FLAME RETARDANT POROUS PLASTIC RESINS

Abstract

Described are flame retardant, porous plastic flame arrestors. The flame retardant, porous plastic flame arrestor is formed by irradiating a flame retardant polymer resin to achieve a fractional melt index, grinding the flame retardant polymer resin into a powder, and sintering the flame retardant polymer resin to form a porous structure. Irradiating the flame retardant polymer resin increases the resin's molecular weight and reduces the resin's melt index through crosslinking.

Claims

1. A flame retardant, porous plastic flame arrestor.

2. A blend comprising the flame retardant, porous plastic flame arrestor of claim 1 and at least one traditional fractional melt resins, wherein the flame retardant, porous plastic flame arrestor is present in ratios of 100%-10%.

3. A method of forming the flame retardant, porous plastic flame arrestor of claim 1, the method comprising: irradiating a flame retardant polymer resin to achieve a fractional melt index; grinding the flame retardant polymer resin into a powder; and sintering the flame retardant polymer resin to form a porous structure.

4. The method of claim 3, wherein the flame retardant polymer resin is polyethylene, polyvinyl chloride, a fluoropolymer, a polymer resin, or combinations thereof.

5. The method of claim 3, wherein irradiating the flame retardant polymer resin increases the resin's molecular weight and reduces the resin's melt index through crosslinking.

6. A method of forming a fractional melt, flame retardant resin comprising: crosslinking a polymer structure of a high melt flow flame retardant resin.

7. The method of claim 6, further comprising grinding the high melt flow flame retardant resin.

8. The method of claim 7, wherein the high melt flow flame retardant resin is configured to produce a sintered porous plastic flame retardant material that meets UL flammability standards for plastic resins.

9. The method of claim 7, further comprising producing a sintered porous plastic part in processing conditions that meet UL flammability test standards.

10. The method of claim 6, wherein crosslinking the polymer structure of the high melt flow flame retardant resin comprises applying an electron beam process, a chemical process, or other irradiated processes to the high melt flow flame retardant resin.

11. The method of claim 6, wherein the high melt flow flame retardant resin is polyethylene, polyvinyl chloride, a fluoropolymer, a polymer resin, or combinations thereof.

12. The method of claim 7, wherein crosslinking the polymer structure of the high melt flow flame retardant resin comprises applying an electron beam process to a flame retardant low density polyethylene.

13. The method of claim 12, wherein the fractional melt, flame retardant resin has a fractional melt of approximately 0.1 g/10 min.

14. The method of claim 12, wherein the fractional melt, flame retardant resin has a fractional melt of approximately 0.9 g/10 min.

15. The method of claim 12, wherein the fractional melt, flame retardant resin has a fractional melt between approximately 0.01-0.99 g/10 min.

16. A porous plastic part produced by converting a flame retardant resin to a fractional melt material and sintering the fractional melt material.

Description

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0039] FIG. 1 is an image of commercially available polymers in pellet form.

[0040] FIGS. 2A-2F, 3 and 4 are images showing the irregularity of particle sizes found in commercially available powdered pellets at different magnifications.

[0041] FIG. 5 is an image of a part formed from a flame retardant polyethylene with a melt index of 3.0, ground from a pellet to a powder and not irradiated (left), a part formed from a flame retardant polyethylene with a melt index of 3.0, ground from a pellet to a powder and irradiated to a melt flow of 0.9 to 1.1 (middle), and a part formed from ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene, for which the molecular weight is so high its melt index is 0 (right), according to certain embodiments of the present invention.

[0042] FIG. 6 is an image of a part formed using the process described in Example 1 (left) and a part formed using the process described in Example 2 (right), according to certain embodiments of the present invention.

[0043] FIG. 7 is another image of the parts shown in FIG. 6.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0044] The subject matter of embodiments of the present invention is described here with specificity to meet statutory requirements, but this description is not necessarily intended to limit the scope of the claims. The claimed subject matter may be embodied in other ways, may include different elements or steps, and may be used in conjunction with other existing or future technologies. This description should not be interpreted as implying any particular order or arrangement among or between various steps or elements except when the order of individual steps or arrangement of elements is explicitly described.

[0045] According to certain embodiments of the present invention, fractional melt resin based polymers such as high density polyethylene (“HDPE”), ultra high molecular weight polyethylene (“UHMW”), polyvinyl chloride (“PVC”), fluoropolymers (“PTFE”) and other crosslinking thermoplastic materials are made flame retardant to meet UL 94 flammability standards in sintered porous plastic molded parts.

[0046] The process starts with a standard high melt flow flame retardant polyethylene resin and through electron beam radiation, chemical additives or other irradiation methods crosslinks the polymer and converts it to a fractional melt resin capable of being sintered in a standard porous plastic molding cycle. This sintered porous plastic part is then capable of passing the UL 94 V0 flammability test for plastic molded parts.

[0047] In certain embodiments, rather than using the conventional methods to heat the mold during sintering as described in the background section above, the powder could be heated directly, by, for instance, a microwave field. This would require blending in an additive that responds to radio frequency (“RF”) energy, inasmuch as the polymers commonly used in porous plastics do not. Furthermore, the mold may need to be formed from a material that does not interfere with the RF field, such as glass.

[0048] In certain embodiments, electron beam irradiation reduces melt index by growing the effective molecular weight. This growth in molecular weight is accomplished either through chain branching, wherein one molecular chain bonds to an adjacent chain somewhere between the ends of the molecule, thereby creating a more or less “Y” shaped molecule, or by chain crosslinking, wherein two independent polymer chains become linked by a third chain, thereby creating a more or less “H” shaped molecule. Either shape would offer greater resistance to flow than a simple uniform molecular chain. Varying degrees of both are possible depending on dose.

