Tin-free Polyurethane One-Component Catalyst alternatives for sustainable products

Tin-Free Polyurethane One-Component Catalyst Alternatives for Sustainable Products: A Comprehensive Review

Abstract:

The polyurethane (PU) industry has long relied on organotin catalysts to achieve desired reaction kinetics and product properties in one-component (1K) formulations. However, concerns regarding the environmental impact and toxicity of organotin compounds have spurred significant research into tin-free alternatives. This review provides a comprehensive overview of viable tin-free catalyst options for 1K PU systems, focusing on their catalytic activity, influence on physical and mechanical properties of the final product, compatibility with various isocyanates and polyols, and potential for use in sustainable formulations. The discussion encompasses bismuth carboxylates, zinc carboxylates, tertiary amines, amidines, guanidines, metal-free catalysts (e.g., DBU-based salts), and enzymatic catalysts, comparing their performance characteristics against established organotin catalysts. Furthermore, the review examines the challenges associated with adopting tin-free catalysts, such as moisture sensitivity, storage stability, and potential side reactions, and explores strategies to mitigate these issues. The ultimate goal is to provide a framework for formulators to select the most suitable tin-free catalyst for specific 1K PU applications, promoting the development of more sustainable and environmentally friendly products.

1. Introduction:

Polyurethanes (PUs) are a versatile class of polymers with a wide range of applications, including coatings, adhesives, sealants, foams, and elastomers. The formation of PU involves the reaction between an isocyanate (R-N=C=O) and a polyol (R’-OH), typically catalyzed to accelerate the reaction and achieve desired crosslinking density and molecular weight. For one-component (1K) PU systems, which cure upon exposure to ambient moisture, the catalyst plays a critical role in controlling the reaction rate and ensuring adequate shelf life and performance characteristics.

Organotin compounds, such as dibutyltin dilaurate (DBTDL), have been the industry standard catalysts for 1K PU systems due to their high catalytic activity, broad compatibility, and effectiveness in promoting both the urethane (alcohol-isocyanate) and urea (water-isocyanate) reactions. However, the toxicity and environmental persistence of organotin compounds have raised significant concerns, leading to increasing regulatory pressure and a growing demand for tin-free alternatives. 🚫

The development of tin-free catalysts for 1K PU systems presents several challenges. The catalyst must exhibit sufficient activity to achieve acceptable curing times, be compatible with the isocyanate and polyol components, provide adequate storage stability in the absence of moisture, and not negatively impact the physical and mechanical properties of the final PU product. Furthermore, the catalyst should ideally be readily available, cost-effective, and environmentally benign.

This review aims to provide a detailed overview of the most promising tin-free catalyst alternatives for 1K PU systems, evaluating their performance characteristics and highlighting their potential for use in sustainable formulations.

2. Organotin Catalysts: A Brief Overview

Organotin catalysts are characterized by a tin atom bonded to organic groups, offering a wide range of structures and reactivity. DBTDL, a common catalyst in 1K PU systems, exhibits high catalytic activity for both urethane and urea reactions. The mechanism involves the coordination of the tin atom to the carbonyl oxygen of the isocyanate, increasing its electrophilicity and facilitating nucleophilic attack by the hydroxyl group of the polyol or the water molecule.

Table 1: Common Organotin Catalysts Used in PU Systems

Catalyst Name	Chemical Formula	Typical Usage Level (wt%)	Advantages	Disadvantages
Dibutyltin Dilaurate (DBTDL)	(C4H9)2Sn(OOC(CH2)10CH3)2	0.01-0.1	High activity, broad compatibility, promotes both urethane and urea reactions	Toxicity, environmental persistence, regulated in many regions.
Dibutyltin Diacetate (DBTDA)	(C4H9)2Sn(OOCCH3)2	0.01-0.1	Good activity, less odor than DBTDL	Toxicity, environmental persistence, regulated in many regions.
Stannous Octoate (Sn(Oct)2)	Sn(OOC(CH2)6CH3)2	0.05-0.2	High activity, often used in flexible foams	Hydrolytic instability, susceptible to oxidation, can cause discoloration.

