Summary
- ECTFE/ETFE is rated better with
- Halogenated hydrocarbons (+96 points); Fuels, mineral oils and aliphatic hydrocarbons (+37 points); Esters and ethers (+32 points); Ketones and aldehydes (+31 points); Mineral acids (+30 points); Oxidising agents and halogens (+28 points); Amines and nitrogen compounds (+21 points)
- Within 10 points of each other
- Organic acids; Alkalis; Salts and salt solutions; Alcohols and glycols; Foods and beverages
Points are the difference in the share of rows rated A or B.
The two materials
PP
Polypropylene
Polypropylene resists most acids, alkalis and salt solutions. Concentrated oxidising acids, chlorinated solvents and aromatic hydrocarbons attack it, and it turns brittle below about 0 °C.
Rated rows: 978. A 66 %, B 11 %, C 15 %, D 8 %
ECTFE/ETFE
Ethylene chlorotrifluoroethylene / ethylene tetrafluoroethylene
ECTFE and ETFE are tough fluoropolymers with broad resistance. Hot amines and some chlorinated solvents at elevated temperature are their main limits.
Rated rows: 374. A 94 %, B 6 %, C 0 %, D 0 %
Share of rows rated A or B, by chemical class
How often the two ratings agree
Chemical classes were assigned by this site, not by the source. Mixtures and trade products without a clear class are not counted.
By chemical class
| Chemical class | PP: rated A or B | ECTFE/ETFE: rated A or B |
|---|---|---|
| Mineral acids | 70 % (63 rows) | 100 % (37 rows) |
| Organic acids | 97 % (64 rows) | 100 % (33 rows) |
| Alkalis | 100 % (22 rows) | 100 % (14 rows) |
| Salts and salt solutions | 99 % (198 rows) | 100 % (114 rows) |
| Oxidising agents and halogens | 72 % (61 rows) | 100 % (17 rows) |
| Alcohols and glycols | 93 % (59 rows) | 100 % (25 rows) |
| Phenols | 79 % (14 rows) | – |
| Ketones and aldehydes | 69 % (35 rows) | 100 % (14 rows) |
| Esters and ethers | 63 % (71 rows) | 95 % (20 rows) |
| Amines and nitrogen compounds | 79 % (39 rows) | 100 % (9 rows) |
| Aromatic hydrocarbons | 14 % (14 rows) | – |
| Fuels, mineral oils and aliphatic hydrocarbons | 63 % (78 rows) | 100 % (13 rows) |
| Vegetable and animal oils, fats, essential oils | 75 % (48 rows) | – |
| Halogenated hydrocarbons | 4 % (70 rows) | 100 % (16 rows) |
| Foods and beverages | 100 % (46 rows) | 100 % (26 rows) |
Where the ratings differ most
Rows where the two ratings at 20 °C are at least two grades apart: 56 in total, the first 40 shown.
| Chemical | Concentration | PP | ECTFE/ETFE |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1,3-Butadiene | D | A | |
| Amyl Chloride | D | A | |
| Aqua Regia | D | A | |
| Benzyl Alcohol | D | A | |
| Bromine | D | A | |
| Butyric Acid | D | A | |
| Carbon Disulfide | D | A | |
| Carbon Tetrachloride | D | A | |
| Cedar Oil | D | A | |
| Chlorine | 10 % wet | D | A |
| Chromic-Sulfuric Acid | concentrated | D | A |
| Cinnamon Oil | D | A | |
| Diethyl Ether | technical grade | D | A |
| Diethylbenzene | D | A | |
| Fluorine | D | A | |
| Nitric Acid | 66 % | D | A |
| Nitric Acid | 70 % | D | A |
| Perchloric Acid | 70 % | D | A |
| Perchloroethylene (PCE) | D | A | |
| Sulfur Dioxide | liquid | D | A |
| Thionyl Chloride | technical grade | D | A |
| Trichloroethane | D | A | |
| Trichloroethylene (TCE) | 100 % | D | A |
| Turpentine Oil | D | A | |
| Xylene | D | A | |
| 1,2-Dichlorobenzene | C | A | |
| 1,4-Dichlorobenzene | C | A | |
| Acetonitrile | C | A | |
| Acrylonitrile | C | A | |
| Amyl Acetate | C | A | |
| Benzene | C | A | |
| Bromobenzene | D | B | |
| Bromoform | D | B | |
| Butyl Acetate | 100 % | C | A |
| Butyl Acrylate | 100 % | C | A |
| Chlorine Water | C | A | |
| Chlorobenzene | C | A | |
| Chloroethane (Ethyl Chloride) | C | A | |
| Chromic Acid | 50 % | C | A |
| Cumene | C | A |
Rating scale
- A very good resistance
- B good resistance
- C limited resistance
- D not resistant
- – no data
- K no general statement possible
A rating marked * is an estimate in the source, not a test result. An estimate is given as one value without a temperature.
More comparisons
Frequently Asked Questions
Is PP or ECTFE/ETFE more chemical-resistant?
Of 374 chemicals rated for both materials at 20 °C, PP and ECTFE/ETFE share the same rating in 287 rows (77 %). PP is rated better in 8 rows and ECTFE/ETFE in 79 rows.
How do PP and ECTFE/ETFE compare for chemical resistance?
Based on 374 chemicals tested for both: PP is rated better with –. ECTFE/ETFE is rated better with Halogenated hydrocarbons, Fuels, mineral oils and aliphatic hydrocarbons, Esters and ethers, Ketones and aldehydes. They perform similarly with Organic acids, Alkalis, Salts and salt solutions, Alcohols and glycols.
About this data
The ratings come from the chemical resistance list published by Bürkle GmbH, which compiled them from raw-material manufacturers’ data. They describe laboratory tests on the raw material at 20 °C and 50 °C.
A finished part also sees pressure, mechanical stress, welds and mixtures that a laboratory test does not. Treat the rating as a first filter and test under your own conditions before relying on it.