Get in Touch with Teng Yang Company
Hot Melt Adhesive Powder
Hot Melt Adhesive Powder for Powder-Dot Coating, Interlining and Lamination
Hot melt adhesive powder is bought by the kilo and consumed by the square metre, and the two numbers rarely move together. Teng Yang mills copolyamide, copolyester, TPU and EVA thermoplastic adhesive powder to a cut you specify, for fusible interlining, garment lamination, footwear and automotive interior trim.
- 4 chemistries Copolyamide (PA), copolyester (PES), TPU, EVA
- 75–425 µm Sieve range this page maps, per ASTM E11 designations
- White · black · custom Colour is a specification, not a fixed option
- Built to spec Cut, melt point and colour set by your line, not our catalogue
Industrial Hot Melt Adhesive Powder or DTF Powder? Read This First
Search “hot melt adhesive powder” and the first page returns 1kg bags for direct-to-film garment printing. That’s a different product sold to a different buyer, and landing here by mistake wastes a procurement cycle.
Which one do you need?
You run a coating line – a scatter head, an engraved roller, a paste-dot printer, a sinter oven – and buy by the tonne against a spec sheet. That is this category.
You run a DTF printer and shake powder onto wet ink before a curing oven. That’s our DTF transfer powder (wholesale) page, and it’s where the grades, packaging and pricing for that process live.
You need a continuous bond line rather than a dot pattern – no powder at all. See hot melt adhesive film or the adhesive web format guide.
Copolyamide, Copolyester, TPU and EVA: Where Each One Stops Working
The expensive mistake in this category is picking a chemistry from a price line and discovering the failure at the wash test, when the garment is already cut. Chemistry sets the wash resistance and dry-clean ceiling; the applicator sets everything else.
Pick against the care label, not the price line
That mistake is structural, not careless. The reason is that every supplier – ourselves included until this page – publishes a four-polymer melt chart that reads like a selection tool, and those charts across this industry disagree by more than 100 °C on the same polymer. Teng Yang resolves it the other way round.
NOTE:
Polyolefin is the fifth family you’ll be offered elsewhere in this category. We don’t mill it – naming it here so you know what to ask other suppliers about.
Melting range is a formulation property, not a family property. Ask for the producible band, not a polymer name.
Where the powder lands – fusible interlining, non-woven laminate, electrostatic flock, heat transfer printing – changes the cut long before it changes the chemistry.
Setting time follows the same rule. Fast set times come from the formulation and the line’s cooling, not from the polymer family name on the bag.
MAT-PA
Polyamide (PA) Hot Melt Adhesive Powder
Copolyamide. Wash-durability first, for fusible interlining and garment accessories. Applied through powder-dot and double-dot lines.
PA grades, mesh and melt points
MAT-PES
PES (Copolyester) Hot Melt Adhesive Powder
Copolyester hot melt adhesive that holds up to laundering and to dry-cleaning solvents – wash resistance is where copolyester hot melt separates from EVA. Leather lining, woven textiles, non-woven technical fabrics, heat transfer printing.
PES grades and fusing windows
MAT-TPU
TPU Hot Melt Adhesive Powder
Thermoplastic polyurethane. Elastomeric bonds surviving stretch and recovery – seam-free apparel, footwear, technical laminates.
TPU grades and RFQ inputs
MAT-EVA
EVA Hot Melt Adhesive Powder
Ethylene-vinyl acetate. Low-temperature and lower-cost scatter coating, where the finished part isn’t laundered as hard.
EVA grades and particle bandsA melting range is a property of a formulation, not a polymer family. Copolyamide hot melt grades and base nylon differ by more than 100 °C, so a single “PA melts at X” row is a number with no basis behind it.
Unlike a category chart, a producible band is answerable. Each chemistry page states its own; Teng Yang delivers against the target you name, across all four families we mill in-house.
The Trap: interlining patents declare powder grading by sieve analysis in µm, not by polymer name – so a chart keyed on polymer name can’t be checked against the industry’s own declaration basis.
The Mesh-to-Micron Crosswalk: Hot Melt Adhesive Powder Particle Size
Every quote in this trade is written in mesh. No standard governs the word.