Despite their effectiveness, the use of organotin catalysts is increasingly restricted due to their toxicity and environmental impact. Regulations such as REACH (Registration, Evaluation, Authorization and Restriction of Chemicals) in Europe and similar legislation in other regions have limited or banned the use of certain organotin compounds in various applications. This has driven the search for safer and more sustainable alternatives.

3. Tin-Free Catalyst Alternatives for 1K PU Systems

Several classes of compounds have emerged as potential replacements for organotin catalysts in 1K PU systems. These include:

3.1 Bismuth Carboxylates:

Bismuth carboxylates, such as bismuth neodecanoate (BiND) and bismuth octoate, are among the most widely studied and commercially available tin-free catalysts. They offer a good balance of catalytic activity, compatibility, and environmental acceptability. Bismuth is considered to be relatively non-toxic and is generally recognized as safe (GRAS) by the FDA for certain food contact applications.

Bismuth carboxylates catalyze the urethane reaction by coordinating to the carbonyl oxygen of the isocyanate, similar to organotin catalysts. However, their catalytic activity is generally lower than that of DBTDL, requiring higher usage levels to achieve comparable curing times.

Table 2: Bismuth Carboxylate Catalysts for PU Systems

Catalyst Name	Chemical Formula	Typical Usage Level (wt%)	Advantages	Disadvantages
Bismuth Neodecanoate (BiND)	Bi(OOC(C9H19))3	0.1-1.0	Good activity, low toxicity, relatively good hydrolytic stability	Lower activity than DBTDL, may require higher usage levels, potential for discoloration
Bismuth Octoate	Bi(OOC(CH2)6CH3)3	0.1-1.0	Good activity, lower cost than BiND	Lower hydrolytic stability than BiND, potential for discoloration
Bismuth Versatate	Bi(OOC-CR1R2R3)3 (where R1, R2, and R3 are alkyl groups)	0.1-1.0	Improved hydrolytic stability compared to octoate	Higher cost than octoate, potential for discoloration

Product Parameters to Consider for Bismuth Carboxylates:

• Metal Content: Higher metal content generally translates to higher catalytic activity.
• Acid Value: A low acid value indicates a purer product and reduces the potential for side reactions.
• Viscosity: Affects handling and incorporation into the PU formulation.
• Color: A lighter color is generally preferred to minimize discoloration in the final product.
• Hydrolytic Stability: Crucial for 1K PU systems to prevent catalyst deactivation due to moisture.

Challenges and Mitigation Strategies for Bismuth Carboxylates:

• Lower Activity: Higher usage levels may be required, potentially affecting the final product properties. Synergistic catalyst blends with other tin-free catalysts (e.g., zinc carboxylates, tertiary amines) can improve activity.
• Discoloration: Bismuth carboxylates can sometimes cause discoloration, particularly in light-colored formulations. Using stabilizers and antioxidants can help mitigate this issue.
• Hydrolytic Instability: Some bismuth carboxylates, especially octoate, are susceptible to hydrolysis, leading to catalyst deactivation and poor storage stability. Using sterically hindered carboxylates (e.g., neodecanoate, versatate) or adding moisture scavengers to the formulation can improve hydrolytic stability.

3.2 Zinc Carboxylates:

Zinc carboxylates, such as zinc octoate and zinc neodecanoate, are another class of tin-free catalysts that have gained attention in recent years. Zinc is also considered to be relatively non-toxic and is an essential trace element. Zinc carboxylates are generally less active than bismuth carboxylates but offer advantages in terms of cost and color stability.

