4.5 Article

Synergistic effects of polyoxometalate-based ionic liquid-doped sepiolite in intumescent flame-retardant high-density polyethylene

期刊

POLYMERS FOR ADVANCED TECHNOLOGIES
卷 32, 期 5, 页码 2240-2251

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/pat.5258

关键词

flame retardancy; polyoxometalate‐ based ionic liquid; sepiolite; synergistic effect

资金

  1. Natural Science Foundation of Shanxi Province [201901D111171]
  2. Fund for Shanxi 1331 Project

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A polyoxometalate-based ionic liquid-doped sepiolite was successfully prepared and applied in constructing a new intumescent flame-retardant system for enhancing the flame retardancy of high-density polyethylene. The addition of SEP-PIL into HDPE/IFR composites significantly improved the flame retardant properties, resulting in the composite achieving a UL-94V-0 rating.
A polyoxometalate-based ionic liquid-doped sepiolite (SEP-PIL) was prepared by electrostatically immobilizing phosphomolybdic acid (PMA) on natural sepiolite embedded with imidazolium cations (SEP-IL), and its structural properties were fully characterized by various methods. Furthermore, a new intumescent flame-retardant system (IFR) for high-density polyethylene (HDPE) was constructed by adding SEP-PIL into conventional HDPE/IFR composites. The retardant properties and thermal decomposition behaviors were comprehensively investigated. The results showed that the HDPE composite containing 24 wt% IFR and 1 wt% SEP-PIL passed UL-94V-0 rating, and the limiting oxygen index increased from 17.8% (pure HDPE) to 27.6%. In addition, the HDPE/IFR/SEP-PIL composite had lower peak heat release rate (PHRR) and total heat release (THR) compared to the HDPE/IFR composite. The thermogravimetric analysis demonstrated that the combination of SEP-PIL with IFR could greatly promote the formation of residual chars. Dynamic rheological measurement further confirmed that the synergistic effect of SEP-PIL and IFR could greatly improve the flame retardancy of HDPE/IFR/SEP-PIL composites.

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

4.5
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