Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2024 Sep 16;19(9):e0310185. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0310185

Thermal phenomena and size effects of Mg powder in combustion process

Ki-Hun Nam 1,#, Jung Kyu Park 2,*,#, Jun-Sik Lee 3,*,#
Editor: Sameer Sheshrao Gajghate4
PMCID: PMC11404785  PMID: 39283834

Abstract

Magnesium is a combustible metal that poses various safety risks, including fires and explosions. However, there are limited safety measures available to prevent and respond to potential fires and explosion incidents in the metal industry. In this study, the combustion process of Mg fires was closely examined using infrared thermal imaging, focusing on the effects of Mg powder size. For the experiment, Mg powder was burned by increasing the temperature to approximately 967.4 K using an ignition unit and controller equipped with a tungsten heater. Moreover, combustion velocity measurement experiments for Mg particle sizes of 75, 100, and 150 μm were conducted using the combustion velocity measurement device presented in the NFPA 484 standard. On combustion of Mg, flames are observed; smoke is emitted as demonstrated by thermal and flow visualization experiments. The combustion velocity measurement experiment results demonstrated that the greater the slope value (combustion velocity) for the combustion length over time, the faster is the combustion velocity, with the 75 μm particle size having the fastest combustion velocity. The results of this experiment can be utilized as references for Mg fire control design and to gain a better understanding of the scope of smoke and fire hazard investigation measures.

Introduction

Magnesium and its alloys are widely used as key materials in the aircraft, automobiles, IT, and electronics field owing to their good specific strength and excellent formability, which are superior to those of aluminum and iron [14]. Moreover, the low melting point of Mg facilitates easy recycling, making it an eco-friendly metal; hence, its use continues to expand [5, 6]. However, Mg is a combustible metal that readily reacts with oxygen in the air, posing a significant risk of fire and explosion [7]. Despite the increasing utilization of Mg, research on preventive measures to address the increasing number of fires related to Mg is scarce. In particular, the ignition point of Mg varies depending on the particle size; that is, smaller particles are more prone to fires and explosions [4, 710]. A previous study that investigated the characteristics of flame propagation mechanisms based on the average diameter sizes (60, 170, 360, and 500 μm) through thermal imaging analysis found that the flame propagation speed increased as the average particle diameter decreased. The mechanism of flame propagation over a layer of Mg metal powder was analyzed in detail using infrared thermal imaging to measure the surface temperature of the powder layer [8], with a case study showing the combustion sequence in the order of (1) pre-combustion, (2) combustion (generating white smoke), (3) and post-combustion stages. Furthermore, research on the ignition temperature of Mg powder indicates that the reaction temperature decreases as the surface area increases [11]. A previous study investigated the oxidation and ignition behavior of Mg alloys containing rare-earth elements [12].

Although extensive research has been performed on the combustion characteristics and performance of Mg powder, studies focusing on post-ignition combustion and flow phenomena are still lacking. Therefore, this study aims to determine the combustion characteristics of Mg metal powder by analyzing its thermal properties using an infrared thermal imaging camera and thermocouples. The results of this experiment investigations can provide valuable insights into extending smoke and hazard fire investigation measures; they can also be used as a reference for magnesium fire control and response design.

Materials and methods

Properties of Mg powder

In this study, Mg of purity 99.5% or higher, as specified by the International Organization for Standardization 7165 (ISO 7165) standards for performance testing of fire extinguishers for metal fires was used [13]. Table 1 lists the physical properties of Mg metal, which is a light, silvery-white metal [1315], as shown in Fig 1. Its specific gravity is 1.74, making it the lightest metal, and it has a relatively low melting point of 922.15 K and boiling point of 1373.15 K. The auto-ignition point varies depending on the particle size. It tends to be lower for smaller particles [13, 16]. The auto-ignition point of Mg powder is 745.93 K and its boiling point is approximately 1,373.15 K, as listed in Table 1. The Mg powder used in this study has an auto-ignition point of approximately 743.15 K because the size of Mg powder is smaller than the reference value in Table 1. The particle sizes of Mg used in this study were 150, 100, and 75 μm. ISO-7167 enacted that all particles should be able to pass a sieve with 387 μm mesh size, and a minimum of 80% of the powder must be retained in a sieve with 150 μm mesh size [13]. For this reason, the particle size was selected step by step based on the magnesium particle size of 150 μm used in the ISO 7165 fire extinguisher performance test for metal fires [16].

