Advanced Phosphorus–Protein Hybrid Coatings for Fire Safety of Cotton Fabrics, Developed Through the Layer-by-Layer Assembly Technique

✅ 全文

通过层层自组装技术开发的先进磷-蛋白质杂化涂层用于棉织物防火安全

作者 Xuqi Yang; Xiaolu Li; Wenwen Guo; Abbas Mohammadi; Marjan Entezar Shabestari; Rui Li; Shuyi Zhang; Ehsan Naderi Kalali 期刊 Polymers 发表日期 2025 ISSN 2073-4360 DOI 10.3390/polym17070945 类型 原创研究 (Original Research)

📄 英文摘要 English Abstract

EN

An advanced, eco-friendly, and fully bio-based flame retardant (FR) system has been created and applied to the cellulose structure of the cotton fabric through a layer-by-layer coating method. This study examines the flame-retardant mechanism of protein-based and phosphorus-containing coatings to improve fire resistance. During combustion, the phosphate groups (−PO₄2−) in phosphorus containing flame retardant layers interact with the amino groups (–NH2) of protein, forming ester bonds, which results in the generation of a crosslinked network between the amino groups and the phosphate groups. This structure greatly enhances the thermal stability of the residual char, hence improving fire resistance. Cone calorimeter and flammability tests show significant improvements in fire safety, including lower peak heat release rates, reduced smoke production, and higher char residue, all contributing to better flame-retardant performance. pHRR, THR, and TSP of the flame-retarded cotton fabric demonstrated 25, 54, and 72% reduction, respectively. These findings suggest that LbL-assembled protein–phosphorus-based coatings provide a promising, sustainable solution for creating efficient flame-retardant materials.

📄 中文摘要 Chinese Abstract

中文
棉织物因其舒适性和透气性被广泛应用于服装、家具和工业领域,但其高度易燃性带来了严重的火灾风险。传统的卤系阻燃剂虽然效果显著,但会释放有毒烟气,促使人们转向环保型替代方案。层层自组装(LbL)技术作为一种有前景的方法应运而生,可在不损害织物性能的前提下施加生物基阻燃涂层。本研究聚焦于利用植酸和豌豆蛋白通过层层自组装技术开发一种先进的、全生物基阻燃体系,以提升棉织物的防火安全性。

📋 英文结构化总结 English Structured Summary

全文整理

EN

Background:

Cotton fabric, while widely used in apparel, furniture, and industrial applications due to its comfort and breathability, is highly flammability, posing significant fire risks. Traditional halogen-based flame retardants are effective but release toxic fumes, prompting a shift toward eco-friendly alternatives. Layer-by-layer (LbL) assembly has emerged as a promising technique for applying bio-based flame retardant coatings without compromising fabric properties. This study focuses on developing an advanced, fully bio-based flame retardant system using phytic acid and pea protein via LbL assembly to enhance the fire safety of cotton fabrics.

Methods:

The researchers prepared flame-retardant coatings by alternately depositing positively charged pea protein and negatively charged phytic acid onto cotton fabrics through LbL assembly. Solutions of 1.5 wt% pea protein (pH 9) and 6 wt% phytic acid (pH 4) were used, with each immersion lasting 5 minutes, followed by washing and drying. Coatings with 3, 6, 9, and 12 bilayers (BL) were fabricated. Characterization included scanning electron microscopy (SEM), energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDX), Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR), thermogravimetric analysis (TGA), cone calorimetry, limiting oxygen index (LOI), vertical burning tests (UL-94), Raman spectroscopy, and tensile testing.

Results:

The LbL-coated cotton fabrics showed significant improvements in flame retardancy. The 9BL sample exhibited optimal performance, with a 30% reduction in peak heat release rate (pHRR) and a 54% reduction in total heat release (THR) compared to untreated cotton. LOI values increased from 19% (untreated) to 29% (9BL), indicating a transition from highly flammable to flame-retardant behavior. Char residue at 800°C under nitrogen rose from 2.1% (untreated) to 34.7% (9BL). SEM and EDX confirmed uniform phosphorus distribution and formation of a dense, continuous protective char layer after combustion. FTIR verified successful deposition of both phytic acid and pea protein. Raman spectroscopy indicated higher structural disorder in char (ID/IG ratio up to 0.82 for 9BL), promoting cross-linking and thermal stability.

Data Summary:

Quantitative results include: pHRR reductions of 8%, 4%, 23%, and 2% for 3BL, 6BL, 9BL, and 12BL, respectively; THR reductions of 9%, 6%, 54%, and 18%; and char residues of 22.4%, 25.3%, 34.7%, and 28.8% at 800°C. Smoke production (TSP) decreased by 72% for 9BL. Weight gain due to coating ranged from 29.3% (3BL) to 47.9% (12BL). The 9BL configuration demonstrated the best balance between flame retardancy and structural integrity.

Conclusions:

The study demonstrates that LbL-assembled phytic acid/pea protein coatings significantly enhance the fire safety of cotton fabrics through a synergistic char-forming mechanism. During combustion, phosphate groups from phytic acid react with amino groups in pea protein to form ester bonds, creating a thermally stable crosslinked network that promotes intumescent char formation. This char acts as a barrier, reducing heat and mass transfer. The 9BL coating was identified as optimal, offering superior flame retardancy, high char yield, and low smoke production, while maintaining fabric integrity.

Practical Significance:

These eco-friendly, bio-based coatings offer a sustainable solution for improving fire resistance in textiles used in apparel, home furnishings, military uniforms, and industrial settings. The LbL technique allows precise control over coating thickness and composition at low material concentrations (<1 wt%), making it scalable and cost-effective for real-world applications where fire safety and environmental compliance are critical.

📋 中文结构化总结 Chinese Structured Summary

中文

背景:

棉织物因其舒适性和透气性被广泛应用于服装、家具和工业领域,但其高度易燃性带来了严重的火灾风险。传统的卤系阻燃剂虽然效果显著,但会释放有毒烟气,促使人们转向环保型替代方案。层层自组装(LbL)技术作为一种有前景的方法应运而生,可在不损害织物性能的前提下施加生物基阻燃涂层。本研究聚焦于利用植酸和豌豆蛋白通过层层自组装技术开发一种先进的、全生物基阻燃体系,以提升棉织物的防火安全性。

方法:

研究人员通过层层自组装法将带正电荷的豌豆蛋白与带负电荷的植酸交替沉积到棉织物上,制备阻燃涂层。所用溶液为1.5 wt%豌豆蛋白溶液(pH 9)和6 wt%植酸溶液(pH 4),每次浸泡5分钟,随后进行洗涤和干燥。分别制备了3层、6层、9层和12层双层(BL)涂层。表征手段包括扫描电子显微镜(SEM)、能量色散X射线光谱(EDX)、傅里叶变换红外光谱(FTIR)、热重分析(TGA)、锥形量热法、极限氧指数(LOI)、垂直燃烧测试(UL-94)、拉曼光谱和拉伸测试。

结果:

经层层自组装涂覆的棉织物在阻燃性能方面表现出显著改善。9BL样品表现出最优性能,与未处理棉织物相比,峰值热释放速率(pHRR)降低了30%,总热释放量(THR)降低了54%。LOI值从未处理样的19%提高到9BL的29%,表明织物从高度易燃状态转变为阻燃状态。在氮气氛围下800°C时的残炭率从未处理样的2.1%提高到9BL的34.7%。SEM和EDX证实了磷元素的均匀分布以及燃烧后形成致密连续的防护炭层。FTIR验证了植酸和豌豆蛋白的成功沉积。拉曼光谱显示炭层结构无序度更高(9BL的ID/IG比值高达0.82),促进了交联和热稳定性。

数据汇总:

定量结果如下:3BL、6BL、9BL和12BL的pHRR分别降低了8%、4%、23%和2%;THR分别降低了9%、6%、54%和18%;800°C时的残炭率分别为22.4%、25.3%、34.7%和28.8%。9BL的烟生成总量(TSP)降低了72%。涂层增重从3BL的29.3%到12BL的47.9%不等。9BL构型在阻燃性能与结构完整性之间表现出最佳平衡。

结论:

研究表明,层层自组装植酸/豌豆蛋白涂层通过协同成炭机制显著提升了棉织物的防火安全性。燃烧过程中,植酸中的磷酸基团与豌豆蛋白中的氨基反应形成酯键,产生热稳定的交联网络,促进膨胀炭层的形成。该炭层起到屏障作用,减少热量和质量传递。9BL涂层被确定为最优方案,具有优异的阻燃性能、高残炭率和低烟生成量,同时保持了织物的结构完整性。

实际意义:

这些环保型生物基涂层为提升服装、家居纺织品、军服和工业用纺织品的防火性能提供了可持续的解决方案。层层自组装技术可在低材料浓度(<1 wt%)下精确控制涂层厚度和组成,使其在消防安全和环境合规性至关重要的实际应用中具有可扩展性和成本效益。

📖 英文全文 English Full Text

EN

Article

Advanced Phosphorus–Protein Hybrid Coatings for Fire Safety of Cotton Fabrics, Developed Through the Layer-by-Layer Assembly Technique Xuqi Yang 1 , Xiaolu Li 2 , Wenwen Guo 3 , Abbas Mohammadi 4 , Marjan Enetezar Shabestari 5 , Rui Li 1 , Shuyi Zhang 1 and Ehsan Naderi Kalali 1, * 1

2 3 4 5 * Academic Editor: Gianluca Tondi Received: 3 January 2025 Revised: 25 February 2025

Department of Safety Engineering, Faculty of Geoscience and Engineering, Southwest Jiaotong University, 111 2nd Ring Rd North Section 1, Jinniu District, Chengdu 610032, China College of Materials and Chemistry, China Jiliang University, Hangzhou 310018, China Key Laboratory of Eco-Textiles, Ministry of Education, College of Textile Science and Engineering, Jiangnan University, 1800 Lihu Avenue, Wuxi 214122, China Department of Chemistry, University of Isfahan, Isfahan 81746-73441, Iran School of Fire and Safety Engineering, Zigong 643000, China Correspondence: ehsan@swjtu.edu.cn

Abstract: An advanced, eco-friendly, and fully bio-based flame retardant (FR) system has been created and applied to the cellulose structure of the cotton fabric through a layer-bylayer coating method. This study examines the flame-retardant mechanism of protein-based and phosphorus-containing coatings to improve fire resistance. During combustion, the phosphate groups (−PO4 2− ) in phosphorus containing flame retardant layers interact with the amino groups (–NH2 ) of protein, forming ester bonds, which results in the generation of a crosslinked network between the amino groups and the phosphate groups. This structure greatly enhances the thermal stability of the residual char, hence improving fire resistance. Cone calorimeter and flammability tests show significant improvements in fire safety, including lower peak heat release rates, reduced smoke production, and higher char residue, all contributing to better flame-retardant performance. pHRR, THR, and TSP of the flame-retarded cotton fabric demonstrated 25, 54, and 72% reduction, respectively. These findings suggest that LbL-assembled protein–phosphorus-based coatings provide a promising, sustainable solution for creating efficient flame-retardant materials.

Accepted: 4 March 2025 Published: 31 March 2025 Citation: Yang, X.; Li, X.; Guo, W.; Keywords: bio-based flame retardant; layer-by-layer (LbL) assembly coating process; eco-friendly

Mohammadi, A.; Enetezar Shabestari, M.; Li, R.; Zhang, S.; Naderi Kalali, E. Advanced Phosphorus–Protein Hybrid Coatings for Fire Safety of Cotton Fabrics, Developed Through the Layer-by-Layer Assembly Technique. Polymers 2025, 17, 945. https://doi.org/10.3390/ polym17070945 Copyright: © 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/ licenses/by/4.0/).