Two facts worth more than any grade chart
No standard governs “Tyler.” The word appears nowhere in ASTM E11 or in ISO 3310-1:2016 – it is a proprietary series with no standards body behind it. ASTM E11 demotes mesh in its own footnote. Those numbers are “the approximate number of openings per linear in. but it is preferred that the sieve be identified by the standard designation in millimetres or micrometres.” Micron is the designation of record; mesh is a convenience label.
Aperture, tolerance and the number nobody checks
Below, each ASTM sieve number sits beside its nominal aperture and the three separate tolerances ISO 3310-1 attaches to it. Buyers routinely quote 400 µm as “No.40” – the first two rows show why that is wrong.
| Nominal aperture | ASTM E11 No. | X (µm) | ±Y (µm) | σ0 (µm) | Wire dia. nom (µm) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 425 µm | No. 40 | 72.5 | 14.0 | 26.8 | 280 |
| 400 µm | none — ISO 565 suppl. | 69.8 | 13.3 | 25.7 | 250 |
| 355 µm | No. 45 | 64.7 | 12.0 | 23.7 | 224 |
| 300 µm | No. 50 | 58.2 | 10.4 | 21.2 | 200 |
| 250 µm | No. 60 | 52.0 | 8.9 | 18.8 | 160 |
| 212 µm | No. 70 | 47.1 | 7.8 | 16.9 | 140 |
| 180 µm | No. 80 | 42.7 | 6.8 | 15.3 | 125 |
| 150 µm | No. 100 | 38.3 | 6.0 | 13.7 | 100 |
| 125 µm | No. 120 | 34.5 | 5.2 | 12.2 | 90 |
| 106 µm | No. 140 | 31.4 | 4.7 | 11.1 | 71 |
| 90 µm | No. 170 | 28.6 | 4.2 | 10.1 | 63 |
| 75 µm | No. 200 | 25.9 | 3.7 | 9.1 | 50 |
The aperture values look arbitrary because they are not decimal. ASTM E11 clause 4.2 advances them “from a base of 1 mm in the ratio of approximately ⁴√2 : 1” – roughly 1.189 – which is what produces 425, 355, 300, 250 rather than round hundreds.
“
A sieve designation is three conformance questions, not one. Two sieves stamped with the same number can return different results and still both conform, ASTM E11 says so in its own scope note. When a customer sends us a mesh number and nothing else, the first thing we ask for is the aperture in microns and who measured it.
The Engraved-Roller Envelope: Matching Powder Cut to Your Coating Line
Every chemistry page asks what you’re bonding. None asks what’s applying it – and that machine was chosen before the adhesive was.
Engraving on your roller caps the usable particle size before chemistry is on the table.
The same powder, two different plants. One labels it “too coarse” while the other calls it “correct.” Both are right about the powder.
A grade recommendation that doesn’t reference the applicator is an uninformed guess posing as an official specification.
Basis: published patent literature on interlining coating lines. The right-hand column is what the cited disclosure states about that route — not a Teng Yang measurement and not a performance promise. Your own line’s figures govern.
| Application route | What it does | What the published record says |
|---|---|---|
| Paste-dot printing | Adhesive paste printed through a rotary screen onto the base cloth. | Documented as the base layer in two-step constructions, ~5–6 g/m² dry (US5677038A). |
| Double-dot (paste base + scatter) | Paste base carries a scattered powder upper layer. | 2 g/m² base + 5 g/m² upper = 7 g/m² total on a 35 g/m² polyester knit (US6300413B1); 5+7 and 6+8 g/m² also disclosed (US6986935B2). |
| Engraved-roller transfer | Powder or paste picked up in engraved cells and transferred to the web. | A line “aiming to achieve add-on weights of from 10 to 15 g/m²” (US5902843A). |
| Scatter head + sinter oven | Powder scattered onto a woven or non-woven web, then fused. | Non-adhering powder is blown off and extracted by suction; the record documents the mechanism but publishes no recovery rate. |
| Electrostatic flock adhesive | Powder carries the flock fibre bed rather than a second fabric. | Named in the category’s own term set as an application; no add-on figure is published for it, so treat any you are quoted as the supplier’s, not the standard’s. |
What we could not find, and will not invent
No published ratio is provided to relate engraving cell depth to the maximum useable particle size for interlining. Interlining patents often co-state the powder grade and the dot density without ever relating the two terms. There’s a publicly stated ratio that controls the gravure coating of liquid dispersions in another industrial sector, and it isn’t transferable here.
