Ammonium polyphosphate came onto the industrial scene over half a century ago. Back then, a growing focus on fire safety pushed chemists to hunt for non-halogen materials that could limit the spread of flames without dumping toxic smoke into the air. Early forms of ammonium polyphosphate worked in plastics, wood, and coatings, beefing up fire resistance, but partners in the industry wanted more. They saw that the phosphate’s tendency to clump, draw in moisture, or disperse unevenly hurt how coatings and plastics performed overall. Fast forward a decade or two, silicone chemistry started blending into the mix. Silicone coatings arrived as a practical fix, giving the particles a protective shell against water and keeping the powder flowing more smoothly during manufacturing. Over time, research groups around the globe pressed forward, tweaking particle size, improving silicone types, and aiming to reduce costs so smaller firms could add the compound to their safety toolkits.
Silicone coated ammonium polyphosphate shows up as a fine white powder with a slight off-white hue depending on how its surface got treated. The silicone shell forms a water-repellent layer, keeping the core less reactive and limiting the material’s tendency to clump or generate fines during handling. These tweaks help the compound slide easily into resin systems and coating mills. Users see a product that can boost the flame retardancy of plastics, paints, adhesives, and foams. My own experience in industrial coatings pointed to how a material’s flow and moisture-resistance can cut downtime in a factory, and this is one example where a small tweak — like a silicone shell — carries real value across multiple floors of a plant.
The backbone of the product is a chain of linked phosphate units, paired with ammonium ions, resulting in a polymeric structure with excellent thermal stability. The silicone layer sits on the outside, keeping moisture from reaching the hydrophilic phosphate core. Manufacturers often push for a specific degree of polymerization, which shapes solubility and how the phosphate breaks down under heat. Most grades settle around a high phosphorus content but keep molecular weight in a range that still lets manufacturers blend it into plastics and coatings. In labs, powder flow and surface area measurements matter, as they signal how the product performs alongside fillers and plasticizers. From storage bins to mixing tanks, suppliers chase lower hygroscopicity, less dust, and sizes centered around 15 to 25 microns, balancing processability with performance. The silicone type and content get adjusted, playing with hydrophobicity without choking off the essential chemical performance of the phosphates underneath.
Technical data sheets for this powder focus on purity, particle size range, phosphorus content, degree of polymerization, moisture levels, and the surface silicone’s percentage. Most suppliers post values like phosphorus content above 28% by weight, moisture below 0.5%, and silicone content in the 1–5% range. Labels may highlight compliance with standards such as REACH or RoHS, giving buyers a sense of regulatory peace of mind for export. Actual performance depends on how closely plant quality control nails these targets. A small shift in silicone percentage might dial up the water resistance but interfere with the rate of resin crosslinking. Manufacturers avoid generic descriptions and lay out a chart of numbers so engineers can compare lots, blends, and suppliers without guesswork.
Most plants make ammonium polyphosphate from combining phosphoric acid and ammonia under controlled conditions to yield a polymeric form. To coat the surface, they usually toss the dry phosphate powder in a mixer or fluidized bed, then mist it with a silicone oil or emulsion. As the fluid hits hot or agitated particles, it forms a thin, even film. The powder keeps moving in the mixer, and the silicone bonds to outer particle surfaces. Getting the coating right takes some trial and error: the temperature needs to stay high enough for the silicone to stick, but not so high it breaks down or fouls the mixer. Application rates have to match production speed. From the plant floor, operators monitor color, dust, and clumpiness and send out regular product samples for lab tests to confirm hydrophobicity. This system doesn’t just run on chemistry; machine techs and chemical workers adjust the process every day based on what they see as the batch runs forward.
Ammonium polyphosphate by itself already manages intumescent behavior, forming a stable char layer when heated that keeps underlying materials from catching fire. The silicone layer doesn’t block this key reaction, but it slows down unwanted side effects, especially hydrolysis from ambient humidity or reactive fillers. In some applications, companies shift the chain length of the polyphosphate or pick silanes or specialty silicones with functional groups that might bind tighter to resins. By blending in titanium or zinc compounds, specialists fine-tune smoke suppression or speed up char formation. In my experience, small formulation tweaks like this separate commodity supplies from specialty ones. Teams often swap recipes seasonally, looking to handle summer humidity or battle shifts in regulatory standards.
