Looking back at industrial chemistry, the mid-20th century stands as the turning point for organophosphate compounds. Isopropylated Trisphenyl Phosphate, often called ITTPP or by its registry names, appeared just as demand rose for improved flame retardants and plasticizers in manufacturing. Those years brought growing attention to worker safety and fire prevention, especially in electrical goods and building materials. Producers sought compounds that offered heat resistance and flexibility, responding to building codes and stricter workplace standards. ITTPP found its way onto factory floors as a better way to meet those tougher benchmarks, benefiting from lessons learned with less stable predecessors.
At its simplest, Isopropylated Trisphenyl Phosphate belongs to the family of aryl phosphates. Makers turn to this compound to take advantage of its particular balance: solid flame retardant properties without the brittleness that sometimes plagues older additives. It improves the feel of plastics, making items like wire insulation more durable. Instead of breaking down at ordinary temperatures, it holds together in tough conditions, offering performance well beyond basic requirements for safety and longevity.
ITTPP appears as a clear, slightly viscous liquid at room temperature. The isopropyl groups bonded to the phenyl phosphate backbone do more than alter its structure — they push up the compound’s resistance to breakdown both from heat and exposure to oxygen. ITTPP resists dissolving in water but dissolves well in most common organic solvents. Its phosphorus content tips it toward lower flammability, which testing confirms with high limiting oxygen index values and self-extinguishing qualities in plastics. It remains stable across a broad temperature range, often holding steady up to 250°C before any significant chemical changes.
Technical data sheets for ITTPP list purity from 95% to 99%, with phosphorus levels documented for consistent fire-resistance performance. Regulatory standards under REACH and TSCA ask for transparency in labeling, including information on isopropyl group distribution and impurity thresholds. Bottles and drums shipped to users include hazard designations under GHS, warning about possible irritation on contact. Different grades are formulated to support electronics or construction applications, and batch test results confirm viscosity, acid value, and color according to ASTM or ISO benchmarks.
Chemical producers typically prepare ITTPP via a Williamson-type ether synthesis. In a reactor vessel, isopropyl alcohol meets trisphenyl phosphate with a strong acid catalyst, setting off selective isopropylation on the phenyl rings. Constant mixing and heat drive the process, then crude product moves to several stages of distillation and filtration. Finished ITTPP has to meet strict quality cutoffs for color, clarity, and purity. Each stage of synthesis is tracked through in-process testing to prevent build-up of unwanted byproducts or variations batch-to-batch.
ITTPP, once made, stands up well to most typical chemical environments. It resists hydrolysis better than non-isopropylated aryl phosphates. In labs, researchers sometimes modify it with other alkyl or aryl groups to tune properties for specialized equipment or composite materials. ITTPP may react under strong acidic or alkaline conditions, but in most real-world uses, it remains stable and resists leaching or migration in plastics. Once blended into PVC or polyurethane, it seldom participates in further chemistry in-service, which reduces risks of unexpected breakdown.
ITTPP hides behind many trade designations. Depending on supplier, it shows up as ITTPP, ITPPP, or various trade names such as Reofos 35 or Fyrolflex RDP. Chemical abstracts list countless registry numbers because some producers tweak the ratio of isopropyl groups or package the molecule in different ways for niche recipes. I have seen “isopropylated triphenyl phosphate” and even abbreviated branding like “ITP Flame Retardant” on shipping manifests, reflecting both oversight by international chemical authorities and practicalities of commercial marketing.
ITTPP does not escape scrutiny. Guidelines from OSHA and the European Chemicals Agency spell out safe handling. Spills get immediate attention because the liquid causes irritation on skin and eyes. Facilities dealing with bulk drums put proper ventilation and splash protection in place as a matter of routine, not just compliance. Container labeling covers both acute and chronic risks, and routine air monitoring takes place in work areas to prevent inhalation when loading mixers or preparing resin blends. In the supply chain, each drum carries batch numbers and safety sheets for rapid response if any issues crop up on loading docks or in transit.