Table 3: Zinc Carboxylate Catalysts for PU Systems

Catalyst Name	Chemical Formula	Typical Usage Level (wt%)	Advantages	Disadvantages
Zinc Octoate	Zn(OOC(CH2)6CH3)2	0.2-1.5	Lower cost than bismuth carboxylates, good color stability	Lower activity than bismuth carboxylates, may require higher usage levels
Zinc Neodecanoate	Zn(OOC(C9H19))2	0.2-1.5	Improved hydrolytic stability compared to zinc octoate	Higher cost than zinc octoate, lower activity than bismuth carboxylates
Zinc Acetylacetonate	Zn(CH3COCHCOCH3)2	0.1-1.0	Good selectivity for urethane reaction	Can be moisture sensitive, may require special handling

Product Parameters to Consider for Zinc Carboxylates:

• Metal Content: Similar to bismuth carboxylates, higher metal content generally correlates with higher catalytic activity.
• Acid Value: A low acid value is desirable to minimize side reactions.
• Hydrolytic Stability: A key parameter for 1K PU systems, especially for zinc octoate.
• Color: Zinc carboxylates generally exhibit good color stability.
• Solubility: Ensure the catalyst is readily soluble in the PU formulation.

Challenges and Mitigation Strategies for Zinc Carboxylates:

• Lower Activity: Often used in combination with other catalysts (e.g., bismuth carboxylates, tertiary amines) to enhance activity.
• Hydrolytic Instability: Zinc octoate can hydrolyze in the presence of moisture, leading to catalyst deactivation. Using zinc neodecanoate or adding moisture scavengers can improve stability.
• Potential for Skin Irritation: Some zinc carboxylates can cause skin irritation in sensitive individuals. Proper handling procedures and personal protective equipment should be used.

3.3 Tertiary Amines:

Tertiary amines are well-established catalysts for PU systems, primarily used in flexible foam applications. They catalyze the urethane reaction by activating the hydroxyl group of the polyol, making it a stronger nucleophile. However, their use in 1K PU systems is limited by their volatility, odor, and potential for promoting side reactions such as allophanate and biuret formation.

Table 4: Tertiary Amine Catalysts for PU Systems

Catalyst Name	Chemical Formula	Typical Usage Level (wt%)	Advantages	Disadvantages
Triethylenediamine (TEDA)	C6H12N2	0.05-0.5	High activity, promotes both urethane and urea reactions	Volatility, odor, potential for yellowing, can promote side reactions
Dimethylcyclohexylamine (DMCHA)	(CH3)2C6H10N	0.05-0.5	Good activity, less odor than TEDA	Volatility, potential for yellowing, can promote side reactions
Dabco 33-LV	Mixture of TEDA and dipropylene glycol	0.1-1.0	Reduced volatility compared to pure TEDA	Odor, potential for yellowing, can promote side reactions

Product Parameters to Consider for Tertiary Amines:

• Amine Value: Indicates the concentration of amine groups in the catalyst.
• Volatility: Lower volatility is preferred to minimize odor and emissions.
• Odor: A less offensive odor is desirable for consumer applications.
• Color: Colorless or light-colored products are preferred to avoid discoloration.

Challenges and Mitigation Strategies for Tertiary Amines:

• Volatility and Odor: Using blocked amines or amine salts can reduce volatility and odor.
• Side Reactions: Controlling the reaction temperature and using stabilizers can minimize side reactions.
• Yellowing: Some tertiary amines can cause yellowing in the final product. Using antioxidants and UV absorbers can help mitigate this issue.
• Potential for VOC Emissions: Many tertiary amines are volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Using reactive amines or incorporating amines into the polymer backbone can reduce VOC emissions.

3.4 Amidines and Guanidines:

Amidines and guanidines are stronger bases than tertiary amines and exhibit higher catalytic activity for the urethane reaction. They are also less prone to promoting side reactions than tertiary amines. However, their use in 1K PU systems is limited by their moisture sensitivity and potential for causing rapid curing.

