Investigation of Flame Retardant Chemicals

Investigation of firing Retardant Chemicals1.0 IntroductionCotton has been used for fabric reference for a long time. It is cool and comfortable to wear. The air spaces at bottom the references all in allow the fibre to absorb liquids. Cotton can be chemically treated to make it fire-resistant by soaking it into chemicals mixed with water. A fibre is a strand composed of polymer chains twisted slightly each other.All fabrics resultant burn with some being much combustible than other, as shown in Figure 2, combustion requires energy, fuel antecedent and oxygen (), but their burning rates can be minify with fervency-retardants applied through chemical-treatment. Flame retardants are usually added to consumer products for furnituZhZhre, insulation, textiles and electronics to meet the flammability standards. The flammability is how cracking something will burn-or-ignite, causing fire-or-combustion (Wikipedia, 2014). There are complete, rudimentary combustion and charring occurs during incomplete combustion, which refers to burning in a lack of sufficient air. Not all carbon atoms form carbon dioxide, some or all may turn into carbon monoxide or forms pure carbon particles (soot) or deposits (char).Flame retardants are used for preventing fires from starting or for delaying fire, as well as limiting the spread of fire and minimise the fire damage. Solid-materials do-not burn now they must be decomposed by heat (pyrolysis) first to release inflammable gases. When the flammable gas burns with oxygen in the air, visible fervors will appear. However, if solid-materials do-not break-down into gases, they will only be slow smouldering and usually reject themselves. Especially if materials char, then form a stable-carbonaceous barrier which prevents-access of the shine to the-underlying material (EFRA, 2014). When materials choose been ignited, the heat generated breaks down from long-chain solid breakwaterecules to smaller molecules which flux as gases.Ammonium sulphate (NH4)2SO4 is an inorganic salt with various technical uses (Wikipedia, 2014), and ammonium dihydrogen phosphate (NH4H2PO4) forms when a phosphoric acid solution is come out into ammonia till the solution is meaning(a)ly acidic. These are used as fire retardants in our experiment in investigate which chemical is a reform cauterize retardant at their utmost and half concentration. newsAnalysisThe most efficient flame retardant was judged by the honest differences of citizenry before and after burning of ammonium sulphate (AS) and ammonium dihydrogen phosphate (ADP) at their supreme (M) and half level best (H) concentrations. The control has the highest differences of chew of 1.48g, because it fully burned after it is put on fire for tether imprimaturs. 5.62mol/L (M) AS and 3.48mol/L (M) ADH have average differences of concourse of 0.2g and 0.073g, which are less than the 2.81mol/L (H)AS and 1.74mol/L (H)ADH. This show the chemicals were more eff ective at their maximum concentration.Due to an anomaly that occurred in the average line of business burnt data, the average area burnt result in circumvent 3.1.3 and Graph 3.2.2 for ADH solution cannot provide a high truth data, so this result will be disregarded. The percentage differences between the mass before burning and average mass were calculated for comparing and justify 3.48mol/L ADH was the best flame retardant in this experiment. pee had the highest percentage difference which proves that water has detailed or no flame retardant ability. Obviously, MADH has the least percentage difference which supports that ADH is a good flame retardant.A higher chiliad resulted in a better flame retardant. Both chemicals had better results in resisting the burning process at maximum concentrations. There was lots of charring on fibres soaked in MADH after burning (black substances showed it was only burnt on the surface), and only a little amount of charring occurred on MASs fi bre. The layer of carbon (black substances) on fibres/polymers surface is charring which proves the chemical is a good flame retardant. The more char fibre has, the more effective the chemical of that fibre coated with. When the fibres soaked in the other three solutions were burned, charring was only nowadays on the edges. Charring occurs during incomplete combustion, which proves the lack of sufficient air during the burning, and therefore supports the result that 3.48mol/L ADH was the best flame retardant. (NH4)2SO4 and ADH (NH4H2PO4) both have NH4 and hydrogen, however, the main difference is sulphate and phosphate. Although AS has one more northward and two more hydrogen atoms than ADH, from the results, member phosphate can be predicted as having a better flame retardant ability than element sulphate.Evaluation ImprovementsThe results have a high level of consistency, as the put of values between trials was small, with a few anomalies. dishearten 7.3.1 shows the mass befo re and after burning of Trial 2 of the control (0.24g), which had a significant large disparity with the other trials data (0.04g 0.03g). Although it could be removed from deliberation of average, due to its small effect on the general results, it was kept. Table 7.3.1 withal shows the amount of burnt area of Control Trial 2 (88 squares) was let down than the other two trials (both fully burned), and is therefore a significant anomaly. This occurred as the fibres werent always steadily put at the analogous place in the flame. This could be improved by placing the fibre in the flame more carefully, and performing a few more trials to ensure the overall accuracy.Part of our group experiment was through twice, due to a authoritative error. At first, the fibres coated with MADH and HADH were not timed, so the time that the fibres were soaked varied. The beakers mightiness be put in the wrong concentration of ADH as it was marked. Therefore, those fibres might contain less or mo re solution, which explains the HADH solutions results that appeared to be a better flame retardant than the MADH solution. A second attempt on the ADH solutions was successful, and showed much better results, matching the expect results. These results were used for analysing with the water and AS solutions data.At half maximum concentration, the molarity is lower than the maximum concentration, but in Table 3.1.3 result of 1.74 mol/L HADH had a smaller area burnt than the MADH. Table 7.3.2 excessively shows the unexpected results of area burnt for ADH. This may be a dictatorial error as human judgement was required to count the get of burnt squares. Burning time can be recorded to the incoming experiment, to determine the best flame retardant. The mass retained of chemicals at their maximum concentration should be twice of the half concentration mass retained. Table 3.1.5 shows fibres masses at maximum concentration is 1.236 (AS) and 1.289 (ADH) times of their half maximum conc entration Graph 2.3.4 shows the growing trend of the mass retained at their half and maximum concentration. The exponential trend due to when chemicals at their maximum concentration the mass retained wont grow whatever higher. In this experiment AS and ADH werent actually done at the same concentration, so in future experiment the last-ditch test of the best flame retardant is to do the chemicals at the same concentrations. Alternatively, aluminium potassium sulphate-12-water and disodium tetraborate-10-water can be added into the experiment, and investigate the best flame retardant.