NBR Latex for Abrasive Paper Coating and Grinding Material Binder

Name: NBR Latex for Abrasive Paper Coating and Grinding Material Binder
Brand: Donghongyue (Shandong) International Trade Co., Ltd
SKU: 2182559902

Shandong, ChinaDonghongyue (Shandong) International Trade Co., Ltd

US$1,300.00

1-9 Tons

US$1,280.00

10-29 Tons

US$1,250.00

30+ Tons

Sample price:US$2.00/kg.Request sample

Product profile

Customization

Available

Raw Material

Synthetic Rubber

Material

Latex Rubber

Model NO.

XNBR

Appearance

Milky White Liquid

Form

Liquid Rubber

Chemical Name

Carboxylated Nitrile Butadiene Rubber Latex

Solid Content

44±2%

Application

Industrial Dipped Gloves and Coated Work Gloves

Packing

1000 Kg IBC Tank / Flexibag

Transport Package

200kg Drum / 1000kg IBC Tank

Specification

44±2% Total Solids Content

Trademark

Qiaolong

Origin

China Supply

HS Code

4002510000

Production Capacity

12000pieces/Year

Key features

Suitable for oil-resistant paper-coating trials Can be evaluated as a binder for fiber gasket sheets

Helps improve resistance to oil and grease Good adhesion to compatible fibers and fillers

Forms a flexible and continuous polymer film Carboxylated structure supports crosslinking

Suitable for selected impregnation and coating processes Controlled viscosity for convenient formulation

Water-based nitrile-rubber dispersion Samples and technical documents available

Company profile

Importers and Exporters

Donghongyue (Shandong) International Trade Co., Ltd

Shandong, China

CertifiedBusiness Type: Manufacturer/Factory & Trading Company CertifiedR&D Capacity: ODM Service Available & OEM Service Available CertifiedCustomization Options: Customization from Samples, Flexible customization, etc. CertifiedExport Year: Less than 1 year CertifiedNearest Port: Qingdao PortAverage Response Time: ≤1.16h

AI-Powered supplier vetting

SummaryThe supplier operates across waterproofing materials, rubber-related products, mechanical equipment, textiles, chemicals, building materials, and selected medical supplies. It states that it provides OEM services for well-known brands and reports multiple technical patents and ISO9001 certification. Quality assurance and raw-material traceability are identified, but the available evidence also shows no SDK, no inventory, no overseas warehouse or showroom, no valid manufacturing-capacity contract with related subcontractors, and no documented corrective-action or complaint-handling procedures. Lead time is stated as within 15 working days in both peak and off-season, but supplier-service governance documentation is incomplete. Financial records are referenced for 2022–2024, without sufficient detail to assess credibility. R&D resources are limited in the evidence, with one engineer and no available design-control documentation.

CertificationsThe company states that it has passed ISO9001 quality management system certification and holds multiple technical patents. This is explicit evidence of certification and technical recognition, although no certificate number, validity period, or certification scope is provided.

After-Sales capabilityThe supplier states that it has no overseas warehouse or showroom, and it has no written procedures or records for corrective and preventive actions or effective customer-complaint handling. These documented gaps indicate weakly evidenced after-sales service infrastructure.

Production capacityThe supplier reports no valid manufacturing-capacity contract with its related subcontractors and no in-stock capacity. It states an average lead time within 15 working days in both peak and off-season, but service-capability governance lacks written assessment procedures and an approved-supplier list. Overall production capacity is not sufficiently substantiated and includes explicit control gaps.

Customization capabilityThe supplier explicitly states that it provides OEM services for well-known brands and offers products intended to meet varied customer demands. Quality assurance and raw-material traceability are also reported, but the absence of an SDK and formal R&D audit documentation limits evidence for technically complex customization.