Silicone-coated ammonium polyphosphate shows up under a variety of names: “hydrophobic ammonium polyphosphate,” “APP-Si,” or “organosilicone surface-treated ammonium polyphosphate.” Each manufacturer throws its house brand on bags, with codes to mark slight differences in chain length or silicone content. This means buyers have to read data sheets closely and sometimes run comparison tests, especially as one supplier’s “Type II” or “Type III” might overlap in function with another’s high-polymer grade or proprietary blend. To keep orders straight in my own work, I learned to save every product spec and check against both trade names and chemical codes.
Silicone-coated ammonium polyphosphate doesn’t pose the same urgent health threats as older halogen-based flame retardants, but dust can irritate the skin, eyes, or lungs if workers go unprotected. In the plants I’ve visited, operators use basic dust masks, eyewash stations, and air handling to keep dust moving away from loading doors and mixing tanks. Most safety data sheets call the product a mild irritant, not a toxin, but companies keep an eye on bag handling, forklift dust, and cleanup protocols to limit risk. Spills get vacuumed, not swept, to prevent fine powder clouds. The silicone coating also helps the powder resist sticking to conveyor parts, but regular maintenance still prevents buildup. Training matters, especially where worker turnover runs high. Safety teams watch for compliance with local and international chemical handling standards, especially where finished products reach children, such as foams for toys, car seat pads, or home insulation.
Coated ammonium polyphosphate mainly serves the plastics, coatings, adhesives, and textiles industries. It plays a key role in intumescent coatings for steel, giving architects and engineers a chance to slow building fires and keep evacuation alarms ringing longer. Polyethylene cable sheaths and polyurethane foams also rely on these phosphate additives to meet strict fire codes, while the silicone exterior makes mixing into raw resin batches and finished parts more reliable. In my observation, companies that transition to silicone-coated grades often see fewer production slowdowns caused by caked material or inconsistent dosing. Fewer line shutdowns translate to more finished goods shipped on time, a direct economic win for plant teams, not just a lab statistic. As safety concerns around traditional brominated retardants grow, product managers turn more of their attention to phosphates, using the coated grades to hit safety and regulatory targets with fewer process headaches.
Research teams keep working to raise the performance bar, especially under pressure from green regulations and tougher fire codes. Universities and private labs explore bimetallic substitutions, new silicone structures, and even bio-based coating shells, hoping to raise fire suppression abilities or cut environmental concerns further. In some projects, researchers dig into nanoscale coatings, seeking even finer layers that might deliver new effects. Each year, trade journals turn up new patent filings, with companies racing to lock down combinations that deliver not just better fire resistance, but also color stability, UV resistance, or compatibility with specific polymers. My contacts in product development lean into joint projects with resin suppliers, coordinating tweaks in both paint and additive to bring multiple benefits with a single switch.
Compared to their halogenated cousins, these phosphate-based additives have a milder toxicity profile. Most studies show limited bioaccumulation and low acute toxicity, but scientists don’t stop tracking long-term risks, particularly as new generations of coatings shift what ends up in wastewater or airborne dust near factories. Ecotoxicology studies keep pouring in, checking for phosphate run-off and the break-down of silicone coatings under harsh conditions. Toxicologists keep their eye on sensitive groups, especially workers with heavy, daily exposure. I’ve seen factory health officers collect regular dust samples and work closely with line workers to document any irritant effects. Even though most tests show low concern, regulatory agencies insist on regular review, just in case new evidence tips the risk scales.
Silicone coated ammonium polyphosphate stands to win bigger roles in the coming decades, pushed forward by tightening flame-retardant rules and consumer demand for safer construction, electronics, and textiles. The market calls for safer, more process-friendly additives that work across countless materials, and this product shows up ready to answer. Scientists aim for stronger, thinner coatings with more recycled or renewable input, trying to further lower the bar for toxicity and manufacturing risk. Adoption hinges on both cost and trust — plants expect lower handling risks and regulators ask for ongoing toxicity proof and clean manufacturing records. On a longer timeline, firms that invest in smarter product trackers and transparency will earn an edge, as more supply chain partners seek accountability from start to finish.