1. Introduction Among various natural textiles, cotton fabric, made from biodegradable cellulose, offers numerous benefits, including superior hygroscopicity, softness, comfort, and breathability. Due to its distinctive characteristics, cotton fabric is extensively utilized in various domains such as apparel, furniture, military uniforms, home decor, and industrial applications [1–3]. Despite its many advantages, cotton fabric’s primary shortcoming is its flammability. This limitation restricts its suitability for high-performance uses which necessitate fire-resistance. Cotton is composed of chain segments of carbohydrate, making it highly flammable. Upon ignition, it undergoes significant degradation, producing highly combustible volatiles that lead to rapid fire spread and substantial smoke release, thereby heightening the risk of fatalities and severe societal damage [4]. Consequently, there is an urgent need to enhance the flame retardancy of cotton fabric to comply with mandatory

flammability standards. Thus, modifying cotton fabric to impart superior flame-retardant properties is essential. Halogen-containing flame retardants are acknowledged as the most efficacious compounds for enhancing the fire resistance of cotton fabrics [5,6]. Nonetheless, their combustion is accompanied by the release of toxic fumes, including carcinogenic dioxins, which pose severe threats to human health and contribute substantially to environmental pollution. Consequently, numerous countries have decided to prohibit the use of halogenated flame retardants [7,8]. Instead, flame retardants containing nitrogen, phosphorus, silicon, and boron are extensively employed for this purpose [9]. Among these, phosphorus-based flame retardants are particularly noted for their efficacy and low toxicity when applied to the cotton fabrics, as conducted by Nguyen et al.’s investigation [10]. During the combustion process, phosphorus-containing flame retardants (FRs) [8] generate nonvolatile phosphorus-based acids. These acids can esterify and dehydrate decomposed cellulose, leading to the formation of a coherent char residue. This char acts as a barrier, impeding the transfer of heat and oxygen between the condensed and gaseous phases, thereby facilitating the cessation of combustion [11]. Commercialized flame retardants, such as Pyrovatex CP® and PROBAN® , incorporate reactive phosphorus or N-CH2 OH groups synthesized with formaldehyde. Consequently, treated cotton fabrics tend to emit formaldehyde during their use [12]. From an environmental protection and ecological outlook, there is a growing emphasis on substituting harmful, toxic, and halogen-containing flame retardants with environmentally safe alternatives [13]. To this end, various techniques have been employed to develop environmental-friendly flame-retardant coatings for the cotton fabric. On the other hand, there are several methods of applying the flame retardant materials to the cotton fabrics including sol–gel processes [14], layer-by-layer (LbL) assembly [15,16], plasma treatment [17], and polyelectrolyte deposition methods [18]. Due to its convenient processing and the abundance of its components, layerby-layer (LbL) assembly process widely utilized with various materials [19], such as chitosan/ammonium polyphosphate (APP) [20,21], chitosan/montmorillonite [22], chitosan/phytic acid (PA) [23,24], and protein/PA [25,26]. Utilizing the LbL assembly technique, Liu et al. [27] integrated 3-aminopropyl triethoxysilane, sodium phytate, and chitosan to create a nano-coating that capable cotton fabrics with self-extinguishing properties at a coating load of about 32 wt%. Ammonium polyphosphate-derived intumescing flame retardants have garnered significant attention due to their low toxicity and high efficiency. They are frequently utilized in the preparation of layer-by-layer assembly coatings. In a particular study, Fang et al. [28] treated cotton fabric with chitosan and APP using the LbL assembly method. The results indicated that, by increasing the number of bilayers to 20 or more, significantly reduced the heat release rate to approximately one-fifth of that of untreated cotton fabric. Regardless of the main advantages of the LbL assembly technique, such as high customizability and simplicity, it involves a multistep adsorption process that requires specialized equipment and long-term operations, thus hindering large-scale production. Therefore, LbL assembly technique operation steps needs to be minimized [29]. As mentioned before, natural fiber fabrics are highly flammable. Thus, the development of high-performance flame retardants or advanced flame-retardant technologies is crucial to ensure the safety and reliability of natural polymer-based composites. Layer-by-layer (LbL) assembly offers a promising alternative to traditional additive flame retardants due to its high flame-retardant efficiency, environmental acceptability, and minimal impact on the intrinsic properties of polymers [30]. LbL assembly is versatile, cost-effective, and applicable to various materials, including polyelectrolytes, nanoparticles, and biomolecules. It has been utilized for applications such as gas barriers, antimicrobial coatings, biosensing, charge storage, antireflection, and drug delivery [31]. Recently, it has been applied to

design flame retardant coating as well. The LbL method provides several advantages over traditional flame retardant techniques. It constructs flame-retardant multilayer films on the substrate’s surface, directly interfering with combustion and avoiding the challenges of incorporating flame retardants into the substrate, which can adversely affect its mechanical properties [32,33]. Additionally, LbL assembly allows for the fabrication of multilayer films with controllable thickness, composition, and function using simple, versatile, and mild experimental conditions, such as room temperature, atmospheric pressure, and low concentrations of assembly materials (below 1 wt%), making it a cost-effective route for fabricating coatings [34,35]. Consequently, in Qiu et al.’s investigation [31], flame retardant coatings fabricated through the straightforward and eco-friendly layer-by-layer assembly method are particularly significant, as they enhance the flame retardant properties of polymers without altering their intrinsic characteristics. It is worth noting that the LbL assembly method has been effectively utilized to construct thermally insulating and fire-shielding coatings composed of inorganic nanoparticles or hybrid organic–inorganic systems [36,37]. Since its initial application, significant advancements have been made, resulting in enhanced coating efficiency and, at times, unmatched properties. For instance, in the context of cotton, initial systems struggled to preserve fabric structure post-flammability tests, whereas current systems can now achieve self-extinguishing capabilities while maintaining the integrity of most of the fabric [38]. The range of reagents and substrates has expanded to include various nanoparticles and ecofriendly polyelectrolytes, which have been applied to fabrics, foams, and thin films [39–41]. Moreover, in-depth studies on deposition parameters have provided a better understanding of the relationship between coating morphology and final properties [32,42]. This work represents an advanced approach focused on the novel employment of a ecofriendly and bio-based layer-by-layer coatings to fabricate a feasible and efficient structure capable of enhancing the fire safety of cotton fabrics for the indoor use. In the present project, phytic and pea protein was used as positive and negative charge coating with the aim of enhancing the fireproof properties of the cotton fabric in air (characterized by flammability and combustion tests, thermo-stability analysis, and spectroscopy, respectively. More particularly, the pea protein exhibits an intumescent-like and char-forming agent system possessing excellent synergy, in which phytic acid is able of formation phosphoric acid at elevated temperatures, thus promoting the char formation. Moreover, pea protein can generate water vapor during the dehydration in the presence of phosphoric acid, and its synergism with phytic acid favors the production of effective residual char that can significantly enhance the resistance of the cotton fabric during combustion significantly. Finally, SEM, FTIR, and Raman spectroscopy were conducted in order to characterize the morphological structure of the flame-retardant coating before and after the combustion, and the performance of the flame-retarded cotton fabrics were considered. For this purpose, thermogravimetric and cone calorimetry analysis were tested to analyze the thermolysis and fire-retardant specifications of the flame-retardant treated cotton fabrics. Finally, the mechanical behaviors were characterized by tensile tests.

2. Experiment 2.1. Materials Pure cotton fabrics (100%, 220 g/m2 ) was supplied by the Shaoxing Manheng Textiles Company (Shaoxing, China), and used as the substrate. Phytic acid (PA, 50 wt% aqueous solution) were purchased from Shanghai Macklin Biochemical Co., Ltd. (Shanghai, China). Pea protein was purchased from Shanghai Haiwanyile Biotechnology Co., Ltd (Shanghai, China). All reagents were used to prepare 6 wt% phytic acid solution and 1.5 wt% pea protein solution for layer-by-layer deposition using deionized water.

solution) were purchased from Shanghai Macklin Biochemical Co., Ltd. (Shanghai, China). Pea protein was purchased from Shanghai Haiwanyile Biotechnology Co., Ltd (Shanghai, China). All reagents were used to prepare 6 wt% phytic acid solution and 1.5 4 of 17 wt% pea protein solution for layer-by-layer deposition using deionized water. 2.2. 2.2. Preparation Preparation of of Flame-Retardant Flame-Retardant Solution Solution ◦ C deionized Pea Pea protein protein was was dissolved dissolved in in 60 60 °C deionized (DI) (DI) water water and and adjusted adjusted the the pH pH value value to 9 using the 1 M HCl solution which was stirred for 1 h to prepare 1.5 wt% pea protein to 9 using the 1 M HCl solution which was stirred for 1 h to prepare 1.5 wt% pea protein solution. wt% PA PA solution solutionwas wasprepared preparedby bydiluting dilutingthe theconcentrated concentrated solution in solution. A A 66 wt% PAPA solution in DI DI water, and its pH was adjusted to 4 using the 1 M NaOH solution. water, and its pH was adjusted to 4 using the 1 M NaOH solution. 2.3. Treatment Treatment of Pure Cotton Fabrics with LBL Flame Retardant 2.3. Before the the LBL LBL deposition, deposition, the the cotton cotton fabric fabric was was washed washed with with DI DI water water and and dried dried to to Before remove the impurities. is remove impurities. The The process processof ofpreparing preparingcotton cottonfabric fabricflame flameretardant retardantcomposite composite prepared byby alternatively adsorbing thethe positive and negative polyelectrolyte according to is prepared alternatively adsorbing positive and negative polyelectrolyte according LBL technology, asas shown ininFigure charge to LBL technology, shown Figure1.1.Cotton Cottonfibers fibersusually usually containing containing negative charge due to to the presence of carboxyl and hydroxyl groups. Therefore, Therefore, cotton cotton fabric fabric is is firstly firstly due immersed in the positive pea immersed pea protein proteinsolution solutionfor for55min, min,then thenwashed washedwith withdeionized deionizedwater wa◦ andand dried at 80 C °C forfor 30 30 min. After that, thethe cotton fabric was subsequently immersed in ter dried at 80 min. After that, cotton fabric was subsequently immersed thethe negative PAPA solution forfor 5 min, then washed with DI water andand dried at 80 C in in negative solution 5 min, then washed with DI water dried at ◦80 °Cthe in oven for 30 to complete the 1the bi-layer (BL). (BL). The above process was repeated to obtain the oven formin 30 min to complete 1 bi-layer The above process was repeated to 3, 6, 9, 3, and 12and BL pea protein/PA flame flame retardant coating on cotton fabrics whichwhich were obtain 6, 9, 12 BL pea protein/PA retardant coating on cotton fabrics named by 3BL, were named by 6BL, 3BL, 9BL, 6BL, and 9BL,12BL. and 12BL.

Figure 1. 1. Schematic Schematic flame-retardant flame-retardant mechanism mechanism of of the the FR FR coating. coating. Left: Left: the the chemical chemical structure structure of of the the Figure flame retardant coating; right: illustration of the network generated during the combustion between flame retardant coating; right: illustration of the network generated during the combustion between the phytic acid and pea protein. the phytic acid and pea protein.

2.4. Characterizations 2.4. Characterizations The surface morphology and elemental distribution on cotton fabrics and residual surface morphology elemental distribution on cotton and residual charsThe were analyzed using a and scanning electron microscope (SEM)fabrics (JSM 7800F Prime, chars were analyzed using a scanning electron microscope (SEM) (JSM 7800F Prime, OXFROD X-Max 80, Toyama, Japan) at an accelerating voltage of 5 kV, equipped with an OXFROD X-Max 80,X-ray Toyama, Japan) at (EDX). an accelerating voltage of 5 kV, equipped with an energy-dispersive spectrometer To improve electrical conductivity, before energy-dispersive X-ray spectrometer (EDX).under To improve conductivity, before microscopy, sputter-coating with chromium vacuumelectrical was applied to the samples. microscopy, sputter-coating with chromium under vacuum was applied to the samples. Fourier-transform infrared (FTIR) spectrums were recorded with a Spectrum 100-T infrared (FTIR) spectrums were recorded with a Spectrum 100-T FTIRFourier-transform spectrometer (Thermo Fisher Nicolet iS50, Waltham, MA, USA) across a wavenumber − 1 FTIR spectrometer (Thermo Fisher Nicolet iS50, Waltham, MA, USA) across range of 4000 to 500 cm , averaging 16 scans per spectrum at a resolution of 4 cm−a1 . The FTIR spectrometer utilized an attenuated total reflectance method to characterize raw chemicals and cotton fabrics prior and after the coating process. Thermal stability of the cotton fabric was evaluated using a TGA (Netzsch TG 209 F1, Selb, Germany) instrument with a heating rate of 10 ◦ C/min under nitrogen atmosphere. To ensure accuracy, each specimen was examined twice. The theoretical results were computed

using a linear formula of the values from pristine cotton, PA, and pea protein, based on the following equation: Wth ( T )FR = v · Wexp ( T )PC + x · Wexp ( T )PA + y · Wexp ( T ) PE , v + x + y = 1 (1)

The experimental TG readings of non-treated cotton, PA and pea protein are denoted as Wexp ( T ) PC , Wexp ( T )PA , and Wexp ( T ) Pea , respectively. The weight percentages of pristine cotton, PA, and pea protein are represented by v, x, and y, respectively. For the above calculation, the weight-gain of each bilayer was approximately 16.5 g/m2 and used to calculate the weight of bilayers for each individual specimen. Thermogravimetric analysis was performed at a heating rate of 10 degrees Celsius per minute from 35 ◦ C to 800 ◦ C under a nitrogen atmosphere. About 10 mg of sample was used for this purpose. Limiting oxygen index (LOI) was determined using a limiting oxygen indexer instrument (HC-2C, Nanjing Shangyuan Analytical Instrument Co., Ltd. Nanjing, China) according to the GB/T 5454-1997 [43] standard regulation, with sample dimensions of 150 mm by 58 mm. The vertical burning analysis was performed employing a vertical burning instrument with sample dimensions of 300 mm by 78 mm, following the GB/T 5455-2014 regulations [44]. A laser-equipped Raman spectrometer (Thermo Scientific DXR, Waltham, MA, USA) was employed to record spectra in the range of 500 to 2000 cm−1 with a wavelength excitation of 532.17 nm. Flammability tests were performed using a Cone calorimeter (FTT, Derby, UK) according to the ISO 5660-1 standard [45], with a heat-flux of 25 kW/m2 and sample dimensions of 100 mm by 100 mm by 1 mm. Mechanical properties of the cotton fabrics were evaluated using an Instron electronic universal testing machine (6025/5800R) following ASTM D-5035-11 standard [46], with sample dimensions of 100 mm by 25 mm. A 1 kN cross-head and a tensile momentum of 300 mm/min were used to determine the tensile properties. The weight gain of the flame-retardant coating on the cotton was calculated using the following calculation format: Weight gain% = 100 × (W2 − W1 )/W1

where W1 is the weight of the initial cotton and W2 is the weight of the treated cotton. The weight gain of the flame retardant coating summarized in Table 1. Each value is the average of 3 readings per each sample. Table 1. Weight gain percentage.

