nano materials report

8/10/2019 Nano Materials Report

1/10

FLORIDA ATLANTIC UNIVERSITY

Investigation of

Nanoparticle Infused FireSuitsEML 4930

Report By: Emma Cusano & Jonathan Padilla

12/3/2014


2/10

2

Table of Contents

Abstract Page 3

Introduction Page 3

Background Theory Page 3

Apparatus Page 5

Procedure Page 5

Data/Results Page 6

Discussion Page 8

Conclusion Page 6

Reference Page 7


3/10

3

Abstract

The purpose of this project was to research the potential benefits of including Nanoparticles

into racing fire suits in order to increase their thermal and flame resistivity. Fire suits are

essential in racing due to inherently dangerous nature of the sport. Most fire suits are

constructed out of Nomex in single and multiple layers and generally supply between 3-10

seconds of flame resistivity. As seen from the results of this project , the inclusion of

Nanoparticles into a fire suit successfully increased the thermal resistivity and thereby

increasing the safety of the suit.

Introduction

The purpose of this experiment was to research the effects of infusing Nanoparticles into a

Nomex fire suit with the goal standing to increase the thermal resistivity of the fire suit . In this

experiment, MgO Nanoparticles


4/10

4

[2]

The choice to use Magnisium Oxide (MgO) Nanoparticles (


5/10

5

[6]

Figure 1: Schematic of DSC

Apparatus

The equipment for this experiment was as follows:

MgO Nanoparticles

Polyethylene Glycol

QSonica Q 500 Sonicator

Mechanical Mixer

Humbolt Furnace

K Type Thermocouple

Klein Tools Multi-meter

Q10 DSC

Procedure

The procedure for infusing the MgO Nanoparticles into the Nomex fire suit was as follows:

First about 95 g of ethanol was measured out in a beaker and the scale zeroed. Next 2.5 g of

MgO were measured out on a scale, the scale was zeroed and 2.08 g of PEG was added . The

mixture was then mechanically mixed for 20 minutes while the mixing speed was slowly

increased from 1 to 3 (approximately 84 rpm). Next the mixture was sonicated for 1 hour. The

mixture was then placed in a bag with previously prepared 4X4 in samples of the race suit. After

resting for 24 hours, the samples were baked at 75 C in order to evaporate the remaining

ethanol.


6/10

6

Figure 2: Preparation of MgO infused Nomex Race Suit Samples

Testing , Data & Results

Two different methods of testing were preformed: Measuring heat resistance byThermocouple and Differential Calorimetry Scanning. The heat resistance test with the

thermocouple was performed as follows First a board was set up and labeled in order to keep

track of the Neat samples vs the MgO infused samples. Next a Ktype thermocouple was placed

under the sample. The thermocouple was outputted to a Klein Tools Multi-meterwhich

contains an internal voltage transducer which converts the measured change in voltage to

temperature. Metal objects were placed on top of the sample in order to keep the sample in

place. Next the flame was applied by propane torch for approximately 10 seconds. This

sampling time was chosen as it is below the time rating for this particular fire suit.


7/10

7

Figure 3: Thermal and flame Resistance Test Set Up

The test was run several times in order to eliminate as much error as possible and the most

accurate lot for temperature vs time was as follows:

Figure 4: Resulting plot of Temperature vs Time for Thermocouple test

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Temperature(F)

Time (s)

MgO run 1

Neat Run 1


8/10

8

The procedure for the DSC test was as follows: First the reference pan, sample pan and neat

pan were all constructed. The sample and neat pans contained 2 mg of the respective test

sample. Next the DSC was run for until a temperature of 500 C in heating and cooling cycles of

10 C. This temperature was determined as previous tests did not show much in the way as

phase changes at lower temperatures. The results were as follows:

Figure 5: DSC curves

Discussion

For the thermal resistance test, referring to figure , some observations can be made. While

applying the flame, the neat sample appeared to resist the flame for approximately 5 seconds

before a sharply rising to temperatures above 550 C. In comparison, the MgO sample appeared

to resist the flame by staying longer at a for approximately 10 seconds before rising to

temperatures of approximately 525 C. It is interesting to note that the temperature seemed to

plateau in the range of 275-290 C which is the temperature where this particular Nomex has

important phase changes occur.

The DSC test results reinforce the thermal resistance test in the following manner. Referring to

figure , the first noticeable difference while comparing the neat sample vs the MgO infused

sample is in the first phase change. First the phase change occurred at a slightly lower

temperature of about 100 C for the neat sample while the MgO sample occurred around 115 C.

Also, noting the higher negative heat flow for the MgO sample indicates that more heat

absorption took place in order to facilitate the phase change. As mentioned earlier, Nomex


9/10

9

does not have a glass transition point, and this is seen from the DSC results of the neat sample

as there is a nearly flat line until the next phase change. In the MgO sample, there is a glass

transition at 275 C which is due to the MgO/PEG polymer inclusion. The last significant phase

change for the Neat sample occurs at 427 C which is the carbonization temperature for Nomex

as per the manufacturers DSC tests. After 427 the material no longer has the capacity to absorbany more heat and steady degrades as shown in the sharp positive curve of the heat flow. The

second cycle of the neat sample revealed no changes at all. In comparison,

It is interesting to note that in both test cases, the material seemed to hold its structural

integrity better with the MgO infused samples in comparison with the Neat sample. After the

same amount of heat was applied for the identical amount of time, the MgO sample always

appeared a bit less carbonized.

Conclusion

In conclusion, both test revealed a positive outcome in the inclusion of MgO Nanoparticles

into a racing fire suit. However, several areas of this experiment require investigation for future

work. First, as mentioned previously, while Magnisium Oxide was chosen primarily because in

addition to already showing fire retardant properties, it is not toxic when it burns and it is less

expensive than many other alternatives. That is not to say that it is the absolute best choice for

this application. Further research indicates that Mgo2 may be a better alternative since more

thermal energy can be absorbed when the MgO2 becomes MgO and the Co2 released will help

suffocate flames.

Although positive results were obtained, PEG has shown to be a poor bonding agent in bothaiding the creation of the polymer chains which would stregthen the material in additon to

bonding those chains to the fiber. Using Gluta and or silane would assist in this in addition to

including the nanoparticles into the Nomex fibers on the production level instead of after the

fact.

Although several iterations of both test were done for the scope of this project, more testing

would need to be done in order to ensure reliable and reproducible results.

Finally, while human life is priceless and no effort should be spared in protecting it, until the

cost of Nanoparticles is reduced by mainstreaming production, etc, it will remain difficult tointegrate their potential into the market.


10/10

10

References

[1] http://www.nakedwhiz.com/gasketsafety/nomextechnicalguide.pdf

[2] http://www.nakedwhiz.com/gasketsafety/nomextechnicalguide.pdf

[3] MSDS Sigma Aldrich

[4]http://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/magnesium-oxide-nanoparticle-

market

[5] Clements, Floria. Development of Flexible Puncture Resistant Materials System Using Silica

Nanoparticles. 1st ed. Vol. 1. Boca Raton: Florida Atlantic U, 2007. Print.

[6] http://pslc.ws/macrog/dsc.htm

nano materials report

Documents