Product Features
Last updated
2026-01-18
Material identity
Chemical name: Basic Copper Hydroxy Phosphate (also indexed as copper(II) hydroxide phosphate / dicopper hydroxide phosphate)
Common formula notation: Cu₂(OH)PO₄ (database form: Cu₂HO₅P)
CAS: 12158-74-6; 1318-84-9
Physical form: powder additive (compounded into polymer)
What it is not: not a complete flame-retardant package; not a plating bath; not a substitute for formulation-specific fire testing
Activation trigger & conditions
Trigger: high-energy thermal exposure (fire / overheating) in the polymer matrix
Energy domain: condensed-phase thermal degradation regime (formulation- and scenario-dependent)
Absent / insufficient behavior: if the matrix does not generate the chemical environment that enables copper-driven char shift, smoke reduction can be small or inconsistent
Excess behavior: excessive loading or poor compatibility can create discoloration or processing issues; performance may plateau or become non-uniform if dispersion is poor
Functional role (function-based)
• Smoke suppression (condensed-phase mechanism focus in halogenated matrices)
• Char promotion / carbonaceous residue support under fire exposure
• Fire-scenario chemistry modulation (matrix-dependent; requires validation)
Application window
Compatible systems: PVC and related halogenated/vinyl formulations where smoke reduction is a design target
Broad loading statement: typically used at low wt% levels as an additive; optimize by formulation and target test method
Processing notes: treat as a dispersible inorganic additive; control dispersion and avoid chemistry that drives premature copper interaction during compounding (validate per stabilizer / plasticizer package)
Limitations & failure modes (cause → mechanism → observable effect)
1)
Non-halogen / low reactive environment → copper chemistry pathway not engaged → little measurable smoke reduction
2)
Plasticizer / stabilizer interference → copper speciation and degradation pathway shift → inconsistent char / inconsistent smoke metrics across tests
3)
Poor dispersion / agglomeration → local hot-spots and uneven chemistry → scatter in smoke results; localized discoloration or defects
Alternatives & tradeoffs (mechanistic comparison; no superiority claims)
•
Molybdate systems: often used for smoke suppression via different condensed-phase chemistry; compatibility depends on formulation and stabilizers
•
Zinc systems: can influence smoke/char in PVC via different pathways; may behave differently with plasticizers and heat history
•
Barrier / filler approaches: reduce smoke via mass/heat transfer changes; typically require different loading and morphology control
When to use
• When PVC/vinyl smoke reduction is a defined requirement and can be validated under relevant fire tests
• When you can control dispersion and keep performance stable across processing history
• When stabilizer/plasticizer interactions have been screened (lab + scale-up)
When not to use
• When the polymer system is non-halogenated and smoke reduction benefit is not observed in screening
• When appearance must be fully color-neutral and any tint is unacceptable (must be formulation-verified)
• When leaching / exposure constraints apply (must be evaluated per end-use requirements)
FAQ
Is BCHP a complete fire-safety solution?
No. It is an additive that must be formulated and validated within a full fire-safety system and test method.
Why does it work better in PVC-like matrices?
Patents and literature associate copper hydroxide phosphate with PVC smoke suppression; performance is matrix- and formulation-dependent and must be tested in the target compound.
What should we measure first?
Run a controlled screening with fixed processing history and compare smoke metrics and residue/char indicators under the same fire test method used by your customer.
Data
No universal numeric performance values are claimed here; results are formulation- and test-method-dependent and must be measured in your compound.
Sources / references
• Copper hydroxide phosphate identifiers and formula notation: PubChem (compound 166635)
• PVC + copper hydroxide phosphate smoke suppression patent context: EP0063768A1
• Material page:
Basic Copper Hydroxy Phosphate (BCHP)
Further reading (technical insights)
Smoke Suppressant vs Flame Retardant
Role of HCl in Smoke Reduction
Copper-Driven Char Catalysis
Copper Species Evolution in Fire
Condensed vs Gas-Phase Suppression
Chemical vs Barrier Smoke Control
Phosphate vs Hydroxyl Contributions
Copper vs Molybdate Systems
Copper vs Zinc Systems
Why Smoke Suppression Fails in Non-PVC Polymers
Why Plasticized PVC Reduces Effect
Why Char Formation Is Inconsistent
Fillers Neutralizing Smoke Suppression
Lab vs Real Fire Smoke Mismatch
Why Stabilizers Disrupt Copper Systems