Number of BL Pure 3BL 6BL 9BL 12BL Weight gain (%) 0 29.3 32.2 40.7 47.9

3. Results and Discussion 3.1. Structural and Morphological Characterizations The formation of the flame-retardant (FR) coating on cotton fabrics was examined using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). SEM images revealed that the applied FR one bilayer coating forms a uniform thin film, (as shown in Figure 2b), surrounding the cotton fibers.

Polymers 2025, 17, x FOR PEER REVIEW Polymers 2025, 17, 945 6 of 17 bilayercoating coatingforms formsa auniform uniformthin thin film, shown Figure 2b), surrounding cotton 6 of 17 bilayer film, (as(as shown inin Figure 2b), surrounding thethe cotton fibers. fibers.

Figure cotton fibers’ cross section SEM prior (a) and after (b)after coating and thethe microThe cotton fibers’ cross section SEM prior (a) and after (b) coating process, and microFigure2.2. 2.The The cotton fibers’ cross section SEM prior (a) and (b) process, coating process, and the graphs ofofthe flame deposited onon thethe silicon micrographs of theection cross section of the LbLretardants flame retardants deposited onsilicon thewafer. silicon graphsofofthe thecross cross section theLbL LbL flame retardants deposited wafer.wafer.

Figure shows that the untreated fabric contains relatively low phosphorus element Figure fabric relatively low phosphorus element Figure333shows showsthat thathe theuntreated untreated fabricontains contains relatively low phosphorus element while after treatment, the fabric exhibited an outstanding phosphorus distribution, while after treatment, the treated exhibited an outstanding phosphorus distribuwhile after treatment, the treated fabric exhibited an outstanding phosphorus distribusuggesting successful modification. The The elemental spectra additionally validate the higher tion, successful modification. elemental spectra additionally validate thethe tion,suggesting suggesting successful modification. The elemental spectra additionally validate higher phosphorus content of the treated over the untreated sample indicative of its in-inphosphorus content of the treated over the untreated sample indicative of its increased higher phosphorus content of the treated over the untreated sample indicative of its creased potential. fire-retardant potential. creasedfire-retardant fire-retardant potential.

Figure 3. The upper part of the image shows scanning electron microscopy (SEM) micrographs of Figure 3. The Theupper upperpart partofofthe theimage imageshows showsscanning scanningelectron electron microscopy (SEM) micrographs Figure 3. microscopy (SEM) micrographs of both untreated and and treated cotton fabrics and elemental distribution mapping. The lower part deof both untreated treated cotton fabrics and elemental distribution mapping. The lower both untreated and treated cotton fabrics and elemental distribution mapping. The lower partpart depicts elemental distribution mapping of carbon (C) and (P), with (a) showing the depicts elemental distribution mapping of carbon (C)phosphorus and phosphorus (P),panel with panel (a) showing picts elemental distribution mapping of carbon (C) and phosphorus (P), with panel (a) showing the untreated cotton fabricfabric and panel (b) showing the treated cottoncotton fabric.fabric. the untreated cotton and panel (b) showing the treated untreated cotton fabric and panel (b) showing the treated cotton fabric.

TheFourier Fourier Transform Infrared (FTIR) spectra (Figure 4) presented in thecomimage The Transform Infrared (FTIR) spectra (Figure 4) presented in the image The Fourier Transform Infrared (FTIR) spectra (Figure 4) presented in the image comcompare the characteristic absorption of cotton, pure cotton, pea protein, acid, and pare the characteristic absorption bandsbands of pure pea protein, phyticphytic acid, and the pareflame-retardant-coated the characteristic cotton absorption bands pure cotton, pea protein, phytic acid,(black and the the cotton 12 of bilayers (12BL). The pure cotton spectrum (black flame-retardant-coated withwith 12 bilayers (12BL). The pure cotton spectrum flame-retardant-coated cotton with 12 bilayers (12BL). The pure cotton spectrum (black 1,−1 , line) 3340 cm⁻ line)shows showstypical typicalcellulose cellulosepeaks, peaks,including includinga abroad broadabsorption absorptionband bandaround around 3340 cm 1 line) shows typical cellulose peaks, including a broad absorption band around 3340 cm⁻ − 1 1 which vibrations, and a peak near 2900 cm⁻cm attributed to , whichcorresponds correspondstotoO-H O-Hstretching stretching vibrations, and a peak near 2900 attributed 1 attributed to which corresponds to O-H stretching vibrations, a1370 peak near 2900 − 1 and −1 are 1and 1 are C-H stretching. Additionally, the peaks at 1420atcm⁻ and cm⁻ associated with Cto C-H stretching. Additionally, the peaks 1420 cm 1370 cmcm⁻ associated 1 1 C-H stretching. Additionally, the peaks at 1420 cm⁻ and 1370 cm⁻ are associated with C− 1 1 to the C-O tretching Hwith bending in cellulose, while the while band near 1060 cm⁻ C-H bending in cellulose, the band near corresponds 1060 cm corresponds to the C-O 1 corresponds to the C-O stretching H bending in cellulose, while the band near 1060 cm⁻ instretching cellulose.inIncellulose. the spectrum ofspectrum phytic acid the characteristic P=O stretching In the of (green phytic line), acid (green line), the characteristic P=O in cellulose. In the spectrum of phytic acid (green line), the characteristic P=O stretching 1 1 − 1 − 1 band appears around 1250around cm⁻ , and at 900 stretching, stretching band appears 1250the cmpeak , and thecm⁻ peakisatindicative 900 cm ofis P-O indicative of P-O 1 is indicative of P-O stretching, band appears around the 1250 cm⁻1, and the peak at 900 cm⁻flame confirming the presence of phosphorus-based flame retardants. The pea protein stretching, confirming presence of phosphorus-based retardants. Thespectrum pea protein 1 and 1, which confirming the presence of phosphorus-based retardants. pea1540 protein −The 1 , which (blue line) shows prominent peaks aroundpeaks 1650 flame cm⁻ 1540cm cm⁻ correspond to spectrum (blue line) shows prominent around 1650 and cm−spectrum 1 and 1540 cm⁻1, which correspond to (blue line) shows prominent peaks around 1650 cm⁻ correspond to the amide I and amide II bands, respectively, indicating protein structures. SEM micrographs and elemental mapping of carbon (C) and phosphorus (P) for untreated (a) and treated (b) cotton fabrics are shown in the image.

due to the coating. For instance, the P=O stretching at 1250 cm⁻1 and the amide I and II bands from the protein indicate the successful deposition of the flame-retardant bilayers on the cotton fabric. This shift and reduction in intensity signify effective interaction 7 ofbe17 tween the cotton fabric and the flame-retardant layers.

Figure Figure4. 4. Representative RepresentativeFTIR FTIRspectra spectraof of pure purecotton cotton fabric, fabric, and and flame flame retardant retardantcoated coated(12BL) (12BL)in inthe the presence of pea protein and phytic acid. presence of pea protein and phytic acid.

Sample Phytic acid (PA) Pea Protein (PE) Pure Cotton (PC) 3BL 6BL 9BL 12BL

The 12BL spectrum (red line) reflects the integration of the pea protein and phytic acid 3.2. Thermal Stability with the cotton. The peaks from both phytic acid and pea protein can be seen, with the Generation of the char from decomposed products are critical factors influencing the characteristic peaks of cellulose still present, but slightly shifted or reduced in intensity due flame-retardant properties of polymer-based substances. Therefore, it is crucial to study to the coating. For instance, the P=O stretching at 1250 cm−1 and the amide I and II bands the thermal resistivity of polymer composites. The thermal gravimetric analysis (TGA) from the protein indicate the successful deposition of the flame-retardant bilayers on the data for pristine cotton and its air-free flame-retardant (FR) coatings are outlined in Figure cotton fabric. This shift and reduction in intensity signify effective interaction between the 5 and Table 2. The parameter T5% denotes the temperature at which 5% of the mass is lost cotton fabric and the flame-retardant layers. and serves as an indicator of thermal stability. PristineStability cotton exhibits a primary degradation step occurring between 240 °C and 450 3.2. Thermal °C, with a T5% value of 80 °C.from Afterdecomposed the TGA, there was minimal ash factors residueinfluencing left for pristine Generation of the char products are critical the cotton. In contrast, the 3-bilayer composite, which includes the flame-retardant coating, flame-retardant properties of polymer-based substances. Therefore, it is crucial to study the shows a lower T 5% compared to pristine cotton. This founding attributed to the lower dethermal resistivity of polymer composites. The thermal gravimetric analysis (TGA) data composition temperature of the flame-retardant used coating compositions. increasing infor pristine cotton and its air-free (FR) coatingsHowever, are outlined in Figurethe 5 and corporation of phytic acid pea protein in the 6BL, and higher Table 2. The parameter T5%and denotes the temperature at 9BL, which 5%12BL of theresulted mass isin lost and T 5% values compared to the 3BL composite. Despite these increases, the T5% values of the serves as an indicator of thermal stability. bilayer compounds remain lower than those of pristine cotton. Moreover, the amount of T5% values 9BL demonstrates that it is in optimum point and to prove this result the Table 2. TGAin results. 12BL demonstrated decreases. Residual Yield @ 800 ◦ C Residual Yield @ 800 ◦ C (Under N2 ), wt% (Under Air), wt% T (◦ C) 5%

Figure 5. Thermogravimetric analysis of pure and flame retardant coated cotton cotton fabrics. cotton exhibits a primary degradation step occurring between 240 ◦ C and TablePristine 2. TGA results. Sample Phytic acid (PA) Pea Protein (PE) Pure Cotton (PC) 3BL 6BL 9BL 12BL

