4.7 Article

A novel boron-nitrogen intumescent flame retardant coating on cotton with improved washing durability

期刊

CELLULOSE
卷 25, 期 1, 页码 843-857

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10570-017-1577-2

关键词

Flame retardant; Cotton; Boronic acid; Intumescent char; Volatiles reduction; Durability

资金

  1. GRF Project [15208015]
  2. PolyU G-UA1Z

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A series of boron-nitrogen polymers (PEIPAs) were synthesized to provide a green alternative for flame retardant finishing on cotton fabrics. An organic boron compound, phenylboronic acid (PA) was successfully bonded to the branched polyethylenimine, which was confirmed by H-1 NMR and FTIR analysis. Thermogravimetric analysis showed that the polymer with molar ratio 1:1 of ethylenimine:PA (PEIPA 1:1), presented the optimal thermal-oxidative stability. PEIPA 1:1 was easily applied on cotton fabrics through a simple dipping method with high uptake in acetone medium. The fabric with 33.8 wt% add-on got self-extinguishing ability. SEM analysis on the char morphology of the treated fabrics revealed the fire protection by the coating through intumescent flame retardant mechanism. TGIR analysis showed the coated fabric has significant reduction in the flammable volatiles production. Further improvement of the coating washing durability was achieved by a novel formaldehyde-free cross-linking treatment. The new washing stable coating achieved LOI values 29.6 and 23.2% before and after repeated launderings respectively with 30 wt% add-on. Cone calorimetry analysis showed that the total heat releases of PEIPA 1:1 treated sample and cross-linked sample (PEIPA 3:1/NeoFR treated) were decreased by 30.3 and 45.5% respectively. Smoke analysis revealed that the treated fabrics have significant decrease in CO2/CO ratio, indicating an effective flame inhibition in gas phase. The novel coatings, simple to synthesize and easy to apply with low waste, are suitable alternative to toxic halogenated flame retardants for cellulosic products.

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