4.4 Article

Thermal performance and flame retardancy studies of vinyl ester and glass fiber reinforced plastic composites containing nanoclay

期刊

JOURNAL OF COMPOSITE MATERIALS
卷 48, 期 2, 页码 165-177

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/0021998312469990

关键词

Organoclay-vinyl ester nanocomposite; glass fiber reinforced plastic; thermomechanical property; thermal stability; flame retardancy

资金

  1. Research Grants Council of Hong Kong SAR [616107, 614067, 6184/03E]
  2. Innovation and Technology Fund of Hong Kong SAR [ITP/036/09NP]
  3. Research Project Competition Grant of HKUST [RPC06/07.EG17]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The thermomechanical properties, thermal stability and flame retardancy of the organoclay-vinyl ester nanocomposites and the glass fiber reinforced plastic composites made from the vinyl ester nanocomposites matrix were studied. The results show that nanoclay addition increases both the storage modulus and glass transition temperature of the vinyl ester and glass fiber reinforced plastic composites due to the reinforcing effects and the molecular relaxing constraining effects of clay platelets. Both the vinyl ester and glass fiber reinforced plastic composites show different thermal degradation behaviors in nitrogen and in air due to the oxidizing effect of oxygen. Nanoclay has little effect on the thermal stability of vinyl ester in nitrogen, while increases the 2(nd) peak decomposition temperature of vinyl ester in air, resulting from the shielding effect of silicate platelets. However, the thermal stability of the glass fiber reinforced plastic composites in both atmospheres is reduced by nanoclay with unknown reasons. The flame retardancy of vinyl ester and glass fiber reinforced plastic composites is significantly improved due to clay that promotes the formation of carbonaceous char platelets acting as mass and heat barrier. Glass fiber reinforcement alters the thermal dynamic, thermal degradation and combustion behaviors of the vinyl ester nanocomposites.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据