RUBBER COMPOUNDS Grade or Quality Classifications

In the early 1900s, all around the world, rubber products and manufacturing suddenly began to flourish. Decades after the vulcanization discovery, rubber was finally beginning to fulfill its 20th Century prophesy as a major supplier to both the automotive and industrial industries.
Tire demand Here in the USA, the Rubber Manufacturers drives rubber Association (or RMA) was established in 1928. production Although having many directives with its rubber manufacturing constituents, this trade association was empowered to catalog and qualify various rubber products as to their quality and expected performance aspects that, to that date, varied widely within the industry.

C g ng tiin ellt Be rB or to at va ev Elle r//E or yo ey ve nv on Co

The RMA later went on to establish specifications for rubber used in flat belting products identifying each according to a specific grade. Originally, there were three such RMA grade classifications #1, #2, and #3. Each was qualified according to a minimum cover tensile RMA qualifies rubber grades and elongation, along with minimum cover and carcass ply adhesions. Over the years that followed, the flat belting picture has changed significantly. Yet, the RMA grade specifications have changed little!! As a result, there tends to be a great deal of confusion about todays compounding grades or qualities. How many are there?? What exactly do they mean?? And how do they apply to compound selection?? Can they be combined?? To answer some of these questions, and to keep current with todays compounding classifications, lets review each of the primary grades that are fundamental to Conveyor and Elevator belting. Youll see that each grade tends to be broadly categorized under either a General Purpose or Special Purpose label.

 G Ge en ne er ra all P Pu ur rp po os se e G Gr ra ad de es s
RMA Grade Designations
Today, we refer to the existing RMA Grade classifications (last updated in 1994) as a reference to General Purpose compounds. RMAs Flat Belt Technical Committee provides a specification for end-users entitled Conveyor Belt Cover Characteristics and Classifications. The properties, test values, and minimum requirements included serve as a guideline for acceptable performance for these basic of all field applications. RMA Grade 1 o Was RMAs 1st rubber grade classification o Referenced as Cut/Gouge Resistant rubber, with good abrasion resistance o Now qualified by min tensile (2500 psi) and elongation (400%) values @ break o The RMA guidelines suggest Typical RMA I that the cover will consist of Application Natural or Synthetic rubber, or blends thereof, suitable for applications involving sharp and abrasive materials or severe loading conditions. Note 1 The properties of Natural rubber are extremely important in this grade! In its purist form, the compound should be 100% Natural rubber, with little dilution from extenders. Fenner Dunlop offerings include Matchless, Grade I, Matchless Plus, and Grade M RMA Grade 2 o Was RMAs 2nd rubber grade classification o Primarily referenced as a Wear Resistant rubber o Now qualified by min tensile (2000 psi) and elongation (400%) values @ break o The RMA guidelines suggest an elastomeric composition similar to Grade I providing excellent service with abrasive materials, with somewhat less cut/gouge resistance than Grade I. Fenner Dunlop offerings include Giant, Grade II, and Giant SAR RMA Grade 3 No longer specified!! Originally referenced as an economy offering (a 50/50 blending of fresh and reclaimed rubber), this grade category eventually disappeared in the early 1970s as market expectations gradually outdated it.

As originally structured, this rubber grading system was a reasonably effective way of qualifying a belts expected field performance. However, what once worked well years ago (with predominately Natural rubber and cotton carcasses) is no longer as meaningful. With advanced polymer and textile technology, todays flat belting products have much different performance indicators. They are also much better products in many cases exhibiting physicals that the early RMA references simply could not have imagined. (As an example Dramatic improvements in adhesion levels have long ago obsoleted the adhesion references that were once an RMA Grade criterion!) Bottom Line The once pertinent RMA Grade classifications, now based on merely tension and elongation values alone, are no longer the best indicators of any compounds performance! Today, the spirit of the RMA Grades is to simply differentiate between the two principal General Purpose application options: 9 Grade 1 best possible Cut/Gouge resistance! 9 Grade 2 best possible Abrasion resistance!

