Material description

Material ID: ACP35

Material type: Aluminium composite panel with a core consisting of polyethylene (PE) and a fire retardant.

Polymer: Polyethylene (39%)

Additives (fire retardants, fillers or traces of inorganic elements): Magnesium Hydroxide (56%), Calcium (2%), Silicon (1%), Titanium (1%), Sodium (1%), traces of other elements (<1%)

Core thickness: 2.97mm

Thickness of single metal skin: 0.5mm

Table 1. Estimated mass concentration of compounds.
CompoundMass Concentration (%)
Polyethylene (PE)39
Magnesium Hydroxide (Mg(OH)2)56
Calcium (Ca)2
Silicon (Si)1
Titanium (Ti)1
Sodium (Na)1
Traces of sulfur (S)<1
Traces of iron (Fe)<1
Traces of chlorine (Cl)<1
Traces of potassium (K)<1

A. Material composition identification

A.1 Attenuated total reflection – Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (ATR-FTIR)

Table 2. FTIR compound identification.
Identified Compounds
Polyethylene (PE)
Magnesium Hydroxide (Mg(OH)2)

Figure 1 . FTIR spectra: Absorbance percentage versus wavenumber from the sample.

Figure 2. FTIR spectra: Absorbance percentage versus wavenumber from the sample and the identified compounds.

 

A.2 Energy Dispersive X-Ray Fluorescence (EDXRF)

Table 2. Inorganic elements and their mass concentration identified with EDXRF.

ElementMass Concentration (%)
Mg20
Ca3
Ti2
Si1
Na1
Fe<1
S<1
Cl<1
Mn<1
K<1

Figure 3. EDXRF spectra. Counts vs energy. Identified elements are shown as vertical lines.

 

B. Thermogravimetric analysis

Table 3. Mass fraction of residue after thermal decomposition.

ConditionFraction of mass residue at 800°C
Non-oxidative (nitrogen)0.40
Oxidative (air)0.41

Table 4. Temperature and amplitude of main peaks in non-oxidative conditions.

Peak IDTemperature peak (°C)Amplitude of peak (°C-1)
Peak 14282.08 x 10-3
Peak 24821.416 x 10-2
Peak 36732.5 x 10-4

Table 5. Temperature and amplitude of main peaks in oxidative conditions.

Peak IDTemperature peak (°C)Amplitude of peak (°C-1)
Peak 13133 x 10-4
Peak 24115.8 x 10-3
Peak 34638.88 x 10-3
Peak 46702.4 x 10-4

 

Figure 4. Normalised mass (solid line) and derivative of the normalised mass (dashed line) in 150 ml min-1 of nitrogen and a heating rate of 20°C min-1.

Figure 5. Normalised mass (solid line) and derivative of the normalised mass (dashed line) in 150 ml min-1 of air and a heating rate of 20°C min-1 .

 

C. Gross Heat of Combustion

Table 7. Gross Heat of Combustion individual results for sample.
TrialΔHc [kJ g-1]
Trial 120.52
Trial 220.55
Trial 320.62
Average20.56
Std dev0.04

D. Ignition parameters

Table 8. Summary of ignition parameters for sample.
Critical heat flux for ignitionIgnition temperatureTotal heat transfer coefficient of lossesApparent thermal inertia
q̇″cr [kW m−2]Tig [°C]hr [W m-2 K-1]kρc [kW2 m-4 K-2 s]
18.5041342.401.125

Figure 6. Time-to-ignition vs incident radiant heat flux for samples.

 

E. Burning behaviour

Table 9. Summary of key burning behaviour metrics.

Heat fluxTestTime to ignitionFraction of mass residuePeak heat release rateTotal energy released
q̇″inc [kW m-2] tig [s]mres [-]q̇″p [kW m-2]Qt [MJ m-2]
35 kW m-2
Test 11260.41178.9487.73
Test 21340.39158.3881.81
Avg1300.40168.6684.77
50 kW m-2
Test 1660.39207.7184.12
Test 2650.39204.5183.43
Avg660.39206.1183.77
60 kW m-2
Test 1460.39244.5582.64
Test 2510.38227.7182.82
Avg480.38236.1382.73
80 kW m-2
Test 1----
Test 2----
Avg----

Figure 7. Normalised mass loss over time for samples tested with 35, 50, 60 and 80 kW m-2.

Figure 8. Heat release rate per unit area over time for samples tested with 35, 50, 60 and 80 kW m-2.

 

Table 10. Effective Heat of Combustion individual results for sample.
TestΔHc [kJ g-1]
35 kW m-2 (Test 1)38.47
35 kW m-2 (Test 2)34.97
50 kW m-2 (Test 1)35.39
50 kW m-2 (Test 2)35.36
60 kW m-2 (Test 1)35.26
60 kW m-2 (Test 2)34.67
80 kW m-2 (Test 1)-
80 kW m-2 (Test 2)-
Average35.69
Std dev1.39

F. Flame Spread

Table 11. Minimum heat flux for flame spread rate and minimum flame spread rate for sample.
Orientationq̇″min.spread [kW m-2]Vf.min [mm s-1]
Horizontal10.60-
Vertical6.30-

Figure 9. Lateral flame spread rate versus heat flux.

Figure 10. Vertical flame spread rate versus heat flux.

Figure 11. Vf-1/2 as function of q̇″ext in horizontal configuration.

Figure 12. Vf-1/2 as function of q̇″ext in vertical configuration.

Table 12. Flame spread parameter results for sample.

OrientationTrial(kρcpΦh2)12 [m32 s12 kW-1]Φ [kW2 m-3]
Horizontal113.0633.67
Horizontal214.3243.05
Vertical13.36955.12
Vertical23.62947.51