低 VOC TPE 的“味道差”在三个来源：残余单体、小分子油、助剂分解。哪一档味道大户没控住，整车厂的气味测试就过不了。
低 VOC TPE 的“成本差”在体系：SEBS 基做到低气味成本可控，换更干净的体系价格跳一档。先定气味等级要到几分，再谈体系。
车内件夏天晒完一股味，主机厂气味测试直接打回。低VOC TPE，先看气味等级，再看数值。
一句话结论：低气味 TPE，先看气味等级，再看 VOC 数值
汽车内饰件的材料，气味和 VOC 是两道坎：气味是主观的，鼻子说了算；VOC 是客观的，仪器测得出。低气味 TPE 的选型，两头都要过。
气味和 VOC 的“关系”要理清：VOC 数值低，不代表气味好闻——有的材料 TVOC 不高，但特定物质味道重。反之亦然。
所以验收要“双轨”：客观数值 + 主观嗅辨，少一条都可能在主机厂翻车。
| 指标 | 测什么 | 常见门槛 |
|---|
| 气味等级 | 主观嗅辨 | VDA270，目标 ≤3.0 级 |
| 总挥发性有机物 TVOC | 挥发总量 | 主机厂清单各有上限 |
| 甲醛/乙醛 | 醛类单项 | GB/T 27630 等 |
| 雾化 | 冷凝物 | 挡风玻璃起雾相关 |
技术金句：汽车内饰的低气味，是“配方减法”做出来的——油、助剂、副产物，每减一样，气味就降一档。
判据一 · 气味来源：三个“味道大户”
低气味 TPE 的“材料-工艺-环境”三角要一起管：材料再好，车间通风差、模具油污多、后处理不足，气味照样超标。
主机厂审厂会查的，不只是材料报告——现场管理也是气味合格的一部分。
低气味项目的“车间管理”还有细节：料斗、模具、输送管道残留的旧料，会污染低气味料。
换料时深度清机、专区存放——气味项目最怕“交叉污染”，一次污染，整批报废。
气味还有一个“温度放大”效应：常温没味，夏天暴晒、冬天暖风一吹，味道全出来了。
所以汽车件的气味测试，必须在高温段（80℃）做——常温达标的高温不达标，是最常见的翻车。
低气味 TPE 的“气味分级应用”：不同部位用不同气味等级的材料，是主机厂的成本策略——仪表板用高级别，隐蔽部位用低级别。
选料时按部位分级，比全车一个标准省钱。
TPE 的气味，主要来自三个地方：
1. 充油：SEBS 基 TPE 大量充油，矿物油的精制程度直接决定气味——低气味牌号用加氢精制油，气味明显低一档；
- 2. 助剂：抗氧剂、润滑剂、光稳定剂在加工中分解，产生气味——助剂选择和添加量都要控；
- 3. 加工副产物：注塑温度过高，材料降解产生小分子——工艺窗口是气味的第三个开关。
加工温度和气味的账：注塑温度每高 10℃，材料降解风险就升一档，气味就重一分。
低气味项目建议做“温度扫描”：同一款料，不同料温打样，选气味和外观都达标的窗口——这个窗口，就是你的工艺标准。
判据二 · 气味等级：怎么测才不算糊弄
气味等级还有个“样品状态”的细节：测气味要用“新鲜样”还是“老化样”，结果差很多。
主机厂一般要按实际零部件状态测——供应商拿粒料测的数据，和装车后的零件气味是两回事。
气味测试不是“闻一下说个味道”，是标准化的：
- VDA270：不同温度（23℃、40℃、80℃）下加热后嗅辨，分级 1-6 级；
- 条件要写死：样品量、加热温度、时间、嗅辨人数都有规定——条件不同，结果不可比；
- 主观性：同一批料，不同人嗅辨可能差半级——所以要多人、多次、盲测。
气味等级比话术诚实：供应商说“气味很低”，不如给一份 VDA270 报告；报告里写清温度条件和等级，才是真数据。
判据三 · 低 VOC 的体系和成本
低气味 TPE 的“气味等级对照”要会读：VDA270 的 3.0 级是常见门槛，但不同主机厂、不同部位要求不同——有的件要求 2.5 级，有的允许 3.5 级。
报价前把目标等级写清，供应商才能报对料。
低气味 TPE 的体系选择：
低气味 TPE 的“助剂清单”要可追溯：抗氧剂、润滑剂、光稳定剂，每个组分都要有来源和评估记录。
供应商给不出助剂清单的，气味问题只能靠猜——猜的代价是整批退货。
- SEBS 基：低气味的主力，油和助剂选好了，气味和 VOC 都好控；
- TPV 基：动态硫化体系，气味控制稍难，但耐油耐候好——内饰件也常用；
- TPO 基：成本低，但气味控制要看配方水平。
成本上，低气味 TPE 比普通 TPE 贵一截——贵在油品、助剂和品控。这笔钱不能省：车内气味超标，主机厂退的是整批，还有品牌损失。
算总账，低气味方案便宜得多。
低气味 TPE 的“成本账”还有一笔：除味剂、吸附剂、后处理工艺（烘烤除味）的钱。材料多花 5 毛，可能省下后处理 2 块——选对材料，是给后处理省钱。
三个问题定体系：气味、VOC、成本
低气味项目的“评审节点”要前置：气味测试不是量产前才做，而是选料、试模、小批、量产四个节点都要测。
四个节点数据串起来，气味问题的根源才找得到——单点测试，只能发现气味，找不到来源。
低气味 TPE 的“对标测试”建议：把现有材料和目标材料同条件测气味，数据并排看。