ITTPP stands as a critical ingredient in PVC and polyurethane production for wire and cable coatings, and it shows up in conveyor belts, floor tile, and synthetic leather. Demand stretches beyond simple fire safety or plastic flexibility. In electrical and electronic assemblies, ITTPP’s chemical stability supports stricter voltage and heat-resistance demands, particularly in enclosed power supplies and circuit boards. In my own visits to flooring factories, operators rely on ITTPP to boost both slip resistance and long service life, reducing the need for early repair or replacement.
R&D labs chase down new blends of ITTPP to replace or reduce halogenated flame retardants, which have drawn tighter regulation over environmental and health concerns. Teams running performance tests try out blends with recycled plastics to see if ITTPP can provide both durability and improved sustainability. Universities and private research groups investigate how the compound interacts at the molecular level inside evolving polymer structures. Reports keep surfacing of ITTPP-based composites showing equal or better mechanical and thermal stability than more established alternatives, driving more manufacturers to trial this additive on production lines.
Researchers have run extensive studies on ITTPP’s toxicology profile. Acute toxicity in animals rates low by oral or dermal exposure, but questions remain about chronic low-level absorption, especially as ITTPP can slowly volatilize from finished plastic parts. Environmental chemists now examine traces of ITTPP in surface water and indoor dust, studying potential endocrine disrupting effects. I have read reviews that weigh these concerns against tested risk levels under current workplace exposure limits, noting that product bans appear premature but ongoing monitoring and stricter air quality testing in schools and homes will shape where ITTPP can go in future consumer goods.
Pressure keeps building to develop flame retardants that neither pollute nor linger in people or the environment. For ITTPP, the path forward looks like one of both adaptation and close observation. Manufacturers put resources into greener syntheses, seeking ways to cut back on waste, lower emissions, and improve ease of recycling. Large players in electronics and building materials watch regulatory signals closely and invest in alternatives, but for applications where fire safety edges out all other concerns, ITTPP likely keeps its place at the production bench. As health and safety data changes, firms that can innovate quickly with new formulations or design strategies will shape which compounds -- ITTPP included -- remain fixtures in tomorrow’s materials markets.
Isopropylated Trisphenyl Phosphate, known in many labs and factories as IPPP, works its way into lots of products that don’t seem to have much in common at first glance. The truth is, most people never stop to ask what’s inside the plastic casings of their TV, or why their older car seats haven’t gone up in smoke during a mishap. This clear, oily chemical plays a big part in that story.
IPPP steps up mostly as a flame retardant. Manufacturers blend it into plastics, rubbers, and coatings to slow the spread of fire. Electrical cables, furniture foam, and tool handles would burn a lot faster without its help. Walk into an office space filled with computers, printers, and rolling chairs and you’ll find plenty of it in the wiring and plastic shells. Factories keep using IPPP because it lets items pass fire safety tests, which helps keep recalls—and tragedies—off the news.
Folks who have gutted an old couch or worked stripping wire in recycling centers might recognize the faint chemical smell where it lingers. Firefighter friends of mine have said modern homes burn differently and more fiercely now, but without chemicals like IPPP, it wouldn’t even be a contest. The stuff buys precious seconds or minutes. It makes me think about everything from kids’ toys to car interiors and what stands between us and disaster.
People don’t just find IPPP in household goods because it keeps things from catching fire. It works as a plasticizer too. That means it softens and stabilizes plastics. In industrial life, IPPP also acts as a hydraulic fluid and part of lubricant formulas. Take any elevator maintained over the years, or older machines moving big loads—they need hydraulic fluids that won’t break down or catch fire easily. IPPP provides that extra safety edge.
Factories also use it in adhesives, certain paints, and sometimes as an antifoaming agent. Basically, if something needs to stay tough, flexible, and not burst into flames, IPPP often plays a role.
Not everyone feels great about having flame retardants stitched into most home products. Studies can’t always agree on how much risk these chemicals bring. Some research points out they can enter the air as dust and reach inside our bodies over time. Scientists keep checking for signs of nerve or hormone disruption, and certain places—like California—have stricter rules about what gets used in furniture and baby products.