People often forget how much chemistry shapes safety in modern life. Fire hazards are everywhere: construction sites, family homes, factories, public transport. One tool many industries turn to is silicone coated ammonium polyphosphate, a mouthful of a name with a pretty clear job. It fights flames, not with brute force, but through quiet science. Once I saw the aftermath of a short-circuit fire in an office building. What stuck out: the charred paper, melted plastic—yet some panels stayed barely touched. That’s what these flame retardants pull off. They step in before disaster grows, slowing down, sometimes stopping, the burn.
In construction, we hear a lot about steel, glass, insulation. Silicone coated ammonium polyphosphate sneaks in where few look—inside walls, behind paint, between beams. Builders mix it straight into drywall gypsum, coatings, paints, and plastic pipes. Wood panels for offices and homes often rely on its hidden strength. It won’t stop a bonfire in its tracks, but it buys people time. Firefighters have a better shot at rescue, and building repairs avoid total collapse.
Some paints act as fire barriers thanks to this tech. A customer once told me about redoing a wooden staircase in an older home. Instead of tearing it all down, he brushed on a fire-retardant paint built around this compound. Regulations got met, but more importantly, his kids could sleep upstairs with extra peace of mind. The coating keeps water out, sticks to surfaces, and slows the spread of heat.
Our phones, laptops, power cords, and chargers run on plastics. Silicone coated ammonium polyphosphate gets involved to lower the odds a spark turns wires into kindling. Inside circuit boards, cable jackets, and casings, it helps plastics resist flames. Unlike older chemicals, this version holds up over years, even decades, without leaking out or causing toxic messes. That’s progress.
Ignoring flame retardants or cutting corners sparks expensive recalls. A few years back, an electronics brand faced lawsuits because chargers overheated and caught fire. Stronger standards followed. Now, compounds like this one are baked into the product from the start, not tacked on later.
Buses, subways, airplanes—they all fill their cabins with seats, liners, and electronics. All that plastic can burn hot and fast. Transit engineers pick materials built to slow flame, so riders have extra seconds to escape if something goes wrong. Inside seat cushions, wall panels, and even some flooring, silicone coated ammonium polyphosphate helps meet strict safety tests without creating clouds of toxic smoke.
The aviation industry, in particular, has seen tragedy where flammable interiors prevented survivors from escaping. Many lives hinge on a few minutes of grace, so this compound matters not just in boardrooms, but in the real, busy world.
Older fire retardants created problems: lingering in water, harming wildlife, even causing health scares. Silicone coated ammonium polyphosphate, on the other hand, breaks down more cleanly and does less environmental harm. Still, the search continues for the safest blend of protection and low impact. More companies chase new ways to recycle building waste with these additives or develop coatings that can be stripped and reused. I’ve seen some labs testing this directly—scorching samples, washing them, grinding them up—to make sure their solutions don’t just pass today's tests, but tomorrow’s too.
No single chemical solves every safety need, but better fire protection builds on smart, careful use of materials. Choosing the right flame retardant, relying on trusted testing, and insisting on updated building codes matter. At the end of the day, silicone coated ammonium polyphosphate offers a solid line of defense where it counts most: in the places people work, live, and move every day.
Anyone who’s worked with flame retardants in plastics or coatings knows the headache that humidity brings. You stack bags or load a mixer, and if the material clumps or soaks up moisture, the whole production hiccups. Ammonium polyphosphate, a regular in fire safety additives, brings real promise, but it’s not immune to that age-old issue: water turns it sticky and can break it down too fast. That’s exactly where silicone coating comes in, and based on firsthand frustrations in labs and on manufacturing floors, this shift makes real sense.
Anyone who’s scooped dry powder into feeders knows how clouds of dust float up and settle in the worst places. Regular ammonium polyphosphate sheds powder everywhere and leaves operators with noses full of the stuff. Silicone coating gives the particles a slick, almost waxy shell. Instead of sticking together or your gloves, each tiny piece stays separate. Mixing runs cleaner, with less waste on the floor or in filters. I’ve seen operators actually nod with relief because it just pours smoother, and the air stays clearer.
Ambient moisture always makes things tricky, especially in summer. Uncoated ammonium polyphosphate sucks up water, lumps together, and plugs up hoppers. Sometimes the only fix is breaking out a mallet or tossing an entire batch, which is money lost and time wasted. The silicone forms a protective layer that keeps water at bay. In storage tests, the coated product stays powdery for weeks, even with the humidity cranked up. For anyone managing warehouse inventory, that’s peace of mind hard to ignore.