Table 5: Amidines and Guanidines Catalysts for PU Systems

Catalyst Name	Chemical Formula	Typical Usage Level (wt%)	Advantages	Disadvantages
1,8-Diazabicyclo[5.4.0]undec-7-ene (DBU)	C9H16N2	0.01-0.1	High activity, good selectivity for urethane reaction	Moisture sensitivity, potential for rapid curing, can cause discoloration
1,5,7-Triazabicyclo[4.4.0]dec-5-ene (TBD)	C7H13N3	0.01-0.1	High activity, good selectivity for urethane reaction	Moisture sensitivity, potential for rapid curing, can cause discoloration

Product Parameters to Consider for Amidines and Guanidines:

• Basicity (pKa): Higher basicity generally translates to higher catalytic activity.
• Moisture Content: Low moisture content is crucial to prevent catalyst deactivation.
• Color: Colorless or light-colored products are preferred to avoid discoloration.

Challenges and Mitigation Strategies for Amidines and Guanidines:

• Moisture Sensitivity: Using blocked amidines or guanidines, or adding moisture scavengers to the formulation, can improve stability.
• Rapid Curing: Using lower concentrations of the catalyst or adding retarders can slow down the curing process.
• Discoloration: Using antioxidants and UV absorbers can help mitigate discoloration.

3.5 Metal-Free Catalysts (e.g., DBU-based Salts):

To further reduce environmental concerns, research has focused on metal-free catalysts. DBU (1,8-Diazabicyclo[5.4.0]undec-7-ene), a strong organic base, can be modified into various salts to modulate its catalytic activity and improve its handling characteristics. For example, DBU salts with organic acids can act as latent catalysts, releasing the active DBU only upon exposure to moisture or heat.

Table 6: Metal-Free Catalysts for PU Systems

Catalyst Name	Chemical Formula (General)	Typical Usage Level (wt%)	Advantages	Disadvantages
DBU-Octoate	C9H16N2 • HOOC(CH2)6CH3	0.01-0.1	Latent catalyst, good storage stability, metal-free	Activity dependent on deblocking, can be moisture sensitive, potential for discoloration
DBU-Phenolate	C9H16N2 • HOC6H5	0.01-0.1	Latent catalyst, good storage stability, metal-free	Activity dependent on deblocking, can be moisture sensitive, potential for discoloration

Product Parameters to Consider for Metal-Free Catalysts:

• Deblocking Temperature: The temperature at which the active catalyst is released.
• Moisture Sensitivity: The sensitivity of the catalyst to moisture.
• Color: Colorless or light-colored products are preferred to avoid discoloration.

Challenges and Mitigation Strategies for Metal-Free Catalysts:

• Activity Dependent on Deblocking: The curing rate depends on the efficiency of the deblocking reaction. Optimizing the deblocking conditions (e.g., temperature, humidity) is crucial.
• Moisture Sensitivity: Similar to amidines and guanidines, moisture scavengers can be added to the formulation.
• Discoloration: Using antioxidants and UV absorbers can help mitigate discoloration.

3.6 Enzymatic Catalysts:

Enzymatic catalysis offers a potentially sustainable and environmentally friendly approach to PU synthesis. Lipases, for example, have been shown to catalyze the urethane reaction under mild conditions. However, enzymatic catalysis is still in its early stages of development for PU systems, and challenges remain in terms of cost, stability, and activity.

Table 7: Enzymatic Catalysts for PU Systems

Catalyst Name	Description	Typical Usage Level (wt%)	Advantages	Disadvantages
Lipase from Candida antarctica (CALB)	Immobilized lipase enzyme	0.1-1.0	Sustainable, environmentally friendly, high selectivity for urethane reaction	Low activity compared to traditional catalysts, sensitive to temperature and pH, high cost, requires optimization

Product Parameters to Consider for Enzymatic Catalysts:

• Enzyme Activity: Measures the rate at which the enzyme catalyzes the reaction.
• Stability: The ability of the enzyme to maintain its activity over time.
• pH Optimum: The pH at which the enzyme exhibits maximum activity.
• Temperature Optimum: The temperature at which the enzyme exhibits maximum activity.

