Comparison of thermal and fire properties of carbon/epoxy laminate composites manufactured using two forming processes
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract Carbon/epoxy composites have been widely used in the aviation industry. However, the flammability of epoxy resins is of great concern within the industry. Currently, vacuum bag and autoclave forming processes are the most commonly used processes for composites. To compare the thermal and fire properties of carbon/epoxy laminate composites manufactured using these two forming processes, a comprehensive experimental investigation and theoretical analysis was carried out in this work. The glass transition temperatures and epoxy resin matrix content in composites were determined. Several thermal and fire properties were quantitatively evaluated, including onset decomposition temperature, time to ignition, mass loss rate (MLR), and heat release rate (HR). The morphologies of specimens before combustion were also observed. For vacuum bag (VB)‐C/ELC and A‐C/ELC, the critical heat flux (14.48 and 20.56 kW m−2), thermal response parameter (165.56 and 204.49 kW s1/2 m−2), heat of gasification (9.13 and 20.10 MJ kg−1), and theoretical heat of combustion (33.27 and 43.82 MJ kg−1) were calculated and compared using the thermal behavior model, MLR model, and heat release rate model, respectively. It has been found that the forming process can significantly affect the fire properties of carbon/epoxy laminate composites. More specifically, the carbon/epoxy laminate composites formed using autoclave forming processes have more combustion resistance and thus have improved fire properties.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Flame retardant materials and properties · Fire dynamics and safety research · Fiber-reinforced polymer composites
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
School of Safety Engineering and Liaoning Key Laboratory of Aircraft Safety and Airworthiness Shenyang Aerospace University Shenyang China
Filter Test Center, School of Resources and Civil Engineering Northeastern University Shenyang China
Mary Kay O'Connor Process Safety Center, Artie McFerrin Department of Chemical Engineering Texas A&M University College Station Texas USA
Funding
Scientific Research Project of Liaoning Provincial Education Department
References (23)
Show source-provided references
1. Sun X. · Rare Met. Mater. Eng. · 2012 · 41 · 422
2. 10.1016/j.compositesa.2017.03.02010.1016/j.compositesa.2017.03.020 ↗
3. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2017.08.02010.1016/j.compositesb.2017.08.020 ↗
4. Shen Z. · 2004
5. 10.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2015.04.02810.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2015.04.028 ↗
6. 10.1016/S1875-5372(15)30021-710.1016/S1875-5372(15)30021-7 ↗
7. 10.1016/j.polymertesting.2014.11.00410.1016/j.polymertesting.2014.11.004 ↗
8. 10.1016/j.tca.2011.01.03410.1016/j.tca.2011.01.034 ↗
9. Xu Y. · Polym. Compos. · 2019 · 40 · 10910.1002/pc.24609 ↗
10. Quintiere J. · 2007
11. Mouritz A. P. · 2006
12. 10.1002/978111997546510.1002/9781119975465 ↗
13. Morgan J. H. · 2015
14. 10.1016/j.jlp.2015.11.00910.1016/j.jlp.2015.11.009 ↗
15. 10.1002/fam.219110.1002/fam.2191 ↗
16. 10.1002/fam.81015040210.1002/fam.810150402 ↗
17. 10.1007/s10973-016-6070-x10.1007/s10973-016-6070-x ↗
18. 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2012.05.11610.1016/j.ijhydene.2012.05.116 ↗
19. 10.1007/s11434-014-0479-z10.1007/s11434-014-0479-z ↗
20. ASTM E662‐14 · 2014
21. 10.1016/j.firesaf.2004.07.00110.1016/j.firesaf.2004.07.001 ↗
22. 10.1016/j.firesaf.2012.08.00210.1016/j.firesaf.2012.08.002 ↗
23. 10.1007/s10973-015-4900-x10.1007/s10973-015-4900-x ↗