| Literature DB >> 35518161 |
Guangyu Zhang1, Xiaoqi Lin2, Qinqin Zhang2, Kaisen Jiang2, Weisheng Chen2, Dezhi Han1.
Abstract
Adding efficient and environmentally friendly flame retardants to polyurethane foams is the preferable way to improve their flame resistance ability. In this work, bio-based rigid polyurethane foams (RPUFs) were prepared with the addition of dicyclohexyl aluminium hypophosphate (DAH) or aluminium diethyl phosphinate (ADP) as the flame retardant. The mechanical properties, thermal degradation and flammability behavior of the obtained RPUFs were evaluated by means of compressive strength tests, thermogravimetry analysis, vertical burning test and scanning electron microscopes. The characterization results indicate that, with the same content of flame retardant, the compressive strength at the deformation of 10% for each RPUF prepared with the addition of DAH is higher than that of the foams with ADP addition, which fully meets the specifications for building insulation materials. Moreover, the average flame height of each RPUF with the addition of flame retardants is less than 250 mm, whereas the average burning time of RPUF with 15 wt% addition of DAH is only 4.4 s, far less than that (12.5 s) of the foam with the same addition amount of ADP. The RPUFs with DAH addition have the potential advantages for thermal insulation applications in various fields. This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry.Entities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 35518161 PMCID: PMC9056552 DOI: 10.1039/d0ra06561g
Source DB: PubMed Journal: RSC Adv ISSN: 2046-2069 Impact factor: 4.036
Fig. 1Apparent density changes of RPUFs after the addition of DAH or ADP.
Fig. 2Stress–strain curves of RPUFs prepared with DAH (a) or ADP (b).
Compressive strength of RPUFs at 10% deformation
| Samples | RPUF0 | RPUF-D5 | RPUF-D10 | RPUF-D15 | RPUF-A5 | RPUF-A10 | RPUF-A15 |
| Compressive strength (kPa) | 207.8 | 154.2 | 136.8 | 197.2 | 106.7 | 114.8 | 155.6 |
Fig. 5SEM images of RPUF-D samples before (A–C) and after (a–c) combustion.
The results of the vertical burning tests of RPUFs
| Samples | Density (kg m−3) | Burning time (s) | Number of combustion droplets | Residual mass fraction (wt%) | Flame height (mm) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RPUF0 | 59.86 | 56.6 | 6 | 33.35 | >250 |
| RPUF-D5 | 74.45 | 49.6 | 0 | 56.25 | <250 |
| RPUF-D10 | 67.61 | 16.1 | 0 | 85.21 | <250 |
| RPUF-D15 | 62.92 | 4.4 | 0 | 85.61 | <250 |
| RPUF-A5 | 63.69 | 16.8 | 0 | 90.23 | <250 |
| RPUF-A10 | 56.02 | 17.1 | 0 | 85.23 | <250 |
| RPUF-A15 | 62.08 | 12.5 | 0 | 90.89 | <250 |
Fig. 3TG (a) and DTG (b) curves of RPUF-D samples.
Fig. 4TG (a) and DTG (b) curves of RPUF-A samples.
TG analysis of RPUF-D and RPUF-A samplesa
| Samples |
|
|
| Residue (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RPUF0 | 260.4 | 367.6 | 328.2 | 17.28 |
| RPUF-D5 | 260.7 | 385.7 | 325.2 | 23.56 |
| RPUF-D10 | 254.7 | 399.6 | 321.5 | 25.24 |
| RPUF-D15 | 256.6 | 398.6 | 321.9 | 23.39 |
| RPUF-A5 | 251.7 | 383.7 | 329.9 | 21.18 |
| RPUF-A10 | 260.7 | 386.6 | 328.5 | 20.81 |
| RPUF-A15 | 265.7 | 387.6 | 325.6 | 20.43 |
T 5%: temperature at weight loss of 5%, T50%: temperature at weight loss of 50%, Tmax: temperature at the maximum thermal mass loss rate.
Fig. 6SEM images of RPUF-A samples before (A–C) and after (a–c) combustion.