The Add-On Weight Bridge: Cost per Square Metre, Not per Kilogram
Powder pricing is based on currency per kilogram, and actual use is based on grams per square metre. Because your applicator, not the polymer itself, determines how much is added to your fabric, using a lower cost-per-kilo powder in higher amounts can be more expensive per square metre of fabric, a costly mistake that won’t show up on the price quote.
Why nobody bridges the two units
The typical interlining line’s production metrics are expressed in currency per square metre or currency per garment, while cost information is based on currency per kilogram. Instead of disputing the price per kilogram, Teng Yang quantify the relationship.
What the record says about where add-on has gone
An interlining patent records that “costs and quality reasons have led to a marked reduction in the amount of coating applied per m²” — from a former 18–25 g/m² to 7–15 g/m² (US6300413B1).
Read that range carefully
The patent data dates to the period 1996-2001. “Nowadays” meant then, not 2026 — treat it as a direction, not a current market figure.
Add-on doesn’t refer to the total interlining weight. In the 7 g/m² shown, for example, conflating it with the 35 g/m² substrate overstates adhesive consumption fivefold.
Kilograms bought isn’t the same as grams landed on fabric, and non-adhering powder is removed via suction. There’s no available data on the transfer efficiency of textile scatter coating, so please use your own observed data.
Ordering: Packaging, Samples and How a Quote Gets Built
The real expense in switching powder vendors is seldom the unit cost. The actual cost is in lost time when a suggested cut doesn’t work on your line because the spec was never checked.
Pricing is often a black box; buyers compare the only metric provided (currency per kilogram) and suffer the consequences when the discrepancy emerges during production.
By running a trial sample on your line, Teng Yang verify suitability first rather than later.
No market minimum, lead time, or Incoterms information is publicly available. We searched and couldn’t find any source that could be cited, so instead of making an assumption, we’ve included factors that influence the price of a quote.
What moves your price
- Finer apertures will cost more than a coarse product because more processing is involved with tighter tolerances and multiple screening steps.
- Standard melt band will cost less than tight custom-bound window
- White and black are standard and add no cost; anything else will involve formulation.
- Copolyamide, copolyester, TPU, and EVA don’t fall into the same price tier.
- Volume tiers and packaging all factor into the total cost of delivered material. Moisture-barrier packaging is part of landed cost, not an afterthought — powder flow degrades with humidity exposure.
What a first order looks like
- you’ll provide: substrate, applicator type, maximum operating temperature, dwell time, any care-labeling requirements, and any applicable competitive spec
- we’ll offer recommended starting point in terms of cut size, melt temperature, and colour, and we’ll supply you a sample to trial on your production equipment; we won’t offer a lab-only test.
- If that trial proves a change in spec, we’ll offer adjusted product to try prior to the discussion of tonnage.
- Minimum Order Quantity, Lead Times, Package Quantities, and Incoterms basis is policy; this page provide neither, because we’ll provide no number that we haven’t yet confirmed as the correct one for your case.
Handling, Storage and Combustible-Dust Basics
Fine thermoplastic powder has no dust problem until it’s airborne. It then becomes combustible dust.
A 75 µm cut going through a scatter head and a dust collector is airborne powder by definition.
No one else in this category will touch the topic — and their silence does not make the risk go away when you file their literature with your safety reviewer.
Why every supplier is silent, including us
No supplier will offer you a Dust Class, because ignition is a property of the dust cloud, not the dust in the bag. But Teng Yang is one of the only suppliers that will hand you the tools and knowledge to close the gaps, rather than the nothing everyone else in this product class gives you.
Three things the record actually says
- The ‘420-micron rule’ is mythical. The current OSHA definition in CPL 03-00-008 is behavioural: it’s ‘a finely divided combustible particulate solid which presents a flash-fire or explosion hazard when suspended in air’. The 420-micron value appears in 2009 guidance as a screening criterion — “deemed” sufficient — not as a boundary below which a dust becomes hazardous and above which it does not.
- Plastic dust IS a target. OSHA’s current National Emphasis Program for Combustible Dust lists plastic dust among other dusts it’s specifically seeking to control.