对标不是看谁好看，是看差异在哪、能不能接受——差异清楚了，换料决策才有依据。
低气味 TPE 的“数据呈现”要规范：报告上写清测试标准、温度、样品状态、等级——不写条件的等级没有意义。
采购方要敢要“完整报告”，供应商要会出“完整报告”，行业才能对得上话。
- 1. 问内饰位置：仪表板、门板、座椅周边——不同位置气味要求不同；
- 2. 问气味目标：主机厂清单要求的气味等级是多少、温度条件是什么；
- 3. 问工艺：现有注塑温度下，材料气味能不能达标——工艺和材料一起验证。
| 等级 | 标准 | 用途 |
|---|
| 低 VOC | 车规 | 内饰 |
| 低气味 | 品控 | 家电 |
| 普通 | 无要求 | 一般件 |
| 源头 | 影响 | 对策 |
|---|
| 油分 | 气味 | 选高纯油 |
| 助剂 | 气味 | 控添加量 |
| 工艺 | 气味 | 控料温 |
科隆客户案例：材料成本超标，定制牌号回到预算线
青岛一家汽车零部件厂，低气味 TPE 项目材料成本超标，报价没竞争力。科隆配合定制耐油、耐温专用牌号，在满足气味等级的前提下优化配方，成本回到预算线内。
成本超标，有时不是料贵，是牌号选宽了——按工况定制，性价比才出得来。
小结
低气味 TPE 的“行业趋势”：新能源车的座舱要求更高，气味的关注从“达标”走向“舒适”。先达标、再优化，是多数车企的路径——选料时给“未来升级”留余地，比一步到位便宜。
低气味 TPE 的“降本路径”：先看配方（油品等级、助剂精简），再看工艺（温度窗口优化），后看供应链（国产牌号替代）。三级降本，每级都能省——但每一步都要重新验证气味，降本不能降气味。
低气味 TPE 的“行业提醒”：座舱空气质量在成为汽车卖点，气味的权重只会升不会降。现在把气味做到位的工厂，后面是吃红利的——晚一步，就是追着标准跑。
低气味 TPE 的“一句话”：气味等级比话术诚实——报告会骗人，鼻子不会。
低气味项目的“验收闭环”：材料、零件、整车三个层级的气味数据要串起来。材料达标零件不达标，问题在工艺；零件达标整车不达标，问题在其他材料——分层排查，气味问题不扯皮。
低气味 TPE 的选型三判据——气味来源、测试方法、体系成本——对着清单过一遍，方向就清楚了。
记住一句话：TPE不是万能的，但用在低气味 TPE上，大概率是对的，别让选型成为量产前的坎。
低气味 TPE 的“供应商审核”看三样：低气味配方经验、检测设备（有没有自己的嗅辨室或气相色谱）、留样追溯能力。三样齐的供应商，气味项目少走一半弯路。
The 'bad smell' of low-VOC TPE comes from three sources: residual monomers, small molecular oils, and additive decomposition. If any major source of odor is not controlled, the vehicle manufacturer's smell test will fail.
The 'cost difference' of low VOC TPE lies in the system: SEBS-based systems can achieve low odor at a controllable cost, while switching to a cleaner system increases the price by a tier. First, decide the odor level to the required points, then discuss the system.
After being exposed to the sun in summer, the interior components have a strong smell, and the OEM's odor test directly rejects them. For low VOC TPE, first check the odor level, then look at the numerical values.
One-sentence conclusion: For low-odor TPE, first look at the odor rating, then look at the VOC value
The materials, odors, and VOCs of automotive interior components are two hurdles: odor is subjective and depends on the nose; VOCs are objective and can be measured with instruments. When selecting low-odor TPE, both aspects must be addressed.