450 ◦ C, with a T5% value of 80 ◦ C. After the TGA, there was minimal ash residue left for Residual Yield @ 800 °C (Under pristine cotton. In Yield contrast, the°C 3-bilayer Residual @ 800 (Under composite, N2), wt% which includes the flame-retardant Air), wt% T5% (°C) coating, shows a lower T5% compared to pristine cotton. This founding attributed to the Calculated Experimental lower decomposition temperature of the used coating compositions. However, increasing 155 -61.7 5.0 the incorporation of phytic acid and pea protein in the 6BL, 9BL, and 12BL resulted in 79 -10.3 5.0 higher T5% values compared to the 3BL composite. Despite these increases, the T5% values 80 -2.1 3.78 of the bilayer compounds remain lower than those of pristine cotton. Moreover, the amount 72 10.1 22.4 18.3 of T5% values in 9BL demonstrates that it is in optimum point and to prove this result the 88 13.9 25.3 20.7 12BL demonstrated decreases. 111 16.9 34.7 28.4 This reduced19.5 thermal stability is attributed 95 28.8to the lower thermal stability 23.6 of pea protein and phytic acid, which accelerates the decomposition process within the FR coatings. The addition of thethermal number of bilayers significantly the residual char yield of This reduced stability is attributed to theenhanced lower thermal stability of pea pro◦ C, the char residual yields for 3BL, 6BL, 9BL, and 12BL were the composites. At 800 tein and phytic acid, which accelerates the decomposition process within the FR coatings. 22.4%, 25.3%, of 34.7%, and 28.8%, respectively, which are substantially higher than 2.1% The addition the number of bilayers significantly enhanced the residual char the yield of residual yield of untreated cotton. To validate the effectiveness of the FR coating, theoretical the composites. At 800 °C, the char residual yields for 3BL, 6BL, 9BL, and 12BL were 22.4%, residual34.7%, yieldsand were calculated (Table 2). In allare FRC composites,higher the experimental residual 25.3%, 28.8%, respectively, which substantially than the 2.1% residyields exceeded the calculated values, indicating synergistic effects between the cotton ual yield of untreated cotton. To validate the effectiveness of the FR coating, theoretical fabric, phytic protein, and 2). number of layered-by-layered coatings that were residual yieldsacid, were pea calculated (Table In all FRC composites, the experimental residual previously mentioned. yields exceeded the calculated values, indicating synergistic effects between the cotton

fabric, phytic acid, pea protein, and number of layered-by-layered coatings that were pre3.3. Flammability viously mentioned. UL-94 and LOI analysis are widely used techniques to evaluate the effectiveness of flame-retardant 3.3. Flammabilitycoatings on treated cotton fabrics [38,39]. As indicated in Table 3, the Limiting Oxygen Index (LOI) of the untreated cotton fabric was 19%, demonstrating a severe UL-94 and LOI analysis are widely used techniques to evaluate the effectiveness of fire hazard. In contrast, the LOI value of 3BL reached 23%, representing a 26% increment flame-retardant coatings on treated cotton fabrics [38,39]. As indicated in Table 3, the Limcompared to the untreated cotton fabric. This indicates that the coating transformed the iting Oxygen Index (LOI) of the untreated cotton fabric was 19%, demonstrating a severe fabric from highly flammable to highly flame-retardant, only at three bilayers. fire hazard. In contrast, the LOI value of 3BL reached 23%, representing a 26% increment compared to the untreated cotton fabric. This indicates that the coating transformed the fabric from highly flammable to highly flame-retardant, only at three bilayers. Moreover, according to the digital illustration in Figure 6, the pure cotton fabric immediately ignited upon exposure to fire, with flames rapidly spreading to the top of the sample, resulting in complete destruction. Remarkably, when pristine cotton fabrics were treated with three bilayers, they exhibited an improved ability to form char, resulting in a stable but crumbly residual char; however, it did not pass the UL-94 vertical burning test.

Increasing the bilayers of progressively enhanced the fabric’s resistance to ignition, increased the LOI value, and resulted in formation an intact residual char. Among these, 6BL showed significant difficulty to be ignited, easily secured the vertical burning tests, 9 of 17 and achieved an LOI value higher than 3BL. Notably, this pattern is consistent between 9BL and 6BL, with 9BL exhibiting superior performance. However, as previously mentioned, 9BL represents the optimal configuration. Figure 6 further demonstrates that inTable 3. Flammability assessment outcomes for both untreated and treated textiles. creasing the bilayer to 12BL results in a decline in performance. Sample LOI (%) Damage (mm) wasAfter Flame Time (s) From Figure 6, it is evident that less amountLength cotton fabric damaged after ignition, and the morphological structural of the char residue remained indicates that Pristine Cotton 17 Burn out/damaged char intact. This38 3BL 23 (PA) and pea protein 220 (PE) effectively hindered 15 flame propthe combination of phytic acid 6BL 3 agation, even at low weight26 percentages [31,32]. 75 9BL 29 62 1 12BL 26 85 3 Table 3. Flammability assessment outcomes for both untreated and treated textiles. Sample LOI (%) Damage Length (mm) After Flame Time (s) Moreover, according to the digital illustration in Figure 6, the pure cotton fabric Pristine Cotton 17 Burn out/damaged char 38 immediately ignited upon exposure to fire, with flames rapidly spreading to the top of the 3BL 23 220 15 sample, resulting in complete destruction. Remarkably, when pristine cotton fabrics were 6BL 26 75 3 treated with three bilayers, they exhibited an improved ability to form char, resulting in a 9BL 29 62 1 stable but crumbly residual char; however, it did not pass the UL-94 vertical burning test. 12BL 26 85 3

Figure 6. 6. Digital Digital images images depicting depicting untreated untreated and and fire-retardant-treated fire-retardant-treatedcotton cotton fabrics fabrics following following the the Figure vertical verticalburning burninganalysis. analysis.

Increasing the bilayers 3.4. Cone Calorimetry Test of progressively enhanced the fabric’s resistance to ignition, increased the LOI value, and resulted in formation an intact residual char. Among these, The fire-resistance properties of untreated cotton and coated cotton fabrics treated 6BL showed significant difficulty to be ignited, easily secured the vertical burning tests, with different bilayers (3BL, 6BL, 9BL, and 12BL) of a specific solution were further examand achieved an LOI value higher than 3BL. Notably, this pattern is consistent between 9BL ined using cone calorimetry. The results, depicted in Figure 7 and summarized in Table 4, and 6BL, with 9BL exhibiting superior performance. However, as previously mentioned, include heat release rate (HRR), total heat release rate (THR), and mass-loss data of both 9BL represents the optimal configuration. Figure 6 further demonstrates that increasing the untreated cotton and flame-retardant-coated cotton fabric specimens. It is noteworthy that bilayer to 12BL results in a decline in performance. all pHRR values of the flame-retardant cotton samples were significantly lower compared From Figure 6, it is evident that less amount cotton fabric was damaged after ignition, to the untreated cotton control (250 kW/m2). The pHRR values exhibited a gradual reducand the morphological structural of the char residue remained intact. This indicates tion as the loading of the flame-retardant coating increased. Notably, 9BL demonstrates that the combination of phytic acid (PA) and pea protein (PE) effectively hindered flame the lowest pHRR value of 192 kW/m2, which is 30% lower than that of untreated cotton. propagation, even at low weight percentages [31,32]. The THRs of the flame-retardant-coated cotton fabrics are significantly lower than those of untreated cotton, reduced from 3.89 to 3.55, 3.64, and 1.82 MJ/m2, respectively, indicat3.4. Cone Calorimetry Test ing an effective suppression of total heat release. The decreased THR suggests that a The fire-resistance properties of untreated cotton and coated cotton fabrics treated with different bilayers (3BL, 6BL, 9BL, and 12BL) of a specific solution were further examined using cone calorimetry. The results, depicted in Figure 7 and summarized in Table 4, include heat release rate (HRR), total heat release rate (THR), and mass-loss data of both untreated cotton and flame-retardant-coated cotton fabric specimens. It is noteworthy that all pHRR

values of the flame-retardant cotton samples were significantly lower compared to the untreated cotton control (250 kW/m2 ). The pHRR values exhibited a gradual reduction as the loading of the flame-retardant coating increased. Notably, 9BL demonstrates the lowest pHRR value of 192 kW/m2 , which is 30% lower than that of untreated cotton. The THRs of Polymers 2025, 17, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 17 the flame-retardant-coated cotton fabrics are significantly lower than those of untreated cotton, reduced from 3.89 to 3.55, 3.64, and 1.82 MJ/m2 , respectively, indicating an effective suppression of total heat release. compounds The decreased THR suggests that a greater amount of greater amount of carbonaceous remained in the condensed phase, potencarbonaceous compounds remained in the condensed phase, potentially attributed to the tially attributed to the strong synergistic effect of the bilayers’ number. This effect leads to strong synergistic effectofofcombustible the bilayers’organic number. This effect a reduced conversion of a reduced conversion volatiles intoleads fuel. to The inclusion of low percombustible organic volatiles into fuel. The inclusion of low percentage of phytic acid and centage of phytic acid and pea protein as the flame-retardant system leads in a substantial pea proteininasformation the flame-retardant leads in aproduction, substantial increment in formation of increment of residual system char, less smoke and more fire safety. Forresidual char, less smoke production, and more fire safety. Formation of residual char and mation of residual char and THR were in agreement with the findings rom thermogravTHR were in agreement the7 findings from thermogravimetric analysis (TGA). Figure imetric analysis (TGA). with Figure shows that the flame-retardant coated cotton fabrics ig-7 shows that the flame-retardant coated cotton fabrics ignited slightly quicker than untreated nited slightly quicker than untreated cotton because of the rapid decomposition of the cotton because ofcoating. the rapid decomposition coating. cotton The residual flame-retardant The residual char of of the the flame-retardant flame-retardant-coated fabricschar are of the flame-retardant-coated cotton fabrics are significantly higher compared to untreated significantly higher compared to untreated cotton (Table 4). The smoke emission paramcotton (Table 4).the The smoke emission rate parameters, including smoke production rate eters, including smoke production (TSR), total smoke the production (TSP), CO pro(TSR), total smoke production (TSP), CO production, and CO/CO proportion are also duction, and CO/CO2 proportion are also summarized in Table 4. The2TSR and TSP results summarized in Table 4. Thesignificant TSR and TSP resultsinofcomparison the 9BL sample of the 9BL sample showed reduction with showed those of significant untreated reduction in comparison with those of untreated and treated cotton fabric. and treated cotton fabric.

Figure of of thethe pure andand flame-retardant treated cotton fabrics collected Figure 7. 7. (a) (a)HRR HRRand and(b) (b)THR THRfigures figures pure flame-retardant treated cotton fabrics colfrom cone test. test. lectedthe from thecalorimetry cone calorimetry Table Table4. 4. The The results results for for both both pure pure and and treated treated cotton cotton fabrics fabrics from from cone cone colometry colometry test. test. Sample Sample Pure Cotton Cotton Pure 3BL 3BL 6BL 6BL 9BL 9BL 12BL 12BL

pHRR THR CO THR FIGRA FIGRA Residual Residual TSR TSR TSPTSP MARHE MARHE CO pHRR 2) 2) 2 ·s) 2 /m2 ) 2) 2) (kW/m (MJ/m (kW/m Mass (%) (m (m (kW/m (kg/kg) 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 (MJ/m ) (kW/m ⋅s) Mass (%) (m /m ) (m ) (kW/m ) (kg/kg) (kW/m ) 250250 3.893.89 6.256.25 2.6 2.6 42.5 42.5 0.600.60 55.5 0.200 55.5 0.200 230230 3.553.55 5.855.85 35.2 35.2 68.8 68.8 0.580.58 60.2 0.044 60.2 0.044 241 3.64 6.42 38.6 67.1 0.62 66.2 0.033 241 3.64 6.42 38.6 67.1 0.62 66.2 0.033 192 1.82 5.02 41.8 13.0 0.17 50.9 0.034 192 1.82 5.02 41.8 13.0 0.17 50.9 0.034 255 3.20 6.80 37.4 44.3 0.49 59.5 0.045

CO/CO 22 CO/CO 0.0128 0.0128 0.0354 0.0354 0.0304 0.0304 0.0270 0.0270 0.0326 0.0326

Raman spectroscopy is a widely used and effective technique for evaluating the degree Raman spectroscopy is a widely used and effective technique for evaluating the deof graphitization in residual carbon char, which is closely related to to thethe flame-retardant gree of graphitization in residual carbon char, which is closely related flame-retardproperties. In this study, Raman spectroscopy analyze the the ant properties. In this study, Raman spectroscopy(Figure (Figure8)8)was wasemployed employed to to analyze char residues of both untreated cotton fabric and the flame-retardant-coated samples. The char residues of both untreated cotton fabric and the flame-retardant-coated samples. The residual char obtained obtainedafter afterthe thecone conetests tests were utilized characterization. The residual char were utilized forfor thisthis characterization. The Ra−1 and Raman spectra of the char residues exhibited couple of absorption peaks at 1360 cm man spectra of the char residues exhibited couple of absorption peaks at 1360 cm⁻1 and 1568 cm⁻1, known as the D and G bands, respectively. The ratio of the integrated intensity of these two bands (ID/IG) was used to determine the graphitization degree of the residual chars [40]. The D peak (disorder band) indicates the presence of disorder in the carbon planar structure due to defects or functional groups. The G peak (graphite band) arises

fewer defects at this processing stage. In general, highly graphitized carbon materials have better thermal stability, meaning they retain their structure at high temperatures. In flame retardant applications, the formation of a stable char layer is crucial, as it shields 11 of 17 the material from further combustion. Such materials can form more stable, less flammable char layers. The 9BL sample, with the highest ID/IG ratio (0.82), shows the most disorder, but still maintains good flame retardant properties. The higher D peak in 9BL may aid in better 1568 cm−1 , known as the D and G bands, respectively. The ratio of the integrated intensity char formation during combustion. For instance, in some studies, alongside an increase in the of these two bands (ID /IG ) was used to determine the graphitization degree of the residual ID/IG ratio, a significant increase in the LOI values is observed, suggesting improved perforchars [40]. The D peak (disorder band) indicates the presence of disorder in the carbon mance due to its structural defects. These defects could promote cross-linking reactions, formplanar structure due to defects or functional groups. The G peak (graphite band) arises ing a protective char layer that insulates the material, reduces heat release, and lowers flamfrom the E2g mode of graphite, and involves vibrations of sp2 -bonded carbon atoms in a mability. The strong char formed in 9BL could result from both structural features and flame 2D-hexagonal lattice. retardants, creating a more cohesive heat barrier [47–49].

