Fire retarded ethylene-vinyl acetate ...
Document type :
Autre communication scientifique (congrès sans actes - poster - séminaire...): Poster
Permalink :
Title :
Fire retarded ethylene-vinyl acetate copolymer: Thermoforming versus 3D printing
Author(s) :
Geoffroy, Laura [Auteur]
Unité Matériaux et Transformations - UMR 8207 [UMET]
Solarski, Fabienne [Auteur]
Unité Matériaux et Transformations - UMR 8207 [UMET]
Jimenez, Maude [Auteur]
Unité Matériaux et Transformations - UMR 8207 [UMET]
Bourbigot, Serge [Auteur]
Unité Matériaux et Transformations - UMR 8207 [UMET]
Unité Matériaux et Transformations - UMR 8207 [UMET]
Solarski, Fabienne [Auteur]

Unité Matériaux et Transformations - UMR 8207 [UMET]
Jimenez, Maude [Auteur]

Unité Matériaux et Transformations - UMR 8207 [UMET]
Bourbigot, Serge [Auteur]

Unité Matériaux et Transformations - UMR 8207 [UMET]
Conference title :
UGéPE 2018
City :
Villeneuve d'Ascq
Country :
France
Start date of the conference :
2018-11-20
English keyword(s) :
Thermoforming
3D printing
Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM)
Fire properties
3D printing
Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM)
Fire properties
HAL domain(s) :
Chimie/Matériaux
Chimie/Polymères
Chimie/Polymères
English abstract : [en]
Thermoforming is a classical polymer shaping process, but it does not easily allow designing complex shapes, on the contrary to 3D printing (or Polymer Additive manufacturing (PAM)). Among all 3D printing techniques, Fused ...
Show more >Thermoforming is a classical polymer shaping process, but it does not easily allow designing complex shapes, on the contrary to 3D printing (or Polymer Additive manufacturing (PAM)). Among all 3D printing techniques, Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM) is of high potential for product manufacturing, with the capability to compete with conventional polymer processing techniques. Currently, classical FDM is a quite low cost technique, but the range of filaments commercially available is limited and costly. However, in some specific 3D printing processes, no filaments are necessary. Polymers pellets feed directly the printing nozzle, allowing to investigate many polymeric matrices, with no commercial limitation. This is of high interest for the design of flame retardant materials, but literature is scarce in that field. In this work, a comparison between thermoforming and 3D printing processes was performed on both neat Ethylene-vinylacetate copolymer (EVA) and EVA flame retarded with Aluminum TriHydroxyde (ATH) at different loadings (30 or 65 wt%) or Expandable Graphite (EG), ie. EVA/ATH (30%), EVA/ATH (65%) and EVA/EG (10%), respectively. Morphological comparisons, using microscopic and electronic microprobe analyses, revealed that 3D printed plates have lower apparent density and higher porosity than thermoformed plates. The fire retardant properties of thermoformed and 3D printed plates were then evaluated using Mass Loss Calorimeter (MLC) test at 50 kW/m2. Results highlight that 3D printing can be used to produce flame retardant systems exhibiting similar or even better flame retardant properties than the thermoformed ones. This is a pioneering innovative study for exploring the feasibility of using PAM technology for designing new and efficient flame retarded materials and it offers the way to make safer materials at low cost.Show less >
Show more >Thermoforming is a classical polymer shaping process, but it does not easily allow designing complex shapes, on the contrary to 3D printing (or Polymer Additive manufacturing (PAM)). Among all 3D printing techniques, Fused Deposition Modeling (FDM) is of high potential for product manufacturing, with the capability to compete with conventional polymer processing techniques. Currently, classical FDM is a quite low cost technique, but the range of filaments commercially available is limited and costly. However, in some specific 3D printing processes, no filaments are necessary. Polymers pellets feed directly the printing nozzle, allowing to investigate many polymeric matrices, with no commercial limitation. This is of high interest for the design of flame retardant materials, but literature is scarce in that field. In this work, a comparison between thermoforming and 3D printing processes was performed on both neat Ethylene-vinylacetate copolymer (EVA) and EVA flame retarded with Aluminum TriHydroxyde (ATH) at different loadings (30 or 65 wt%) or Expandable Graphite (EG), ie. EVA/ATH (30%), EVA/ATH (65%) and EVA/EG (10%), respectively. Morphological comparisons, using microscopic and electronic microprobe analyses, revealed that 3D printed plates have lower apparent density and higher porosity than thermoformed plates. The fire retardant properties of thermoformed and 3D printed plates were then evaluated using Mass Loss Calorimeter (MLC) test at 50 kW/m2. Results highlight that 3D printing can be used to produce flame retardant systems exhibiting similar or even better flame retardant properties than the thermoformed ones. This is a pioneering innovative study for exploring the feasibility of using PAM technology for designing new and efficient flame retarded materials and it offers the way to make safer materials at low cost.Show less >
Language :
Anglais
Peer reviewed article :
Non
Audience :
Internationale
European Project :
Award :
Meilleur poster
Administrative institution(s) :
Université de Lille
CNRS
INRA
ENSCL
CNRS
INRA
ENSCL
Collections :
Research team(s) :
Ingénierie des Systèmes Polymères
Submission date :
2019-09-18T08:17:06Z
2019-09-18T08:20:21Z
2019-09-18T08:38:42Z
2019-09-18T09:43:43Z
2019-09-18T08:20:21Z
2019-09-18T08:38:42Z
2019-09-18T09:43:43Z