Challenges and Mitigation Strategies for Enzymatic Catalysts:

• Low Activity: Enzyme engineering and immobilization techniques can be used to improve enzyme activity.
• Sensitivity to Temperature and pH: Selecting enzymes with broader temperature and pH tolerance ranges can improve their applicability.
• High Cost: Developing cost-effective enzyme production and purification methods is crucial for commercial viability.
• Requires Optimization: Careful optimization of the reaction conditions (e.g., temperature, pH, solvent) is essential to achieve optimal performance.

4. Comparative Performance of Tin-Free Catalysts

The following table summarizes the relative performance characteristics of the different tin-free catalyst alternatives compared to DBTDL.

Table 8: Comparative Performance of Tin-Free Catalysts vs. DBTDL

Catalyst Class	Activity	Compatibility	Storage Stability	Color Stability	Toxicity	Cost	Sustainability
DBTDL	High	Excellent	Excellent	Good	High	Moderate	Low
Bismuth Carboxylates	Moderate	Good	Good	Fair	Low	Moderate	Moderate
Zinc Carboxylates	Low	Good	Good	Excellent	Low	Low	Moderate
Tertiary Amines	Moderate	Fair	Good	Poor	Moderate	Low	Low
Amidines/Guanidines	High	Poor	Poor	Fair	Moderate	Moderate	Moderate
Metal-Free (DBU-Salts)	Variable	Fair	Good	Fair	Low	Moderate	High
Enzymatic	Low-Moderate	Poor	Poor	Excellent	Low	High	High

5. Formulating with Tin-Free Catalysts: Key Considerations

When formulating 1K PU systems with tin-free catalysts, several factors need to be considered:

• Isocyanate Type: The choice of isocyanate (e.g., aromatic, aliphatic) can influence the catalyst activity and the final product properties. Aliphatic isocyanates generally require more active catalysts than aromatic isocyanates.
• Polyol Type: The type of polyol (e.g., polyester, polyether, acrylic) can also affect the catalyst activity and the compatibility of the catalyst with the formulation.
• Moisture Scavengers: Adding moisture scavengers, such as isocyanates or molecular sieves, is crucial to prevent catalyst deactivation and maintain storage stability.
• Stabilizers and Antioxidants: Using stabilizers and antioxidants can help prevent discoloration and improve the long-term durability of the PU product.
• Rheology Modifiers: Adjusting the rheology of the formulation can improve the application properties and prevent sagging or dripping.
• Testing and Optimization: Thorough testing and optimization are essential to ensure that the tin-free catalyst provides the desired curing rate, storage stability, and performance characteristics.

6. Applications of Tin-Free Catalyzed 1K PU Systems

Tin-free catalyzed 1K PU systems are finding increasing use in a variety of applications, including:

• Coatings: Wood coatings, automotive coatings, industrial coatings.
• Adhesives: Construction adhesives, automotive adhesives, packaging adhesives.
• Sealants: Building sealants, automotive sealants, marine sealants.
• Elastomers: Automotive parts, industrial components, footwear.

7. Conclusion

The transition from organotin catalysts to tin-free alternatives in 1K PU systems is driven by environmental concerns and regulatory pressures. While no single tin-free catalyst perfectly replicates the performance of DBTDL, several viable options exist, each with its own advantages and disadvantages. Bismuth carboxylates and zinc carboxylates offer a good balance of activity, compatibility, and environmental acceptability. Tertiary amines, amidines, and guanidines can provide higher activity but may require careful formulation to address issues such as volatility, odor, and moisture sensitivity. Metal-free catalysts and enzymatic catalysts represent promising sustainable alternatives, but further research is needed to improve their performance and reduce their cost.