Every fire retardant must survive the processing conditions in plastics or wood, then hang on to its structure once the product sits outside. Water can start breaking down ammonium polyphosphate, so in outdoor paints or garden furniture, uncoated versions lose their punch pretty fast—sometimes in a matter of months. With the silicone, the coating keeps rain and dew out, slowing the breakdown and letting the flame-retardant properties stick around much longer. I’ve seen weathering tests where the coated additive kept doing its job well past the point where the uncoated one faded out.
Factories always look for ways to cut cleanup time and reduce wasted product. Silicone-coated ammonium polyphosphate needs less cleaning between runs, with less build-up on the side of mixers and within feeding systems. That means lower maintenance bills and higher uptime, something managers genuinely chase. On top of that, less airborne dust leads to fewer chances for workers to breathe in irritants or for fine particles to create static problems around sensitive equipment.
The silicone coating story doesn’t just come down to better handling and storage. There’s a bigger picture about fire safety lasting longer without relying on heavier chemicals that come with their own baggage. Some researchers are playing with bio-based silicone coatings, looking for a smaller environmental footprint for future versions. From the ground floor, you can see how even a thin coating changes the whole workflow—fewer rejects, more consistent results, and a product that stands up better in real world use. It’s not just chemistry on a data sheet. It’s a tool that keeps operations moving and end products safer for longer spells, which feels like a game changer in everyday manufacturing.
In the world of plastics and flame retardants, silicone coated ammonium polyphosphate (APP) draws plenty of curiosity—and even more questions. Folks working with plastics ask the same thing over and over: Will this stuff actually play well with different polymers? Anyone who’s mixed hot-melt adhesives, polyester, or PVC compounds knows the story. Additives promise a lot on paper, then clump, settle, or ruin the finish in a real-life batch. That’s why every new flame retardant brings a healthy dose of skepticism.
I’ve seen many approaches from companies in the plastics business. Some throw new additives into a few laboratory resins and call it a win. Others send samples out to actual production lines and let the numbers do the talking. Silicone coated APP looks simple. In practice it’s a tricky balance of chemistry. The silicone coat keeps moisture out and helps the powder mix with hydrophobic (water-hating) resins. It promises to fix that classic con of ordinary APP: poor compatibility with polyolefins or anything that doesn’t love water.
Real experience tells a more nuanced story. Polypropylene and polyethylene, the tough kids of the plastics family, make things complicated. Silicone’s oily surface helps the powder slide in, but only so far. Too much filler turns tough plastics into brittle noodles. I’ve seen masterbatch makers agonize over how much APP to add before quality drops—sometimes less is more.
Let’s be clear: compatibility goes beyond “does it mix?” The resin has to set right, keep its strength, and look the same from batch to batch. With silicone coated APP, the game changes in polyamides and polyesters. These plastics handle heat better, so flame retardants work more efficiently. The silicone keeps particles from clumping. Technicians running compounding lines report fewer clogged screens and smoother throughput, especially at higher processing speeds.
There’s a story out of South China where an appliance factory cut downtime just by switching from plain APP to its silicone cousin. Their extruders stayed clean, their dyes needed fewer flushes, and the parts started passing flammability tests at UL V-0 right away. That real-world boost means more than spec sheets ever could.
Compatibility doesn’t only mean “does it work?” but also “is it worthwhile?” Short chain and long chain variants of coated APP exist, and prices swing widely depending on the coating quality. Some companies cut corners on silicone grade, leading to gumminess, dust issues, or moisture leaks back in during storage. Over the years, I’ve watched frustrated production managers shelve low-cost grades and pay more for a consistent product that saves labor in the long run.
So, is silicone coated APP compatible with every polymer out there? Not exactly. PVC, ABS, even toughened polyamides see real performance gains, with smoother mixing and less water uptake. Polyolefins still pose a challenge, but some clever use of dispersants and process tweaks can make things work if mechanical strength isn’t pushed to the limit.
Real progress in flame retardant additives comes from transparency and feedback. Compounders who stay in touch with ingredient suppliers about what works—and what fails—get ahead. Research teams who test materials on actual production gear, not just in beakers, rarely regret the extra time. In this patchwork of polymers and coatings, nobody wins with shortcuts. Success means listening, tweaking, and getting through the messier bits of real manufacturing life.