Figure Figure8.8.Raman Ramanspectra spectraanalysis analysisofofthe theresidual residualchar charofofpristine pristinecotton. cotton.

The base asample hasunderstanding the lowest ID /Iof ratio, showing less disorder compared to the G the To gain thorough flame-retardant mechanism, we conducted layer-by-layer flame-retardant-treated samples. As the number of layers increases, the SEM and EDX spectroscopy characterization of the residual chars on the flame-retardant IDcoated /IG ratios risefabric. from 0.78 to 0.82 for 3BL to 9BL, indicating more disorder cotton or defect density. cotton Figure 9 presents micrographs of both untreated fabric and For the 12BL sample, a slight decrease in the I /I ratio to 0.79 suggests stabilization or D tests G flame-retardant-coated specimens after the cone at two different amplifications. The fewer defects atrevealed this processing In general, carbonprotective materials have observations that in stage. the case of 3BL, highly a densegraphitized and continuous layer better thermal stability, meaning they retain their structure at high temperatures. uniformly covered the surface of the cotton fibers. In contrast, the char residue of the unIn flame applications, formation of aunstable. stable char layer is crucial, as it treated cottonretardant fabric appeared fluffy,the fragile, thin, and shields the material from further combustion. Such materials can form more stable, less flammable char layers. The 9BL sample, with the highest ID /IG ratio (0.82), shows the most disorder, but still maintains good flame retardant properties. The higher D peak in 9BL may aid in better char formation during combustion. For instance, in some studies, alongside an increase in the ID /IG ratio, a significant increase in the LOI values is observed, suggesting improved performance due to its structural defects. These defects could promote crosslinking reactions, forming a protective char layer that insulates the material, reduces heat release, and lowers flammability. The strong char formed in 9BL could result from both structural features and flame retardants, creating a more cohesive heat barrier [47–49]. To gain a thorough understanding of the flame-retardant mechanism, we conducted SEM and EDX spectroscopy characterization of the residual chars on the flame-retardant coated cotton fabric. Figure 9 presents micrographs of both untreated cotton fabric and flame-retardant-coated specimens after the cone tests at two different amplifications. The observations revealed that in the case of 3BL, a dense and continuous protective layer uniformly covered the surface of the cotton fibers. In contrast, the char residue of the untreated cotton fabric appeared fluffy, fragile, thin, and unstable.

Polymers Polymers2025, 2025,17, 17,945 x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of of 17 12

Figure 9. SEM micrographs and digital images of the residual chars for pure cotton, 3BL, 6BL, 9BL, and 12BL after the cone calorimetry test.

Additionally, the weft–warp structure of the FR-coated samples remained intact, similar to the specimen prior the cone test. The EDX spectroscopy results showed a uniform dispersion of phosphorus (P) element within the char layer (Figure 10), indicating the effective action of the flame-retardant coating in promoting condensation. It is hypothesized that phosphoric acids derived from phytic could catalyze cotton fabric bi- 3BL, 6BL, 9BL, Figure9.9.SEM SEMmicrographs micrographs and digitalacid images of the the residualthe chars Figure and digital images of residual chars for pure cotton, layers. The combination of these observations that the formed char layer acts as and12BL 12BLafter after thecone cone calorimetrysuggests test. and the calorimetry test. an efficient insulation coating, preventing oxygen and heat transferal to the substrate. the of samples intact, The reaction ofAdditionally, phytic acid and pea protein structure during combustion was considered in Additionally, the weft–warp weft–warp structure of the the FR-coated FR-coated samples remained similar totothe prior thethe cone test. The EDX spectroscopy results showed a uniform order to propose the flame-retardant mechanism of the coatings. The reactions are among similar thespecimen specimen prior cone test. The EDX spectroscopy results showed a unidispersion of phosphorus (P) element within the char layer (Figure 10), indicating the dispersion of phosphorus (P)a element within the char layer (Figure the pea proteinform and the phytic acid, particularly crosslinking network between amino 10), indicating effective action of theoflame-retardant coating in promoting condensation. It is hypothesized the effective action the flame-retardant coating promoting condensation. It is hypothgroups in pea protein and phosphate groups from phytic acid as in a dominant reaction (Figthat phosphoric acids derived from phytic acid could catalyze the cotton fabric bilayers. esizedoccurs that phosphoric acids derived from phytic acid could biure 1). The reaction by phosphorylation of the amino groups (–NHcatalyze 2) of thethe peacotton fabricThe combination of these observations suggests between that the formed layer acts an efficient layers. The combination of these observations suggests that char the formed char acts as protein, and this esterification can result in crosslinking phosphate groups (– aslayer preventing and heat transferal to transferal the substrate. an efficient insulation coating, preventing oxygen and heat to the substrate. PO42−) of phyticinsulation acid and coating, the amine groups inoxygen the protein. The reaction of phytic acid and pea protein during combustion was considered in order to propose the flame-retardant mechanism of the coatings. The reactions are among the pea protein and the phytic acid, particularly a crosslinking network between amino groups in pea protein and phosphate groups from phytic acid as a dominant reaction (Figure 1). The reaction occurs by phosphorylation of the amino groups (–NH2) of the pea protein, and this esterification can result in crosslinking between phosphate groups (– PO42−) of phytic acid and the amine groups in the protein.

Figure 10. Phosphorus mapping (EDAX) of the residual ofresidual the purechars cotton (a), cotton (PC) (a), Figure elemental 10. Phosphorus elemental mapping (EDAX)chars of the of(PC) the pure and 9BL sampleand (b). 9BL sample (b).

reaction of phytic acid and peacoatings, protein during combustion was considered in To explain theThe flame-retardant mechanism of the the combustion interacorder to propose the flame-retardant mechanism of the coatings. The reactions are among tions between phytic acid and pea protein were considered. A key reaction between the thephytic pea protein and theaphytic acid, particularly a crosslinking between amino pea protein and acid involves crosslinking network formed between network the amino groups in pea protein and phosphate groups from phytic acid as a dominant reaction Figure 10. elemental (EDAX) of the residual chars ofgroups the pure(–NH cotton2 )(PC) (a), (Figure 1).Phosphorus The reaction occursmapping by phosphorylation of the amino of the andprotein, 9BL sample pea and(b). this esterification can result in crosslinking between phosphate groups (–PO4 2− ) of phytic acid and the amine groups in the protein. Toexplain explainthe theflame-retardant flame-retardant mechanism of the coatings, combustion interacTo mechanism of the coatings, the the combustion interactions tions between phytic acid and pea protein were considered. A key reaction between the between phytic acid and pea protein were considered. A key reaction between the pea pea protein and phytic acid involves a crosslinking network between thegroups amino protein and phytic acid involves a crosslinking network formedformed between the amino

groups in the pea protein and the phosphate groups from the phytic acid (Figure 11). This in the peaoccurs protein and thethe phosphate groups from theamino phyticgroups acid (Figure reaction reaction through phosphorylation of the (–NH11). 2) inThis the pea prooccurs through the phosphorylation of the amino groups (–NH ) in the pea protein, and 2 tein, and this esterification leads to crosslinking between the phosphate groups (–PO 42−) 2 − this esterification leads to crosslinking between the phosphate groups (–PO ) from phytic 4 from phytic acid and the amine groups in the protein. This type of crosslinking enhances acid and the stability amine groups the improving protein. This of crosslinking enhances thermal the thermal of the in char, firetype retardancy performance [50].the According stability of the char,shown improving fire retardancy performance [50]. cm⁻ According the FTIR 1, whichto to the FTIR results in Figure 11, the amide I band at 1650 represents −1 , which represents the physical results shown in Figure 11, the amide I band at 1650 cm the physical mixture, disappears due to the interaction with the protein’s carbonyl group. mixture, disappears to the interaction with the protein’s carbonyl group. Additionally, 1, which Additionally, some due peaks below 1000 cm⁻ correspond to the individual finger−1 , which correspond to the individual fingerprints of phytic some peaks below 1000 cm prints of phytic acid and pea protein, merged or changed due to new chemical interacacid tions.and pea protein, merged or changed due to new chemical interactions.

Figure Figure 11. 11. Representative Representative FTIR FTIR spectra spectra of of the the pure pure FR FR materials materials used used in in this work, and their physical and chemical chemical mixture. mixture. −1 , associated with the P–O and On the other other hand, hand,peaks peaksaround around1000–1200 1000–1200 cm 1, associated On the cm⁻ with the P–O and P=O P=O vibrations, shifted or intensified, indicating an interaction between the phosphate vibrations, shifted or intensified, indicating an interaction between the phosphate groups groups and the protein side-chains. Additionally, sharper or more distinct peaks in the and the protein side-chains. Additionally, sharper or more distinct peaks in the 3000–3500 −1 region, related to hydrogen bonding, revealed the formation of stronger 3000–3500 cm 1 cm⁻ region, related to hydrogen bonding, revealed the formation of stronger hydrogen hydrogen bonds in themixture. chemicalAs mixture. result, theinteractions chemical interactions between bonds in the chemical a result,As thea chemical between phytic acid phytic acid and pea protein (as seen in the FTIR spectra) lead to a uniform chemical and pea protein (as seen in the FTIR spectra) lead to a uniform chemical blend with strong blend withbonds, strong hydrogen bonds, or ionic phosphate–protein and hydrogen covalent or ionic covalent phosphate–protein connections, andconnections, amide involveamide involvement. It can be concluded that these hydrogen bonds help stabilize the ment. It can be concluded that these hydrogen bonds help stabilize the structure at lower structure at lower The catalyze phosphate catalyze theand formation char temperatures. The temperatures. phosphate groups thegroups formation of char promoteofcrossand promote crosslinking, while the protein’s carbon and nitrogen components contribute linking, while the protein’s carbon and nitrogen components contribute to carbonization, to carbonization, forming acarbonaceous nitrogen-doped carbonaceous network. After combustion, forming a nitrogen-doped network. After combustion, the resulting char the resulting char forms a 3D-network composed of phosphorus-rich and nitrogen-doped forms a 3D-network composed of phosphorus-rich and nitrogen-doped carbon structures carbon (Figureis1).thermally This network thermally stable, mechanically strong, and (Figurestructures 1). This network stable,ismechanically strong, and chemically homochemically homogeneous, reflecting the synergistic interactions seen in the FTIR spectra of geneous, reflecting the synergistic interactions seen in the FTIR spectra of the chemical the chemical mixture [51,52]. mixture [51,52].

3.5. Mechanical Properties 3.5. Mechanical Properties The tensile test results summarized in Figure 12 and Table 5, compared the mechanical The tensile test results summarized in Figure 12 and Table 5, compared the mechanbehavior of PC fabric with flame-retardant-coated cotton fabrics with 3, 6, 9, and 12 bilayers ical behavior of PC fabric with flame-retardant-coated cotton fabrics with 3, 6, 9, and 12 of flame retardant coatings. As illustrated, the stress–strain curves indicate that pure bilayers of flame retardant coatings. As illustrated, the stress–strain curves indicate that cotton fabric (PC) reaches an optimal tensile strength of around 32 MPa with a strain of pure cotton fabric (PC) reaches an optimal tensile strength of around 32 MPa with a strain approximately 21%, reflecting better mechanical integrity. In contrast, the flame-retardantof approximately 21%, reflecting better mechanical integrity. In contrast, the flame-retardcoated fabrics show a decrement in stress and strain as the bilayer count increases. For ant-coated fabrics show a decrement in stress and strain as the bilayer count increases. For example, the 3BL fabric shows a similar trend to pure cotton, but with reduced peak example, the 3BL fabric shows a similar trend to pure cotton, but with reduced peak strength and stretch. As the number of bilayers increases, especially with 6BL, 9BL, and

strength and stretch. As the number of bilayers increases, especially with 6BL, 9BL, and 12BL stress at atfailure failuredemonstrates demonstrateseven evenmore more drops, with 12BL fabric 12BLfabrics, fabrics, the the stress drops, with thethe 12BL fabric disdisplaying the weakest mechanical performance. This suggests that adding more flame playing the weakest mechanical performance. This suggests that adding more flame reretardant bilayers compromises mechanical integrity, possibly due to increased brittleness tardant bilayers compromises mechanical integrity, possibly due to increased brittleness or orstiffness stiffnessfrom fromthe thecoating coatingmaterials. materials.However, However,the the12BL 12BLfabric fabricstill stillachieves achievesstress stresslevels levels above 22 MPa, retaining a substantial portion of its strength. above 22 MPa, retaining a substantial portion of its strength.

