Experimental Investigation on Thermal Degradation …
565
Fig. 10 Evolution of back face temperature in three different assemblies
affect the total mass loss percentage of the composite but surely gives the rigidity to
the assembly which seems to be missing in case of P.L.H (see Fig. 5).
In case of the second assembly (P.L.H), the mass loss percentage is estimated
using the separate mass loss of honeycomb (99%) and P.L (33%) which is about
66%. This value is higher than the mass loss percentage obtained for the assembly
test of P.L.H (59%). This suggests that the addition of honeycomb to the P.L assembly
results in a decrease in mass loss. Similarly, the estimated average value for P.L is
45% while the actual mass loss percentage of P.L assembly is 33%. Here also the
assembly of paint and laminate results in a decrease in the mass loss percentage.
4 Conclusion
In the present work, the thermal degradation of a multilayer composite is studied
under the cone calorimeter at the incident flux of 50 kW/m
2 . The experimental
campaign is divided into two phases. In the first phase, each constitutes of the multilayer material (i.e., paint, laminate, and honeycomb) is studied separately and in the
second phase, 3 different assemblies (P.L, P.L.H, and composite) are formed and
various thermal decomposition parameters are determined. The first phase of the
experimental study confirms that during the decomposition, CO emissions are more
dominant in the case of laminate and honeycomb while CH 4 is observed only in case
of paint and laminate. The emission patterns of CO and CH 4 observed in the first
phase of the study helps in identifying the different stages of decomposition in the
second phase of the experimental study in which three different assemblies are used.
The second phase of this study allows us to conclude that the primary decomposition is governed by paint and laminate. After the primary phase is over, the
565
Fig. 10 Evolution of back face temperature in three different assemblies
affect the total mass loss percentage of the composite but surely gives the rigidity to
the assembly which seems to be missing in case of P.L.H (see Fig. 5).
In case of the second assembly (P.L.H), the mass loss percentage is estimated
using the separate mass loss of honeycomb (99%) and P.L (33%) which is about
66%. This value is higher than the mass loss percentage obtained for the assembly
test of P.L.H (59%). This suggests that the addition of honeycomb to the P.L assembly
results in a decrease in mass loss. Similarly, the estimated average value for P.L is
45% while the actual mass loss percentage of P.L assembly is 33%. Here also the
assembly of paint and laminate results in a decrease in the mass loss percentage.
4 Conclusion
In the present work, the thermal degradation of a multilayer composite is studied
under the cone calorimeter at the incident flux of 50 kW/m
2 . The experimental
campaign is divided into two phases. In the first phase, each constitutes of the multilayer material (i.e., paint, laminate, and honeycomb) is studied separately and in the
second phase, 3 different assemblies (P.L, P.L.H, and composite) are formed and
various thermal decomposition parameters are determined. The first phase of the
experimental study confirms that during the decomposition, CO emissions are more
dominant in the case of laminate and honeycomb while CH 4 is observed only in case
of paint and laminate. The emission patterns of CO and CH 4 observed in the first
phase of the study helps in identifying the different stages of decomposition in the
second phase of the experimental study in which three different assemblies are used.
The second phase of this study allows us to conclude that the primary decomposition is governed by paint and laminate. After the primary phase is over, the