Think about flour or salt at home. Leave the lid off, let them sit out in a damp kitchen, and you’ll spoil them quick. Silicone coated ammonium polyphosphate shares some of the same quirks—leave it in the wrong spot or with the wrong lid, and problems crop up. The silicone coating does a good job fighting moisture, but it can only do so much.
It’s easy to take shortcuts. Sometimes, powders come in sacks meant for grain, tossed into a corner near a drafty window. Small mistakes like that invite moisture in, and moisture ruins this flame-retardant's punch. Clumping, hard lumps, and even changes in performance creep in before you know it. Years working in facilities, I saw folks undervalue tidiness, and the cost comes fast—clean-up, wasted material, and safety headaches.
Temperatures make a big difference. Most shop floors and stock rooms drift from cool mornings to warm afternoons. Ammonium polyphosphate doesn’t like swings; stability keeps the chemistry intact. Warmer-than-ideal shelves—near a steam pipe, south-facing window, or heater—risk softening the silicone coat. It turns sticky or breaks down. On one site, a midday sunbeam toasted a pallet in no time, and the material was no good before a single bag got opened.
You can’t see humidity just by walking in, but it sneaks through open doors, cracked buckets, and worn gaskets on warehouse windows. All the silicone in the world won’t protect the stuff if you stack bags straight onto cold concrete or leave pallets unwrapped. After a stormy week, I’ve seen sacks buckle and powder clump. That’s not just money lost—it’s frustrated staff and ruined schedules, too.
It sounds obvious—pick a dry, cool corner, seal everything tight, and treat containers like you want your coffee or cereal to stay fresh. Bags and drums should sit up off the floor. Pallets with plastic wrap block out a lot of headaches; shrink wrap and a tight lid keep most trouble out. Regular turnover helps, too. Old stock in a forgotten shed almost always turns up problems. Rotate it, make notes with dates, and keep the inventory moving out.
Hand tools and shovels, not just hands, make less mess. Training absolutely matters. The worst spills I’ve seen came from rushing the job, cutting corners to save a few minutes. Staff guided to clean as they go, using masks and gloves, keep dust down. Good gloves seal out the itch, since powder can get on your skin. Smart labels let new workers skip confusion, and clear signage reminds everyone this isn’t just chalk dust.
Routine checks on the environment, not just the product, go far. Cracks or leaky doors call for repair. Silica gel packs or dehumidifiers chip away at moisture, especially during wet seasons. Reliable containers—sturdy drums, tight lids, thick bags—outlast this season and next. Plenty of teams skip these details, but the ones who focus save time and money, hitting less waste and fewer product complaints.
Silicone coated ammonium polyphosphate pops up in factories, labs, and even some household projects. It’s not something I want drifting in the air or clinging to my skin. Breathing dust from this chemical can irritate eyes and lungs. Touching it without gloves dries out hands and sometimes leads to rashes—something I regret ignoring during my early lab years. So, carelessness doesn’t pay off. Even those who think their body “gets used to” certain materials risk developing allergic reactions. Good habits start with knowing the basic risks and learning from those before us who underestimated them.
I remember one colleague who thought a bit of dust on his shirt meant nothing. He ended up coughing through every lunch break for weeks. Simple steps—nitrile gloves and chemical splash goggles—would have spared him misery and trips to the clinic. Dust masks do the heavy lifting for lungs. A basic lab coat, sleeves rolled down, blocks dust from settling on the skin. I always check for tiny holes or weak seams before suiting up, too. The difference isn’t fancy gear; it’s consistent use. People forget, but chemicals never do.
Every workspace I’ve visited with poor airflow seemed to invite accidents. Silicone coated ammonium polyphosphate breaks into fine particles during mixing and transferring. That dust collects fast, so having a fume hood or at least a reliable extractor fan can turn a risky job into a routine one. Even something as simple as opening a window helps, but dedicated systems make the air feel lighter and less irritating. Regular air quality checks matter, especially in facilities where crews work hours at a stretch. An engineer I know spots clogged vents in seconds—experience shows in every breath he takes.
Many folks ignore minor spills, sweeping up with bare hands or cheap brooms. I’ve seen granules left under benches “for later” become tomorrow’s bigger headache. A good SOP calls for a vacuum with a HEPA filter, not a quick sweep. Washing down the area with plenty of water avoids dust clouds but demands care not to flush chemicals into drains without treatment. Waste goes inside tightly closed bags or bins marked for hazardous material pickup. I’ve thrown out my share of torn gloves and paper towels, always double-bagged. Lazy shortcuts creep up, but they turn into regulation fines or sick coworkers.
