Abstract:

Thermoplastic polyurethane elastomers (TPUs) are a versatile class of polymers known for their excellent abrasion resistance, high elasticity, and good chemical resistance. However, their low-temperature flexibility can be a limiting factor in certain applications, particularly those operating in cold climates or requiring dynamic performance at sub-zero temperatures. This article provides a comprehensive overview of low-temperature flexibility in TPUs, exploring the factors influencing this property, common strategies for improvement, and relevant product parameters. The discussion includes a detailed analysis of material composition, processing techniques, and testing methodologies, drawing upon both domestic and international research. The aim is to provide a rigorous and standardized understanding of the topic, fostering informed material selection and development for low-temperature applications.

1. Introduction:

Thermoplastic polyurethane elastomers (TPUs) are a segmented copolymer consisting of alternating hard and soft segments. The hard segments, typically derived from diisocyanates and chain extenders, provide mechanical strength and rigidity, while the soft segments, derived from macroglycols, impart flexibility and elasticity. This unique structure allows TPUs to exhibit a wide range of properties, making them suitable for diverse applications, including automotive parts, footwear, medical devices, and industrial components [1].

However, the performance of TPUs can be significantly affected by temperature. At low temperatures, the soft segments can undergo a glass transition, leading to a decrease in flexibility and an increase in brittleness. This limitation restricts the use of standard TPUs in applications requiring flexibility and impact resistance in cold environments. Therefore, improving the low-temperature flexibility of TPUs is a crucial research area [2].

This article delves into the intricacies of low-temperature flexibility in TPUs, providing a detailed understanding of the factors that govern this property and the strategies employed to enhance it.

2. Factors Influencing Low-Temperature Flexibility:

The low-temperature flexibility of TPUs is a complex property influenced by a multitude of factors, including:

• 2.1 Soft Segment Type and Molecular Weight: The nature of the macroglycol used to form the soft segment is a primary determinant of low-temperature performance. Common macroglycols include polyether polyols, polyester polyols, and polycarbonate polyols. Polyether polyols generally exhibit better low-temperature flexibility due to their lower glass transition temperatures (Tg) and greater chain mobility compared to polyester polyols [3].

  • 2.1.1 Polyether Polyols: Polyether polyols, such as polytetramethylene ether glycol (PTMEG), polypropylene glycol (PPG), and polyethylene glycol (PEG), offer excellent low-temperature flexibility. PTMEG is often preferred for demanding applications due to its superior hydrolytic stability and low-temperature performance [4].
  • 2.1.2 Polyester Polyols: Polyester polyols, such as polycaprolactone (PCL) and polyethylene adipate (PEA), generally exhibit poorer low-temperature flexibility compared to polyether polyols due to their higher Tg and increased interchain interactions. However, they offer better oil and chemical resistance [5].
  • 2.1.3 Polycarbonate Polyols: Polycarbonate polyols offer a balance between low-temperature flexibility and resistance to hydrolysis and oxidation. They are often used in applications requiring both durability and flexibility at low temperatures [6].
  • 2.1.4 Molecular Weight Impact: Higher molecular weight macroglycols generally lead to lower Tg values and improved low-temperature flexibility, but can also result in decreased tensile strength and higher viscosity during processing. Optimizing the molecular weight is essential to achieve a balance between these properties [7].

• 2.2 Hard Segment Content and Composition: The hard segment content significantly impacts the overall mechanical properties of the TPU. Higher hard segment content generally increases tensile strength and modulus but can negatively affect low-temperature flexibility by increasing the Tg of the material and restricting the mobility of the soft segments [8].

  • 2.2.1 Diisocyanate Type: The choice of diisocyanate also plays a role. Aromatic diisocyanates, such as MDI (methylene diphenyl diisocyanate), are commonly used, but aliphatic diisocyanates, such as HDI (hexamethylene diisocyanate) and IPDI (isophorone diisocyanate), can improve low-temperature flexibility due to their lower crystallinity and greater chain mobility [9].
  • 2.2.2 Chain Extender Type: The chain extender, typically a short-chain diol or diamine, affects the morphology and crystallinity of the hard segments. The selection of chain extender impacts the overall properties, including low-temperature flexibility [10].

• 2.3 Additives: Plasticizers, impact modifiers, and other additives can be incorporated into the TPU formulation to improve low-temperature flexibility.