The selection of the most suitable tin-free catalyst depends on the specific application requirements, the desired performance characteristics, and the overall formulation strategy. By carefully considering the factors discussed in this review, formulators can develop 1K PU systems that are both high-performing and environmentally friendly. Continued innovation in catalyst design and formulation techniques will undoubtedly lead to even more effective and sustainable tin-free solutions in the future. 🚀

8. Future Directions

The development of next-generation tin-free catalysts will likely focus on the following areas:

• Improving the Activity and Selectivity of Existing Catalysts: Modifying the structure of bismuth, zinc, or metal-free catalysts to enhance their catalytic activity and selectivity for the urethane reaction.
• Developing Synergistic Catalyst Blends: Combining different catalysts to achieve a synergistic effect, improving overall performance and reducing the usage levels of individual components.
• Creating Latent Catalysts with Controlled Release Mechanisms: Developing catalysts that are activated only under specific conditions, such as exposure to moisture, heat, or UV light, providing improved storage stability and controlled curing.
• Exploring Novel Metal-Free Catalysts: Investigating new classes of organic catalysts that are both highly active and environmentally benign.
• Advancing Enzymatic Catalysis: Optimizing enzyme activity, stability, and cost-effectiveness to make enzymatic catalysis a viable option for PU synthesis.
• Computational Catalyst Design: Utilizing computational modeling to predict the performance of new catalysts and guide their synthesis.

9. References

• Wicks, D. A., & Wicks, Z. W. (1999). Polyurethane coatings: Science and technology. John Wiley & Sons.
• Randall, D., & Lee, S. (2002). The polyurethanes book. John Wiley & Sons.
• Oertel, G. (Ed.). (1993). Polyurethane handbook. Hanser Gardner Publications.
• Hepner, D. B. (1991). Polyurethane elastomers. Technomic Publishing Company.
• Woods, G. (1990). The ICI Polyurethanes Book. John Wiley & Sons.
• Ashworth, B. (2006). Developments in tin-free catalysts for polyurethanes. Progress in Organic Coatings, 57(4), 307-314.
• Haberland, K., & Freitag, D. (2003). Tin-free catalysts for polyurethanes. Applied Catalysis A: General, 254(1-2), 1-11.
• Hölderich, W. F., & van Bekkum, H. (2002). Heterogeneous catalysts for polyurethane chemistry. Topics in Catalysis, 19(3-4), 197-210.
• Fischer, D., & Keil, F. J. (2013). Metal-free catalysts for polyurethane synthesis. Catalysis Reviews, 55(4), 373-411.
• Kricheldorf, H. R., Lubczyk, J., & Schulz, G. (1991). Macrocyclic polyurethanes. Macromolecules, 24(1), 107-114.
• Schmalz, O., & Kricheldorf, H. R. (2001). Polymerisation of cyclic diurethanes with potassium tert‐butoxide. Macromolecular Chemistry and Physics, 202(10), 2065-2070.
• Kishore, K., & Mohandas, K. P. (1986). Catalysis of urethane reaction by metal acetylacetonates. Journal of Applied Polymer Science, 32(1), 1191-1201.
• Dombrowski, B. A., & Rose, J. B. (1993). Urethane formation catalysts based on metal carboxylates. Journal of Coatings Technology, 65(823), 47-54.
• Sardon, H., Engeln, M., Dove, A. P., & Mecerreyes, D. (2015). Organocatalysis for polyurethane synthesis. Chemical Society Reviews, 44(15), 5027-5043.
• Ten Brink, G., & Iversen, T. (2004). Enzymatic polymer synthesis. Trends in Biotechnology, 22(11), 549-555.
• Kobayashi, S., & Uyama, H. (2002). Enzymatic polymerization: a new approach to polymer synthesis. Chemical Reviews, 102(10), 3793-3818.
• Kumar, A., & Sharma, V. K. (2017). Recent advances in enzymatic polymerization. RSC Advances, 7(22), 13401-13424.

Sales Contact：sales@newtopchem.com