The best safety routines spread when teams remind each other. If someone spots me using cracked goggles, I appreciate the nudge to swap them out. After all, small rips can sneak up when I’m in a hurry. Training sticks when real stories back up dry rulebooks. One shop manager used to start safety meetings by recalling that day someone tried to “save time” pouring straight from a bag. He’d set the bag down, open it slowly, and show everybody how much dust came out before he even poured a thing.
Before leaving for the day, I double-check work surfaces for residue, even in tight corners. Regular wipes with damp cloths—not dry, which just stirs up clouds—keep the space safer for the next shift. Labeled containers, spill stations, and written logs showed up in any shop or lab where I felt most secure. Trust builds, not from rules on the wall, but from catching each other’s mistakes and fixing them fast.
Taking silicone coated ammonium polyphosphate lightly invites avoidable trouble. Respect grows from seeing what’s gone wrong and deciding not to repeat it. Clear routines, good gear, and a willingness to speak up save time, materials, and health, every single day.
| Names | |
| Preferred IUPAC name | Ammonium polyphosphate, silicone-treated |
| Other names |
Silicone Coated APP Silicone Coated Ammonium Polyphosphate Phase II APP-II Silicone Coated Ammonium Polyphosphate Silicone Modified Flame Retardant Silicone Coated APP |
| Pronunciation | /ˈsɪlɪˌkoʊn ˈkoʊtɪd əˈmoʊniəm ˌpɒl.iˈfɒs.feɪt/ |
| Identifiers | |
| CAS Number | 68333-79-9 |
| Beilstein Reference | 14187341 |
| ChEBI | CHEBI:132909 |
| ChEMBL | CHEMBL1201731 |
| ChemSpider | 5486806 |
| DrugBank | DB11145 |
| ECHA InfoCard | ECHA InfoCard: 03-2119972300-48-XXXX |
| EC Number | 68333-79-9 |
| Gmelin Reference | 101120 |
| KEGG | C18614 |
| MeSH | D005440 |
| PubChem CID | 22978197 |
| RTECS number | WN0300000 |
| UNII | 9G0W97P44S |
| UN number | UN3262 |
| CompTox Dashboard (EPA) | DTXSID5049227 |
| Properties | |
| Chemical formula | (NH4PO3)n |
| Appearance | White free-flowing powder |
| Odor | Odorless |
| Density | 1.90 g/cm³ |
| Solubility in water | Slightly soluble |
| log P | -2.2 |
| Acidity (pKa) | 5.5 |
| Basicity (pKb) | 5.5 - 7.0 |
| Magnetic susceptibility (χ) | -4.0×10⁻⁶ cm³/mol |
| Refractive index (nD) | 1.95 |
| Viscosity | Viscosity: ≤30 mPa.s (20°C, 25% aqueous suspension) |
| Thermochemistry | |
| Std molar entropy (S⦵298) | 186 J·mol⁻¹·K⁻¹ |
| Pharmacology | |
| ATC code | D08AX99 |
| Hazards | |
| Main hazards | May cause irritation to eyes, skin, and respiratory tract. |
| GHS labelling | GHS07, GHS09 |
| Pictograms | GHS07,GHS08 |
| Signal word | Warning |
| Hazard statements | H315, H319, H335 |
| Precautionary statements | P261, P264, P270, P271, P272, P273, P280, P285, P302+P352, P304+P340, P308+P313, P312, P321, P332+P313, P337+P313, P362+P364, P403+P233, P405, P501 |
| NFPA 704 (fire diamond) | 1-0-0-NA |
| Flash point | > 250°C |
| LD50 (median dose) | > 5000 mg/kg (rat, oral) |
| NIOSH | RT3357000 |
| PEL (Permissible) | 10 mg/m3 (inhalable), 3 mg/m3 (respirable) (total dust, as nuisance dust) |
| REL (Recommended) | 1 mg/m³ |
| Related compounds | |
| Related compounds |
Ammonium Polyphosphate Melamine Polyphosphate Expandable Graphite Aluminum Hydroxide Magnesium Hydroxide Red Phosphorus Melamine Cyanurate |