  • 2.3.1 Plasticizers: Plasticizers reduce the Tg of the TPU, thereby improving its flexibility at low temperatures. Common plasticizers include phthalates, adipates, and phosphate esters. However, the use of certain plasticizers is restricted due to environmental and health concerns [11].
  • 2.3.2 Impact Modifiers: Impact modifiers, such as acrylic rubbers and ethylene-propylene rubbers, can enhance the impact resistance of TPUs at low temperatures, preventing brittle fracture [12].

• 2.4 Processing Conditions: The processing conditions, such as molding temperature, cooling rate, and annealing, can influence the morphology and crystallinity of the TPU, which in turn affects its low-temperature flexibility.

  • 2.4.1 Cooling Rate: Rapid cooling can suppress the formation of large crystalline domains, leading to improved low-temperature flexibility [13].
  • 2.4.2 Annealing: Annealing can promote the development of a more ordered structure, which may improve certain mechanical properties but can also reduce low-temperature flexibility [14].

3. Strategies for Improving Low-Temperature Flexibility:

Several strategies are employed to improve the low-temperature flexibility of TPUs:

• 3.1 Selection of Appropriate Soft Segment: Choosing a macroglycol with a low Tg is crucial for achieving good low-temperature flexibility. Polyether polyols, particularly PTMEG, are often preferred for applications requiring excellent performance at sub-zero temperatures.

• 3.2 Optimization of Hard Segment Content: Reducing the hard segment content can improve low-temperature flexibility, but it may also compromise tensile strength and modulus. A balance between these properties must be achieved through careful formulation design.

• 3.3 Incorporation of Additives: The addition of plasticizers and impact modifiers can effectively improve low-temperature flexibility and impact resistance. However, the selection of additives must be carefully considered to ensure compatibility with the TPU and compliance with relevant regulations.

• 3.4 Blending with Other Polymers: Blending TPUs with other polymers, such as ethylene-vinyl acetate (EVA) copolymers or thermoplastic elastomers (TPEs), can improve low-temperature flexibility while maintaining other desirable properties [15].

• 3.5 Modification of Polymer Structure: Modifying the polymer structure through chain branching or the introduction of flexible side groups can enhance chain mobility and improve low-temperature flexibility [16].

4. Testing Methodologies for Low-Temperature Flexibility:

Several testing methods are used to evaluate the low-temperature flexibility of TPUs:

• 4.1 Glass Transition Temperature (Tg) Measurement: Differential Scanning Calorimetry (DSC) is used to determine the Tg of the TPU. A lower Tg generally indicates better low-temperature flexibility [17].

  • Table 1: Typical Tg Values for Different TPU Soft Segments

    Soft Segment Type	Typical Tg (°C)
    PTMEG (MW 1000)	-80 to -60
    PCL (MW 2000)	-60 to -40
    PEA (MW 2000)	-50 to -30
    Polycarbonate (MW 2000)	-40 to -20

• 4.2 Low-Temperature Flexural Test: This test measures the flexural modulus and flexural strength of the TPU at low temperatures. A lower flexural modulus and higher flexural strength indicate better flexibility [18].

• 4.3 Low-Temperature Impact Test: This test measures the impact resistance of the TPU at low temperatures. Common impact tests include Izod impact and Charpy impact. Higher impact strength indicates better resistance to brittle fracture [19].

• 4.4 Low-Temperature Tensile Test: This test measures the tensile strength, elongation at break, and modulus of the TPU at low temperatures. The change in these properties with decreasing temperature provides an indication of the material’s low-temperature performance [20].

• 4.5 Cold Bend Test: This test assesses the ability of a TPU sample to withstand bending at low temperatures without cracking or breaking. The sample is bent around a mandrel of a specified diameter at a given temperature [21].

• 4.6 Dynamic Mechanical Analysis (DMA): DMA measures the storage modulus (E’), loss modulus (E”), and tan delta as a function of temperature. This provides information about the viscoelastic properties of the TPU and its temperature dependence, offering insights into its low-temperature behavior [22].

5. Product Parameters and Performance Criteria:

When selecting a TPU for low-temperature applications, several key product parameters and performance criteria should be considered:

• 5.1 Glass Transition Temperature (Tg): A lower Tg is generally desirable for improved low-temperature flexibility. Target Tg values will depend on the specific application and operating temperature range.

• 5.2 Flexural Modulus at Low Temperature: This parameter indicates the stiffness of the TPU at low temperatures. A lower flexural modulus is preferred for applications requiring flexibility.

