CAJ | 학술논문

通过比较钙锌稳定剂A和有机锡稳定剂B的稳定效果，确定了两种稳定剂在管材配方中各自的加入量。对分别由两种稳定剂制得的管材进行性能测试，发现使用钙锌稳定剂A的管材冲击性能差，达不到标准要求。以Brahendar塑化曲线为指导，通过对配方及工艺的调整，钙锌稳定剂A制得的管材能够达到标准要求。比较两种稳定剂应用于PVC管材成本，钙锌稳定剂A制得的管材成本较低。
통과비교개자은정제A화유궤석은정제B적은정효과，학정료량충은정제재관재배방중각자적가입량。대분별유량충은정제제득적관재진행성능측시，발현사용개자은정제A적관재충격성능차，체불도표준요구。이Brahendar소화곡선위지도，통과대배방급공예적조정，개자은정제A제득적관재능구체도표준요구。비교량충은정제응용우PVC관재성본，개자은정제A제득적관재성본교저。
Based on the comparison of stabilizing effect of Ca/Zn stabilizer A and organotin stabilizer B, the dosage of the two stabilizers in pipe formula were determined respectively. Properties of pipes using the two stabilizers were tested. The impact performance of the pipe using Ca/Zn stabilizer was poor and could not meet standard requirement. According to Brabendar plasticizing curve, pipe formula and processing technique were changed, then the modified pipe could meet the standard requirement. The cost of the pipe using Ca/Zn stabilizer was lower than the pipe using organotin stabilizer.