Table 1. Material properties of magnesium [15].

Autoignition point (K) Specific gravity
Powder Ribbons and shavings Chunk 1.74
745.93 783.15 923.15

Fig 1. Magnesium powder (150 μm(a)) used in the experiment (FE-SEM images × 100 (b) and × 400 (c)).

Fig 1

Experimental set-up and conditions

This study investigates the phenomenon of Mg metal fire based on thermal and flow visualization because the smoke cannot be ocularly observed during Mg metal burning. The experimental equipment comprises a diode-pumped solid-state (DPSS) laser, a high speed camera, and an IR camera (FLIRA655sc). After the DPSS laser forms a 2D plane, a CCD camera is used to capture the image flowing on the plane. Additionally, the combustion velocity of Mg was measured using a combustion velocity measurement device based on the particle size. The characteristics of the combustion product particles were analyzed using SEM (model: S-4800 made by Hitachi).

Figs 2 and 3 show the schematic of the flow and thermal visualization setup for the smoke of Mg metal fire. The setup consists of a DPSS laser, a smoke generator, an IR camera, and a video camera. A digital camera was used to capture the flow images that were illuminated by a laser sheet. Simultaneously, the IR camera, which could operate up to a temperature of 2273.15 K, captured thermal images. A data logger (model GL840) and four K-type thermocouples (0.32 mm, 3.15–1, 545.15 K) were utilized to calibrate and measure the combustion temperature of Mg powder.

Fig 2. Schematic of flow visualization setup.

Fig 2

Fig 3. Schematic of thermal visualization setup.

Fig 3

In this experiment, 20 g of Mg powder with an average particle size of 75 μm and a purity of over 99% was utilized, as shown in Fig 2. Before the experiment, the Mg powder was adequately dried by storing it in a desiccator for 24 h at a temperature of 296.15 K ± 278.15 K. The experimental setup was prepared, and the Mg powder was ignited using an ignition device (ceramic heater) for approximately 5 min. Experimental data were simultaneously collected through the IR camera, thermocouples, and flow visualization apparatus. Despite only a small amount of Mg used for the combustion experiments, safety measures were taken, as shown in Fig 3, by installing a 10-mm-thick gypsum board on the floor, on top of which the experimental bed and a circular container were placed. During the combustion process, Mg continued to burn after oxygen was depleted. Subsequently, Mg reacted with nitrogen from the air to form Mg3N2. Following the methodology outlined in [17], the experiment on flow visualization was conducted to visualize the height of flame propagation caused by natural convection within the chamber.

To understand the combustion velocity of Mg powder, a combustion velocity measurement device was made based on the standards specified in the NFPA 484 standard using an ignition device, as shown in Fig 4. Combustion experiments according to Mg powder particle size were conducted nine times, with each of the three sizes of Mg powder tested three times. For the combustion experiment, 10 g of Mg particles of sizes 150, 100, and 75 μm were placed in the combustion velocity measurement device and heated using the ignition device for 5 minutes.

Fig 4. Set up of the burning rate experiment equipment.

