Magnafloc 156 Equivalent — High MW Anionic Polyacrylamide
Magnafloc 155, 156 and 1011 are the high molecular weight anionic grades most often named in mining tenders and drilling fluid specifications, and they sit one molecular weight step below [Magnafloc 336](/products/brand-equivalents/magnafloc-336-equivalent). For none of these three could we obtain a manufacturer data sheet stating charge density and molecular weight as figures — the range brochures that are reachable are marketing documents without grade-level parameters. So this page does what the tender actually needs instead: it puts our high molecular weight anionic range against the duty, and settles which grade on a test. Note that 1011 is specified into drilling fluid work rather than water treatment, and for that duty our [PHPA oilfield grade](/products/specialty/phpa-oilfield-grade) line is often the better starting point.
Head-to-Head Comparison
Side-by-side data: Our equivalent vs BASF Magnafloc 155 / 156 / 1011
| Parameter | Our Equivalent | BASF Magnafloc 155 / 156 / 1011 |
|---|---|---|
| Type | Anionic PAM powder | Anionic PAM powder |
| Molecular Weight | High (our scale) | Not published as a figure on any data sheet we could obtain |
| Charge Density | Selected on trial result | Not published as a figure on any data sheet we could obtain |
| Grade Naming | Grade named after trial, not before | Magnafloc 155 / 156 / 1011 |
| MOQ | 500 kg | Set by regional distributor |
| Lead Time | 7–10 days ex-works | Set by regional distributor |
| Trial Sample | Free 5 kg with test protocol | Via distributor request |
Specifications
| Our Grade | Contact us for grade selection |
| Positioned Against | BASF Magnafloc 155 / 156 / 1011 |
| Type | Anionic (partially hydrolysed polyacrylamide) |
| Molecular Weight | High (our scale) |
| Charge Density | Selected on trial result — see note below |
| Appearance | White granular powder |
| Packaging | 25 kg PP woven bags + PE liner |
Key Features
- Covers the high molecular weight anionic band the 155, 156 and 1011 numbers occupy
- Charge density selected from a settling or jar test, not assumed from a lookup table
- Mining, mineral processing and drilling fluid duty from one grade line
- Drilling fluid specifications routed to the PHPA line where that fits better
- Free trial sample with settling or jar test protocol
- Batch-specific TDS, COA and MSDS with every shipment
Applications
- Mining and mineral processing thickeners and clarifiers
- Gold, copper and iron ore tailings settling
- Drilling fluid viscosifier and shale inhibition duty
- Coal preparation plant water recovery
- Industrial process water clarification and reuse
Get a Quote for the BASF Magnafloc 155 / 156 / 1011 Equivalent
Tell us the grade you run now and your monthly volume. Quotation with full specifications and batch COA within 24 hours. Free trial sample available so you can confirm performance by jar test before committing.
Related Articles
Water Treatment Duty and Drilling Fluid Duty Are Not the Same Problem
These three grade numbers get grouped together in cross-reference tables because they share a molecular weight band, but they are specified into two genuinely different jobs, and the substitution decision runs differently in each. Getting this distinction right before you order matters more than which supplier you order from.
In water treatment and mineral processing you are flocculating: the polymer has to find suspended particles, adsorb onto them and bridge them into an aggregate large enough to settle or filter. Success is measured in settling rate, cake solids and supernatant clarity, and the governing variables are charge density against particle surface charge, and process water ionic strength. The polymer is consumed by the solids and the dose scales with solids loading.
In drilling fluid the polymer is not flocculating anything you want to remove. It is doing three other jobs at once — building low-shear viscosity for cuttings transport, encapsulating reactive shale to stop it hydrating and dispersing, and reducing filtrate loss into the formation. Success is measured on rheology, on filtration control and on how the cuttings come up. The governing variables are temperature stability, salt tolerance and hydrolysis level rather than charge matching. A grade that flocculates well can be a poor viscosifier, and vice versa, which is why we route drilling enquiries to the PHPA line rather than assuming one grade covers both.
| Water treatment / mineral processing | Drilling fluid | |
|---|---|---|
| What the polymer does | Bridges particles into settleable flocs | Builds viscosity, encapsulates shale, controls filtrate |
| Success measured on | Settling rate, cake solids, overflow clarity | Rheology, API filtrate, cuttings integrity |
| Governing variable | Charge density vs particle surface charge | Temperature and salt stability, hydrolysis level |
| Effect of high salinity | Screens charge, collapses chain, cuts performance | Same mechanism, but managed by grade selection and hydrolysis |
| Dose driver | Solids loading | Mud volume and formation reactivity |
| Our starting product | High molecular weight anionic range | PHPA oilfield grade line |
Why Three Grade Numbers Share One Page
A fair question, and the answer is a deliberate choice rather than a shortcut. We could not obtain a manufacturer data sheet stating charge density or molecular weight as a figure for 155, 156 or 1011. The range brochures that are publicly reachable are marketing documents without grade-level parameters. What we do know from how they are specified is that they occupy the same high molecular weight anionic band, one step below the very high molecular weight grades.
