4.7 Article

Preparation and characterization of flame retardant n-hexadecane/silicon dioxide composites as thermal energy storage materials

期刊

JOURNAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
卷 181, 期 1-3, 页码 1004-1009

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2010.05.114

关键词

Composite materials; Sol-gel; Flame retardant property; Thermal properties; Thermal energy storage

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [50776043]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Flame retardant n-hexadecane/silicon dioxide (SiO2) composites as thermal energy storage materials were prepared using sol-gel methods. In the composites, n-hexadecane was used as the phase change material for thermal energy storage, and SiO2 acted as the supporting material that is fire resistant. In order to further improve flame retardant property of the composites, the expanded graphite (EG) was added in the composites. Fourier transformation infrared spectroscope (FT-IR), X-ray diffractometer (XRD) and scanning electronic microscope (SEM) were used to determine chemical structure, crystalloid phase and microstructure of flame retardant n-hexadecane/SiO2 composites, respectively. The thermal properties and thermal stability were investigated by a differential scanning calorimeter (DSC) and a thermogravimetric analysis apparatus (TGA), respectively. The SEM results showed that the n-hexadecane was well dispersed in the porous network of the SiO2. The DSC results indicated that the melting and solidifying latent heats of the composites are 147.58 and 145.10 kJ/kg when the mass percentage of the n-hexadecane in the composites is 73.3%. The TGA results showed that the loading of the EC increased the charred residue amount of the composites at 700 degrees C. contributing to the improved thermal stability of the composites. It was observed from SEM photographs that the homogeneous and compact charred residue structure after combustion improved the flammability of the composites. (C) 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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