The article assesses the fire barrier capability of a glass-reinforced intumescent flame retardant system under burn-through conditions. The material is a glass fiber-reinforced intumescent flame retardant polypropylene. The experimental evaluation involved a burn-through test close to the UL2596 standardized test (without grit) for assessing Electrical Vehicle battery protective materials under thermal runaway. The backside time/temperature curves demonstrated the ability of the intumescent material to withstand for 30 min without burn-through. Numerically, a three-dimensional pyrolysis model, including mass and energy conservation principles, heat transfer equations in porous media, and a moving boundary condition (expansion rate) to simulate the thermal expansion of an intumescent material, was implemented. The comparison between the model and experiments showed a good prediction. A parametric study on critical parameters, including emissivity, convective heat coefficient, gas mass diffusion coefficients, and flame heat flux, provided a coherent description of the barrier properties of the material as analyzed by the numerical model.
ShahidSAgelin-ChaabM. A review of thermal runaway prevention and mitigation strategies for lithium-ion batteries. Energy Convers Manag X2022; 16: 100310.
2.
DaiYPanahiA. Thermal runaway process in lithium-ion batteries: a review. Next Energy2025; 6: 100186.
3.
DorszALewandowskiM. Analysis of fire hazards associated with the operation of electric vehicles in enclosed structures. Energies2022; 15: 11.
4.
ChowWkChowCl. Electric vehicle fire hazards associated with batteries, combustibles and smoke. Int J Automot Sci Technol2022; 6(2): 165–171.
5.
HeldMTuchschmidMZenneggM, et al. Thermal runaway and fire of electric vehicle lithium-ion battery and contamination of infrastructure facility. Renew Sustain Energy Rev2022; 165: 112474.
6.
RuizVPfrangAKristonA, et al. A review of international abuse testing standards and regulations for lithium ion batteries in electric and hybrid electric vehicles. Renew Sustain Energy Rev2018; 81: 1427–1452.
7.
FengXOuyangMLiuX, et al. Thermal runaway mechanism of lithium ion battery for electric vehicles: a review. Energy Storage Mater2018; 10: 246–267.
8.
RaoZLyuPDuP, et al. Thermal safety and thermal management of batteries. Battery Energy2022; 1(3): 20210019.
9.
MallickSGayenD. Thermal behaviour and thermal runaway propagation in lithium—ion battery systems—a critical review. J Energy Storage2023; 62: 106894.
10.
ZhangXChenSZhuJ, et al. A critical review of thermal runaway prediction and early-warning methods for lithium-ion batteries. Energy Mater Adv2023; 4: 0008.
11.
KasniyaBKanumuriTShrivastavaV, et al. A review of Li-ion battery’s thermal runaway mitigation strategies with an eye towards a smarter BTMS. In: 2022 IEEE 10th power India international conference (PIICON), 2022, pp. 1–6, https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10045200
12.
JaguemontJBardéF. A critical review of lithium-ion battery safety testing and standards. Appl Thermal Eng2023; 231: 121014.
TranchardPSamynFDuquesneS, et al. Fire behaviour of carbon fibre epoxy composite for aircraft: Novel test bench and experimental study. J Fire Sci2015; 33(3): 247–266.
15.
GandomanFHJaguemontJGoutamS, et al. Concept of reliability and safety assessment of lithium-ion batteries in electric vehicles: basics, progress, and challenges. Appl Energy2019; 251: 113343.
16.
KangSKwonMYoon ChoiJ, et al. Full-scale fire testing of battery electric vehicles. Appl Energy2023; 332: 120497.
17.
NyazikaTJimenezMSamynF, et al. Pyrolysis modeling, sensitivity analysis, and optimization techniques for combustible materials: a review. J Fire Sci2019; 37: 377–433.
18.
AmokraneAFleurotteMHodrojA, et al. Influence of parameter variation intervals on pyrolysis sensitivity analysis for charring and non-charring materials. J Fire Sci2024; 42(5): 363–404.
19.
LucheriniAHidalgoJPToreroJL, et al. Numerical heat transfer model for swelling intumescent coatings during heating. Int J Thermal Sci2023; 184: 107922.
20.
FleurotteMDebenestGAuthierO, et al. Modelling of the swelling behaviour of a fire retarded material under a cone calorimeter. J Fire Sci2023; 41(4): 136–166.
21.
TranchardPSamynFDuquesneS, et al. Modelling behaviour of a carbon epoxy composite exposed to fire: part II—comparison with experimental results. Materials2017; 10(5): 470.
22.
TranchardPSamynFDuquesneS, et al. Modelling behaviour of a carbon epoxy composite exposed to fire: part I—characterisation of thermophysical properties. Materials2017; 10(5): 494.
23.
BourbigotSSarazinJDavyCA, et al. Foamed geopolymers for fire protection: burn-through testing and modeling. Fire Mater2021; 46(7): 1011–1019.
24.
StaggsJCreweRButlerR. A theoretical and experimental investigation of intumescent behaviour in protective coatings for structural steel. Chem Eng Sci2012; 71: 239–251.
25.
LyonRESafronavaN. A comparison of direct methods to determine n-th order kinetic parameters of solid thermal decomposition for use in fire models. J Thermal Anal Calorim2013; 114: 213–227.
26.
StoliarovSIDingY. Pyrolysis model parameterization and fire growth prediction: the state of the art. Fire Saf J2023; 14: 103905.
27.
LiJStoliarovSI. Measurement of kinetics and thermodynamics of the thermal degradation for non-charring polymers. Combust Flame2013; 160(7): 1287–1297.
28.
BourbigotSSarazinJBensabathT, et al. Intumescent polypropylene: reaction to fire and mechanistic aspects. Fire Saf J2019; 105: 261–269.
29.
LiJStoliarovSI. Measurement of kinetics and thermodynamics of the thermal degradation for charring polymers. Polym Degrad Stab2014; 106: 2–15.
30.
GriffinGJ. The modeling of heat transfer across intumescent polymer coatings. J Fire Sci2010; 28(3): 249–277.
31.
HendersonJBWiecekTE. A mathematical-model to predict the thermal response of decomposing, expanding polymer composites. J Compos Mater1987; 21(4): 373–393.
32.
ZhangJHereidJHagenM, et al. Effects of nanoclay and fire retardants on fire retardancy of a polymer blend of EVA and LDPE. Fire Saf J2009; 44(4): 504–513.
