| Literature DB >> 33802797 |
Lifei Wei1,2, Rui Wang2, Zhiguo Zhu2, Wenqing Wang2, Hanguang Wu2.
Abstract
Significant improvement in the fire resistance of class="Chemical">polyethylene terephthalate (Entities:
Keywords: PET; flame retardant; graphene
Year: 2021 PMID: 33802797 PMCID: PMC8002576 DOI: 10.3390/ma14061470
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Figure 1The preparation route of GO-HCCP (graphene oxide-hexachlorocyclotriphosphazene).
Figure 2The preparation route of PET-0.4G-0.2H.
Figure 3Molecular structure of the GO-HCCP. (a) FTIR (fourier transform infrared spectrometry), (b) XRD (X-ray diffraction), (c) XPS (X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy), (d) Raman, (e) TGA (thermogravimetric analysis) curve of GO, HCCP and GO-HCCP.
Figure 4SEM-EDS of GO-HCCP.(a) SEM; (b) EDS; (c) C; (d) O; (e) P.
Figure 5SEM images of neat PET and its composites’ fracture surfaces. (a) PET, (b) PET-0.4G, (c) PET-0.2H, (d) PET-0.4G-0.2H.
DSC data of neat PET and its composites.
| Sample | 1 Tg (°C) | 2 Tcc (°C) | 3 Tmc (°C) | 4 Tm (°C) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PET | 71.1 | 141.0 | 199.9 | 248.0 |
| PET-0.4G | 49.4 | 108.2 | 156.5 | 203.7 |
| PET-0.2H | 51.4 | 128.3 | 133.2 | 206.5 |
| PET-0.4G-0.2H | 72.4 | 143.5 | 199.0 | 250.7 |
1 Tg is glass transition temperature. 2 Tcc is cold crystallization temperature. 3 Tmc is melting crystallization temperature. 4 Tm is melting temperature.
Thermal degradation data of neat PET and its composites in N2.
| Sample | 1 T5 wt% (°C) | 2 T30 wt% (°C) | 3 T50 wt% (°C) | 4 Tmax (°C) | 5 Cw (wt%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PET | 381.9 | 412.8 | 425.7 | 428.7 | 8.3 |
| PET-0.4G | 383.8 | 411.1 | 422.2 | 425.7 | 8.8 |
| PET-0.2H | 391.8 | 420.7 | 432.1 | 435.6 | 6.9 |
| PET-0.4G-0.2H | 391.7 | 418.7 | 430.1 | 432.6 | 11.0 |
1 T5 wt%, 2 T30 wt% and 3 T50 wt% are the temperature at 5 wt%, 30 wt% and 50 wt% mass loss, respectively. 4 Tmax is the maximum mass loss rate temperature. 5 Cw is the char residue weight at 700.
LOI and UL-94 of neat PET and its composites.
| Samples | Composition (wt%) | LOI (%) | UL-94 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GO | HCCP (Pwt%) | GO-HCCP | |||
| PET | 0 | 0 | 0 | 22 | V-2 |
| 1 PET-0.4G | 0.4 | 0 | 0 | 21 | V-2 |
| 2 PET-0.2H | 0 | 0.2 | 0 | 26 | V-2 |
| 3 PET-0.4G-0.2H | 0 | 0 | 0.4-0.2 | 24 | V-2 |
1 PET-0.4G is composed of PET and 0.4 wt% GO, 2 PET-0.2H is composed of PET and 0.2 Pwt% HCCP, 3 PET-0.4G-0.2H is composed of PET and 0.4 wt% GO and 0.2 Pwt% HCCP.
Cone calorimetric date of neat PET and its nanocomposites.