The 'relationship' between odor and VOC needs to be clarified: a low VOC value does not mean the smell is pleasant—some materials have low TVOC but specific substances have a strong odor. The opposite is also true.
So acceptance needs a 'dual-track' approach: objective data and subjective smell detection; missing either could lead to failure at the OEM.
| Indicator | What are you testing? | Common threshold |
|---|
| Odor level | Subjective olfactory identification | VDA270, target ≤3.0 level |
| Total Volatile Organic Compounds (TVOC) | Total Volatile Content | Each OEM list has its own limit |
| Formaldehyde/Acetaldehyde | Aldehyde items | GB/T 27630, etc. |
| Atomization | Condensate | Windshield fog-related |
Technical catchphrase: The low smell of car interiors is created through 'formula subtraction' — for every reduction in oil, additives, or by-products, the odor decreases by one level.
Criterion One · Source of Smell: Three 'Major Contributors to Odor'
The 'material-process-environment' triangle of low-odor TPE must be managed together: no matter how good the material is, if the workshop has poor ventilation, mold is oily, and post-processing is insufficient, the odor will still exceed the standard.
The OEM's factory inspection will check not only the material reports — on-site management is also part of passing the odor standards.
There are also details in the 'workshop management' of low-odor projects: leftover materials in hoppers, molds, and conveyor pipes can contaminate low-odor materials.
Thoroughly clean the machine when changing materials and store them in designated areas — smell-related items are most susceptible to 'cross-contamination'; one instance of contamination can result in the entire batch being scrapped.
Smell also has a 'temperature amplification' effect: it has no odor at room temperature, but under summer sun or winter warm wind, all the smells come out.
Therefore, the odor test of automotive parts must be conducted at high temperatures (80°C) — passing at room temperature but failing at high temperature is the most common pitfall.
The 'odor grading application' of low-odor TPE: different materials with different odor levels are used for different parts, which is the OEM's cost strategy—high-grade for dashboards, low-grade for hidden parts.
When selecting materials, grading by part is cheaper than using a single standard for the whole vehicle.
The smell of TPE mainly comes from three sources:
1. Oil filling: SEBS-based TPE contains a large amount of oil. The degree of refinement of mineral oil directly determines the odor — low-odor grades use hydrogen-refined oil, with the odor noticeably lower by one level;
- 2. Additives: Antioxidants, lubricants, and light stabilizers decompose during processing, producing odors — the choice and amount of additives must be controlled;
- 3. Processing by-products: if the injection molding temperature is too high, the material degrades and produces small molecules — the process window is the third switch for odor.
Account of processing temperature and odor: For injection molding, for every 10℃ increase in temperature, the risk of material degradation rises by one level, and the odor becomes stronger.
For low-odor projects, it is recommended to perform a 'temperature scan': use the same material, sample at different material temperatures, and select the window where both odor and appearance meet standards — this window becomes your process standard.
Criterion Two · Odor Level: How to Measure It Without Fooling Around
There is also a detail about the 'sample condition' in the smell rating: measuring the smell with a 'fresh sample' or an 'aged sample' makes a big difference.
Automakers generally need to measure according to the actual condition of the parts — the data measured by suppliers using granular material is a different matter from the odor of the parts after being installed in the car.
Odor testing is not 'take a sniff and say the smell'; it is standardized:
- VDA270: Smell evaluation after heating at different temperatures (23℃, 40℃, 80℃), graded from levels 1-6;
- The conditions must be strictly specified: the sample amount, heating temperature, time, and the number of people performing the olfactory evaluation are all regulated—results are not comparable if the conditions are different;
- Subjectivity: The same batch of material may smell differently to different people by half a level — so it requires multiple people, multiple times, and blind testing.
Smell ratings are more honest than talking points: when a supplier says 'the smell is very low,' it is better to provide a VDA270 report; the report clearly states the temperature conditions and ratings, which is the real data.
Criterion Three · Low VOC Systems and Costs
You need to know how to read the 'odor level comparison' for low-odor TPE: Level 3.0 of VDA270 is a common threshold, but different OEMs and different parts have different requirements — some parts require level 2.5, while others allow level 3.5.
Clearly write down the target grade before quoting, so that the supplier can quote the correct material.
System selection for low-odor TPE:
The 'additive list' for low-odor TPE should be traceable: antioxidants, lubricants, and light stabilizers—each component must have source and evaluation records.
If the supplier cannot provide a list of additives, odor issues can only be guessed — the cost of guessing is returning the entire batch.
