4.7 Article

Comparative experimental analysis of the fire resistance of sandwich panels with polyisocyanourate core reinforced with fiberglass fabric

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.csite.2022.102550

关键词

Sandwich panels; Fire resistance; PIR foam Core; Fiberglass fabric; Gypsum; Plaster plate; Ceramic plate

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study compares the fire resistance performance of two sandwich panels with different coating materials and finds that the system with plasterboard coating performs better in terms of structural stability, tightness, and thermal insulation, providing longer resistance to fire.
Sandwich panels are systems with structural functions that are used in the field of civil con-struction, currently, they are used in the construction of buildings and also as cladding for walls, ceilings, among others. This article shows the results of an experimental comparative analysis of the behavior of fire resistance in two sandwich panels with structural function composed of Polyisocyanurate (PIR) foam core and fiberglass-reinforced fabric of dimensions of 3150 mm x 2800 mm x 150 mm. The first-panel system on its face exposed to fire was coated with plaster plates while the other system with ceramic plates. The parameters subject to comparison for both systems were structural stability, tightness, and thermal insulation. For this, the fire resistance test was carried out evaluating the behavior of each of the Samples subjected to the exposure of the fire to compare with each other. According to the results obtained in this research, the ma-terials used to shape the sandwich panel structure and the coating material influence the results of the parameters and the fire resist the behavior. Thus, in this study the plasterboard-coated system showed better performance against the evaluated parameters and a long time of resistance to fire than that of the ceramic-plated system, checking the thermal insulation benefits and fire pro-tection qualities of the plaster.

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