From experience talking to workers in recycling plants, I know long-term exposure brings up real health concerns. People want less invisible risk in the air and dust inside their own homes. It’s fair to push for more testing, and for upgrades to old rules about what goes in everyday items. The science keeps moving, but safer alternatives usually take investment and patience. Changing what’s inside millions of products isn’t fast work.
IPPP shows up for a good reason: it protects life and property from fire. That said, it makes sense to keep looking for ways to do that job with less risk to health. Supporting research into new flame retardant chemistries and better building materials could give us the best of both worlds: homes and cars that aren’t firetraps, without a chemical cloud hanging over everyday life. Talking about what’s in our couches and tech gear is one place to start.
In the end, the story of IPPP reminds us that real safety means looking beneath the surface and paying attention to what’s hidden in plain sight. We all play a part—consumers, workers, scientists, and leaders—in pushing for solutions that don’t trade one danger for another.
You find a name like Isopropylated Trisphenyl Phosphate on a materials list, and you might wonder if you even want to pronounce it, much less touch it. This chemical pops up in flame retardants, lubricants, and hydraulic fluids. I remember spotting it on a label in an electronics manufacturing plant and needing to figure out exactly how close I wanted my hands to get.
A lot of companies use this compound because it stands up well to heat and doesn’t break down quickly. People counting on a machine to work safely during a power surge don’t think about the cocktail of ingredients inside. Chemists make those calls. That doesn’t mean the folks mixing, pouring, or cleaning up around the stuff shouldn’t ask questions—myself included.
Many chemicals in this family carry risks. If you rub some on your skin, it could cause irritation. Breathing dust or vapors for hours leaves your lungs dry and scratchy. From my time floor-walking in factories, I saw that holding an oily rag or scrubbing up spills left many workers with cracked fingers. Rarely did anyone connect those minor injuries to bigger risks down the road.
Toxicologists found that long-term and repeated exposure to isopropylated trisphenyl phosphate can have effects on the liver and nervous system. Some animal studies have raised red flags for hormone disruption and developmental concerns. The details matter. The chemical’s risk level changes based on how much lingers in the air, how long you’re around it, and whether your work involves open drums or closed systems. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency flagged it for further review, and the EU narrowed its allowed uses. That should make anyone handling large quantities pay attention.
One evening working late, I walked into a part of the plant that stank of something sharp, almost sweet. I recognized that signature, chemical “bite,” and asked about it. Storage barrels had been moved, and the team, running on autopilot, wore their usual gloves and masks. The Material Safety Data Sheet called for splash goggles, Nitrile gloves, and even a respirator, but that paperwork usually sat in a binder that gathered dust. Nobody wants to sweat in a half-mask all night.
That night, a spill led to headaches and a mild rash for several workers. Nothing life-changing, but it got people thinking—how often were gloves swapped, or goggles worn? Spot checks filled in the paperwork, but not the practice.
Instead of relying on labels and data sheets, I always push for practical steps. Ventilation counts for a lot. Fans, local exhausts, or simple open windows change the game. Training shouldn’t be once a year; drills and reminders keep people alert. Gloves and goggles may feel like overkill but prevent most problems if used properly.
Push supervisors to order better gear or safer alternatives. Chemicals like isopropylated trisphenyl phosphate will stick around as long as they get things done cheaply, but the hidden costs show up as burnout, sick days, and hospital visits. Companies should tap real-world feedback—ask floor crews what works and what doesn’t. Change starts when the people touching these substances daily demand better conditions.
Storing and moving isopropylated trisphenyl phosphate feels less dramatic than handling some headline-grabbing industrial chemicals, but that’s no reason to cut corners. This organophosphate ester mainly works as a flame retardant and plasticizer. Anyone responsible for it knows its oily liquid form can pose health and safety risks if not managed with respect.