- There’s no OSHA requirement to conduct a Dust Hazard Analysis. OSHA cites either its specific dust standards or the General Duty Clause. NFPA is not directly enforceable and may only serve as evidence of generally recognized industry practices. It’s the responsibility of the owner or operator of the facility, not the powder supplier, to conduct a DHA.
View remaining records & analysis
- Your cited standard is obsolete. The presiding document is NFPA 660, which consolidated NFPA 652, 654, 61, 484, 655 and 664 into chapters of one standard. NFPA 652 won’t be updated further as it’s in the process of being retired. If your file still names 652, it is naming a document no longer moving through the standards committee.
That last is why no supplier can give you a dust class. Ignition and explosion properties are functions of the dust cloud in your system, not a name or grade.
Basis: OSHA CPL 03-00-008 definitions and OSHA 3371 example table; polymer values from peer-reviewed literature on other polymers. No Kst, Pmax, MIE or ST class exists in the public record for copolyamide, copolyester, TPU or EVA hot melt powder, and Teng Yang has measured none. These rows show what the parameters are and how far the nearest published attestation sits from this product.
| Parameter | Unit | Nearest published value — and to what |
|---|---|---|
| Kst | bar·m/s | PA12 powder: 116.6 (peer-reviewed). PA12 is not copolyamide hot melt. |
| Pmax | bar(g) | PA12 powder: 6.76 at 750 g/m³. |
| MIT | °C | PA12 powder: 350. |
| LEL | g/m³ | PA12 powder: 30. |
| ST class | — | St 0 = 0; St 1 >0 to ≤200; St 2 >200 to ≤300; St 3 >300 bar·m/s. OSHA’s only thermoplastic exemplar is polymethyl acrylate, at St 2. |
What we ask you to do
Store cool, dry and sealed with desiccant. High humidity attacks your flow before it hurts the bond, and a caked 90 µm cut will fail on the line for reasons that have nothing to do with the chemistry.
Ground and bond disperse into heads, ducting, and the collector. Suspended fine powder + a source of ignition = your problem.
The DHA is yours. The framework, entered into the record via NFPA 652, allows analysis of the data by published parameters and enables your facility to treat a material as explosive rather than test it, with either path available without a number from us. Cross-reference the clause with NFPA 660 (which now contains that text), and we’ve read the 652 wording, not 660’s renumbering — we don’t know of a more recent update.
You want a Safety Data Sheet before you get a sample?
Name the chemistry, we’ll provide the SDS →
What We Can Prove About Our Powder, and What We Can’t
- The hot melt adhesive powder line holds no product certification of its own today.
- Teng Yang publishes no first-party laboratory data for this powder – you’ll find no particle size distribution, peel figure, or wash-retention percentage. You’ll find none here, because none are produced for this product line.
- If your audit requires a certificate we do not hold, we are not the right supplier for that order. Stating that up front is more efficient for all concerned than saying so after a sample test.
The risk you’re managing isn’t bad powder. It’s a supplier whose paperwork fails your customer’s audit, identified only after you’ve committed to production.
What replaces a badge is a system you can verify yourself.
- 01 Safety data sheet per chemistry, on request.
- 02 Conformance to your restricted-substance list by written agreement — state your list and limits, and we’ll document it in the contract.
- 03 Samples to your nominated third-party laboratory, tested to your protocol rather than ours.
- 04 Production against the resulting report, with lot-level sieve confirmation on request.
The Adjective-to-Unit Register: Reading a Hot Melt Adhesive Powder Spec
This category sells adjectives. Here’s the unit each one owes you, and the conditions without which the number means nothing.
Basis: published standard designations. Teng Yang publishes none of these numbers for its powder today. This register exists so you can demand them from us on exactly the same terms as from anyone else.
The adjective you’ll be sold
Governing method
Mandatory unit
Without these conditions it means nothing
-
01“Fine” / “200 mesh”ASTM E11 designation ↔ aperture; tolerances per ISO 3310-1µm nominal apertureX, ±Y and σ0 tolerances, and wire diameter. Two conforming sieves of the same number can disagree.
-
02“Narrow distribution” / “D50 of 80 µm”ISO 13320 laser diffractionµm, volume basis, as D10 / D50 / D90Edition named, optical model and refractive index stated. A sieve result and a laser D50 are different measurements — there is no conversion between them.
