| Literature DB >> 30960343 |
Raúl Gómez-Rojo1, Lourdes Alameda2, Ángel Rodríguez3, Verónica Calderón4, Sara Gutiérrez-González5.
Abstract
In the European Union, the demand for polyurethane is continually growing. In 2017, the estimated value ofEntities:
Keywords: leaching test; microstructure; polymer waste; polyurethane foam
Year: 2019 PMID: 30960343 PMCID: PMC6419407 DOI: 10.3390/polym11020359
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Polymers (Basel) ISSN: 2073-4360 Impact factor: 4.329
Figure 1Polyurethane foams from different industries.
Figure 2Previous processing of polyurethane foam waste.
Results of Results CNHS Analysis of different PU waste.
| Waste | Chemical Element (%) | Others | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C | H | N | S | ||
| P | 64.48 | 5.63 | 6.74 | 0.00 | 23.15 |
| B | 62.06 | 5.07 | 6.58 | 0.00 | 26.29 |
| SG | 64.67 | 7.75 | 4.80 | 0.00 | 22.78 |
| A | 63.74 | 6.15 | 6.04 | 0.00 | 24.07 |
| I | 63.34 | 5.58 | 7.28 | 0.00 | 23.80 |
Figure 3(a) TGA of the polyurethanes (P) and (b) polyurethanes (B) that come from the insulation industry for refrigeration from the Paneles Aislantes Peninsulares (PAP) Factory.
Figure 4TGA of polyurethane (I) that come from the insulation industry for refrigeration from the Italpannelli factory.
Figure 5(a) The TGA of polyurethanes (SG) and (b) polyurethanes (A) that come from the insulation industry for refrigeration, from the Paneles Aislantes Peninsulares factory.
Figure 6(a,b) Microstructure of the PU waste (P) and (c,d) PU waste (A) by SEM.
Figure 7(a,b) Microestructure of the PU waste (B); (c,d) PU waste (I) and (e,f) PU waste (A) by SEM.
Electrical conductivity, total of dissolved solids, salt, and pH of the different wastes.
| Waste | EC (µs/cm) | TDS (mg/L) | Salt (mg/L) | pH |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Distilled water | 1.8 | 1.24 | Out of scale | 6.6 |
| P | 38.2 | 19.7 | 14.3 | 6.6 |
| B | 63.4 | 40.5 | 28.3 | 7.5 |
| SG | 149.2 | 95.4 | 69.0 | 7.9 |
| A | 27.9 | 21.5 | 15.6 | 7.7 |
| I | 32.8 | 20.7 | 15.3 | 6.8 |
Chart 1Cutting time, grinding time and energy consumption of different PU wastes.
Chart 2Granulometric curve (volume %) of different PU wastes.
Results of apparent density, real density, and total water absorption of different PU waste.
| Waste | Apparent Density (Unprocessed) (kg/m3) | Apparent Density (Processed) (kg/m3) | Real Density (kg/m3) | Total Absorption (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| P | 451.4 | 141.7 | 1052.7 | 2.0 |
| B | 37.6 | 45.5 | 1370.9 | 28.0 |
| SG | 33.1 | 39.8 | 1211.1 | 645.0 |
| A | 212.5 | 86.1 | 1378.6 | 333.5 |
| I | 33.8 | 56.0 | 1105.0 | 49.0 |
Mechanical resistance to compression and flexion at 28 days in samples (1/1.5) with different PU waste.
| Sample | 1/1.5 (P) | 1/1.5 (SG) | 1/1.5 (A) | 1/1.5 (B) | 1/1.5 (I) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Compression strength at 28 days | 2.00 | 3.71 | 3.70 | 3.95 | 4.33 |
| Flexion strength at 28 days | 1.15 | 1.71 | 1.97 | 2.23 | 2.20 |
Results of non-combustion test and gross heat of combustion test in samples (1/1.5) with different PU waste.
| Sample | 1/1.5 (P) | 1/1.5 (SG) | 1/1.5 (A) | 1/1.5 (B) | 1/1.5 (I) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Temperature increase (°C) | 71.15 | * | * | 16.6 | 19.5 |
| Flaming time (s) | 339 | * | * | NONE | NONE |
| Loss of mass (%) | 37.89 | * | * | 26.63 | 27.72 |
| Superior Calorific Power (MJ/kg) | - | - | - | 1.048 | 1.596 |
* Failed.
Results of thermal conductivity and weight per unit of surface of sample 1/1.5 (B) and 1/1.5 (I).
| Parameter | Standard Plaster | Gypsum-PU 1/1.5 (B) | Gypsum-PU 1/1.5 (I) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Thermal conductivity (W/m × k) | 0.30 | 0.20 | 0.18 |
| Weight (kg/m2) | 8.33 | 5.88 | 5.60 |