Patent Grant
9127156
This Application claims priority of Taiwan Patent Application No. 101122930, filed on Jun. 27, 2012, the entirety of which is incorporated by reference herein.
The technical field relates to a flame-retardant thermoplastic starch material, a flame-retardant thermoplastic starch-based bio-composite, and a method for manufacturing the same.
In general, plants store energy in starch, and the starch may be stored in grain, beans, tubers, or the like. Since these natural sources of starch are cheap and abundant all over the earth, it has been applied to various industrial applications, including the food, paper, textile, and glue industries. Native starch refers to partially crystallized nano-level particles. Hydrogen bonds between these particles make them assemble with each other to become a huge assembly. Therefore, it is difficult for the native starch to be used in a melting process. Conventionally, starch is often used as filler in plastics to decrease cost and increase rigidity.
The hydrogen bonds between starch particles may be broken by adding polyol into the starch. The polyol may be glycerol, sorbitol, or polyethylene oxide (PEO), for example. As a result, the molecular chain entanglement and chain motion of the starch can reach a point where the starch develops characteristics of thermoplasticity. Thus, the thermoplastic starch may have a mobility similar to that of other synthesized polymers, and therefore it may be suitable for use in molding and extruding the thermoplastic. However, pure thermoplastic starch has poor mechanical strength, resulting in limited applications. Therefore, a mixture of thermoplastic starch and a biodegradable polymer, or a mixture of thermoplastic starch and polyolefin may be used.
In Taiwan, over 1.5 million tons of plastic material is used every year. If all this plastic material could be replaced with an eco-friendly material (biomass content 25%), consumption of the petroleum-based material could be reduced by about 400,000 tons per year.
In addition, in some applications such as automobile interiors, domestic electrical devices, or electronic products, the plastic material needs to be flame-retardant. However, since thermoplastic starch itself is inflammable and exhibits melt-dripping behavior, it is very difficult to develop a flame-retardant starch-based bio-composite. Thus, petrol materials with high impact resistance, such as polystyrene, acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS), polycarbonate (PC)/ABS, are still the most commonly used plastic materials.
Therefore, a novel thermoplastic starch and bio-composite with flame-retardant properties is required.
A detailed description is given in the following embodiments with reference to the accompanying drawings.
In one embodiment, a flame-retardant thermoplastic starch material is provided, comprising: (A1) 100 parts by weight of starch; (A2) 5 to 75 parts by weight of plasticizer; and (A3) 5 to 30 parts by weight of organic phosphonate flame-retardant, wherein the organic phosphonate flame-retardant has the following formula (I):
wherein X is a trivalent aliphatic hydrocarbon radical containing 3 to 12 carbon atoms; R1 and R2 are independently C1 to C8 alkyl; and n is 0 or 1.
In another embodiment, a flame-retardant thermoplastic starch-based bio-composite is provided, comprising: (A) 5 to 40 parts by weight of the flame-retardant thermoplastic starch material as described previously; (B) 60 to 90 parts by weight of thermoplastic polymer; and (C) 3 to 10 parts by weight of impact modifier.
In still another embodiment, a method for manufacturing a flame-retardant thermoplastic starch-based bio-composite is provided, comprising: mixing (A1) 100 parts by weight of starch, (A2) 5 to 75 parts by weight of plasticizer, and (A3) 5 to 30 parts by weight of organic phosphonate flame-retardant and performing a roll mill plasticizing process to form a flame-retardant thermoplastic starch (A), wherein the organic phosphonate flame-retardant has the following formula (I):
wherein X is a trivalent aliphatic hydrocarbon radical containing 3 to 12 carbon atoms, R1 and R2 are independently C1 to C8 alkyl; and n is 0 or 1; and performing a blending process to (A) 5 to 40 parts by weight of the flame-retardant thermoplastic starch, (B) 60 to 90 parts by weight of thermoplastic polymer, and (C) 3 to 10 parts by weight of impact modifier to form a flame-retardant thermoplastic starch-based bio-composite.
The following description is of the best-contemplated mode of carrying out the disclosure. This description is made for the purpose of illustrating the general principles of the disclosure and should not be taken in a limiting sense. The scope of the disclosure is best determined by reference to the appended claims.
Moreover, the formation of a first feature over or on a second feature in the description that follows may include embodiments in which the first and second features are formed in direct contact, and may also include embodiments in which additional features may be formed between the first and second features, such that the first and second features may not be in direct contact.