Fig 4

Results and discussion

Fig 5 show infrared images of the temperature reached after ignition and thermal images depicting the Mg combustion process over time. Owing to the high-temperature conditions under which the experiment is conducted, the temperature range spans from 373.1K to 967.4K to observe heat flow phenomena during combustion. The images show the flame spreading due to the combustion heat. There was a rapid burning accompanied by a white flame and white smoke. Upon analyzing the temperature distribution through the infrared thermal images, we observed that the peripheral areas where combustion is accompanied by flame show a temperature distribution above 967.4 K. Fig 6 shows the temperature changes from the time of ignition to the time of reaching maximum temperature, measured at the center of the Mg powder surface by the thermocouples. The maximum temperature reached approximately 993.15 K, 48 s after ignition, followed by a trend of small decreases and increases. There are slight discrepancies between the temperatures shown in the thermal images and the temperatures measured by the thermocouples. This is because the temperature differs with the measurement location (surface temperature). Furthermore, the heat generated during combustion does not transfer internally beyond the boiling point of Mg, affecting the ongoing combustion process.

Fig 5. Infrared thermal image of Mg combustion.

Fig 5

Fig 6. Temperature of the thermocouple on the surface of Mg.

Fig 6

Thermal and fluid flow characteristics

Fig 7 presents a flow visualization of the combustion approximately 1.5 s after ignition. We can observe the smoke flow pattern of the burning Mg powder. During the combustion process, intense light and heat are generated in the middle portion, and the flame temperature of burning Mg reaches up to approximately 3,273.15 K [14], rendering it unrecordable by optical cameras. As the combustion of Mg progresses, the flame temperature rises above the boiling point (1,380.15 K). At this point, the vaporized Mg on the surface continues to combust as it combines with oxygen, producing MgO. The white smoke generated during combustion (shown as green smoke in Fig 7) is solid particles of oxidized Mg produced as Mg vaporizes and combusts; these particles solidify due to the high melting point of Mg.

Fig 7. Photo of experimental flow visualization 1.5 s after ignition.

Fig 7

Combustion velocity

Mg demonstrates a higher activation energy and lower reactivity when the metal particles are larger. When the particle size is small, the temperature increase is faster and the preheating time is shorter than in larger particles, causing the reaction to occur more quickly [2, 5, 8, 9].

Fig 8 shows the combustion length over time by the Mg particle size. The combustion velocity measurement results indicate that on average 90, 60, and 45 s was required for 150, 100, and 75 μm of Mg to burn 30 mm, respectively. This indicates that the smaller the Mg particle size, the faster is the combustion velocity and the quicker the combustion spread. Additionally, after combustion, the average length of the combustion residue was 32, 35, and 45.7 mm for Mg 150, 100, and 75 μm, respectively. The slope of the combustion length over time was 9.2, 8.0, and 9.5 for 150, 100, and 75 μm, respectively. A higher slope value indicates a faster combustion velocity, with 75 μm being the fastest. This suggests that the smaller the Mg particle size, the faster is the heat diffusion among particles during combustion, and that fires involving smaller Mg particles may be more hazardous than those involving larger Mg particles.

Fig 8. Combustion velocity by particle size.

Fig 8

The change in the particle shape and composition after Mg combustion was analyzed through SEM photography as shown in Fig 9. Mg has an irregular shape, mostly forming plates, and smaller sizes tend to be more spherical. Additionally, there was no agglomeration among particles, which is common in fine particles before combustion. However, compared to the circled and irregular shapes in the pre-combustion of magnesium, the samples appear in varying forms.

Fig 9. SEM images of Mg combustion products.

Fig 9

Magnesium undergoes melting, evaporation, and combustion processes due to heat. During these processes, magnesium goes through a melting process and combines with oxygen in the air to produce MgO, and reacts with nitrogen to produce Mg3N2. In addition, a reaction occurs to generate MgOH by combining with some atmospheric moisture. In this melting and chemical reaction process, the reaction rate and amount of reaction vary depending on the particle size, leading to different types of combustion products and particle shapes [18, 19]. Due to this phenomenon. Unlike pure magnesium, which showed a non-uniform but round shape as shown in Fig 1(b) and 1(c), after combustion, it is believed that various inconsistent changes in shape appeared depending on the size of the particles. There is no significant difference in the transformation of magnesium particles by the high temperature heat of combustion.