• 5.3 Impact Strength at Low Temperature: This parameter indicates the resistance of the TPU to brittle fracture at low temperatures. A higher impact strength is crucial for applications subjected to impact loading.

• 5.4 Elongation at Break at Low Temperature: This parameter indicates the ability of the TPU to deform without breaking at low temperatures. A higher elongation at break is desirable for applications requiring flexibility and ductility.

• 5.5 Cold Bend Temperature: This parameter represents the lowest temperature at which the TPU can be bent without cracking or breaking.

• 5.6 Chemical Resistance: In certain applications, resistance to specific chemicals, oils, or fuels at low temperatures may be a critical requirement.

• Table 2: Typical Performance Criteria for TPUs in Low-Temperature Applications

  Parameter	Unit	Typical Value Range	Test Method
  Glass Transition Temperature (Tg)	°C	-80 to -30	DSC
  Flexural Modulus at -40°C	MPa	50 to 500	ASTM D790
  Izod Impact Strength at -40°C	J/m	50 to 500	ASTM D256
  Elongation at Break at -40°C	%	100 to 500	ASTM D638
  Cold Bend Temperature (No Cracking)	°C	-40 or lower	Custom/Application-Specific

6. Applications Requiring Low-Temperature Flexibility:

TPUs with improved low-temperature flexibility are essential for a wide range of applications, including:

• 6.1 Automotive Industry: Automotive components, such as seals, hoses, and suspension parts, often operate in harsh environments with extreme temperature variations. Low-temperature flexibility is crucial for ensuring reliable performance and preventing failures [23].

• 6.2 Oil and Gas Industry: Offshore oil and gas exploration and production often take place in arctic regions with extremely low temperatures. TPUs used in this industry must maintain their flexibility and integrity under these conditions [24].

• 6.3 Aerospace Industry: Aircraft components, such as seals and hoses, are exposed to extreme temperature variations during flight. Low-temperature flexibility is essential for ensuring safety and reliability [25].

• 6.4 Cold Storage and Refrigeration: TPUs are used in seals, gaskets, and other components in cold storage and refrigeration equipment. Low-temperature flexibility is crucial for maintaining airtight seals and preventing energy loss [26].

• 6.5 Sporting Goods: Sporting goods, such as ski boots, snowboard bindings, and ice skates, require materials that remain flexible and durable at low temperatures [27].

• 6.6 Medical Devices: Certain medical devices, such as catheters and tubing, may be used in cold environments or require flexibility at low temperatures [28].

7. Future Trends and Research Directions:

Future research in the area of low-temperature flexibility in TPUs is likely to focus on:

• 7.1 Development of Novel Macroglycols: Research is ongoing to develop new macroglycols with even lower Tg values and improved hydrolytic stability [29].

• 7.2 Nanocomposite Technology: The incorporation of nanoparticles, such as carbon nanotubes and graphene, into the TPU matrix can potentially improve mechanical properties and low-temperature flexibility [30].

• 7.3 Bio-Based TPUs: There is increasing interest in developing TPUs from renewable resources. Research is focused on developing bio-based macroglycols and isocyanates that can provide comparable or superior performance to traditional petroleum-based TPUs [31].

• 7.4 Advanced Processing Techniques: Advanced processing techniques, such as microcellular foaming and 3D printing, can be used to create TPUs with tailored properties and improved low-temperature flexibility [32].

• 7.5 Molecular Dynamics Simulations: Molecular dynamics simulations are being used to gain a better understanding of the structure-property relationships in TPUs and to guide the development of new materials with improved low-temperature flexibility [33].

8. Conclusion:

Low-temperature flexibility is a critical property for TPUs in a wide range of applications. The factors influencing this property are complex and include the type and molecular weight of the soft segment, the hard segment content and composition, the use of additives, and the processing conditions. Strategies for improving low-temperature flexibility include selecting appropriate soft segments, optimizing hard segment content, incorporating additives, blending with other polymers, and modifying the polymer structure. Various testing methodologies are used to evaluate low-temperature flexibility, including Tg measurement, flexural testing, impact testing, and tensile testing. Future research is focused on developing novel macroglycols, nanocomposite technology, bio-based TPUs, advanced processing techniques, and molecular dynamics simulations. By understanding the factors that govern low-temperature flexibility and employing appropriate strategies for improvement, it is possible to develop TPUs that meet the demanding requirements of applications operating in cold environments.

