| Literature DB >> 29329212 |
Anabel Palacios1, Alvaro De Gracia2, Laia Haurie3, Luisa F Cabeza4, A Inés Fernández5, Camila Barreneche6.
Abstract
The implementation of organic phase change materials (PCMs) in severalEntities:
Keywords: differential scanning calorimetry (DSC); dripping test; flame retardants; phase change materials (PCMs); thermal energy storage (TES)
Year: 2018 PMID: 29329212 PMCID: PMC5793615 DOI: 10.3390/ma11010117
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Figure 1PCM classification adapted from Abhat [8] regarding the PCM type available within the temperature range of 20 to 30 °C.
Properties of PCM used on this study (from literature).
| Compound | Melting Temperature (°C) | Heat of Fusion (kJ/kg) | Thermal Conductivity (W/m·°C) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Paraffin RT-21 | 21 [ | 100 [ | 0.2 [ |
| 73.5% Capric acid + 26.5% Myristic acid | 24.1 [ | 152 [ | n.a |
| 75.2% Capric acid + 24.8% Palmitic acid | 22.1 [ | 153 [ | n.a |
Properties of tested flame retardant [24,29].
| Compound | Method | Onset Decomposition Temperature (°C) | Enthalpy of Decomposition (kJ/kg) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aluminum hydroxide | Endothermic decomposition | 180 | 1300 |
| Magnesium hydroxide | Endothermic decomposition | 340 | 1450 |
| Hydromagnesite | Endothermic decomposition | 200 | 800 |
| APP | Char forming | 190 | - |
| IFR | Char forming | 190 | - |
Flame retardant formulations.
| Formulations |
|---|
| PCM + (15%-20%-25%-40%) APP |
| PCM + (40%-50%-60%) Hydromagnesite |
| PCM + (40%-50%-60%) Magnesium hydroxide |
| PCM + (40%-50%-60%) Aluminum hydroxide |
| PCM + (15%-20%-25%) IFR |
Figure 2Derivative thermogravimetric curves of the PCM.
Figure 3Heat released rate curves vs. temperature for organic PCM under study.
Dripping test results for PCM.
| Flame Retardant (wt %) | Ignition Time (s) | N° of Ignitions | Average Combustion Time (s) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 26 | 1 | 300 | |
| 60% Paraffin + 40% APP | 20 | 3 | 82 |
| 50% Paraffin + 50% HM | 26 | 1 | 293 |
| 60% Paraffin + 20% IFR | 50 | 2 | 239 |
| 50% Paraffin + 50% Al(OH)3 | 27 | 1 | 288 |
| 50% Paraffin + 50% Mg(OH)2 | 26 | 1 | 286 |
| 19 | 1 | 200 | |
| 80% (CA + MA) + 20% APP | 12 | 2 | 109 |
| 50% (CA + MA) + 50% HM | 14 | 15 | 8 |
| 80% (CA + MA) + 20% IFR | 21 | 2 | 102 |
| 50% (CA + MA) + 50% Al(OH)3 | 19 | 2 | 117 |
| 50% (CA + MA) + 50% Mg(OH)2 | 24 | 17 | 4 |
| 12 | 1 | 224 | |
| 80% (CA + PA) + 20% APP | 10 | 2 | 104 |
| 50% (CA + PA) + 50% HM | 9 | 17 | 7 |
| 80% (CA + PA) + 20% IFR | 16 | 3 | 106 |
| 50% (CA + PA) + 50% Al(OH)3 | 14 | 1 | 322 |
| 50% (CA + PA) + 50% Mg(OH)2 | 32 | 26 | 4 |
Figure 4Legend of the parameters to comprehend the graph (above) and ignition-extinction periods for CA + MA mixture formulation with flame retardants (below). (a) Fire performance of capric and myristic eutectic with 50 wt % magnesium hydroxide; (b) Fire performance of capric and myristic eutectic with 50 wt % hydromagnesite; (c) Fire performance of capric and myristic eutectic with 20 wt % APP; (d) Fire performance of capric and myristic eutectic mixture. t: ignition time; t: extinction time; t: combustion time.
DSC of PCM-fire retardant optimum combination results.
| Compositions | Melting Enthalpy (kJ/kg) | Peak Temperature (°C) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Paraffin RT-21 | 118 ± 3 | 22.3 ± 0.2 | |
| 73.5% Capric acid + 26.5% Myristic acid | 143 ± 3 | 24.1 ± 0.2 | |
| 75.2% Capric acid + 24.8% Palmitic acid | 141 ± 3 | 23.3 ± 0.2 | |
| 60% Paraffin RT-21 + 40% APP | 111 ± 4 | 22.6 ± 0.2 | |
| 50% CA + MA + 50% Hydromagnesite | 53 ± 3 | 22.0 ± 0.2 | |
| 50% CA + MA + 50% Magnesium hydroxide | 55 ± 3 | 24.4 ± 0.2 | |
| 50% CA+PA + 50% Hydromagnesite | 56 ± 1 | 19.0 ± 0.6 | |
| 50% CA+PA + 50% Magnesium hydroxide | 55 ± 2 | 23.0 ± 0.2 |