Document oNm88dyy60qV9ae0JgNYrw6X

Non-confidential attachment of PFAS public consultations PP-SFP-IPD-Auto 24/Aug/2023 Irradiated Products Division Sumitomo Electric Fine Polymer, Inc. Typical application of PFAS tubing for automatic transmission (AT) of automotive Comparison table of general characteristic of PFAS(PVDF) and its alternatives Comparison of properties between [PVDF] and other PFAS alternatives. Gray shaded cells are issues when substituting PVDF sleeve. Materials with 175 or higher are Silicone, PEEK, Mica and Ceramic. Mica and Ceramic are inorganic, so cannot processed into tubing. Silicone and PEEK are potential candidate, but they have following issues: PEEKVery stiffsee "Flexural Modulus") SiliconeWeak in mechanical strength (see "Tensile breaking strength"), oil resistance, abraision Therefore, they cannot be the substitute of PVDF heat-shrink tubing. Comparison between current PVDF/FKM and silicone in sleeve shape component Characteristics Tensile strength Variation(1,000hours) mass variation Variation(1,000hours) Dimension variation[ Inner diameter ] Variation(1,000hours) Dimension variation[ Wall Thickness ] Variation(1,000hours) Dimension variation[ Length ] Variation(1,000hours) Dynamic Cut-Through Variation (1,000hours) Unit MPa MPa % g g % mm mm % mm mm % mm mm % N N % Oil imersion /Requirement Initial 120C1,000hours <30% Initial 120C1,000hours <10% Initial 120C1,000hours <10% Initial 120C1,000hours <10% Initial 120C1,000hours <10% Initial 120C1,000hours 30 PVDF/FKM 25.8 21.9 15.0 1.2 1.2 -0.8 4.40 4.45 -1.14 0.49 0.49 0.00 80.0 81.1 -1.4 125.2 125.8 0 Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Comparison between current material [mixture of PVDF/FKM] and silicone in sleeve shape Data of original and after oil immersed [120, 1000Hrs] Silicone 9.6 1.6 83.3 1.5 1.6 -6.9 4.02 4.23 -5.2 0.88 0.83 4.79 80.0 82.7 -3.4 38.6 14.7 61.9 Failure Pass Pass Pass Pass Failure The test condition and requirements are in line with the spec of a major car manufacture's. You can see from the data that PFAS (PVDF/FKM) is within the spec, but silicone is significantly out of spec on tensile strength and abrasion resistance (dynamic cut-through) worse than PFAS. This is data of 120, minimum temp requirement, but inside of transmission may rise up to 150, which is considered to be worse than the status of the table. Thus, we can say there is no alternative material of PFAS for this application.