Temperature swings mess with more than comfort—they also mess with chemical stability. Isopropylated trisphenyl phosphate shouldn’t bake in the sun or freeze on a cold warehouse floor. Specialists usually recommend a range close to room temp, between 15°C and 30°C (around 59°F to 86°F). High heat speeds up breakdown and can even send vapor into the air, leading to both safety headaches and wasted product. At the same time, letting it get too cold won’t do any favors for how it pours and mixes.
Humidity plays its role, too. The chemical’s not eager to react with water, but nobody wants water pooling around drums or leaking into containers. I’ve seen how careless storage can leave you scrubbing sticky messes off warehouse floors, a job that’s annoying and wastes money. Keeping drums dry on clean pallets and away from water sources stops those headaches before they start.
Not every container earns a place holding industrial chemicals. Isopropylated trisphenyl phosphate sits comfortably in steel or high-quality HDPE drums – think 200-liter barrels, sometimes smaller for labs. Used barrels offer false savings: dents, corrosion, or leftover chemicals can set off issues you won’t see until they bubble up later.
Tight seals matter. Loose lids invite air and moisture that can spoil what’s inside. In places where temperature swings are wild, gaskets that resist both the chemical and extremes of hot or cold stop leaks.
Accidents often come down to sloppy habits. I’ve watched seasoned workers skip gloves or let a little splash go unreported, thinking these chemicals aren’t as scary as the press suggests. But repeated contact irritates skin and eyes; inhaling mists or fumes can cough up bigger health problems. Full goggles, gloves, and aprons aren’t for show—they protect real folks. Some facilities invest in simple eye-wash stations and spill kits where drums rest; these tools earn their keep in any mishap.
Ventilation beats any fancy warning sign. Even without much smell, vapors accumulate if air doesn't move. I’ve seen storage rooms in older plants where a small fan makes night-and-day difference—not just for safety, but also for worker comfort. Keeping product off the floor, away from sunlight, stacked only two high, also helps avoid drum ruptures.
The chemical resists fire but doesn't put it out. Flames catch if heat and ignition live nearby. Keeping it away from open sparks or smoking areas feels obvious, but slips still happen—especially during transfer or loading. Foam and carbon dioxide fire extinguishers suit the emergency bill here. I remember a fire drill where someone fumbled for a water hose—a waste of time for chemicals like these.
During transfers, spills mark the line between calm and chaos. Simple measures help: secure hoses, slow flow rates, grounded equipment to cut down static. Moving one drum at a time with dollies or forklifts, never rolling them, spares back injuries and keeps containers sealed tight. Labels fade in sun or chemical mist, so double check that every drum or tote shows what’s inside, with hazard highlights.
After years working remote warehouses, I’ve learned that daily vigilance, not just rules, save the most trouble. Small steps, like checking seals or wiping a splash before it dries, keep workers healthy, product pure, and safety records clean.
Walk down any hardware store aisle and you’ll run into dozens of products containing chemicals most people have never heard of. Isopropylated Trisphenyl Phosphate, or ITTP, rarely shows up in casual conversation, but it pops up more than you’d guess. Manufacturers use it to help plastics resist fire. It works as a flame retardant in things like electronics, furniture padding, building insulation, and coatings. My own living room probably has a little bit of it somewhere, tucked away in a couch or TV set.
The trouble with chemicals like ITTP often starts long after the factory workers sling it into foam or circuit boards. These compounds don’t bind tightly; they drift out over time, joining up with household dust or, in some unlucky cases, ending up in waterways after a rainstorm. Anyone with a curious toddler, a crawling pet, or shaky cleaning habits runs some risk of exposure.
Scientists at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency spent years looking at flame retardants and flagged ITTP as a “possible human carcinogen.” The World Health Organization has also pointed at it for causing disruptions in hormones. Lab studies in animals turned up trouble in thyroid function, changes in cholesterol, and even some sketchy effects on memory and learning. Now, people aren’t rats, and high dosage animal tests don’t match up perfectly with real-life living room exposure, but that’s not a free pass. Traces of ITTP started showing up in human urine samples, mainly among children, and that throws up red flags.