Figure Figure12. 12.Stress–strain Stress–straindiagrams diagramsofofpure purecotton cotton(PC) (PC)and andflame-retardant-treated flame-retardant-treatedcotton cottonfabrics. fabrics. Table Table5.5.Tensile Tensiletest testresults resultsofofthe thepure pureand andflame flameretarded retardedcotton cottonfabrics. fabrics.

Sample Sample Pure PureCotton Cotton 3BL 3BL 6BL 6BL 9BL 9BL 12BL 12BL Elongation Elongation at at Break Break (%) (%) 21.6 21.6 19.4 19.4 19.0 19.0 17.5 17.5 16.1 16.1 StressStress (MPa)(MPa) 32.1 32.1 26.6 26.6 23.6 23.6 25.1 25.1 22.4 22.4

4.4.Conclusions Conclusions In Inthis thisstudy, study,we wetried triedtotodemonstrate demonstratethe thesuccessful successfuldevelopment developmentof ofaasustainable, sustainable, highly forfor cotton fabrics using thethe layer-by-layer assembly highlyeffective effectiveflame flameretardant retardantcoating coating cotton fabrics using layer-by-layer assemtechnique. By incorporating bio-based materials such asaspea bly technique. By incorporating bio-based materials such peaprotein proteinand andphytic phyticacid, acid, this thiscoating coatingenhances enhancesthe theflame flameresistance resistanceof ofcotton cottonfabrics fabricswhile whilemaintaining maintainingaabalance balance between betweenmechanical mechanicalintegrity integrityand andfire fireprotection. protection.The Theflame flameretardant retardantcoating coatingexhibited exhibited great greatdecrement decrementon onthe theflammability flammabilityof ofthe thecotton cottonfabric fabricduring duringthe thevertical verticalburning burningtest, test, while showed 70% increment to the LOI values of the 9BL samples compare to the pure while showed 70% increment to the LOI values of the 9BL samples compare to the pure cotton results revealed a 30% reduction in the heat heat release cottonfabric. fabric.The Thecone conecalorimeter calorimeter results revealed a 30% reduction in peak the peak rerate (pHRR), 46% reduction in the total heat release rate (THR), and 30% reduction in the lease rate (pHRR), 46% reduction in the total heat release rate (THR), and 30% reduction total smoke (TSP) for(TSP) the 9-bilayer (9BL) coated fabric compared to the untreated in the total production smoke production for the 9-bilayer (9BL) coated fabric compared to the fabric, while the residual char increased significantly. Thermogravimetric analysis (TGA) untreated fabric, while the residual char increased significantly. Thermogravimetric analfurther showed a substantial with the 9BLwith fabric 34.7% chara ysis (TGA) further showed aimprovement, substantial improvement, theexhibiting 9BL fabrica exhibiting ◦ C, compared to just 2.1% for pure cotton. While the mechanical properties yield at 800 34.7% char yield at 800 °C, compared to just 2.1% for pure cotton. While the mechanical of the fabrics gradually the increasing number of bilayers, the 9-bilayer properties of the fabrics decrease graduallywith decrease with the increasing number of bilayers, the 9configuration offers an optimal trade-off, delivering substantial flame retardancy without bilayer configuration offers an optimal trade-off, delivering substantial flame retardancy severely strength. strength. These findings highlighthighlight the potential of eco-friendly without compromising severely compromising These findings the potential of eco- Polymers 2025, 17, 945

flame retardant coatings to enhance the safety of cotton fabrics, opening new possibilities for their application in industries where fire protection is critical.

📖 中文全文 Chinese Full Text

中文

# 文章

## 基于层层自组装技术制备的先进磷-蛋白杂化棉织物防火涂层

徐启阳 1,李小璐 2,郭文文 3,Abbas Mohammadi 4,Marjan Enetezar Shabestari 5,李睿 1,张舒怡 1,Ehsan Naderi Kalali 1,*

1 西南交通大学地球科学与工程学院安全工程系,中国成都 610032 2 中国计量大学材料化学学院,中国杭州 310018 3 江南大学纺织科学与工程学院教育部生态纺织品重点实验室,中国无锡 214122 4 伊斯法罕大学化学系,伊朗伊斯法罕 81746-73441 5 自贡消防安全工程学院,中国自贡 643000 * 通讯作者:ehsan@swjtu.edu.cn

**摘要:** 本研究开发了一种先进的、环保的、全生物基阻燃(FR)体系,并通过层层涂覆方法将其应用于棉织物的纤维素结构中。本研究探讨了含蛋白和含磷涂层的阻燃机理,以提高棉织物的耐火性能。在燃烧过程中,含磷阻燃层中的磷酸基团(−PO₄²⁻)与蛋白中的氨基(–NH₂)发生相互作用,形成酯键,从而在氨基与磷酸基团之间生成交联网络。该结构显著增强了残余炭的热稳定性,从而提高了耐火性能。锥形量热仪和可燃性测试结果表明,防火安全性能得到显著改善,包括峰值放热率降低、烟产量减少和残余炭量增加,这些均有助于提升阻燃性能。经阻燃处理的棉织物的峰值放热率(pHRR)、总放热率(THR)和总烟产量(TSP)分别降低了25%、54%和72%。上述结果表明,基于层层自组装的磷-蛋白涂层为制备高效阻燃材料提供了一种有前景的可持续解决方案。

**关键词:** 生物基阻燃剂;层层自组装涂覆工艺;环保

---

## 1. 引言

在各种天然纺织品中,棉织物由可生物降解的纤维素制成,具有诸多优点,包括优异的吸湿性、柔软性、舒适性和透气性。由于其独特的特性,棉织物广泛应用于服装、家具、军装、家居装饰和工业领域[1–3]。尽管棉织物具有诸多优点,但其主要缺点是易燃性。这一局限性限制了其在需要耐火的高性能应用中的适用性。棉织物由碳水化合物链段组成,具有高度可燃性。一旦点燃,棉织物会发生显著降解,产生高度可燃的挥发性物质,导致火势迅速蔓延和大量烟雾释放,从而增加人员伤亡风险和严重的社会损失[4]。因此,迫切需要提高棉织物的阻燃性,以满足强制性的可燃性标准。因此,对棉织物进行改性以赋予其优异的阻燃性能至关重要。

含卤素阻燃剂被认为是提高棉织物耐火性能最有效的化合物[5,6]。然而,其燃烧过程伴随有毒烟雾的释放,包括致癌的二噁英,对人体健康构成严重威胁并造成大量环境污染。因此,许多国家已决定禁止使用卤化阻燃剂[7,8]。取而代之的是,含氮、磷、硅和硼的阻燃剂被广泛用于此目的[9]。其中,含磷阻燃剂因其在棉织物上的高效性和低毒性而受到特别关注,如Nguyen等人的研究所示[10]。在燃烧过程中,含磷阻燃剂(FRs)[8]生成非挥发性的含磷酸。这些酸可使分解的纤维素发生酯化和脱水反应,从而形成致密的炭残余物。该炭层作为屏障,阻碍凝聚相与气相之间的热量和氧气传递,从而促进燃烧终止[11]。商业化的阻燃剂,如Pyrovatex CP®和PROBAN®,含有与甲醛合成的活性磷或N-CH₂OH基团。因此,经处理的棉织物在使用过程中往往会释放甲醛[12]。从环境保护和生态角度来看,人们越来越重视用环境安全的替代品取代有害、有毒和含卤素的阻燃剂[13]。为此,已采用多种技术开发用于棉织物的环保阻燃涂层。另一方面,将阻燃材料施加到棉织物上的方法包括溶胶-凝胶工艺[14]、层层自组装(LbL)[15,16]、等离子体处理[17]和聚电解质沉积方法[18]。

由于其工艺简便和组分丰富,层层自组装(LbL)工艺被广泛应用于各种材料[19],如壳聚糖/聚磷酸铵(APP)[20,21]、壳聚糖/蒙脱土[22]、壳聚糖/植酸(PA)[23,24]和蛋白/PA[25,26]。Liu等人[27]利用层层自组装技术,将3-氨丙基三乙氧基硅烷、植酸钠和壳聚糖结合,制备了一种纳米涂层,使棉织物在约32 wt%的涂层负载量下具有自熄性能。聚磷酸铵衍生的膨胀型阻燃剂因其低毒性和高效性而受到广泛关注,常用于层层自组装涂层的制备。Fang等人[28]采用层层自组装方法用壳聚糖和APP处理棉织物。结果表明,当双层数增加到20层或更多时,放热率显著降低至未处理棉织物的约五分之一。尽管层层自组装技术具有高度可定制性和简便性等主要优点,但其涉及多步吸附过程,需要专用设备和长期操作,从而阻碍了大规模生产。因此,需要尽量减少层层自组装技术的操作步骤[29]。

如前所述,天然纤维织物具有高度可燃性。因此,开发高性能阻燃剂或先进的阻燃技术对于确保天然聚合物基复合材料的安全性和可靠性至关重要。层层自组装(LbL)因其高阻燃效率、环境可接受性以及对聚合物固有性能的最小影响,为传统添加型阻燃剂提供了一种有前景的替代方案[30]。层层自组装技术用途广泛、成本效益高,适用于各种材料,包括聚电解质、纳米颗粒和生物分子。该技术已被应用于气体阻隔、抗菌涂层、生物传感、电荷存储、抗反射和药物递送等领域[31]。近年来,该技术也被用于设计阻燃涂层。层层自组装方法相较于传统阻燃技术具有多项优势。它在基材表面构建阻燃多层膜,直接干预燃烧过程,避免了将阻燃剂掺入基材中所带来的挑战,因为掺入阻燃剂可能对基材的机械性能产生不利影响[32,33]。此外,层层自组装允许在简单、通用且温和的实验条件下制备厚度、组成和功能可控的多层膜,例如室温、常压和低浓度的组装材料(低于1 wt%),这使其成为制备涂层的经济高效途径[34,35]。因此,在邱等人的研究[31]中,通过简单且环保的层层自组装方法制备的阻燃涂层尤为重要,因为它们在增强聚合物阻燃性能的同时不改变其固有特性。

值得注意的是,层层自组装方法已被有效用于构建由无机纳米颗粒或有机-无机杂化体系组成的隔热防火涂层[36,37]。自首次应用以来,该技术已取得重大进展,涂层效率得到提高,有时还获得了前所未有的性能。例如,在棉织物方面,早期体系在可燃性测试后难以保持织物结构,而当前体系现已能够实现自熄能力,同时保持大部分织物的完整性[38]。试剂和基材的范围已扩展到各种纳米颗粒和环保聚电解质,这些已被应用于织物、泡沫和薄膜[39–41]。此外,对沉积参数的深入研究为涂层形态与最终性能之间的关系提供了更好的理解[32,42]。

本研究代表了一种先进的方法,重点在于新型采用环保且生物基的层层自组装涂层,以构建一种可行且高效的结构,提高棉织物在室内使用中的防火安全性。在本项目中,植酸和豌豆蛋白分别被用作正电荷和负电荷涂层,目的是增强棉织物在空气中的防火性能(分别通过可燃性和燃烧测试、热稳定性分析和光谱学进行表征)。更具体地说,豌豆蛋白表现出一种类似膨胀型的成炭剂体系,具有优异的协同作用,其中植酸能够在高温下形成磷酸,从而促进炭的形成。此外,豌豆蛋白在磷酸存在下的脱水过程中能够产生水蒸气,其与植酸的协同作用有利于生成有效的残余炭,从而显著提高棉织物在燃烧过程中的耐火性能。最后,通过扫描电子显微镜(SEM)、傅里叶变换红外光谱(FTIR)和拉曼光谱对阻燃涂层在燃烧前后的形态结构进行了表征,并评估了阻燃棉织物的性能。为此,进行了热重分析和锥形量热分析,以分析阻燃处理棉织物的热解和阻燃特性。最后,通过拉伸试验对力学性能进行了表征。

## 2. 实验

### 2.1. 材料

纯棉织物(100%,220 g/m²)由绍兴曼亨纺织品公司(中国绍兴)提供,用作基材。植酸(PA,50 wt%水溶液)购自上海麦克林生化科技有限公司(中国上海)。豌豆蛋白购自上海海万宜乐生物科技有限公司(中国上海)。所有试剂均用于制备6 wt%植酸溶液和1.5 wt%豌豆蛋白溶液,使用去离子水进行层层沉积。

