Four organisations publish a resin coded LL0209AA. Their own datasheets print 0.9 or 1.0 melt index, measure density by ISO 1183, ASTM D2839 or GB/T 1033, and quote film properties at 38 microns or at 0.030 mm.
That gap sits upstream of every substitution decision. A purchase spec reading “LL0209AA” does not fix a number, so the first job is working out which producer’s column your own spec was copied from.
The equivalence lists circulating for this grade name five codes and attach a melt index to none of them. Melt index and density are the only two figures that survive a cross-origin comparison at all, and even those arrive measured against three different standard families.
Which LL0209AA Does Your Spec Describe?
Four separate organisations publish an LLDPE film grade under the code LL0209AA with headline numbers attached, and those numbers do not agree.
| Publishing organisation | Melt index (g/10 min) | Плотность (г/см³) | Density method |
|---|---|---|---|
| Iran Petrochemical Commercial (Amir Kabir, Shazand, Tabriz) | 0.9 | 0.920 | ISO 1183 |
| Arak Petrochemical (Shazand) | 0.9 | 0.920 | ASTM D2839 |
| Lotte Chemical Titan (Malaysia, Indonesia) | 1.0 | 0.920 | not printed |
| PetroChina Dushanzi → PetroChina Dushanzi | 1.0 | 0.920 | GB/T 1033-86 |
Those two density methods are not interchangeable labels for one measurement. ASTM D2839 takes density off an extruded melt-index strand, where ISO 1183 uses an annealed specimen.
Различие PetroChina Dushanzi version runs on BP gas-phase fluidised-bed technology with 1-butene comonomer.
Shanghai SECCO publishes a butene LL0209AA as well, described for blown film, heavy-duty bags, liner and stretch wrap. Its melt index is another matter: published figures disagree and no producer-issued sheet backs any of them, so a quoted SECCO number stays unconfirmed until the datasheet is in hand.
None of these four columns is wrong. They are four documents wearing one code, and only one of them is the baseline you are substituting away from.
Which Grades Sit in LL0209AA’s Melt Index and Density Band
Lotte Chemical Titan’s LL 0209SR and LL 0209SC, SABIC’s 118 series and Westlake’s LF1020 and LF1022 all land inside LL0209AA’s melt index and density band, and their producers publish the figures.
| Producer (document) | Марка | Melt index (g/10 min) | Плотность (г/см³) | Сомономер |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lotte Chemical Titan (current product guide) | LL 0209SR, LL 0209SC | 1.0 | 0.920 | not stated |
| SABIC (2023 catalogue) | 118NJ, 118ZJ, 118LJ, 118WJ | 1.0 | 0.918 | not stated |
| Westlake (September 2022 guide) | LF1020 | 1.1 | 0.919 | butene |
| Westlake (September 2022 guide) | LF1022 | 1.1 | 0.918 | butene |
The codes usually circulated as LL0209AA equivalents are a different matter. SABIC 926NT, 726QE, 726NE and 6821MJ, plus QAPCO Q2018C, appear on trading pages with no melt index or density attached to any of them.
None of those four SABIC codes appears in SABIC’s 2023 published polymer catalogue. They may be legacy or regional designations rather than withdrawn products.
The nearest LLDPE code that catalogue does carry is 6821NJ, at 0.8 melt index and 0.921 density. It is a hexene copolymer where LL0209AA is butene, which puts it below the band on melt index and on the wrong side of the comonomer question.
A 0.1 g/10 min spread is not by itself a disqualifier. On a fractional-melt film grade that is roughly 11 %, inside the lot-to-lot band most COAs carry, and a spec written as 0.9 ± 0.15 accepts every version of the code.
Westlake’s pair sits another notch out at 1.1. If the COA shows melt index at the edge of your spec, ask for the molecular-weight distribution data before you accept the lot.
Does the Substitute Share LL0209AA’s Comonomer?
LL0209AA is a butene copolymer on every producer document that names a comonomer, and butene is the first thing a close-looking candidate tends to lose.
