Study on preparation and Properties of Epoxy Fire-proof Coatings

In this paper, the purpose of improving the fire resistance of epoxy type fire retardant coating, the use of control variables of research methods. Eight formulations were prepared with ammonium pyrophosphate, melamine and pentaerythritol as the invariants, and were prepared with flame retardant including retardant aluminum hydroxide, zinc borate and expanded graphite as the variants. One of them was a comparative blank sample and analyzed by cone calorimeter. The results show that the performance of formula 2 with aluminum hydroxide as flame retardant is the best, and the whole experiment has achieved the expected effect. Through my research, I explored a cost-effective epoxy type fire retardant coating formula.


Purpose of research
Epoxy fire resistant coating，With excellent chemical corrosion resistance, heat resistance, acid and alkaline resistance, good electrical insulation and resistance to hydrocarbon fire [1].Secondly, the epoxy flame retardant coating has excellent sealing ability, and the flame retardant component will not migrate to the coating surface, so its fire resistance is less affected by time and environment [2].At present, the domestic understanding of epoxy fire-proof coatings is not enough, and the products introduced are far from the international leading level [3].With the accelerating pace of construction, navigation and offshore oil exploitation in China, the demand for epoxy fire resistant coatings for outdoor use will be increasing [4].Therefore,study on preparation and properties of epoxy fire resistant coatings is of great significance [5].
3)Mix，add the weighing materials to the beaker in the order of the first liquid and then the powder, stir them evenly with the glass rod, ensure that the paint slurry has the fluidity needed for the next operation, and then divide them into 4 equal shares with a small beaker. Add the prescribed ingredients to different small beakers. 4)Daub，after each beaker is fully mixed, paint from each beaker is evenly coated on different prefabricated boards. 5)Dry,put the coated wood in the sunlight to air for 1-2 days, then take it to the vacuum dryer to dry 0.5h-1h.  6)After drying, take out and cover the bottom and around the wood board with aluminum foil. Only leave the side of the fire retardant coating, put it in the cone calorimeter, and draw the form according to the data recorded by the calorimeter.
7)The experimental data are analyzed by drawing tables, and the conclusion is drawn.  Table 2, we can see that the 24s of the second board ignited is much larger than that of the blank board ignited for 16s. The average heat release rate of the first 180s and the first 300s is also much smaller than that of the blank sample, which indicates that the heat release rate and the total amount of the No. 2 plank are lower, which better protects the plank from the influence of high temperature. The average mass loss rate shows that the structure of the No. 2 paint board is more stable [6],and the debris loss per unit time is smaller than that of the blank board.
From the comparison of heat release rates in fig.4, it can be seen that the time of the final stabilization of heat release is not much different, which is about 1000s. However, the heat release rate of blank board is unstable, and the figure of heat release rate of board 2 is more gentle.From fig.2,we can see that the total exothermic THR pattern of the two samples is consistent as a whole, but the THR pattern of the blank sample has a larger slope, a faster rate, and a duration of about 800s, while the THR pattern of the No. 2 board has a smaller span, a smaller slope, and a slower rate. Duration more than 1000s, more refractory [7].From the maximum mass of the board showed in fig.3, you can see that the loss of quality of the sample 2 is slower, obviously because of the better fire resistance paint. Formula No. 3 board analysis: from Table 2, the fire resistance of the board of Formula No. 3 is 20 seconds before igniting, which is a little shorter than the 16 seconds of blank board. The average heat release rate of the first 180s was larger than that of the blank sample, and the average heat release rate of the first 300s was smaller than that of the blank sample. From the diagram of heat release rate in fig.4, we can see that the curve of blank sample has three peaks and that of board No. 3 has two peaks, which shows that the heat release rate of the two boards is not stable when burning. From fig.2 the total exothermic THR figure of the two samples, it can be seen that the slope and maximum value of sample 3 are higher than that of Then look at the total mass residual diagram of the two samples and the average mass loss rate in fig.3. The difference is not obvious, even the average mass loss rate of sample 3 is faster than that of blank sample .so, the fire resistance of blank sample and sample 3 is basically the same in general.
Formula 4 board analysis: according to the comparison of table 2, the ignition time of blank sample is 16 s, and the ignition time of sample 4 is 30s, which indicates that sample 4 has certain fire resistance, but from heat release rate, heat release peak value, the total mass loss, mass loss rate, sample 4 is much greater than the blank sample. From fig.4, it can be seen that the heat release rate diagram of sample 4 is more gentle and approximate to only one wave peak. Referring to comparison of Test Diagram between 4 samples Plate conical Calorimeter in fig.1, it is shown that the combustion of sample 4 is more uniform. In the total heat release diagram, the figure span and slope of sample No. 4 are larger, which proves that the thermal release rate is much larger than that of blank sample.