In one embodiment, a flame-retardant thermoplastic starch material is provided. The flame-retardant thermoplastic starch material comprises (A1) 100 parts by weight of starch; (A2) 5 to 75 parts by weight of plasticizer; and (A3) 5 to 30 parts by weight of organic phosphonate flame-retardant. In another embodiment, the flame-retardant thermoplastic starch material comprises (A1) 100 parts by weight of starch; (A2) 20 to 45 parts by weight of plasticizer; and (A3) 10 to 20 parts by weight of organic phosphonate flame-retardant.
Examples of the starch (A1) may include, but are not limited to, corn starch, cassava starch, potato starch, esterified starch, etherified starch, or combinations thereof. Examples of the plasticizer (A2) may include, but are not limited to, water, polyol, or combinations thereof. Examples of the polyol may include, but are not limited to, glycerol, sorbitol, polyethylene oxide (PEO), or the like. The polyol may break hydrogen bonds between starch molecules such that the starch molecules, which have chain entanglement and chain motion, may reach a better thermoplastic ability.
The organic phosphonate flame-retardant (A3) may have the following formula (I):
wherein X is a trivalent aliphatic hydrocarbon radical containing 3 to 12 carbon atoms; R1 and R2 are independently C1 to C8 alkyl; and n is 0 or 1. In one embodiment, the trivalent aliphatic hydrocarbon radical has the following formula (II):
wherein R3 is C1 to C8 alkylene or a single bond; R4 is C1 to C3 alkyl or hydrogen; and R5 and R6 are independently C1 to C5 alkylene. Table 1 illustrates some examples of the trivalent aliphatic hydrocarbon radical in this disclosure. However, these structures are, of course, merely examples and are not intended to be limiting.
In one embodiment, the organic phosphonate flame-retardant (A3) is a liquid. Therefore, it can be miscible with water/glycerol, such that they can be evenly mixed with the starch.
In another embodiment, a method for manufacturing a flame-retardant thermoplastic starch-based bio-composite is provided. In the method for manufacturing a flame-retardant thermoplastic starch-based bio-composite, (A1) 100 parts by weight of starch, (A2) 5 to 75 parts by weight of plasticizer, and (A3) 5 to 30 parts by weight of organic phosphonate flame-retardant are first mixed and a roll mill plasticizing process is performed to form a flame-retardant thermoplastic starch (A) at 60° C. to 100° C. In another embodiment, the roll mill plasticizing process is performed at 70° C. to 90° C.
Next, a blending process is performed to (A) 5 to 40 parts by weight of the flame-retardant thermoplastic starch as described above, (B) 60 to 90 parts by weight of thermoplastic polymer, and (C) 3 to 10 parts by weight of impact modifier to form a flame-retardant thermoplastic starch-based bio-composite. In one embodiment, the blending process is performed at 170° C. to 260° C. In another embodiment, the blending process is performed at 190° C. to 240° C.
The resulting flame-retardant thermoplastic starch-based bio-composite may comprise (A) 5 to 40 parts by weight of the flame-retardant thermoplastic starch material (FR-thermoplastic starch); (B) 60 to 90 parts by weight of thermoplastic polymer; and (C) 3 to 10 parts by weight of impact modifier. In another embodiment, the flame-retardant thermoplastic starch-based bio-composite may comprise (A) 5 to 40 parts by weight of the flame-retardant thermoplastic starch material (FR—thermoplastic starch); (B) 70 to 85 parts by weight of thermoplastic polymer; and (C) 5 to 7 parts by weight of impact modifier. It should be noted that the plasticizer (A2) in the resulting flame-retardant thermoplastic starch-based bio-composite does not contain water (only polyol), resulting from the process performed at a high temperature that removes all the water in the plasticizer (A2).
Examples of the thermoplastic polymer (B) may include, but are not limited to, polycarbonate (PC), acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS), polybutylene terephthalate (PBT), or combinations thereof. In addition, the polycarbonate, which has a shorter carbon chain than ABS and PBT (ABS and PBT are more inflammable than PC), may have a better miscibility with the flame-retardant thermoplastic starch. A blending temperature in the embodiment may be at least 200° C. It is noted that conventional flame-retardant may start to react and/or decompose at this high temperature, and therefore the conventional flame-retardant may not be used in this composite system. In addition, according to various embodiments, the flame-retardant thermoplastic starch is added into polycarbonate, and impact modifier which is compatible with the starch is also added into the mixture. Therefore, the toughness (impact resistance) of the composite material may be improved, and its flame-retardant properties may achieve a rating to UL-94V0 level, resulting from its compatibility and optimization by adjusting its composition.