Melt index and density are what most buyers screen on first, and selecting an LLDPE grade on those two numbers narrows a field without closing it. Comonomer type is invisible in both.
Westlake routes every high-strength film grade in its slate to hexene, and leaves butene on trash bags, food storage bags and stretch wrap.
The two in-house candidates split the same way. DFDA-7042 comes off PetroChina Lanzhou’s UCC gas-phase fluidised bed with 1-butene and a titanium catalyst, which matches LL0209AA’s chemistry. EZP2010HA is a hexene-1 metallocene grade from a Unipol line at Dushanzi.
Match the comonomer before you match anything else. A hexene grade sitting on LL0209AA’s two numbers is a different film, not a closer one.
Where LL0209AA Equivalents Split on Slip and Antiblock
Three unrelated producers each sell several distinct grades at one identical melt index and density, separated only by the slip and antiblock package.
- Arak Petrochemical publishes LL0209AA and LL0209KJ on a single datasheet at 0.9 melt index and 0.920 density, every number shared. Only the prose separates them: LL0209KJ “offers high slip film with easy opening properties” in the 35 to 100 micron range.
- Lotte Chemical Titan routes LL 0209AA to heavy-duty sack film, LL 0209SR to retail and shopping bags, and LL 0209SC to high-clarity packaging, all at one pair of numbers.
- SABIC’s 2023 catalogue lists 118NJ, 118ZJ, 118LJ and 118WJ from “Without slip & antiblock” through “Medium slip & medium antiblock” to “High slip & high antiblock” without moving either figure.
None of the three states this as a rule anywhere. The convention falls out of how each of them assigns grade codes.
No datasheet in this set prints a slip or antiblock loading. They say “high slip” or “without slip”, and Arak adds that masterbatch, pigment or a thickness change will shift film slip and antiblock behaviour anyway.
On paper they look identical. I still qualify the second source on a real production run before committing to dual-sourcing, and the slip package is usually what the trial catches.
What to Ask For Before Accepting an LL0209AA Substitute
The test method, the film gauge, the slip and antiblock package, and a production trial belong on the request list before a substitute lot is accepted.
Arak Petrochemical says so on its own datasheet: “Values shown are averages & are not to be considered as product specifications.”
- The test method, taken off the COA and not the marketing sheet. ISO 1133, ASTM D1238 and GB/T 3682 all yield a number called melt index. Confirm which one produced the figure on the lot you are offered.
- The film gauge behind every film property. PetroChina Dushanzi quotes falling-weight impact of 80 g on 0.030 mm film, Arak 150 g at 38 microns. Thicker film absorbs more dart energy, so those are two tests, not a ranking.
- The additive package the lot actually carries. Get the producer’s own slip and antiblock wording into the purchase order, not just into the enquiry.
- A trial run before the second source is approved. Two resins can hold very different molecular-weight distributions at one melt index, and the standard 190 °C / 2.16 kg test carries neither that nor long-chain branching.
Robert Nark and Karen Xiao of Celgard name the consequence. Blend a 1 melt index LLDPE with a 5 melt index one and the lower-viscosity resin “will encapsulate the higher viscosity resin” unless the screw was designed for it.
Neither mLLDPE EZP2010HA nor DFDA-7042 prints a melt index or density on its product page, and both defer the full datasheet to request. Pull that COA data, check it against your own LL0209AA column, and only then commit to a second source.
Where Most Substitution Calls Go Wrong
The mistake is shopping for a code instead of a spec. Rewrite your own purchase specification as numbers before you go looking: melt index with the standard that produced it, density with the standard that produced it, comonomer, and the additive class.
Once the specification reads that way, the equivalence question mostly answers itself. The circulating code lists stop being a shortlist and become claims you can test in an afternoon against four producer datasheets.
Then document the grade-substitution call in writing. Six months later nobody remembers who approved what, and the only thing that survives is the column you wrote the spec against.