-
03“Narrow span” / “span 1.2”None. No standard defines span.Dimensionless ratioThe honest cell is the empty one. Span is a vendor convention derived from D10/D50/D90; it inherits every condition above and adds no authority of its own.
-
04“Low melt” / “melting range 60–95 °C”ISO 11357-3 (DSC)°CHeating rate, sample mass, atmosphere, and which transition is being reported. A melting range with no heating rate is a shape, not a measurement.
-
05“Softening point 110 °C”ASTM E28 (ring-and-ball) or ASTM D3461 (Mettler)°CWhich method — they are not interchangeable. E28’s named scope is rosin and terpene resins; hot melt powders fall under “and similar materials”.
-
06“High flow”ISO 1133-1g/10 minTemperature and load. An MFI with no load stated is uninterpretable.
-
07“Excellent peel” / “strong adhesion”ISO 11339 (T-peel)N/mmSubstrate, bonding conditions, dwell, pressure, and test speed. Adhesion is a property of a bonded joint, never of a powder on its own.
-
08“Wash resistant”ISO 6330 or AATCC launderingcycles, at a stated temperatureCycle count, temperature, and the pass criterion. “Machine washable” with no method is a hope.
-
09“Low ignition risk”ASTM E1226 / E1515, or EN 14034 parts 1–4mJ · bar·m/s · bar(g) · g/m³No supplier’s particle-size sheet can answer this. It is a property of your dust cloud, established by your DHA.
Want any of these on our powder? Name the method and the conditions in your RFQ – we’ll tell you what we can run and what has to go to your lab
Submit Request →Adhesive Powder Processing Tools
-
add on weight bridge
Calculate and monitor the coating weight of adhesive powder precisely. Ensures optimal application thickness during the lamination process.
Access Tool -
engraved roller envelope
Determine the exact volume and surface area requirements for engraved applicator rollers. Optimize powder distribution uniformity.
Access Tool -
combustible dust screening
Assess the hazard parameters of powder particulates in manufacturing environments. Facilitates compliance with industrial safety protocols.
Access Tool
PARAMETERS
SEND US THE LINE, NOT JUST THE CHEMISTRY
That’s enough for us to recommend a cut and ship a sample.
01
01
SUBSTRATE
02
02
APPLICATOR
03
03
TEMPERATURE CEILING
04
04
ADD-ON TARGET
05
05
CARE-LABEL REQUIREMENT
01
What is hot melt adhesive powder used for?
What is hot melt adhesive powder used for?
Powder-dot and double-dot coating of fusible interlining, garment lamination, footwear and leather lining, and automotive interior trim. A solid thermoplastic melts at a set temperature, bonds on contact, then re-solidifies as it cools – no solvent, no separate curing step, and nothing to reclaim from a mixing vessel at shift end.
02
Is this the same as DTF powder?
Is this the same as DTF powder?
No – different product, different buyer. See our DTF powder page for more details.
03
What mesh should I order?
What mesh should I order?
Start from your applicator, not from the chemistry.
Send the roller gauge or scatter-head type, plus the add-on weight your line needs.
Cut follows from those two. Working backwards from a chemistry name is how the wrong grade gets shipped.
04
Can you match a specific melt point, cut and colour?
Can you match a specific melt point, cut and colour?
Yes, all three, across copolyamide, copolyester, TPU and EVA. Colour is a real variable rather than a menu – white and black are standard, and anything else adds a formulation step.
05
Why don’t you publish a spec table with test data?
Why don’t you publish a spec table with test data?
Because we haven’t run those tests, and a number we didn’t measure is worth nothing to your engineer. We publish producible targets and the methods you should demand from any supplier, ourselves included – the full position is detailed in our capabilities documentation and the method register.
06
Do you have OEKO-TEX, REACH or RoHS certification for the powder?
Do you have OEKO-TEX, REACH or RoHS certification for the powder?
Not for this powder line. Name the certificate your audit needs and we’ll tell you plainly whether it exists and for what.
07
What are the disadvantages of hot melt adhesive?
What are the disadvantages of hot melt adhesive?
Heat resistance is the honest limit: a thermoplastic bond softens as it approaches its own melt range, which is exactly why the care label – not the price – should pick the chemistry. Application needs heat, and the powder is moisture-sensitive in storage.
