English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Aluminium diethylphosphinate (AlPi-Et) and inorganic aluminium phosphinate with resorcinol-bis(di-2,6-xylyl phosphate) (AlPi-H+RXP) were compared with each other as commercially available halogen-free flame retardants in poly(butylene terephthalate) (PBT) as well as in glass-fibre-reinforced PBT (PBT/GF). Pyrolysis behaviour and flame retardancy performance are reported in detail. AlPi-H+RXP released phosphine at very low temperatures, which can become a problem during processing. AlPi-Et provided better limiting oxygen index (LOI) values and UL 94 ratings for bulk and PBT/GF than AlPi-H+RXP. Both flame retardants acted via three different flame-retardancy mechanisms in bulk as well as in PBT/GF, namely, flame inhibition, increased amount of char, and a protection effect of the char. AlPi-Et was more efficient in decreasing the total heat evolved of PBT in the cone calorimeter test. AlPi-H+RXP reduced the peak heat release rate of PBT more efficiently than AlPi-Et. An optimum loading of AlPi-Et in PBT/GF was found, which was below the supplier’s recommendation. This loading provides a maximum increase in LOI and a maximum decrease in total heat evolved.

Competition in aluminium phosphinate-based halogen-free flame retardancy of poly(butylene terephthalate) and its glass-fibre composites