MTT/HPCA Acceleration system VS ETU&MgO on CR rubber compounds

[JDLSHF]

Grettings!

I don't know about fellow rubber manufacturer's health and safety issues, but in the company that I work in, there is a starting interest to substitute on polychloroprene rubber compounds the typical ETU with MgO curing system with alternatives, such as MTT with HPCA (and only these two, I don't have triazine to test).

The only information on compounding and testing was on this article:
Rubberchem 2006.

In curing attempts, there was not much sucess in having a replacement from ETU/MgO to MTT/HPCA, but this is also affect with having BR and a complementar sulphur based acceleration for the BR vulcanization. So, in respective to the mentioned article, it's not a pure CR masterbatch the one i'm using for testing. Nevertheless, I must use this on the formulations that I need to make a change in, and not on theorical examples, so I ask if any fellow rubber compounder has any experience or positive results with this changing from ETU/MgO to MTT/HPCA. The CR and BR phr are 90 and 10 (approximately).

Thanks!

 

[Metten]

In Europe ETU is being phased out.

Alternatives are Mixland SD+ and Robac SRM 102.

 

[JDLSHF]

Metten

Thanks for the reply. Yes, ETU is being "banned" gradually from usage, and hence my post with alternative vulcanization systems to it.
But what I have are samples of MTT and HPCA, so, I'm trying to work with that now.

Thanks.