화학공학소재연구정보센터
홈 로그인 로그아웃 연락처 사이트맵
Applied Chemistry for Engineering, Vol.32, No.4, 417-422, August, 2021
DOI10.14478/ace.2021.1047  Export Citation
유기 단열재의 화재위험성 등급 평가
Fire Risk Rating Evaluation of Organic Insulation Materials
유지선, 전 남1, 정영진2, †
  • 강원대학교 소방방재연구센터
  • 1한국건설생활환경시험연구원
  • 2강원대학교 소방방재공학과
Ji Sun You, Nam Jeon1, and Yeong-jin Chung2, †
  • Fire & Disaster Prevention Research Center, Kangwon National University, Samcheok 25913, Korea
  • 1Real-scale Fire Testing & Research Center, Samcheok 25913, Korea
  • 2Department of Fire Protection Engineering, Kangwon National University, Samcheok 25949, Korea
E-mail:
초록
본 연구에서는 유기 단열재인 poly isocyanurate foam (PIR), poly urethane foam (PUR), phenol foam (PF)을 선정하여 ISO 5660-1의 기준에 따라 콘칼로리미터(cone calorimeter)를 이용하여 측정하였다. 화재위험성 평가를 표준화하기 위하여 기준물질(PMMA)을 사용하여 Chung’s equations-III와 Chung's equation-IV에 의한 화재위험성을 등급화하여 평가하였다. Chung’s equations-II의 화재성능지수-II 값은 PF가 14.77 s2/kW로 화재성능지수-II가 가장 높았고, PUR이 0.08 s2/kW로 화재성능지수-II가 가장 낮았다. 화재성장지수-II 값은 PF가 0.01 kW/s2로 화재성장지수-II가 가장 낮았고, PUR이 1.14 kW/s2로 화재성장지수-II가 가장 높았다. Chung’s equations-III의 화재성능지수-III에서 PUR이 0.11로 화재성능지수-III가 가장 낮게 나타났고, PF가 20.23으로 화재성능지수-III가 가장 높았다. FGI-III에서는 PUR이 14.25로 화재성장지수-III가 가장 높게 나타났고, PF가 0.13으로 가장 안전한 물질로 판단하였다. 그리고 Chung’s equation-IV의 화재위험성지수-IV는 PUR (130.03) >> PIR (19.13) > PMMA (1.00) > PF (0.01)의 순서로 나타났다. 따라서 PF가 화재위험성이 가장 낮고, PUR이 가장 높은 것으로 판단하였다.
In this study, poly isocyanurate foam (PIR), poly urethane foam (PUR), and phenol foam (PF) of organic insulation materials were selected, and investigated using a cone calorimeter, as per ISO 5660-1. Standard materials (PMMA) were used to standardize the fire hazard assessment, and the fire risk was classified and evaluated by Chung’s equations-III and IV. The fire performance index-II value of Chung’s equations-II was the highest value with PF of 14.77 s2/kW. And the PUR was 0.08 s2/kW, the lowest value of fire performance index-II value. The fire growth index-II value was the lowest value with PF of 0.01 kW/s2. And the PUR was 1.14 kW/s2, the highest value of fire growth index-II value. The fire performance index-III (FPI-III) of Chung’s equations-III had the lowest value for PUR (0.11) and the highest for PF (20.23). The PUR showed the highest value of the fire growth index-III (FGI-III) as 14.25, while the PF exhibited 0.13 regarded as the safest materials. The fire risk index-IV (FRI-IV) value of Chung’s equation-IV was in the following order: PUR (130.03) >> PIR (19.13) > PMMA (1.00) > PF (0.01). Therefore, it was concluded that the fire risk associated with PF is the lowest, whereas that associated with PUR is the highest.
Keywords:Cone calorimeter;Insulation;Fire performance index-III;Fire growth index-III;Fire risk index-IV
  1. Asimakopoulou E, Zhang J, McKEE M, Wieczorek K, Krawczyk A, Andolfo M, Scatto M, Sisani M, Bastianini M, J. Phys.: Conf. Ser., 1107, 1 (2018)
  2. Hidalgo JP, Torero JL, Welch S, Fire Mater., 42, 358 (2018)
  3. Park JW, Cho NW, Fire Sci. Eng., 31, 74 (2017)
  4. Hu L, Mike JA, Merci B, Fire Technol., 53, 1 (2017)
  5. Aydogan B, Usta N, Res. Eng. Struct. Mater., 4, 71 (2018)
  6. Pater P, Hull TR, Stec AA, Lyon RE, Polym. Adv. Technol., 22, 1100 (2011)
  7. Tewarson A, SFPE Handbook of Fire Protection Engineering, 3rd. ed., 83-161, Massachusetts (2002).
  8. Ohlemiller TJ, et al., Proceedings of the Fall Conference of the Fire Retardant Chemicals Assoc. Oct. 15-18, Ponte Vedra, FL, USA, 1-28 (2000).
  9. Xie QY, Zhang HP, Xu L, J. Macromol. Sci. A, 45, 529 (2008)
  10. Zhang T, Zhou X, Yang L, Materials, 9, 1 (2016)
  11. Vahabi H, Kandola BK, Saeb MR, Polymers, 11, 1 (2019)
  12. Sonnier R, Viretto A, Dumazert L, Gallard B, Combust. Flame, 169, 1 (2016)
  13. Babrauskas V, New Technology to Reduce Fire Losses and Costs, London, UK, 78-87 (1986).
  14. Hirschler MM, Decomposition and Chemical Composition, ACS Symp Series, Washington DC, 797, 293-306 (2001).
  15. ISO 5660-1, Reaction-to-fire tests-heat release, smoke production and mass loss rate-part 1, Switzerland (2015).
  16. Chung YJ, Jin E, Appl. Chem. Eng., 32(1), 75 (2021)
  17. Stec AA, Hull TR, Energ. Buildings, 43, 498 (2011)
  18. Gahlen P, Frobel S, Karbach A, Gabriel D, Stommel M, Polym. Test, 93, 1 (2021)
  19. Chen K, Tian C, Liang S, Zhao X, Wang X, Polym. Degrad. Stabil., 150, 105 (2018)
  20. Kuranska M, Cabulis U, Auguscik M, Prociak A, Ryszkowska J, Kirpluks M, Polym. Degrad. Stabil., 127, 11 (2016)
  21. Pfundstein M, Insulating Materials: Principles, Materials, Applications, De Gruyter GmbH (2013).
  22. Liu X, Hao J, Gaan S, RSC Adv., 6, 74742 (2016)
  23. Xu W, Wang GJ, Zheng XR, Polym. Degrad. Stabil., 111, 142 (2015)
  24. Troizsch J, Plastics Flammability Handbook 3E: Principles, Regulations, Testing, and Approval, Hanser Publications (2004).
  25. Chung YJ, Jin E, Appl. Chem. Eng., 29(6), 670 (2018)