Typical RMA II Applications

Note 2 The test methods for Fenner Dunlop Americas Conveyor and Elevator belting and its rubber covers are based on testing in compliance with ASTM D378-91 and ASTM D41292.

S Sp pe ec ciia all P Pu ur rp po os se e G Gr ra ad de es s
Out of necessity, World War II accelerated the development of Synthetic rubber. With Allied access to Natural rubber virtually severed, a major emphasis was placed on the making of Synthetic rubber. By the end of that war, after just four years, Synthetic rubber production in the USA alone increased over 100 fold!! With the advent of Synthetic rubbers, came the opportunity to chemically create polymers and compounds that could meet specific needs needs that could never have been met with Natural rubber alone. While there is only one chemical type of Natural rubber, there are more than twenty different chemical types of Synthetic rubber. Within each Synthetic polymer type, there are often many distinguishable grades or qualities offered. Each grade or quality references a specific rubber-performance expectation and are therefore cataloged as one of several Special Purpose grades. With Conveyor & Elevator belting, here are some of the more prominent of those compound grade categories. 3

MSHA (Mine Safety Health Administration)

Major fires, causing untold personnel and property loss, have always been a mine site issue. During the 1950s, several world-wide government regulatory agencies principally the NCB in Great Britain, and the United States Bureau of Mines (USBM) began to implement strategy designed to minimize these tragedies. In the USA, the result was Schedule 28 (later referred to as Schedule 2G) a federal regulation mandating a fire resistant standard for all rubber destined for use in underground mining/conveying operations. The USBM began to require that all belting sold in such underground service must pass their new flame retardency tests and be appropriately branded, as such.

MSHA Application

Note 3 Today, MSHA has replaced the USBM as the agency that regulates the flame retardency test in the USA which is now cataloged as 30 CFR 18.65. In Canada, their governing flame retardency test is referenced as Can\CSA-M422-M87. Note 4 When such flame testing was first implemented, Scandura solid woven PVC products were amongst the first belt offerings to pass their respective flame testing requirements both in the USA, and in Great Britain. Many early PVC industrial conveyor belts, liked that produced by Scandura, were 2G compliant. However, DuPonts Neoprene (due to the same inherent chlorine content as in PVC) was the first and for many years the only commercially available rubber polymer that could be economically compounded to pass 2G. It wasnt until the early 1970s that belt manufacturers were finally able to compound more cost efficient SBR and BR rubbers to satisfy the federal flame retardency test. Fenner Dunlop offerings include F, FAR, MSHA/FR, SFAR, FF, FFAR, LT/FR, FF-CSA, FFAR-CSA, FFOR, and FORP Important to understand, however that flame retardency is NOT the same as flame proof. All elastomeric belts WILL burn!! Flame retardant ones are merely qualified to selfextinguish when the source of the flame is removed or will no longer propagate the fire!

Oil (and sometimes Acid) Resistant

In the presence of oil, or oil-based contaminants, standard compounded rubbers will swell and degrade resulting in a genuine loss of physical properties (abrasion, adhesion, tensile, etc). 4

Soon after WWII, existing oil resistant technology combined with newly available Synthetic rubbers to legitimately offset rubber degradation when in contact with such undesirable contaminants. Today, several different polymers are used and/or blended together (including Neoprene and Nitrile) to offer differing degrees of resistance to such absorption and deterioration. Typically compounds containing the highest levels of Nitrile concentration will offer the greatest resistance to oil degradation. It is important to understand that NO compound is totally resistant to oil Oil Resistant Application degradation! Oil resistant offerings will merely withstand contact with such volatiles and contaminants for a longer time before compound degradation (and ultimately belt demise) takes place. Fenner Dunlop offerings include MOR, ORN, SOR, ORP, FORP, FFOR, and Uscothane