[0049] Such an approach may not be feasible for use with a polypropylene-based flame retardant polymer, wherein ionizing radiation has the opposite effect on polypropylene, causing molecular chain scission and an increase in melt flow. Likewise, this approach may not be feasible with other chemicals or additives where ionizing radiation results molecular growth.

[0050] In FIG. 4, the part on the far left was molded from a flame retardant polyethylene with a melt index of 3.0, ground from a pellet to a powder and not irradiated. The part in the middle was molded from the same powder but irradiated to a melt flow of 0.9 to 1.1. The part on the right is molded from what is called an “ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene,” for which the molecular weight is so high its melt index is 0.0. As shown in FIG. 5, as the melt index approaches zero, the material exhibits more predictable behavior. According to certain embodiments, a flame retardant polyethylene with a melt index of 0.1 exhibits the visual appearance of the UHMW part shown on the right.

[0051] The differences in the appearances of the visual appearances above may be attributed to the fact that a fractional melt polymer has sufficient viscosity in its molten state to significantly reduce the three effects mentioned in the background section above. In other words, the same melt viscosity that permits less than 1 gram of material to be forced through the test orifice in 10 minutes (tested per the ASTM procedure for melt index determination) also permits the particles to largely retain their starting shape, size etc., avoiding the defects seen above.

[0052] In addition to the obvious visual improvement with lower melt flow, the UHMW polyethylene, which has a melt index of 0.0, produces a weaker structure than those made from even a slightly higher melt index, such as a 0.5 melt index PE. Such a result is consistent with what one would expect to happen as the melt index reaches 0.0.

[0053] In any event, the evidence demonstrates that use of a flame resistant polymer with fractional melt index produces a cleaner and more predictable sintered product. The fractional melt index for these flame resistant polymer may be between approximately 0.001-0.999 g/10 min, approximately 0.01-0.99 g/10 min, approximately 0.01-0.7 g/10 min, approximately 0.01-0.5 g/10 min, approximately 0.01-0.3 g/10 min, approximately 0.01-0.2 g/10 min, approximately 0.1-0.9 g/10 min, approximately 0.1-0.7 g/10 min, approximately 0.1-0.5 g/10 min, approximately 0.1-0.3 g/10 min, and approximately 0.1-0.2 g/10 min.

[0054] In certain embodiments, the fractional melt powder may be processed at loadings from 100%-10% with conventional fractional melt (0.5 g/10 min) high density polyethylene powders, and may be processed at loadings from 95%-5%, at loadings from 80%-20%, at loadings from 95%-80%, at loadings from 20%-5%, at loadings from 60%-40%, at loadings from %70-50%, at loadings from %50-30% (wherein the percentages represent the amount of fractional melt powder included in the blends).

Example 1

[0055] A flame retardant LDPE concentrate with a melt flow of 3 g/10 min was ground into a 40 mesh powder using conventional resin grinding equipment. This powder was then cross-linked using an electron beam process to a fractional melt of 0.9 g/10 min. This fractional melt powder was then processed at loadings from 100%-10% with conventional fractional melt (0.5 g/10 min) high density polyethylene powders. These mixtures were then sintered into 7 inch long by 0.67 inch wide by 0.107 inch test bars and a porous plastic flame arrestor filter 1.7 inch outside diameter, 0.62 inch height with a wall thickness of 0.187 inch. This flame arrestor filter size is typical of a ceramic filter used in reserve power batteries employed in data centers for back-up power that are required to meet UL 94 V0 flammability standards. The parts were processed using standard sintering molds and process conditions.

[0056] The parts were tested at Applied Technical Services under UL flammability test procedures. The 5 samples of the test bar and molded flame arrestor parts at 100% loading of ground radiated FR LDPE passed the UL 94 V0 test requirement. The 50/50% blend of the FR powder and a standard HDPE resin met the UL 94 V2 test requirements.

Example 2

[0057] A second flame retardant LDPE concentrate with a melt flow of 5 g/10 min from a different supplier was ground into a 40 mesh powder using conventional resin grinding equipment. This powder was then cross-linked using the same electron beam process to a fractional melt of 0.1 g/10 min. This fractional melt powder was then processed at loadings from 100%-20% with conventional fractional melt (0.5 g/10 min) high density polyethylene powders. [this was not in your write-up—should this be included?] This fractional melt powder was then molded into five samples of the same porous plastic flame arrestor filter 1.7 inch outside diameter, 0.62 inch height with a wall thickness of 0.187 inch. The samples were processed using standard sintering molds and process conditions.

[0058] The samples were tested at Applied Technical Services under UL flammability test procedures, and the five tested samples all passed the UL 94 V0 test requirement.

[0059] FIGS. 6 and 7 show parts produced using the process described in Example 1 and Example 2. As can be seen in FIGS. 6 and 7, the lower melt flow achieved with the sample produced using the process described in Example 2 improved the molding of the fractional melt powder, as compared to the molding of the fractional melt powder in the test sample produced using the process described in Example 1.

[0060] Different arrangements of the components depicted in the drawings or described above, as well as components and steps not shown or described are possible. Similarly, some features and sub-combinations are useful and may be employed without reference to other features and sub-combinations. Embodiments of the invention have been described for illustrative and not restrictive purposes, and alternative embodiments will become apparent to readers of this patent. Accordingly, the present invention is not limited to the embodiments described above or depicted in the drawings, and various embodiments and modifications may be made without departing from the scope of the claims below.