- SEBS-based: Low-odor main material, if the oil and additives are chosen well, the smell and VOC are both easy to control;
- TPV-based: dynamic vulcanization system, odor control is somewhat difficult, but it has good oil and weather resistance—also commonly used for interior parts;
- TPO base: Low cost, but odor control depends on the formulation level.
In terms of cost, low-odor TPE is significantly more expensive than ordinary TPE—mainly due to the oil, additives, and quality control. This money cannot be saved: if the vehicle interior odor exceeds the standard, the OEM returns entire batches, and there is also brand damage.
Overall, the low-odor option is much cheaper.
There is another item in the “cost account” of low-odor TPE: the money for deodorizers, adsorbents, and post-processing processes (baking for odor removal). Spending an extra 0.5 yuan on materials may save 2 yuan on post-processing—choosing the right material saves money on post-processing.
Three questions define the system: odor, VOC, cost
The 'review points' for low-odor projects need to be brought forward: odor testing should not be done only before mass production; it should be conducted at four stages: material selection, mold trial, small batch, and mass production.
Only by connecting data from four nodes can the root cause of the odor problem be found — single-point testing can only detect the odor, not find its source.
Suggestions for 'benchmark testing' of low-odor TPE: Test the smell of the existing material and the target material under the same conditions, and compare the data side by side.
Benchmarking is not about who looks better, but about identifying the differences and whether they are acceptable—once the differences are clear, material change decisions have a basis.
The 'data presentation' of low-odor TPE needs to be standardized: the report should clearly state the test standards, temperature, sample condition, and grade — a grade without specifying the conditions is meaningless.
The buyer must dare to demand a 'complete report,' and the supplier must be able to provide a 'complete report,' only then can the industry be on the same page.
- 1. Ask about interior locations: dashboard, door panels, around the seats — different locations have different odor requirements;
- 2. Question about odor target: What is the odor level required by the OEM checklist, and what are the temperature conditions?
- 3. Ask about the process: Under the current injection molding temperature, can the material's odor meet the standard — verify both the process and the material together.
| Level | standard | Purpose |
|---|
| Low VOC | automotive standard | Interior |
| Low odor | Quality Control | Home appliances |
| Ordinary | No requirements | General items |
| source | Influence | Countermeasure |
|---|
| Oil content | smell | Choose high-purity oil |
| Additive | smell | Controlled addition amount |
| Craft | smell | Material temperature control |
Cologne Customer Case: Material Costs Exceed Standards, Custom Grades Return to Budget Line
A car parts factory in Qingdao had a low-odor TPE project with material costs exceeding the budget, making the quotation uncompetitive. Kolon collaborated to customize oil-resistant and heat-resistant special grades, optimizing the formulation while meeting the odor level requirements, bringing the cost back within the budget.
Cost overruns are sometimes not due to expensive materials, but because the grade chosen was too broad—customizing according to operating conditions is the only way to achieve a good cost-performance ratio.
Summary
The 'industry trend' of low-odor TPE: New energy vehicle cabins have higher requirements, and attention to odor has shifted from 'meeting standards' to 'comfort.' Meeting standards first and then optimizing is the path for most car companies—leaving room for 'future upgrades' when selecting materials is cheaper than achieving it all at once.
The 'cost reduction path' for low-odor TPE: first look at the formulation (oil grade, streamlining additives), then look at the process (optimizing the temperature window), and finally look at the supply chain (substituting with domestic grades). Three levels of cost reduction, each level can save costs—but every step requires re-verifying the odor; cost reduction cannot come at the expense of odor.
Industry reminder for low-odor TPE: Cabin air quality is becoming a selling point for cars, and the importance of odor will only increase, not decrease. Factories that get the odor right now will reap the benefits later—if they are late, they will just be chasing the standards.
A 'one-liner' for low-odor TPE: The odor rating is more honest than the marketing—reports can lie, but your nose won't.
The 'acceptance closed loop' for low-odor projects: odor data at the levels of materials, parts, and the whole vehicle need to be linked. If materials meet the standard but parts do not, the problem lies in the process; if parts meet the standard but the whole vehicle does not, the problem lies in other materials—by investigating layer by layer, odor issues are handled without shirking responsibility.
Three criteria for selecting low-odor TPE—odor source, testing method, system cost—go through the checklist, and the direction will be clear.
Remember one thing: TPE is not万能, but using it on low-odor TPE is most likely the right choice. Don't let selection become an obstacle before mass production.
For 'supplier audits' of low-odor TPE, look at three things: experience with low-odor formulations, testing equipment (whether they have their own sniffing room or gas chromatography), and sample retention and traceability capabilities. Suppliers that have all three can halve the detours in odor-related projects.