In one embodiment, the impact modifier (C) is a rubber system having a core-shell structure. The shell portion of the rubber system may be polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA). The shell portion may improve its miscibility with the thermoplastic polymer and fix the size of the impact modifier. The core portion of the rubber system may comprise acrylic rubber, silicone-acrylic rubber, or combinations thereof. The core portion may provide the toughness (impact resistance) of the material.
It is noted that in the present disclosure, the organic phosphonate flame-retardant (A3) is first mixed and plasticized with starch, and then a blending process is performed afterwards. However, in some other research, the flame-retardant is added into the polymer matrix directly (rather than being plasticized first). In this case, the flame-retardant thermoplastic starch (which has flame-retardant properties itself) can not be formed.
In addition, since conventional thermoplastic starch contains a great amount of polyol, the starch-based bio-composite forming therefrom is usually inflammable and has melt dripping characteristics. However, in various embodiments of the disclosure, some of the polyol is replaced by the flame-retardant when the thermoplastic starch with flame-retardant properties is formed. Therefore, the amount of the plasticizer used may be decreased, and a bio-composite with flame-retardant properties may be formed.
The flame-retardant thermoplastic starch-based bio-composite in various embodiments has high workability at high temperatures, good molding ability and mechanical strength, and flame-retarding properties. Therefore, the flame-retardant thermoplastic starch-based bio-composite may be used in automobile interiors, domestic electrical devices, or electronic products.
In examples 1 to 17, the flame-retardant thermoplastic starch-based bio-composites were formed. The composition and material used in different examples are illustrated in Tables 2 to 5.
100 parts by weight of starch, 30 to 70 parts by weight of water, 5 to 30 parts by weight of glycerol, and 5 to 30 parts by weight of flame-retardant were mixed according to the composition shown in Tables 2 and 4. The flame-retardant included Chemguard-1045 (ORGANIC PHOSPHONATE; CG-1045; Chembridge International Corp.; as shown below), triphenyl phosphate (TPP), phosphate base flame-retardant (Resorcinol bis(dixylenyl phosphate); PX-200), or combinations thereof.
wherein n is 1.
Then, the mixture described above was put into a roll mill machine. The roll mill process was performed at 60° C. to 100° C. for 30 minutes to 80 minutes to plasticize the material. A granulator was then used to form a flame-retardant thermoplastic starch.
A blending process was performed to (A) 5 to 40 parts by weight of the resulting flame-retardant thermoplastic starch, (B) 60 to 90 parts by weight of PC, ABS, or PBT, and (C) 3 to 10 parts by weight of impact modifier, according to the composition shown in Tables 3 and 5. The process continued for 1 minute to 5 minutes at 170° C. to 260° C. to form the flame-retardant thermoplastic starch-based bio-composite.
The flame-retardant thermoplastic starch-based bio-composite in comparative example 1 was formed using the following method. The composition and material used in different examples are illustrated in Tables 4 and 5.
100 parts by weight of starch, 50 parts by weight of water, and 5 parts by weight of glycerol were mixed. Then, the mixture was put into a roll mill machine. The roll mill process was performed at 80° C. for 30 minutes to plasticize the material. A granulator was then used to form a thermoplastic starch.
A blending process was performed to (A) 30 parts by weight of the resulting thermoplastic starch, (B) 70 parts by weight of PC, (C) 10 parts by weight of organic phosphonate flame-retardant (ORGANIC PHOSPHONATE; Chembridge International Corp), and (D) 5 parts by weight of impact modifier. The process continued for 2 minutes at 230° C. to form the flame-retardant thermoplastic starch-based bio-composite.
The flame-retardant thermoplastic starch-based bio-composite in comparative example 2 was formed using the following method. The composition and material used in different examples are illustrated in Tables 4 and 5.
100 parts by weight of starch, 50 parts by weight of water, and 10 parts by weight of glycerol were mixed. Then, the mixture was put into a roll mill machine. The roll mill process was performed at 80° C. for 30 minutes to plasticize the material. A granulator was then used to form a thermoplastic starch.
