This work shows that halogen-free, flame retarded polyamide 6 (PA6), fabrics may be produced in which component fibres still have acceptable tensile properties and low levels (preferably ď10 wt %) of additives by incorporating a nanoclay along with two types of flame retardant formulations. The latter include (i) aluminium diethyl phosphinate (AlPi) at 10 wt %, known to work principally in the vapour phase and (ii) ammonium sulphamate (AS)/dipentaerythritol (DP) system present at 2.5 and 1 wt % respectively, believed to be condense phase active. The nanoclay chosen is an organically modified montmorillonite clay, Cloisite 25A. The effect of each additive system is analysed in terms of its ability to maximise both filament tensile properties relative to 100% PA6 and flame retardant behaviour of knitted fabrics in a vertical orientation. None of the AlPi-containing formulations achieved self-extinguishability, although the presence of nanoclay promoted lower burning and melt dripping rates. The AS/DP-containing formulations with total flame retardant levels of 5.5 wt % or less showed far superior properties and with nanoclay, showed fabric extinction times ď 39 s and reduced melt dripping. The tensile and flammability results, supported by thermogravimetric analysis, have been interpreted in terms of the mechanism of action of each flame retardant/nanoclay type.

No abstract

No abstract

The thermal decomposition kinetics of polybutylene terephthalate (PBT) and flame-retardant PBT (FR-PBT) were investigated by thermogravimetric analysis at various heating rates. The kinetic parameters were determined by using Kissinger, Flynn-Wall-Ozawa and Friedman methods. The y (α) and z (α) master plots were used to identify the thermal decomposition model. The results show that the rate of residual carbon of FR-PBT is higher than that of PBT and the maximum mass loss rate of FR-PBT is lower than that of PBT. The values of activation energy of PBT (208.71 kJ/mol) and FR-PBT (244.78 kJ/mol) calculated by Kissinger method were higher than those of PBT (PBT: 195.54 kJ/mol) and FR-PBT (FR-PBT: 196.00 kJ/mol) calculated by Flynn-Wall-Ozawa method and those of PBT and FR-PBT (PBT: 199.10 kJ/mol, FR-PBT: 206.03 kJ/mol) calculated by Friedman methods. There is a common thing that the values of activation energy of FR-PBT are higher than that of PBT in different methods. The thermal decomposition reaction models of the PBT and FR-PBT can be described by Avarami-Erofeyev model (A1).