It’s easy to shrug off a tiny dose of anything. Life comes with risks you can’t see. Yet the more scientists measure, the more they find those little exposures stack up over months and years. My local recycling center sorts through electronics and foam almost every day. The dust in the sorting area holds compounds like ITTP. Workers may breathe in a bit here and there. I’ve seen toddlers lick their hands after crawling on living room rugs. Each exposure seems trivial, but over a lifetime, that’s a lot of uncertainty and possible harm.
A few states in the U.S. passed laws banning some flame retardants, but not all. Sometimes one bad ingredient gets swapped out for another that’s just as questionable. Facing down hazards like ITTP, the solution doesn’t just revolve around regulation. It calls for stronger chemical testing before manufacturers bring new products to market. I grew up trusting labels that promised “fire safety.” It turns out “safety” should include long-term health as well.
Safer alternatives do exist—materials that resist burning without releasing toxic chemicals. The push for these substitutes often lags because of cost or lack of consumer pressure. Here’s where information makes a difference. Customers need to press companies for full transparency. If more folks demanded household products built with non-toxic materials, stronger market signals could nudge manufacturers in the right direction.
We can’t pull every risky chemical out of our homes overnight. I find real peace in simple habits. Dust and vacuum with a HEPA filter. Open windows when weather lets you. Wash hands after handling electronics or foam old enough to contain flame retardants. Push for local recycling programs to keep toxic waste out of the landfill. What matters most is not ignoring questions once they show up—especially when it comes to hidden hazards like ITTP.
Digging around for facts on Isopropylated Trisphenyl Phosphate (ITPP) isn’t as easy as it sounds. This additive has earned a long name for a reason—its complex structure carries weight in the chemical world. The common query usually starts with the chemical formula or the CAS number. For ITPP, the chemical formula often lands somewhere close to C27H33O4P, but the true composition can shift because the compound contains different isopropyl groups. It’s not a single molecule, but a mixture. The CAS number, 68937-41-7, gives us a handle to grab onto in regulatory documents, safety sheets, and shipping labels.
CAS numbers always come in handy. They don’t describe the molecule’s structure, but they cut through confusion in trade, labeling, and safety documentation. I’ve run into plenty of headaches with chemicals sporting a dozen synonyms, but the CAS number clears up a lot of doubts fast. For ITPP, 68937-41-7 ties every safety sheet and technical bulletin together. Skip the fancy lab jargon and confirm the number before mixing, burning, or tossing it away.
Flame retardants—like ITPP—turn up everywhere: electronics, insulation, floor adhesives, even car seats. Too many companies get comfortable with the vague “phosphate ester” label, and forget about the real-world details that shape hazards and recycling decisions. Mixing up one isopropylated phosphate blend with another could trigger compliance headaches or, worse, lead to unintentional environmental harm. Back in my university days, I watched an entire shipment rerouted because the paperwork called out the wrong additive blend, and nobody caught it until the truck reached the plant. That single CAS number would have saved everyone a lot of money and wasted time.
Documenting exact formulas isn’t about academic nitpicking. Safety depends on knowing the ingredients in your chemical soup, since each twist on the molecule can mean fresh toxicity or longer half-lives in soil or water. The industry loves standardized codes like 68937-41-7 because regulators, buyers, and shippers can all agree on the ingredient—regardless of what brand splashes onto the drum.
ITPP’s use keeps rising, but so do environmental questions. Some researchers worry these flame retardants sneak out of landfill or leach from plastics, piling up in waterways. The data isn’t perfect, but the risks are real. Legislators and advocacy groups push for more disclosure on chemical formulations. Big buyers—especially in tech and auto sectors—are leaning harder on suppliers to spell out formulas and match CAS numbers before signing off on any contract.
If a regulatory question pops up, the CAS number makes it simple to search ingredient lists, hazard reports, or new research. Some progressive manufacturers focus on greener alternatives with clearer structures. I lean toward that approach too. Swapping out mystery mixtures for defined, tested compounds tends to pay off—stripping down disposal hassles, reducing liability, and improving customer confidence.