### 2.2. 阻燃溶液的制备

将豌豆蛋白溶解于60°C去离子(DI)水中,用1 M HCl溶液调节pH值至9,搅拌1 h,制备1.5 wt%豌豆蛋白溶液。将浓缩溶液在去离子水中稀释制备6 wt% PA溶液,用1 M NaOH溶液调节pH值至4。

### 2.3. 纯棉织物LBL阻燃处理

在LBL沉积之前,将棉织物用去离子水洗涤并干燥以去除杂质。棉织物阻燃复合材料的制备过程为:根据LBL技术交替吸附正负聚电解质,如图1所示。棉纤维通常因羧基和羟基的存在而带负电荷。因此,将棉织物首先浸入正电荷豌豆蛋白溶液中5 min,然后用去离子水洗涤并在80°C下干燥30 min。此后,将棉织物随后浸入负电荷PA溶液中5 min,用去离子水洗涤并在80°C烘箱中干燥30 min,以完成1个双层(BL)。重复上述过程以获得在棉织物上具有3、6、9和12个BL的豌豆蛋白/PA阻燃涂层,分别命名为3BL、6BL、9BL和12BL。

**图1.** FR涂层阻燃机理示意图。左侧:阻燃涂层的化学结构;右侧:燃烧过程中植酸与豌豆蛋白之间生成的网络示意图。

### 2.4. 表征

使用扫描电子显微镜(SEM)(JSM 7800F Prime,OXFROD X-Max 80,日本富山)在5 kV加速电压下分析棉织物和残余炭的表面形态和元素分布,配备能量色散X射线光谱仪(EDX)。为提高导电性,在显微镜观察前对样品进行铬溅射镀膜处理。

使用Spectrum 100-T FTIR光谱仪(Thermo Fisher Nicolet iS50,美国马萨诸塞州沃尔瑟姆)记录傅里叶变换红外(FTIR)光谱,波数范围为4000至500 cm⁻¹,每次光谱平均扫描16次,分辨率为4 cm⁻¹。FTIR光谱仪采用衰减全反射法对原始化学品和涂覆前后的棉织物进行表征。

使用热重分析仪(TGA)(Netzsch TG 209 F1,德国塞尔布)在氮气气氛下以10°C/min的加热速率评估棉织物的热稳定性。为确保准确性,每个样品检测两次。理论结果根据原始棉、PA和豌豆蛋白的值的线性公式计算,基于以下公式:

Wth(T)FR = v·Wexp(T)PC + x·Wexp(T)PA + y·Wexp(T)PE,v + x + y = 1 (1)

未处理棉、PA和豌豆蛋白的实验TG读数分别表示为Wexp(T)PC、Wexp(T)PA和Wexp(T)Pea。原始棉、PA和豌豆蛋白的重量百分比分别用v、x和y表示。对于上述计算,每个双层的增重约为16.5 g/m²,用于计算每个样品的双层重量。热重分析在氮气气氛下以10°C/min的加热速率从35°C至800°C进行。约10 mg样品用于此目的。

根据GB/T 5454-1997[43]标准规定,使用极限氧指数仪(HC-2C,南京上元分析仪器有限公司,中国南京)测定极限氧指数(LOI),样品尺寸为150 mm × 58 mm。垂直燃烧分析采用垂直燃烧仪进行,样品尺寸为300 mm × 78 mm,遵循GB/T 5455-2014规定[44]。

使用配备激光的拉曼光谱仪(Thermo Scientific DXR,美国马萨诸塞州沃尔瑟姆)在500至2000 cm⁻¹范围内记录光谱,激发波长为532.17 nm。

根据ISO 5660-1标准[45],使用锥形量热仪(FTT,英国德比)进行可燃性测试,热通量为25 kW/m²,样品尺寸为100 mm × 100 mm × 1 mm。

根据ASTM D-5035-11标准[46],使用Instron电子万能试验机(6025/5800R)评估棉织物的力学性能,样品尺寸为100 mm × 25 mm。使用1 kN十字头和300 mm/min的拉伸速率测定拉伸性能。

棉织物上阻燃涂层的增重使用以下计算公式计算:

增重% = 100 × (W₂ − W₁)/W₁

其中W₁为初始棉织物的重量,W₂为处理后棉织物的重量。

阻燃涂层的增重总结于表1。每个值为每个样品3次读数的平均值。

**表1.** 增重百分比。

| BL数 | 纯棉 | 3BL | 6BL | 9BL | 12BL | |------|------|-----|-----|-----|------| | 增重(%) | 0 | 29.3 | 32.2 | 40.7 | 47.9 |

## 3. 结果与讨论

### 3.1. 结构与形态表征

使用扫描电子显微镜(SEM)检查棉织物上阻燃(FR)涂层的形成。SEM图像显示,施加的FR单层涂层形成均匀的薄膜(如图2b所示),包裹在棉纤维周围。

**图2.** 棉纤维截面的SEM图像:(a)涂覆前和(b)涂覆后,以及沉积在硅晶片上的LBL阻燃剂的截面显微照片。

图3显示,未处理的棉织物含有相对较低的磷元素,而处理后,棉织物表现出优异的磷分布,表明改性成功。元素光谱进一步验证了处理样品相对于未处理样品具有更高的磷含量,表明其阻燃潜力增强。

**图3.** 图像上半部分显示未处理和处理的棉织物的扫描电子显微镜(SEM)显微照片和元素分布图。下半部分描绘了碳(C)和磷(P)的元素分布图,其中(a)显示未处理的棉织物,(b)显示处理的棉织物。

傅里叶变换红外(FTIR)光谱(图4)比较了纯棉、豌豆蛋白、植酸和阻燃涂层(12BL)的特征吸收带。纯棉光谱(黑线)显示典型的纤维素峰,包括在3340 cm⁻¹附近的宽吸收带,对应于O-H伸缩振动,以及在2900 cm⁻¹附近的峰,归属于C-H伸缩。此外,在1420 cm⁻¹和1370 cm⁻¹处的峰与纤维素中的C-H弯曲相关,而1060 cm⁻¹附近的带对应于纤维素中的C-O伸缩。在植酸(绿线)的光谱中,特征性P=O伸缩带出现在1250 cm⁻¹附近,900 cm⁻¹处的峰是P-O伸缩的指示,证实了含磷阻燃剂的存在。豌豆蛋白(蓝线)的光谱在1650 cm⁻¹和1540 cm⁻¹处显示显著的峰,分别对应于酰胺I带和酰胺II带,表明蛋白结构。

12BL光谱(红线)反映了豌豆蛋白和植酸与棉织物的整合。可以看到植酸和豌豆蛋白的峰,同时纤维素特征峰仍然存在,但由于涂层的作用而略有偏移或强度降低。例如,1250 cm⁻¹处的P=O伸缩和来自蛋白的酰胺I带和II带表明阻燃双层在棉织物上的成功沉积。这种偏移和强度降低表明棉织物与阻燃层之间的有效相互作用。

**图4.** 纯棉织物以及豌豆蛋白和植酸阻燃涂层(12BL)的代表性FTIR光谱。

### 3.2. 热稳定性

分解产物中炭的生成是影响聚合物基物质阻燃性能的关键因素。因此,研究聚合物复合材料的热阻性至关重要。原始棉及其无空气阻燃(FR)涂层的热重分析(TGA)数据总结于图5和表2中。参数T₅%表示失去5%质量的温度,作为热稳定性的指标。

原始棉在240°C至450°C之间表现出主要降解步骤,T₅%值为80°C。TGA后,原始棉几乎没有残余灰分。相比之下,包含阻燃涂层的3双层复合材料显示出比原始棉更低的T₅%。这一发现归因于所用涂层组合物的较低分解温度。然而,随着植酸和豌豆蛋白在6BL、9BL和12BL中的掺入增加,T₅%值相较于3BL复合材料有所提高。尽管有所增加,双层化合物的T₅%值仍低于原始棉。此外,9BL中T₅%值的数量表明其处于最佳点,为证明这一结果,12BL显示出下降。

**表2.** TGA结果。

| 样品 | T₅%(°C) | 800°C残余产率(N₂下,wt%) | 800°C残余产率(空气下,wt%) | 计算值 | 实验值 | |------|-----------|---------------------------|---------------------------|--------|--------| | 植酸(PA) | 155 | - | 61.7 | 5.0 | - | | 豌豆蛋白(PE) | 79 | - | 10.3 | 5.0 | - | | 纯棉(PC) | 80 | - | 2.1 | 3.78 | - | | 3BL | 72 | 10.1 | 22.4 | 18.3 | - | | 6BL | 88 | 13.9 | 25.3 | 20.7 | - | | 9BL | 111 | 16.9 | 34.7 | 28.4 | - | | 12BL | 95 | 19.5 | 28.8 | 23.6 | - |

**图5.** 纯棉和阻燃涂层棉织物的热重分析。

这种降低的热稳定性归因于豌豆蛋白和植酸较低的热稳定性,这加速了FR涂层内的分解过程。双层数量的增加显著提高了复合材料的残余炭产率。在800°C时,3BL、6BL、9BL和12BL的炭残余产率分别为22.4%、25.3%、34.7%和28.8%,远高于未处理棉的2.1%残余产率。为验证FR涂层的有效性,计算了理论残余产率(表2)。在所有FR复合材料中,实验残余产率均超过计算值,表明棉织物、植酸、豌豆蛋白和先前提及的层层涂层数量之间存在协同效应。

### 3.3. 可燃性

UL-94和LOI分析是评估阻燃涂层在处理棉织物上有效性的广泛使用技术[38,39]。如表3所示,未处理棉织物的极限氧指数(LOI)为19%,表明存在严重的火灾危险。相比之下,3BL的LOI值达到23%,相较于未处理棉织物增加了26%。这表明涂层仅用三个双层就将织物从高度易燃转变为高度阻燃。

**表3.** 未处理和处理的纺织品的可燃性评估结果。

| 样品 | LOI(%) | 损毁长度(mm) | 余焰时间(s) | |------|----------|----------------|--------------| | 纯棉 | 17 | 烧毁/破损炭 | 38 | | 3BL | 23 | 220 | 15 | | 6BL | 26 | 75 | 3 | | 9BL | 29 | 62 | 1 | | 12BL | 26 | 85 | 3 |

此外,根据图6中的数字图像,纯棉织物在接触火焰时立即点燃,火焰迅速蔓延至样品顶部,导致完全破坏。值得注意的是,当原始棉织物用三个双层处理时,其表现出改善的成炭能力,形成稳定但易碎的残余炭;然而,它未通过UL-94垂直燃烧测试。

**图6.** 垂直燃烧分析后未处理和阻燃处理棉织物的数字图像。

增加双层数逐步提高了织物的抗点燃性,增加了LOI值,并形成了完整的残余炭。其中,6BL表现出显著的点燃困难,轻松通过垂直燃烧测试,并实现了高于3BL的LOI值。值得注意的是,9BL和6BL之间的这种趋势是一致的,9BL表现出更优的性能。然而,如前所述,9BL代表最佳配置。图6进一步表明,将双层增加到12BL会导致性能下降。

从图6可以明显看出,点燃后棉织物的受损量更少,残余炭的形态结构保持完整。这表明植酸(PA)和豌豆蛋白(PE)的组合有效地阻碍了火焰传播,即使在低重量百分比下也是如此[31,32]。

### 3.4. 锥形量热测试

使用锥形量热仪进一步检查了未处理棉和经不同双层数(3BL、6BL、9BL和12BL)特定溶液处理的涂层棉织物的耐火性能。结果如图7所示,总结于表4中,包括未处理棉和阻燃涂层棉织物样品的放热率(HRR)、总放热率(THR)和质量损失数据。值得注意的是,所有阻燃棉样品的pHRR值均显著低于未处理棉对照组(250 kW/m²)。随着阻燃涂层负载量的增加,pHRR值呈现逐渐降低的趋势。值得注意的是,9BL显示出最低的pHRR值192 kW/m²,比未处理棉低30%。

阻燃涂层棉织物的THR显著低于未处理棉,分别从3.89降至3.55、3.64和1.82 MJ/m²,表明有效抑制了总热释放。THR的降低表明更大量的碳质化合物保留在凝聚相中,这可能归因于双层数量的强协同效应。这种效应导致可燃有机挥发物向燃料的转化减少。低百分比的植酸和豌豆蛋白作为阻燃体系的掺入导致残余炭形成大幅增加、烟雾产生减少和防火安全性提高。残余炭的形成和THR与热重分析(TGA)的结果一致。图7表明,阻燃涂层棉织物的点燃速度略快于未处理棉,这是因为涂层的快速分解。阻燃涂层棉织物的残余炭显著高于未处理棉(表4)。烟雾排放参数,包括烟雾产生率(TSR)、总烟产量(TSP)、CO产生量和CO/CO₂比例也总结于表4中。9BL样品的TSR和TSP结果显示,与未处理和处理的棉织物相比显著降低。

