4.7 Article

Preparation of a halogen-free flame retardant and its effect on the poly (L-lactic acid) as the flame retardant material

期刊

POLYMER
卷 229, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.polymer.2021.124027

关键词

Poly(L-lactic acid); Flame retardance; Thermal stability

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41907329]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Tianjin City, China [20JCYBJC00580]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A novel flame retardant (POCODA) synthesized from POC and ODA was investigated for its effects on the thermal stability and combustion behavior of poly(L-lactic acid) (PLA) composites. The addition of POCODA/APP as a synergistic flame retardant showed improvements in the flame retardancy of PLA-based composites, with the optimal ratio achieving a V-0 rating. The proposed mechanism of flame retardance for the PLA/2%POCODA/10%APP composite was discussed based on SEM, TG-IR, and PY-GC/MS measurements.
A novel flame retardant (POCODA) was synthesized using the POC and ODA. The POCODA/APP as a synergistic flame retardant (FR) was incorporated into the poly(L-lactic acid) (PLA) to investigate effects of this synergistic FR on the thermal stability, combustion behavior and flame retardancy on the PLA. The limited oxygen index (LOI) value of the PLA-based composites gradually increased with an enhancement in the amount of the POCODA/APP. Except the PLA/5%APP, the V-0 level achieved for other composites. Both the POCODA and POCODA/APP exhibited the self-extinguishing effect on the PLA in the UL-94 test. The pHRR, THR, TSP and other combustion performance parameters of the composites reduced, compared to neat PLA, and the PLA/2% POCODA/10%APP composite exhibited the dense and continuous carbon residue after the CONE measurement and showed most excellent flame retardance. With combination of the results of the SEM, TG-IR and PY-GC/MS measurement, the flame retardant mechanism of the PLA/2%POCODA/10%APP composite was also proposed and discussed in detail.

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