Advertisement

Preparation of petroleum-based binder pitch for manufacturing thermally conductive carbon molded body and comparison with commercial coal-based binder pitch

  • Jong Hoon Cho
  • Ji Sun ImEmail author
  • Min Il Kim
  • Young-Seak LeeEmail author
  • Byong Chol Bai
Original Article
  • 6 Downloads

Abstract

In the present study, carbon molded bodies were prepared by using graphite/coke fillers and petroleum-based binder pitch with various softening points, and the thermal properties of the prepared carbon molded bodies were investigated. The ratio of a binder affects the molded body preparation: no molded body was prepared at a low binder pitch content, and swelling occurred during the thermal treatment at a high binder pitch content. The binder pitch thermal treatment yield was the highest at 41 wt% at the softening point of 150 °C and the lowest at 23 wt% at the softening point of 78 °C. A significant mass reduction was found in the range of 150 to 300 °C in the petroleum-based binder pitch, and in the range of 300 to 475 °C in the coal-based binder pitch. The molecular weight of the binder pitch was analyzed through the matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight (MALDI-TOF) method. The molecular weight ratio within the interval showing the highest binder pitch molecular weight (178 to 712 m/z) was the highest at 66.4% in the coal-based binder pitch (softening point 115 °C) and the lowest at 46.0% in the petroleum-based binder pitch (softening point 116 °C). When the petroleum-based binder pitch was applied, as the softening point was increased, the voids decreased and thus the thermal conductivity increased. The highest thermal conductivity was 99.5 W/mK for the carbon molded bodies prepared using the coal-based binder pitch and 102.8 W/mK for those prepared by using the petroleum-based binder pitch. The results showed that the thermal properties were similar between the coal-based binder pitch (softening point 115 °C) and the petroleum-based binder pitch (softening point 150 °C).

Keywords

Pitch Softening point Graphite block Thermal conductivity 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Korea Institute of Energy Technology Evaluation and Planning (KETEP) grant funded by the Ministry of Trade, Industry & Energy (MOTIE) of the Republic of Korea (No. 10077710, Development of 600 W/mk grade exothermal material & component preparation by petroleum based pitch).

Supplementary material

42823_2019_106_MOESM1_ESM.docx (11 mb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 11262 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Brisson PY, Darmstadt H, Fafard M, Adnot A, Servant G, Soucy G (2006) X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy study of sodium reactions in carbon cathode blocks of aluminium oxide reduction cells. Carbon 44:8.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2005.11.030 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chin-Tu L, Bryant MD (1994) Thermoelastic evolution of contact area and mound temperatures in carbon graphite electrical brushes. Wear 174:1–2.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0043-1648(94)90095-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ding T, Chen G, Bu J, Zhang W (2011) Effect of temperature and arc discharge on friction and wear behaviours of carbon strip/copper contact wire in pantograph–catenary systems. Wear 271:9–10.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wear.2010.12.031 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lin JW, Chang HC (2011) Measurement of friction surface and wear rate between a carbon graphite brush and a copper ring. Tribol Trans 54:6.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10402004.2011.613555 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Zj Liu, Jl Zhang, Hb Zuo, Tj Yang (2012) Recent progress on long service life design of Chinese blast furnace hearth. ISIJ Int 52:10.  https://doi.org/10.2355/isijinternational.52.1713 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Xiaowei L, Jean-Charles R, Suyuan Y (2004) Effect of temperature on graphite oxidation behavior. Nucl Eng Des.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nucengdes.2003.11.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sorlie M, Oye H (1992) Cathodes in aluminium electrolysis. Aluminium-Verlag GmbH, Dusseldorf, p 350Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Yurkov A, Khramenko S, Borisov V (2008) Effect of the structure and properties of hearth carbon blocks on premature shutdown of electrolytic baths. Refract Ind Ceram 49:2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Yuan G, Li X, Dong Z, Westwood A, Cui Z, Cong Y, Kang F (2012) Graphite blocks with preferred orientation and high thermal conductivity. Carbon 50:1.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2011.08.017 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zhong B, Zhao G, Huang X, Liu J, Chai Z, Tang X, Wu Y (2014) Binding natural graphite with mesophase pitch: a promising route to future carbon blocks. Mater Sci Eng, A 610:29.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2014.05.038 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fitzer E (1987) The future of carbon-carbon composites. Carbon 25(2):163–190.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0008-6223(87)90116-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Pierson HO (2012) Handbook of carbon, graphite, diamonds and fullerenes: processing, properties and applications. William Andrew, Norwich. https://www.elsevier.com/books/handbook-of-carbon-graphite-diamonds-and-fullerenes/pierson/978-0-8155-1339-1 Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Inagaki M, Kang F (2014) Materials science and engineering of carbon: fundamentals. Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford.  https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-800858-4.00002-4 Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Choi JE, Ko S, Jeon YP (2019) Preparation of petroleum impregnating pitches from pyrolysis fuel oil using two-step heat treatments. Carbon Lett 29:1.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s42823-019-00041-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sakai M (1979) Dependence of viscoelastic properties of a carbon paste on grain size of coke. Carbon 17:2.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0008-6223(79)90022-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kim JG, Kim JH, Bai BC, Choi YJ, Im JS, Bae TS, Lee YS (2018) Influence of kneading ratio on the binding interaction of coke aggregates on manufacturing a carbon block. Carbon Lett 28:1.  https://doi.org/10.5714/cl.2018.28.024 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Golounin A, Sokolenko V, Khramenko S, Marakushina E (2009) Catalytic transformation of the alkylation products of naphthalene. Coke Chemy 52:3.  https://doi.org/10.3103/S1068364X09030077 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lee SM, Kim KH, Lee YS (2017) Preparation of carbon discs using petroleum-based binder pitch reformed with carbon black. Carbon Lett 23:1.  https://doi.org/10.5714/cl.2017.23.084 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Song Y, Zhai G, Li G, Shi J, Guo Q, Liu L (2004) Carbon/graphite seal materials prepared from mesocarbon microbeads. Carbon 42:8–9.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbon.2003.12.037 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kim JG, Kim JH, Song BJ, Jeon YP, Lee CW, Lee YS, Im JS (2016) Characterization of pitch derived from pyrolyzed fuel oil using TLC-FID and MALDI-TOF. Fuel 167:1.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2015.11.050 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kim HG, Kim YS, Kwac LK, Kuk YS, Shin HK (2018) Characterization of Toluene- and Quinoline-Insoluble Extracted from Pyrolysis Fuel Oil-Derived Pitch for Manufacture of C/C Composites. Int J Precis Eng Manuf 19:7.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12541-018-0122-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Korean Carbon Society 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Carbon Industry Frontier Research CenterKorea Research Institute of Chemical Technology (KRICT)DaejeonRepublic of Korea
  2. 2.Department of Chemical Engineering and Applied ChemistryChungnam National UniversityDaejeonRepublic of Korea
  3. 3.Advanced Materials and Chemical EngineeringUniversity of Science and Technology (UST)DaejeonRepublic of Korea
  4. 4.Korea Institute of Convergence TextileIksan-siRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations