Functional additives can improve a polymer in one area while changing it in another. Fillers, conductive systems, detectable additives, antimicrobials, processing aids and other modifiers can all affect mechanical properties, processing behaviour, surface characteristics, colour, thermal performance and environmental resistance.
Testing during development allows these effects to be identified before a formulation is scaled up. Rather than treating testing as a final pass/fail exercise, we use it to understand how a material is behaving and to guide formulation changes where required.
Functional fillers and additives can affect tensile strength, elongation, stiffness and impact resistance. Comparative testing allows these effects to be quantified and formulations adjusted before scale-up.
Additives can influence melt flow, viscosity, dispersion and moulding behaviour. Testing during development helps identify whether a formulation remains practical to manufacture as well as functionally effective.
UV, UVC, temperature, moisture and repeated cleaning can alter polymer performance over time. Representative environmental exposure allows materials to be challenged before long-term use.
formulation may need to deliver more than conventional mechanical performance. Depending on the application, this can include metal/X-ray detectability, thermal conductivity, surface characteristics or other measurable functional properties.
Mechanical testing helps establish whether a functional formulation still delivers the strength, toughness and durability required by the finished component.
Radical Materials can evaluate properties including tensile strength, elongation, flexure, impact resistance and abrasion behaviour, using moulded test specimens where appropriate. Comparative testing is particularly useful when assessing the effect of additive loading, filler type, polymer grade or formulation changes.
The objective is not simply to maximise a functional property, but to achieve it without unnecessarily compromising the underlying performance of the polymer.
Charpy impact testing measures the energy absorbed by a standard test specimen during fracture and provides a practical indication of material toughness and resistance to sudden impact.
The results can be used to compare different polymers, additive systems and formulation changes, particularly where functional fillers may increase brittleness or reduce impact performance.
Carrying out impact testing in-house allows us to evaluate these effects during development and adjust formulations before scale-up.
Tensile testing allows us to evaluate properties including tensile strength, yield behaviour, modulus and elongation, helping to quantify how functional additives affect the mechanical performance of a polymer.
We use Tinius Olsen 10 kN and Mecmesin 250 N test systems with associated software to test filled and unfilled polymers under controlled conditions.
Comparative testing is particularly useful during formulation development, allowing changes in mechanical performance to be assessed alongside the required functional properties.
Abrasion testing is used to compare the resistance of polymers and coatings to surface wear under controlled conditions.
Testing can be used to assess the effect of formulation changes, fillers, surface treatments or environmental exposure, with material loss measured where appropriate to provide comparative wear data.
This is particularly useful where surface durability is an important requirement of the finished component.
A material that performs well when newly moulded may behave differently after exposure to UV, UVC, temperature, moisture or repeated cleaning.
Radical Materials can subject development formulations to accelerated UVA/UVB exposure, UVC exposure, low-temperature conditioning, heated-water immersion and other environmental challenges before re-evaluating relevant material properties.
This allows changes such as embrittlement, colour shift, loss of impact strength or altered surface behaviour to be identified during development rather than after the material has entered service.
Accelerated weathering allows us to assess how polymer formulations respond to prolonged ultraviolet exposure and repeated disinfection cycles.
Our Q-Lab equipment can expose materials to UVA/UVB and UVC radiation under controlled conditions. UVA/UVB testing is useful for evaluating weathering and colour stability, while UVC exposure is particularly relevant to materials used in food-processing, healthcare and laboratory environments where germicidal UV systems may be used repeatedly.
Testing can be followed by visual, mechanical or other material evaluation to identify effects such as colour change, embrittlement or loss of performance.
Material performance can change significantly at temperatures far removed from ambient laboratory conditions.
Our low-temperature capability allows polymer samples to be conditioned at temperatures down to approximately -30°C before subsequent testing, helping to identify changes in toughness, brittleness and mechanical performance.
Heated water baths can be used for elevated-temperature conditioning, immersion testing and accelerated ageing before re-evaluating relevant material properties.
Together, these methods allow formulations to be challenged under conditions that more closely reflect demanding end-use environments.
Many specialist polymers need to deliver properties that are not captured by conventional mechanical tests alone.
Depending on the application, Radical Materials can assess metal detectability, X-ray detectability, thermal performance, surface behaviour and other functional properties using equipment and test conditions selected to reflect the intended use.
Where possible, testing is carried out using representative specimen sizes, orientations, backgrounds and operating conditions so that development decisions are based on meaningful comparative data rather than generic material claims.
Our Minebea Intec Dylight system allows us to evaluate the X-ray detectability of polymer samples under application-relevant conditions.
Samples can be assessed at different sizes, thicknesses and additive loadings, and where appropriate tested against representative food products or other backgrounds. This helps us compare formulations and determine whether the level of X-ray contrast is likely to be sufficient for the intended application.
The system is particularly useful during development of SCOPIC® X-ray detectable materials, where detectability needs to be balanced against processing, colour, mechanical properties and other formulation requirements.
Our Safeline metal-detection equipment allows us to assess the metal detectability of polymer samples and finished formulations under controlled conditions.
Different materials, additive levels and specimen sizes can be compared against calibrated standards or benchmark formulations, providing practical data during development and optimisation.
This enables us to refine SCOPIC® metal-detectable compounds and masterbatches so that detectability can be considered alongside processing behaviour, mechanical performance and the requirements of the finished component.
Contact-angle measurement provides information about the wettability and surface energy of a material.
This can be useful when investigating adhesion, coating behaviour, contamination, surface modification or additive migration, and when comparing how formulation changes affect the interaction between a polymer surface and liquids.
We carry out comparative in-house flammability screening to assess how formulation changes affect fire behaviour during development, enabling us to compare candidate materials before external testing.
Testing is performed in alignment with recognised test methods and can be used to compare characteristics such as burning rate, self-extinguishing behaviour and vertical burning performance, including indicative HB, V-2 and V-0 classifications.
Processing behaviour and additive dispersion can be just as important as the headline functional property.
Our in-house analytical capability includes melt-flow testing, microscopy, ash-content measurement, moisture analysis and contact-angle measurement, helping us investigate how a formulation behaves during processing and how additives are distributed within the finished material.
These techniques can be used to identify issues such as poor dispersion, unexpected filler loading, changes in flow behaviour, moisture-related processing problems or alterations in surface energy.
Moisture content can have a significant effect on polymer processing, particularly in materials that are sensitive to hydrolysis or moisture-related changes in viscosity and surface finish.
Our Mettler Toledo HR73 moisture analyser allows us to measure moisture levels in polymer pellets, powders and other formulation components before processing. This is useful for material preparation, troubleshooting and comparative development work, particularly where drying conditions may influence performance.
Melt-flow testing provides a practical measure of how readily a molten polymer flows under defined conditions.
It is commonly used for quality control and material comparison, but is also valuable during formulation development, where additives, fillers or processing aids may alter flow behaviour.
Comparative testing helps us assess whether a formulation remains practical to mould or extrude while delivering the required functional performance.
High-temperature ashing is used to remove the polymer fraction from a sample and determine the remaining inorganic residue.
This provides a useful indication of filler or additive content in mineral-filled and other inorganic-containing polymer formulations, and can be used for formulation checks, comparative analysis and quality control.
High-resolution microscopy allows us to examine the distribution and dispersion of fillers, pigments and functional additives within polymer samples.
This can help identify agglomeration, poor dispersion or other formulation issues that may influence mechanical, optical, surface or functional performance.
Microscopy is particularly useful during development because it allows visual observations to be considered alongside processing and material-test data.
Testing is most valuable when it is used to answer a specific development question.
A functional additive may deliver the required antimicrobial, detectable, conductive or processing effect while also changing other properties such as impact strength, melt flow, colour, surface behaviour or environmental resistance. By testing candidate formulations during development, these interactions can be identified early and used to guide further formulation work.
At Radical Materials, testing is therefore integrated into an iterative development process of formulation → compounding → processing → testing → refinement.
This allows us to compare alternative additives or loading levels, identify unwanted side effects and optimise the material around the requirements of the finished application before commercial scale-up.
Typical development questions might include:
The objective is not simply to generate test data, but to use that data to make better formulation decisions.
Some aspects of polymer performance are best evaluated by specialist external laboratories, particularly where independent verification, accredited methods or highly specialised equipment are required.
Radical Materials works with appropriate independent laboratories to support development programmes with testing that sits outside our in-house capability. This includes areas such as antimicrobial efficacy, where external verification is important both technically and for customer confidence.
Our role is to integrate those results with the data generated during formulation, compounding, processing and in-house material testing. This allows external test results to be interpreted in the context of the complete material rather than treated as isolated pass/fail data.
Where testing identifies a performance issue, the formulation can be adjusted and re-evaluated through the same development cycle. This is particularly valuable where several requirements need to be balanced at the same time, such as antimicrobial efficacy, mechanical performance, appearance, processability and regulatory constraints.
Using a combination of in-house testing and independent specialist laboratories allows us to keep development practical and responsive while still obtaining appropriate third-party evidence where it is needed.