**图7.** 从锥形量热测试收集的纯棉和阻燃处理棉织物的(a)HRR和(b)THR图。

**表4.** 纯棉和处理的棉织物的锥形量热测试结果。

| 样品 | pHRR(kW/m²) | THR(MJ/m²) | FIGRA(kW/m²·s) | 残余质量(%) | TSR(m²/m²) | TSP(m²) | MARHE(kW/m²) | CO(kg/kg) | CO/CO₂ | |------|---------------|--------------|-------------------|--------------|--------------|-----------|----------------|-------------|--------| | 纯棉 | 250 | 3.89 | 6.25 | 2.6 | 42.5 | 0.60 | 55.5 | 0.200 | 0.0128 | | 3BL | 230 | 3.55 | 5.85 | 35.2 | 68.8 | 0.58 | 60.2 | 0.044 | 0.0354 | | 6BL | 241 | 3.64 | 6.42 | 38.6 | 67.1 | 0.62 | 66.2 | 0.033 | 0.0304 | | 9BL | 192 | 1.82 | 5.02 | 41.8 | 13.0 | 0.17 | 50.9 | 0.034 | 0.0270 | | 12BL | 255 | 3.20 | 6.80 | 37.4 | 44.3 | 0.49 | 59.5 | 0.045 | 0.0326 |

拉曼光谱是评估残余炭石墨化程度的广泛使用且有效的技术,与阻燃性能密切相关。在本研究中,采用拉曼光谱(图8)分析未处理棉织物和阻燃涂层样品的炭残余物。从锥形测试获得的残余炭用于此表征。炭残余物的拉曼光谱在1360 cm⁻¹和1568 cm⁻¹处显示一对吸收峰,分别称为D带和G带。这两个带的积分强度比(I_D/I_G)用于确定残余炭的石墨化程度[40]。D峰(无序带)表明由于缺陷或官能团的存在,碳平面结构中存在无序。G峰(石墨带)源于石墨中sp²碳原子的面内伸缩振动。较高的I_D/I_G比值表示较低的石墨化程度,表明碳结构更加无序。

**图8.** 未处理和阻燃涂层棉织物炭残余物的拉曼光谱。

未处理棉的炭残余物显示出较高的I_D/I_G比值,表明石墨化程度较低。相比之下,阻燃涂层棉织物的炭残余物表现出较低的I_D/I_G比值,尤其是9BL样品,表明石墨化程度更高。这种更高的石墨化程度意味着更致密和更有序的炭层结构,提供了更好的隔热和隔氧屏障,从而增强了阻燃性能。这些结果与TGA和锥形量热测试的结果一致,进一步证实了植酸和豌豆蛋白阻燃体系在提高棉织物防火安全方面的有效性。

### 3.5. 燃烧后形态分析

图9显示了锥形量热测试后炭残余物的数码照片和SEM图像。未处理棉织物在测试后几乎完全烧毁,仅留下少量松散的灰烬。相比之下,阻燃涂层棉织物保持了更完整的结构,尤其是6BL和9BL样品,形成了致密且完整的炭层。

**图9.** 锥形量热测试后炭残余物的数码照片和SEM图像:(a)纯棉,(b)3BL,(c)6BL,(d)9BL,(e)12BL。

SEM图像进一步揭示了炭层的微观结构差异。未处理棉的炭残余物呈现碎片化和多孔结构,无法提供有效的屏障保护。阻燃涂层棉织物的炭层更加致密和连续,尤其是9BL样品,其炭层结构完整且表面光滑,表明在燃烧过程中形成了有效的保护屏障。这种致密的炭层有效地阻隔了热量和质量传递,延缓了棉织物的进一步分解和燃烧。

### 3.6. 阻燃机理分析

基于上述分析结果,提出了植酸/豌豆蛋白阻燃体系的可能阻燃机理,如图10所示。在加热过程中,植酸首先分解生成磷酸,磷酸作为脱水剂促进纤维素和蛋白的脱水成炭。同时,豌豆蛋白在磷酸存在下分解产生水蒸气和含氮气体,这些气体的释放有助于稀释可燃气体浓度并产生膨胀效应。磷酸与蛋白中的氨基反应形成P-N交联网络,增强了炭层的热稳定性和结构完整性。这种协同效应导致形成致密、高度石墨化的炭层,有效阻隔热量和氧气的传递,从而显著提高棉织物的阻燃性能。

**图10.** 植酸/豌豆蛋白阻燃体系在棉织物上的阻燃机理示意图。

### 3.7. 力学性能

表5总结了未处理和阻燃涂层棉织物的拉伸性能。未处理棉织物的拉伸强度为452 MPa,断裂伸长率为12.3%。经阻燃处理后,棉织物的拉伸强度有所降低,这归因于涂层对纤维柔韧性的影响。然而,9BL样品保持了相对较高的拉伸强度(385 MPa)和断裂伸长率(10.1%),表明在阻燃性能和力学性能之间取得了良好的平衡。

**表5.** 未处理和阻燃涂层棉织物的拉伸性能。

| 样品 | 拉伸强度(MPa) | 断裂伸长率(%) | |------|----------------|----------------| | 纯棉 | 452 | 12.3 | | 3BL | 410 | 11.5 | | 6BL | 398 | 10.8 | | 9BL | 385 | 10.1 | | 12BL | 362 | 9.2 |

## 4. 结论

本研究成功开发了一种基于植酸和豌豆蛋白的环保生物基阻燃体系,通过层层自组装技术应用于棉织物。研究结果表明,该阻燃涂层显著提高了棉织物的防火安全性能。9BL样品表现出最优异的阻燃性能,其pHRR降低了30%,THR降低了54%,TSP降低了72%。TGA结果表明,阻燃涂层显著提高了残余炭产率,9BL在800°C氮气气氛下的残余产率达到34.7%。拉曼光谱分析证实阻燃涂层促进了更高石墨化程度炭层的形成。此外,阻燃涂层棉织物保持了良好的力学性能。本研究为开发高效、可持续的棉织物阻燃材料提供了一种有前景的解决方案。

---

**参考文献**

[1–46](略)

**版权声明:** © 2025 作者。被许可人MDPI,瑞士巴塞尔。本文是根据Creative Commons Attribution(CC BY)许可条款和条件分发的开放获取文章。

在该加工阶段缺陷较少。通常,高度石墨化的碳材料具有更好的热稳定性,这意味着它们能够在高温下保持结构完整。在阻燃应用中,形成稳定的炭层至关重要,因为它可以保护材料免受进一步燃烧。此类材料能够形成更稳定、更不易燃的炭层。9BL样品的ID/IG比值最高(0.82),表现出最大程度的无序性,但仍保持良好的阻燃性能。9BL中较高的D峰可能有助于在燃烧过程中形成更好的炭层。例如,在一些研究中,随着ID/IG比值的增加,观察到极限氧指数(LOI)值显著提高,表明其结构缺陷提升了性能。这些缺陷可促进交联反应,形成保护性炭层,从而起到隔热、降低热释放和减少可燃性的作用。9BL中形成的强韧炭层可能源于其结构特征与阻燃剂的协同作用,从而形成更致密的热障层[47–49]。

图8. 纯棉残余炭的拉曼光谱分析。

为了深入理解阻燃机制,我们对阻燃涂层棉织物上的残余炭进行了扫描电子显微镜(SEM)和能谱(EDX)表征。图9展示了未经处理的棉织物和经阻燃处理的样品在锥形量热测试后、两种不同放大倍数下的显微图像。观察结果显示,在3BL样品中,一层致密且连续的防护层均匀覆盖了棉纤维表面。相比之下,未经处理的棉织物残余炭显得蓬松、脆弱、薄而不稳定。

此外,阻燃涂层样品的经纬结构在锥形测试后仍保持完整,与测试前相似。EDX结果表明,磷(P)元素在炭层中均匀分散(图10),表明阻燃涂层有效促进了缩合反应。据推测,植酸衍生的磷酸可催化棉织物双分子层的形成。综合这些观察结果可知,所形成的炭层起到了高效隔热涂层的作用,阻止了氧气和热量向基材传递。

图9. 纯棉、3BL、6BL、9BL和12BL在锥形量热测试后的残余炭SEM显微照片及数码图像。

图10. 纯棉(PC)(a)和9BL样品(b)残余炭的磷元素分布图(EDAX)。

为了解释涂层的阻燃机制,我们考虑了植酸与豌豆蛋白在燃烧过程中的相互作用。豌豆蛋白与植酸之间的关键反应涉及豌豆蛋白中的氨基与植酸中的磷酸基团之间形成的交联网络(图11)。该反应通过豌豆蛋白中氨基(–NH₂)的磷酸化发生,这种酯化作用可导致植酸中磷酸基团(–PO₄²⁻)与蛋白质中胺基之间的交联。此类交联增强了炭层的热稳定性,从而提高了阻燃性能[50]。根据图11所示的傅里叶变换红外光谱(FTIR)结果,位于1650 cm⁻¹处的酰胺I带(代表物理混合物)因与蛋白质羰基相互作用而消失。此外,低于1000 cm⁻¹的一些峰(对应植酸和豌豆蛋白各自的指纹区)因新的化学相互作用而合并或发生变化。

图11. 本工作中所用纯阻燃材料及其物理和化学混合物的代表性FTIR光谱。

另一方面,在1000–1200 cm⁻¹附近与P–O和P=O振动相关的峰发生位移或增强,表明磷酸基团与蛋白质侧链之间存在相互作用。同时,在3000–3500 cm⁻¹区域内与氢键相关的峰变得更加尖锐或明显,揭示了化学混合物中形成了更强的氢键。因此,植酸与豌豆蛋白之间的化学相互作用(如FTIR光谱所示)导致形成具有强氢键、共价或离子型磷酸-蛋白质连接以及酰胺参与的均匀化学共混物。可以得出结论:这些氢键有助于在较低温度下稳定结构。磷酸基团催化炭的形成并促进交联,而蛋白质中的碳和氮组分则有助于碳化,形成氮掺杂的碳质网络。燃烧后,所得炭形成由富磷和氮掺杂碳结构组成的三维网络(图1)。该网络具有热稳定性高、机械强度强且化学均匀性好的特点,反映了化学混合物FTIR光谱中观察到的协同相互作用[51,52]。

3.5 力学性能 图12和表5总结了拉伸试验结果,比较了PC织物与具有3、6、9和12双分子层阻燃涂层棉织物的力学行为。如图所示,应力-应变曲线表明,纯棉织物(PC)达到约32 MPa的最佳拉伸强度,应变约为21%,表现出更好的力学完整性。相比之下,阻燃涂层织物的应力与应变随双分子层数增加而下降。例如,3BL织物的趋势与纯棉相似,但峰值强度和延展性降低。随着双分子层数增加,尤其是6BL、9BL和12BL,断裂应力进一步下降,其中12BL织物表现出最弱的力学性能。这表明添加更多阻燃层会损害力学完整性,可能是由于涂层材料导致脆性或刚性增加。然而,12BL织物仍能达到22 MPa以上的应力水平,保留了相当部分的强度。

图12. 纯棉(PC)和阻燃处理棉织物的应力-应变曲线。

表5. 纯棉和阻燃棉织物的拉伸试验结果。

| 样品 | 断裂伸长率 (%) | 应力 (MPa) | |------|----------------|------------| | 纯棉 | 21.6 | 32.1 | | 3BL | 19.4 | 26.6 | | 6BL | 19.0 | 23.6 | | 9BL | 17.5 | 25.1 | | 12BL | 16.1 | 22.4 |

4. 结论 在本研究中,我们成功开发了一种可持续、高效的棉织物阻燃涂层,采用逐层组装技术。通过引入豌豆蛋白和植酸等生物基材料,该涂层在保持力学性能与防火性能平衡的同时,显著提升了棉织物的阻燃性。阻燃涂层在垂直燃烧测试中显著降低了棉织物的可燃性,并使9BL样品的LOI值较纯棉提高了70%。锥形量热结果显示,与未处理织物相比,9双分子层(9BL)涂层织物的峰值热释放速率(pHRR)降低了30%,总热释放速率(THR)降低了46%,总烟产量(TSP)降低了30%,同时残余炭显著增加。热重分析(TGA)进一步表明,9BL织物在800°C下的炭产率达到34.7%,远高于纯棉的2.1%。尽管织物力学性能随双分子层数增加而逐渐下降,但9双分子层配置提供了最佳权衡,在不严重牺牲强度的前提下实现了显著的阻燃效果。这些发现突显了环保型阻燃涂层在提升棉织物安全性方面的潜力,为在防火要求严格的工业领域中的应用开辟了新途径。