A blending process was performed to (A) 30 parts by weight of the resulting thermoplastic starch, (B) 70 parts by weight of PC, (C) 15 parts by weight of organic phosphonate flame-retardant (PX-200), and (D) 5 parts by weight of impact modifier. The process continued for 2 minutes at 230° C. to form the flame-retardant thermoplastic starch-based bio-composite.
The flame-retardant thermoplastic starch-based bio-composite in comparative example 3 was formed using the following method. The composition and material used in different examples are illustrated in Tables 4 and 5.
100 parts by weight of starch, 50 parts by weight of water, and 10 parts by weight of flame-retardant (9,10-dihydro-9-oxa-10-phosphaphenan-threne-10-oxide; DOPO) were mixed. Then, the mixture was put into a roll mill machine. The roll mill process was performed at 80° C. for 30 minutes to plasticize the material. A granulator was then used to form a thermoplastic starch.
A blending process was performed to (A) 20 parts by weight of the resulting thermoplastic starch, (B) 80 parts by weight of PC, and (C) 5 parts by weight of impact modifier. The process continued for 2 minutes at 230° C. to form the flame-retardant thermoplastic starch-based bio-composite.
The flame-retardant thermoplastic starch-based bio-composite in comparative example 4 was formed using the following method. The composition and material used in different examples are illustrated in Tables 4 and 5.
100 parts by weight of starch, 50 parts by weight of water, and 10 parts by weight of glycerol were mixed. Then, the mixture was put into a roll mill machine. The roll mill process was performed at 80° C. for 30 minutes to plasticize the material. A granulator was then used to form a thermoplastic starch.
A blending process was performed to (A) 10 parts by weight of the resulting thermoplastic starch, (B) 90 parts by weight of PC, (C) 5 parts by weight of DOPO and 10 parts by weight of CG-1045, and (D) 5 parts by weight of impact modifier. The process continued for 2 minutes at 230° C. to form the flame-retardant thermoplastic starch-based bio-composite.
Tables 6 and 7 further illustrate the workability of the resulting flame-retardant thermoplastic starch-based bio-composite in examples 1-17 and comparative examples 1-4. In examples 1 to 17, during the preparation of thermoplastic starch, some polyol was replaced with organic phosphate flame-retardant. Therefore, the polymer was added to the thermoplastic starch to perform a blending process after the flame-retardant was plasticized with the starch. On the other hand, in comparative examples 1, 2, and 4, the flame-retardant was added directly into the composite to form a starch-based bio-composite. In comparative example 3, DOPO was used as the flame-retardant, and the resulting starch-based bio-composite had poor melting ability and was difficult to extrude. Accordingly, the flame-retardant thermoplastic starch-based bio-composite in the examples had better workability than those in the comparative examples.
During the manufacturing process, the flame-retardant thermoplastic starch-based bio-composite in these examples required less plasticizer. In addition, they were workable at higher temperatures and had a better molding ability, mechanical strength, and flame-retardant properties. Thus, they represent an eco-friendly material which might be used in automobile interiors, domestic electrical devices, or electronic products.
While the disclosure has been described by way of example and in terms of the preferred embodiments, it is to be understood that the disclosure is not limited to the disclosed embodiments. On the contrary, it is intended to cover various modifications and similar arrangements (as would be apparent to those skilled in the art). Therefore, the scope of the appended claims should be accorded the broadest interpretation so as to encompass all such modifications and similar arrangements.
