Comparison
rPP Copo PIR Filled vs Polycarbonate
A side-by-side comparison of Recycled Polypropylene Copolymer Post-Industrial Recycled Filled and Polycarbonate.
Physical
Density
0.900-0.920 g/cm³
1.20 g/cm³
Water Absorption (24h)
0.02-0.05 %
0.15 %
Transparency
Opaque
Transparent (88% light transmission)
Shrinkage
1.0-2.5 % (depending on filler)
0.5 – 0.8 %
Mechanical
Young's Modulus
1.5-3.0 GPa (with filler)
2.3 – 2.4 GPa
Tensile Strength
25-40 MPa
60 – 70 MPa
Elongation at Break
5-50 % (depending on filler)
100 – 150 %
Impact Strength (Izod)
40-80 J/m (with filler)
600 – 900 J/m
Flexural Strength
—
90 – 100 MPa
Hardness (Rockwell M)
—
70
Thermal
Glass Transition Temperature
-5 °C
147 °C
Melting Point
150-165 °C
—
Continuous Service Temperature
80-95 °C
115 – 130 °C
Heat Deflection Temperature
70-90 °C (0.45 MPa, with filler)
130 – 140 °C
Thermal Conductivity
—
0.20 W/m·K
CTE
—
65 – 70 × 10⁻⁶ /K
Electrical
Dielectric Constant
2.2-2.5
2.9 – 3.0
Volume Resistivity
>10^16 Ohm·cm
10¹⁶ Ω·cm
Dielectric Strength
18-28 kV/mm
15 kV/mm
Chemical resistance
Acids
Good
—
Bases
Good
Poor
Solvents
Good resistance to many organic solvents
—
UV Resistance
Poor (requires UV stabilizers)
Poor (unless coated)
Acids (dilute)
—
Good
Alcohols
—
Fair
Oils
—
Good
Gasoline
—
Fair
Acetone
—
Poor (attacks)
Sustainability
Recyclability
Recyclable
Recyclable
Recycling Code
5 (PP)
7
Carbon Footprint
Lower than virgin PP copolymer
~5 kg CO₂e / kg
Bio-based Content
—
0 – 50 % (bio grades)