Given that, three separate pages would carry the same content with the number swapped, and each would tell you the same thing: send a sample. That is a doorway page pattern, it is worse for you because the information is identical, and search engines are right to treat it as padding. One page that names all three and explains the reasoning is more useful and more honest.
Where the numbers genuinely diverge, we say so. 1011 is specified into drilling fluid work rather than water treatment, which is a different chemistry problem as set out above, and our PHPA line is usually the better starting point for it. If a settling test shows your duty needs a different grade from ours than another of the three would have, that is exactly what the test is for, and we will tell you the result rather than defend the page.
Dosage Guide
Polymer demand for high molecular weight anionic duty is established by settling or jar test on the target slurry. Use your current Magnafloc dose rate as the starting reference and expect the optimum to move if you are on recycled or high-hardness process water. Make up at 0.1 to 0.25 percent and allow full ageing before dosing.
Frequently Asked Questions — Magnafloc 156 Equivalent — High MW Anionic Polyacrylamide
Why are 155, 156 and 1011 on one page instead of three?
Because we could not obtain a data sheet stating charge density or molecular weight as a figure for any of the three, they occupy the same high molecular weight anionic band, and the honest match for all three is decided by the same test on your slurry. Splitting them into three pages carrying the same content would be padding, not information. If a test shows your duty needs a different grade from ours than another of the three, we will tell you that.
Should I be on this page or the Magnafloc 336 page?
The [336 page](/products/brand-equivalents/magnafloc-336-equivalent) covers the very high molecular weight end, specified into high-rate thickeners and Bayer process settling. This page covers the step below it. If your bags read 336, start there. If they read 155, 156 or 1011, start here. Where you are unsure, send both the grade name and the duty and we will place it.
Is Magnafloc 1011 the right product for my drilling fluid?
1011 is specified into drilling fluid work rather than water treatment, and that duty is a different chemistry problem — you are managing viscosity, filtration control and shale inhibition rather than flocculating solids. Our [PHPA oilfield grade](/products/specialty/phpa-oilfield-grade) line is built for it and is usually the better starting point. Send us the mud system and we will say which of the two applies.
What do you need from me to make the match?
The grade name from your tender or delivery note, the duty and stage, the approximate solids content and particle size, the process water chemistry, and ideally a one to two litre sample. With those we can run a settling or jar comparison against our own grades rather than working from the number alone.
Is your grade a licensed copy of Magnafloc 156?
No. It is an independently manufactured anionic polyacrylamide positioned against the duty these grades are specified into. Grade descriptors follow different in-house scales, which is why we show each side on its own scale and settle the match with a test on your own slurry.
How do I make sure the trial sample is worth running?
Most trials that fail do so on procedure rather than on product, and three things account for nearly all of it. First, run the bench work at plant temperature and in plant process water, not cold and fresh — hardness and dissolved salts screen anionic charge and will change the result. Second, allow the make-up solution to age fully before dosing, because a partially hydrated polymer under-performs in a way that looks like the wrong grade. Third, run your incumbent grade side by side on the same slurry on the same day rather than comparing against a remembered dose rate, so the two results are actually comparable. Tell us the temperature, the process water chemistry and the solids loading when you request the sample and we will send the protocol set up for those conditions.
Related Products
APAM High Molecular Weight
Anionic PAM with 18-28 million MW for municipal and industrial wastewater clarification.
View DetailsApplication Solutions
View Product Details →
Trademark notice. BASF Magnafloc 155 / 156 / 1011 and all other third-party product and brand names on this page are trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective owners. Henan Jinghua New Material Technology Co., Ltd. is not affiliated with, endorsed by, sponsored by or authorised by those owners, and no such relationship is implied. Those names are used here for the sole purpose of identifying the products our grades are compared against, which is necessary to describe what we supply. Our products are independently manufactured and are not licensed copies. Grade descriptors quoted for third-party products are taken from each manufacturer’s own published literature and follow that manufacturer’s own scale; we do not publish figures those manufacturers do not publish. Performance on your process should be confirmed by jar test or CST test before any change of supply.