用聚異丙基丙烯醯胺水膠製作熱致色變節能窗材

Fabrication of thermochromism type energy saving window panel by PNIPAAm gel

吳政昱(Cheng-yu Wu)

指導教授 ： 李基禎 ； 郭鴻森

大同大學/工程學院/機械工程學系所/碩士(2008年)

摘要

在本研究中使用了不同方法製造聚異丙基丙烯醯胺水膠並試著將其製作成節能窗材，從不同製造方法中選出UV光接枝聚合的感溫性高分子NIPAAm水膠是最適合運用在節能窗材上。
在不同體積莫耳濃度的感溫性高分子NIPAAm節能窗材方面，由實驗結果可得知當M=0.53時，溫差在4.5℃±0.0051℃且節能效律為36.3%±2.71%左右，M=0.265時，溫差在2.75℃±0.0055℃且節能效律為20.1%±16.12%左右，M=0.133時，溫差在2.15℃±0.0055℃且節能效律為15.6%±21.42%左右。經比較可以發現當濃度降低其節能效率下降、臨界溶解溫度範圍提高、反應速度加快，雖然濃度降低仍可以達到節能的目的且反應速度加快，但臨界溶解溫度範圍提高可能使實際運用上會有所困難，有機會產生節能窗材無法相分離的情形，加上在低體積莫耳濃度時相分離後水膠粒子會沉澱的現象，使節能窗材無法順利運作，故實際運用上不適合降低節能窗材的濃度。
由以上結果可以得知M=0.53為較佳的節能窗材，為了解其是否符合實際運用的需求，而將節能效率實驗時間由2小時拉長至3天，結果顯示可以連續使用3天以上，而在這3天中溫差在4.5℃±0.0051左右且節能效率都在22~25%左右，證明此節能窗材可以實際運用。

關鍵字

熱致色變 ； 聚異丙基丙烯醯胺 ； 節能窗材

並列摘要

In this study, we made thermochromism type energy saving window by using poly (N-isopropylacrylamide) (PNIPAAm) hydrogel, which was made by UV-induced grafting polymerization and would be change color at lower critical solution temperature ( LCST ).
After the experiment, we knew that when hydrogel molarity was 0.53 the energy saving window has batter energy saving efficiency about 36.3%±2.71% and the temperature difference was about 4.5℃±0.0051℃; when hydrogel molarity was 0.265 the energy saving window has lower energy saving efficiency about 20.1%±16.12% and the temperature difference was about 2.75℃ ±0.0055℃; when hydrogel molarity was 0.265 the energy saving window has lower energy saving efficiency about 15.6% ±21.42% and the temperature difference was about 2.15℃± 0.0055 ℃. So we could say that when molarity was decreased, the energy saving efficiency of the energy saving window would be decreased too, but LCST and velocity of the reaction would be increased. Even if energy saving window could be work when the molarity was decreased, but might not phase separation in real situation. Furthermore, when the molarity was decreased the hydrogel particle would collect under the bottom of the acryl vessel. That would make the energy saving window can not work, so it is better then did not decrease the molarity on the real situation.
For this result we could say that when molarity was 0.53 the energy saving window was the better energy saving window then these molarity. To understand this energy saving window can be used in real situation or not, we take to the experiment from two hours to three days. The result proved that this energy saving window could be used in real situation, the temperature difference was about 4.5℃±0.0051 and the energy saving efficiency of the energy saving window was about 22% to 25%.

並列關鍵字

energy saving window ； thermochromism ； PNIPAAm

參考文獻

件，國立中央大學光電學科研究所，2006

[4] 謝育忠，電漿濺鍍電致色變氧化鎳薄膜特性研究與節能評估，中

原大學化學工程學系，2002

探討，中興大學化學工程研究所，2003

效率探討，大同大學機械工程學系，2007