| Number | Date | Country | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 101122930 A | Jun 2012 | TW | national |
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3789091 | Anderson et al. | Jan 1974 | A |
| 3849368 | Anderson et al. | Nov 1974 | A |
| 4397759 | Hancock | Aug 1983 | A |
| 4405731 | Carter, Jr. | Sep 1983 | A |
| 5126387 | Hand | Jun 1992 | A |
| 5710305 | Archer et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
| 5773495 | Haschke et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
| 5852114 | Loomis et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
| 5859147 | Dalla Torre et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
| 6153677 | Dalla Torre et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
| 6235815 | Loercks et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
| 6306941 | Klatt et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
| 6313105 | Bengs et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
| 6605657 | Favis et al. | Aug 2003 | B1 |
| 6962950 | Bastioli et al. | Nov 2005 | B1 |
| 7067076 | Wo et al. | Jun 2006 | B2 |
| 7094817 | Halley et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
| 7241838 | Shelby et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
| 7495044 | Long et al. | Feb 2009 | B2 |
| 7772303 | Hong et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
| 7786210 | Uradnisheck et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
| 7998888 | Shi et al. | Aug 2011 | B2 |
| 8278375 | Schanen et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
| 20010039303 | Loercks et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
| 20030109605 | Bond et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
| 20030109650 | Campbell et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
| 20030159788 | Porter et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
| 20040097662 | Gaggar et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
| 20040122135 | Halley et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
| 20040197554 | Bond et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
| 20040242803 | Ohme et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
| 20050009965 | Schell et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20050038144 | Wo et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
| 20050079785 | Bond et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
| 20050130275 | Lee et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
| 20070088113 | Suzuki et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
| 20080287592 | Favis et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
| 20090018237 | Fujii et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
| 20090043047 | Ha et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
| 20090160095 | Narayan et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
| 20090176938 | Xu et al. | Jul 2009 | A1 |
| 20100003434 | Bastioli et al. | Jan 2010 | A1 |
| 20100168284 | Gaggar et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
| 20100197834 | Suzuki et al. | Aug 2010 | A1 |
| 20100249293 | Treece et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
| 20100305271 | Mentink et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
| 20100311874 | Mentink et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
| 20100311905 | Mentink et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
| 20110065616 | Lourdin et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
| 20110086951 | Gaggar et al. | Apr 2011 | A1 |
| 20110152461 | Lee et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
| 20110213055 | Gohil et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
| 20120059097 | Liao et al. | Mar 2012 | A1 |
| 20120123025 | Schanen et al. | May 2012 | A1 |
| 20120157630 | Navarro et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
| 20120220687 | Bastioli et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
| 20120299211 | Bond et al. | Nov 2012 | A1 |
| 20130116382 | Kisin et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
| 20130231421 | Liao et al. | Sep 2013 | A1 |
| 20130261234 | Ma | Oct 2013 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country |
|---|---|---|
| 101386703 | Mar 2009 | CN |
| 101851353 | Oct 2010 | CN |
| 0535994 | Apr 1993 | EP |
| 0596437 | May 1994 | EP |
| 0704495 | Apr 1996 | EP |
| 2094779 | Sep 2009 | EP |
| 2000-103970 | Apr 2000 | JP |
| 2004-002613 | Jan 2004 | JP |
| 2007-175808 | Jul 2007 | JP |
| 2007-204656 | Aug 2007 | JP |
| 2009-029897 | Feb 2009 | JP |
| 2009-062450 | Mar 2009 | JP |
| 2009-286933 | Dec 2009 | JP |
| 328544 | Mar 1998 | TW |
| I283167 | Jul 2007 | TW |
| 200846406 | Dec 2008 | TW |
| 201211139 | Mar 2012 | TW |
| WO2009103856 | Aug 2009 | WO |
| WO2010012041 | Feb 2010 | WO |
| Entry |
|---|
| Machine translation of JP 2009-029897, 2015. |
| Taiwan Office Action for Taiwan Application No. 101122930 dated Jan. 8, 2014. |
| Nie, “Intumescent Flame Retardation of Starch Containing Polypropylene Semibiocomposites: Flame Retardancy and Thermal Degradation”, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 2009, pp. 10751-10758. |
| Reti, “Flammability Properties of Intumescent PLA Including Starch and Lignin”, Polymers for Advanced Technologies, 2008, pp. 628-635. |
| Wu, “Flame Retardancy and Thermal Degradation of Intumescent Flame Retardant Starch-Based Biodegradable Composites”, Ind. End. Chem. Res., 2009, pp. 3150-3157. |
| Matko, “Flame Retardancy of Biodegradable Polymers and Biocomposites”, Polymer Degradation and Stability, 2005, pp. 138-145, vol. 88. |
| Wittek, “Mechanical Properties and Fire Retardancy of Bidirectional Reinforced Composite Based on Biodegradable Starch Resin and Basalt Fibres”, eXPRESS Polymer Letters, 2008, pp. 810-822, vol. 2, No. 11. |
| Chinese Office action from cooresponding Chinese Application No. 201210270266.9. mailed on Apr. 27, 2015, 10 pages. |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20140005299 A1 | Jan 2014 | US |