| Sample | 1 TTI | 2 pHRR | 3 THR | 4 pSPR | 5 COP | 6 CO2P | 7 MEHC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (s) | (kW/m2) | (MJ/m2) | (m2/S) | (g/s) | (g/s) | (MJ/Kg) | |
| PET | 63 ± 2 | 875.9 ± 11 | 60.7 ± 1 | 0.24 ± 0.01 | 0.024 ± 0.02 | 0.62 ± 0.02 | 19.0 ± 0.2 |
| PET-0.4G | 50 ± 1 | 916.0 ± 12 | 71.4 ± 2 | 0.27 ± 0.02 | 0.019 ± 0.01 | 0.65 ± 0.02 | 18.9 ± 0.2 |
| PET-0.2H | 57 ± 2 | 618.9 ± 9 | 55.1 ± 1 | 0.21 ± 0.01 | 0.021 ± 0.01 | 0.51 ± 0.01 | 16.6 ± 0.1 |
| PET-0.4G-0.2H | 58 ± 1 | 648.6 ± 11 | 63.3 ± 2 | 0.20 ± 0.02 | 0.015 ± 0.01 | 0.43 ± 0.01 | 17.8 ± 0.2 |
1 TTI is the time to ignition, 2 pHRR and 3 THR are the peak of heat release rate and the total heat release, respectively, 4 pSPR is the peak of smoke production rate, 5 COP and 6 CO2P are CO production and CO2 production, respectively, 7 MEHC is the mean effective heat of combustion.
Quantitative comparison of flame-retardant modes for PET composites.
| Sample | Barrier Effect (%) | Flame Inhibition Effect (%) | Charring Effect (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| PET-0.4G | 11.1 | 0 | 4.4 |
| PET-0.2H | 22.2 | 12.6 | 9.5 |
| PET-0.4G-0.2H | 29.1 | 5.6 | 7.6 |
Figure 6Mechanical properties of sample: (a) Elastic modulus, (b) Tensile strength
Figure 7SEM images of chars for composites after the cone calorimetry tests. (a,b) PET, (c,d) PET-0.4G, (e,f) PET-0.2H, (g,h) PET-0.4G-0.2H.
Figure 8Real-time Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (RTFTIR) spectra for condensed products of (a) PET (b) PET-0.4G-0.2H.
Figure 9Raman spectra (a) and XPS (b) scan spectra of char residue of neat PET and its composites.
Compounds identified in the pyrograms of PET and PET-0.4G-0.2H.
| NO. | Retention Time, min | Name | Content, (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PET | PET-0.4G-0.2H | |||
| 1, 1′ | 6.10 | Benzene | 7.6 | 5.2 |
| 2, 2′ | 7.49 | Styrene | 5.1 | 3.7 |
| 3, 3′ | 7.82 | Acetophenone | 3.9 | 3.1 |
| 4, 4′ | 7.95 | Benzoic acid | 34.1 | 39.6 |
| 5, 5′ | 8.53 | Methyl benzoate | 8.5 | 4.8 |
| 6, 6′ | 9.23 | Biphenyl | 7.2 | 4.3 |
| 7, 7′ | 9.47 | p-ethylbenzoic acid | 6.3 | 4.6 |
| 8, 8′ | 11.13 | Terephthalic acid | 8.7 | 11.3 |
| 9, 9′ | 12.46 | p-Acetylacetophenone | 5.0 | 7.2 |
| 10, 10′ | 13.56 | p-Vinylbiphenyl | 1.9 | 1.7 |
| 11, 11′ | 13.706 | p-Phenylacetophenone | 2.1 | 1.6 |
| 12, 12′ | 15.01 | Ethane-1,2-diyl dibenzoate | 1.7 | 1.4 |
| 13, 13′ | 15.37 | Terphenyl | 3.1 | 1.9 |
| 14, 14′ | 16.98 | 1,3-Diphenyl-1,3-propanedione | 1.6 | 1.1 |
| 15 | 17.33 | Phthalazine-1,4(2H,3H)-dione, 2-(2-methyl-5-nitrophenyl) | - | 1.3 |
| 16 | 17.95 | 5-Ethyl-5-phenylhydantoin | - | 0.9 |
| 17 | 20.52 | 1,2,4-benzenetricarboxylic acid, 3,5-dinitro-trimethyl ester | - | 1.4 |
| 18 | 21.25 | 8,10,18,20,21,23-hexaene-2,7,12,17-tetrone | - | 1.2 |
| 19 | 21.37 | o-(4,6-Diphenyl-1,3,5-triazin-2-yl)phenol | - | 0.8 |
Figure 10Proposed pyrolysis processes for PET.
Figure 11Proposed pyrolysis processes for PET-0.4G-0.2H.
Figure 12Proposed flame-retardant mechanism.