Chasing down the right chemical ID often feels tedious. But if you’re stuck choosing a flame retardant, painting your office with glossy new adhesives, or just filling out a compliance spreadsheet, that one detail—the CAS number—saves a lot of grief. That’s true for Isopropylated Trisphenyl Phosphate, as much as anything else in the chemical playbook.
| Names | |
| Preferred IUPAC name | tris(4-propan-2-ylphenyl) phosphate |
| Other names |
IPTPP Isopropylated triphenyl phosphate Isopropylated triaryl phosphate Phenol, isopropylated, phosphate (3:1) 3:1 Phenol, isopropylated, phosphate Tris(isopropylphenyl) phosphate |
| Pronunciation | /ˌaɪ.səˈproʊ.pə.leɪ.tɪd traɪsˈfiː.nəl ˈfoʊs.feɪt/ |
| Identifiers | |
| CAS Number | 68937-41-7 |
| 3D model (JSmol) | `3D model (JSmol)` string for **Isopropylated Trisphenyl Phosphate**: ``` C1=CC=C(C=C1)OP(=O)(OC2=CC=CC=C2)OC3=CC=CC=C3C(C)C ``` *(This is the SMILES string for a typical major component of Isopropylated Triphenyl Phosphate.)* |
| Beilstein Reference | 3543662 |
| ChEBI | CHEBI:81939 |
| ChEMBL | CHEMBL1907318 |
| ChemSpider | 221693 |
| DrugBank | DB14629 |
| ECHA InfoCard | ECHA InfoCard: 100.042.338 |
| EC Number | 234-715-6 |
| Gmelin Reference | 65741 |
| KEGG | C19241 |
| MeSH | D058108 |
| PubChem CID | 12721 |
| RTECS number | TF0350000 |
| UNII | B1Y12A3Z4V |
| UN number | UN2584 |
| CompTox Dashboard (EPA) | DTXSID7045138 |
| Properties | |
| Chemical formula | C27H33O4P |
| Molar mass | 546.7 g/mol |
| Appearance | Clear, viscous liquid |
| Odor | Odorless |
| Density | 1.16 g/cm³ |
| Solubility in water | insoluble |
| log P | 5.6 |
| Vapor pressure | 0.00016 mm Hg @ 25°C |
| Acidity (pKa) | 1.24 |
| Basicity (pKb) | 6.97 |
| Magnetic susceptibility (χ) | -7.3e-6 |
| Refractive index (nD) | 1.5500 |
| Viscosity | 36–45 mPa·s (25 °C) |
| Dipole moment | 3.12 D |
| Thermochemistry | |
| Std molar entropy (S⦵298) | 578.6 J·mol⁻¹·K⁻¹ |
| Std enthalpy of formation (ΔfH⦵298) | -1197.8 kJ/mol |
| Std enthalpy of combustion (ΔcH⦵298) | -6534 kJ/mol |
| Pharmacology | |
| ATC code | J05AX |
| Hazards | |
| Main hazards | May damage fertility or the unborn child. Causes damage to organs through prolonged or repeated exposure. Toxic to aquatic life with long lasting effects. |
| GHS labelling | GHS02, GHS07, GHS08 |
| Pictograms | GHS07,GHS09 |
| Signal word | Warning |
| Hazard statements | H302, H315, H319, H373, H411 |
| Precautionary statements | P210, P273, P280, P370+P378, P501 |
| NFPA 704 (fire diamond) | 2-1-0-Health:2 Flammability:1 Instability:0 |
| Flash point | 220°C (closed cup) |
| Autoignition temperature | 530°C |
| Lethal dose or concentration | LD50 (Oral, Rat): 3700 mg/kg |
| LD50 (median dose) | 1,200 mg/kg (rat, oral) |
| NIOSH | WH7100000 |
| PEL (Permissible) | PEL: 3 mg/m³ |
| REL (Recommended) | 0.1 mg/m3 |
| Related compounds | |
| Related compounds |
Triphenyl phosphate Tricresyl phosphate Resorcinol diphenyl phosphate Bisphenol A bis(diphenyl phosphate) 2-Ethylhexyl diphenyl phosphate |