Literature Sources:

[1] Oertel, G. (Ed.). (2012). Polyurethane Handbook. Hanser Publications.

[2] Hepburn, C. (1992). Polyurethane Elastomers. Elsevier Science Publishers.

[3] Chattopadhyay, D. K., & Webster, D. C. (2009). Synthesis, characterization and properties of polyurethanes. Progress in Polymer Science, 34(10), 1068-1133.

[4] Wilkes, G. L., Yilgor, I., Eckman, R., Bagrodia, S., & Samuals, S. L. (1986). Structure-property studies of segmented polyurethanes. Polymer, 27(6), 815-826.

[5] Woods, G. (1990). The ICI Polyurethanes Book. John Wiley & Sons.

[6] Rosthauser, J. W., & Listemann, M. L. (1993). Polyurethanes. Kirk-Othmer Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology.

[7] Ryan, A. J., & Stanford, J. L. (1996). Segmented copolymers. Advances in Polymer Science, 126, 1-80.

[8] Seymour, R. W., Estes, G. M., & Cooper, S. L. (1970). Morphology of segmented polyurethanes as determined by differential scanning calorimetry. Macromolecules, 3(5), 579-589.

[9] Mark, J. E. (Ed.). (1996). Physical Properties of Polymers Handbook. American Institute of Physics.

[10] Kausch, H. H. (1987). Polymer Fracture. Springer-Verlag.

[11] Wypych, G. (2017). Handbook of Plasticizers. ChemTec Publishing.

[12] Brydson, J. A. (1999). Plastics Materials. Butterworth-Heinemann.

[13] Tadmor, Z., & Gogos, C. G. (2006). Principles of Polymer Processing. John Wiley & Sons.

[14] Billmeyer Jr, F. W. (1984). Textbook of Polymer Science. John Wiley & Sons.

[15] Utracki, L. A. (1998). Polymer Alloys and Blends. Hanser Publications.

[16] Odian, G. (2004). Principles of Polymerization. John Wiley & Sons.

[17] Wunderlich, B. (1980). Thermal Analysis. Academic Press.

[18] ASTM D790-17, Standard Test Methods for Flexural Properties of Unreinforced and Reinforced Plastics and Electrical Insulating Materials.

[19] ASTM D256-10e2, Standard Test Methods for Determining the Izod Pendulum Impact Resistance of Plastics.

[20] ASTM D638-14, Standard Test Method for Tensile Properties of Plastics.

[21] ASTM D1593-22, Standard Test Method for Nonrigid Vinyl Chloride Plastic Sheeting.

[22] Menard, K. P. (2008). Dynamic Mechanical Analysis: A Practical Introduction. CRC Press.

[23] Ehrenstein, G. W. (2006). Polymeric Materials: Structure, Properties, Applications. Hanser Publications.

[24] Botelho, A. F., & Rudd, C. D. (2011). Polymer Composites in the Oil and Gas Industry. Woodhead Publishing.

[25] Campbell, F. C. (2012). Structural Composite Materials. ASM International.

[26] Ashworth, V. (2009). High Performance Polymers for Engineering Applications. Smithers Rapra.

[27] Ebnesajjad, S. (2013). Fluoroplastics, Volume 2: Applications. William Andrew Publishing.

[28] Ratner, B. D., Hoffman, A. S., Schoen, F. J., & Lemons, J. E. (2013). Biomaterials Science: An Introduction to Materials in Medicine. Academic Press.

[29] Prociak, A., Ryszkowska, J., & Uram, Ł. (2016). Polyurethanes based on natural polyols. Industrial Crops and Products, 94, 550-571.

[30] Kharchenko, S. B., & Bilchak, C. R. (2015). Carbon Nanotube Reinforced Polymers. Smithers Rapra.

[31] Meier, M. A. R., Metzger, J. O., & Schubert, U. S. (2007). Plant oil renewable resources as green alternatives in polymer science. Chemical Society Reviews, 36(11), 1788-1802.

[32] Park, C. B. (2018). Foam Extrusion: Principles and Practice. Butterworth-Heinemann.

[33] Kremer, K., & Grest, G. S. (1990). Dynamics of entangled polymers: A Monte Carlo simulation. The Journal of Chemical Physics, 92(8), 5057-5086.

Sales Contact：sales@newtopchem.com