4.7 Article

Flammability and Thermal Kinetic Analysis of UiO-66-Based PMMA Polymer Composites

Journal

POLYMERS
Volume 13, Issue 23, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/polym13234113

Keywords

metal-organic frameworks; polymer composite; pyrolysis kinetics; flame retardancy

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) are emerging as novel flame retardants for polymers, improving their thermal stability and flame retardancy. The lack of specific studies on the thermal decomposition kinetics of MOF-based polymer composites is a gap. Combining UiO-66 and SiO2 to form a composite can reduce the burning intensity and mass loss rate of PMMA.
Metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) are emerging as novel flame retardants for polymers, which, typically, can improve their thermal stability and flame retardancy. However, there is a lack of specific studies on the thermal decomposition kinetics of MOF-based polymer composites, although it is known that they are important for the modeling of flaming ignition, burning, and flame spread over them. The thermal decomposition mechanisms of poly (methyl methacrylate) (PMMA) have been well investigated, which makes PMMA an ideal polymer to evaluate how fillers affect its decomposition process and kinetics. Thus, in this study, UiO-66, a common type of MOF, was embedded into PMMA to form a composite. Based on the results from the microscale combustion calorimeter, the values of the apparent activation energy of PMMA/UiO-66 composites were calculated and compared against those of neat PMMA. Furthermore, under cone calorimeter tests, UiO-66, at only 1.5 wt%, can reduce the maximum burning intensity and average mass loss rate of PMMA by 14.3% and 12.4%, respectively. By combining UiO-66 and SiO2 to form a composite, it can contribute to forming a more compact protective layer, which shows a synergistic effect on reducing the maximum burning intensity and average mass loss rate of PMMA by 22.0% and 14.7%, respectively.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available