve got more tricks up my sleeve than just words. 😉

Sales Contact：[email protected]