Heat Resistance
As contact temperatures increase, rubber experiences an acceleration of the oxidation (or aging) process. When those temperatures rise above 180-200 oF, an unprotected cover compound will tend to get hard. Eventually, will most of these will likely crack. Besides an overall degradation, the cover cracking can lead to undesirable carry-back issues. The hardening aspect can aggravate splice life (e.g., cover fill-in adhesion, etc). With the proper blending of standard SBR and BR rubbers, compounds in the early 1950s could offer resistance to heat degradation up to 250 oF, or so. Today, some of these compounds are still in service while now combining their very moderate heat resistance with good abrasion resistance. For higher temperatures, those approaching 350 oF, Butyl rubber was initially used. However, in the 1970s, this problematic compound was slowly being replaced by EPDM for such extreme high heat resistance. Besides processing somewhat better in the factory than Butyls, EPDMs hardened when heat aged often considered more desirable in field service than softening (as Butyls tended to do). 5

Hot Service Application

Today, Fenner Dunlop uses a variety of EPDM and EPR polymers to optimize heat resistance. This was done to achieve more consistent heat resistance throughout the entire high temperature range! Similar to the oil resistant story, NO compound is totally resistant to heat degradation! So-called high heat offerings will merely endure higher temperatures, and possibly for a somewhat longer time, before such compound/belt degradation takes place. Fenner Dunlop offerings include Sahara, Sahara SAR, and Super Sahara Note 5 For BOTH heat and oil, Fenner Dunlop offerings include Sahara OR (SHOR), and Super Sahara OR (SSHOR)

Static Conducting
As belting interfaces with the various conveyor components, the resulting friction can produce a static charge. Standard rubber compounds tend to act as insulators, and inhibit the release of any such static. As this static builds up, any subsequent discharge can result in a spark. In some dusty/dry enclosures grain elevators, munitions factories, fertilizer plants, etc that spark could lead to a devastating explosion! With concern over such spontaneous combustion explosions in the early 1970s, OSHA instituted qualifying guidelines on all belts destined for such static-induced service. They mandated that all belts utilized in such service would have to pass an electrical resistance test having a maximum surface resistivity. (Today, that maximum resistivity level is set at 300 mega-ohms). Upon passing that test, such belts would be deemed static conductingand suitable for this service.

Static Conducting Environment (Grain Terminal)

Fenner Dunlop offerings include FORP

FDA (Food & Drug Administration)

This government agency regulates belt surfaces that come in contact with consumable goods. These belts are typically light-weight and color-pigmented (nonblack). Ingredients contained in these products are therefore FDA approved. Fenner Dunlop offerings include FDI and FDP 6
Typical FDA Application

S Su um mm ma ar ry y G Gr ra ad de eo or rQ Qu ua alliit ty y
Over the past six decades, the era of Synthetic rubber has evolved. Compound performance has vastly improved. New, and often overlapping, compounding needs are continually being addressed and satisfied. As they are developed, these new compounds will be categorized just as existing ones have into one or more grade or quality classifications, consistent with their performance expectations! Fenner Dunlop Americas expects to not only participate in this process, but to pioneer and benefit from it as well. Belt selection requires both carcass and cover/compound choices and within each of these separate categories, the available options can be staggering. Most compounds will cross-reference into more than one grade category. When selecting the proper compound, all compound requirements must be factored together and requested, as such!! No single grade reference is likely to fulfill that, and provide the elastomeric value needed! As the compounding/grade aspects of Conveyor and Elevator belting continually change, questions are bound to arise. To assure that youre both current and properly informed, dont hesitate to give us a call. Well analyze your needs, and help provide a meaningful solution. In the final analysis, that rapport is certain to be a win-win for all of us!!

* * * * * * *

Geoff Small G Normanton Corporate Director of Technology September 2005

George Big G Frank Manager, Application Engineering