DB66 High Wear Resistance Plasticizer for Crystal Shoe Soles

# DB66 High Wear Resistance Plasticizer for Crystal Shoe Soles > **Why do crystal soles fail at the abrasion test while a black sole of the same hardness passes?** Because abrasion resistance and hardness are not the same property. A clear sole combines a hardness target with a transparency requirement, and the plasticizer package has to deliver both while staying flexible at low temperature. DB66 is designed for PVC and TPR sole systems with stable performance in abrasion resistance and repeated low-temperature flexing, suitable for injection and compression moulded soles. Hardness and resilience targets should be confirmed through a trial on your formulation. ## Abrasion resistance is a plasticizer decision as much as a filler decision Sole wear comes from two effects that run at the same time. Abrasive wear removes material from the surface, and fatigue wear opens small cracks that grow with each step. In a plasticized sole compound, the plasticizer sets the flexibility that lets the material deform under load instead of cracking, while the filler and the resin set the hardness. When the plasticizer is under-dosed for the target hardness, the compound becomes more brittle and the abrasion loss rises; when it is over-dosed, the sole deforms too far and the wear rate again increases, and the part can also feel soft at the edges. | Sole performance factor | What sets it | Practical consequence | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Abrasion loss | Plasticizer type and loading versus filler | Decides how long the tread pattern lasts | | Low-temperature flexing | Plasticizer low-temperature behaviour | Cracks in winter or in cold storage | | Hardness and rebound | Loading and filler level | Comfort and dimensional stability | | Transparency (crystal grades) | Compatibility and refractive index match | Haze, cloudiness, visible core lines | | Tensile strength | Whole compound balance | Resistance to tearing at the flex line | ## Manufacturer data on DB66 Per the manufacturer data, tensile strength shows an improvement direction of about 20% after filler addition, and DB66 can replace more than 50% of the primary DOP / DOTP plasticizer. Both figures are directions to be verified on your own formulation: tensile and abrasion results depend on filler grade and loading, on moulding conditions and on the test method used. | Property | Manufacturer direction | Verification | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Tensile strength after filler addition | About 20% improvement direction | Tensile test on moulded specimens | | Replacement of primary plasticizer | More than 50% of DOP / DOTP | Staged trial at 30%, 50% and above | | Abrasion resistance | Stable performance direction | Abrasion test on finished soles | | Low-temperature flexing | Stable under repeated flex | Cold flex test at the service temperature | | Moulding methods | Injection and compression | Confirm cycle and hardness | ## Designing a crystal sole compound Crystal soles raise a requirement that ordinary soles do not: the compound has to stay clear. Transparency in plasticized PVC depends mainly on compatibility between the plasticizer and the resin, and on the absence of domains that scatter light. A plasticizer that separates slightly during cooling, or that gels unevenly, will show up as haze even when the mechanical properties are correct. | Design step | Setting | Note for a clear sole | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Hardness target | Set from the product brief | Hardness moves with total loading | | Plasticizer package | DB66 as the main fraction | Compatibility supports clarity | | Filler | Kept low where transparency is required | Filler raises hardness but reduces clarity | | Stabilizer and lubricant | Chosen for colour and release | Some lubricants can cloud the surface | | Moulding conditions | Stable temperature and cycle | Uneven cooling shows as internal haze | Where a crystal effect is produced by a formulation rather than by a transparent compound alone, the plasticizer still has a role, because uneven gelation and migration both disturb the optical structure. The trial should therefore be evaluated for appearance, not only for hardness and abrasion. ## Defect checklist for sole moulding | Defect | Likely cause | First check | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | High abrasion loss | Loading too low for the hardness target | Loading and filler balance | | Cracks at the flex line | Low-temperature flexibility insufficient | Cold flex result | | Haze or cloudiness | Compatibility or cooling profile | Trial sheet clarity and mould cooling | | Sticky surface | Over-loading or migration | Total loading and stabilizer system | | Warping after demoulding | Cooling or packing pressure | Cycle settings | ## Frequently asked questions **Can DB66 be used in TPR soles as well as PVC?** It is described as designed for PVC and TPR sole systems, with injection and compression moulding both supported. The loading that suits each system differs and is confirmed by trial. **How much of the primary plasticizer can be replaced?** Per the manufacturer data, more than 50% of the primary DOP or DOTP can be replaced. A staged trial from about 30% upwards is the practical way to confirm the result on your line. **Will replacement change the hardness?** It can. Different plasticizers have different plasticizing efficiency by weight, so the total loading usually needs a small adjustment to hold the hardness target. **How should abrasion be evaluated?** On specimens produced under the intended production conditions and tested by the method required by your customer's specification, with a reference sole produced from the current formulation for comparison. ## Request a sample and a recommendation Send us your sole formulation and hardness target and our team will suggest a starting package with DB66, supplied as a 1kg complimentary testing sample dispatched worldwide via DHL or FedEx. Trial order MOQ is 1 MT, and bulk shipments are loaded as 23 MT flexitank containers from Ningbo or Shanghai.