Conclusion

This study experimentally investigated the combustion characteristics and fire development of Mg through thermal and flow visualization. The thermal and flow visualization results demonstrate smoke-developing patterns during Mg metal fire. The combustion reaction was not visible initially but was observed at the smoldering and fire stages. It transformed to flame in the fire stage and eventually smoldered. This experiment showed that smaller Mg particles have faster heat diffusion during combustion, indicating a higher risk if a fire occurs with smaller Mg particles. Therefore, developing management strategies and fire suppression technologies that consider the impact of Mg particle size on fire spread is necessary. After measuring the combustion rate according to the particle size, the time for the combustion length to reach 30 mm was 90 seconds for 150 μm, 60 seconds for 100 μm, and 45 seconds for 75 μm. The average combustion length for each size was 32 mm for 150 μm, 35 mm for 100 μm, and 45.7 mm for 75 μm. This indicates that the smaller the particle size, the faster the combustion and diffusion rate. Additionally, in Figs 5 and 6, a rapid increase in temperature occurred at approximately 37 seconds and reached the maximum temperature at approximately 48 seconds. As shown in Fig 8, this means that magnesium changes to a vapor state through a smoldering process after ignition, generating a flame and rapid combustion. The results of this experiment can also be utilized to better formulate and expand smoke prevention measures for Mg-related fire hazards. In addition, the results can serve as references for the design of metal fire control. Notably, research on Mg fires is still in its early phases. In the future, we intend to investigate the mechanism of combustible Mg metal fire. Furthermore, we plan to further explore the combustion characteristics and toxicity with increasing amounts of Mg to propose solutions for extinguishing agents and responsive technologies.

Supporting information

S1 File. MSDS of Mg powder.

Material Safety Data Sheet of Magnesium Powder.

(PDF)

pone.0310185.s001.pdf (1.3MB, pdf)
S2 File. Graph data.

Raw graph data of Figs 5 and 7.

(XLSX)

pone.0310185.s002.xlsx (10.5KB, xlsx)

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting information files. In our experiments, commercial Mg powder was used. The following link contains information on the powder used in the experiment. https://hanaamt.com/metal-powder/mg-metal-powder/.

Funding Statement

This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korean Government (MSIT) (No. 2021R1F1A1055898) This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korean Government (MSIT) (No. 2022R1F1A1074289).

References

  • 1. An D, Sunderland PB, Lathrop DP. Suppression of sodium fires with liquid nitrogen. Fire Safety Journal. 2013. May;58:204–207. doi: 10.1016/j.firesaf.2013.02.001 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 2. Kuai N, Li J, Chen Z, Huang W, Yuan J, Xu W. Experiment-based investigations of magnesium dust explosion characteristics. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries,. 2011. July;24(4):302–313. doi: 10.1016/j.jlp.2011.01.006 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 3. Bidabadi M, Yosefi SH, Kh A, Poorfar AK, Hajilou M, Zadsirjan S. Modeling of combustion of a magnesium dust cloud in heterogeneous media. Combustion, Explosion, and Shock Waves. 2014. Nov;50:658–663. doi: 10.1134/S0010508214060069 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 4. Choi K, Sakasai H, Nishimura K. Minimum ignition energies of pure magnesium powders due to electrostatic discharges and nitrogen’s effect. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries,. 2016. May;41:144–146. doi: 10.1016/j.jlp.2016.03.008 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 5. Nifukua M, Koyanaka S, Ohya H, Barre C, Hatori M, Fujiwara S, et al. Ignitability characteristics of aluminum and magnesium dusts that are generated during the shredding of post-consumer wastes. Journal of Loss Prevention Process. 2007. July;20(4-6):322–329. doi: 10.1016/j.jlp.2007.04.034 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 6. Wu Y, Qu W, Wang Z, Zhuang H. Experimental study on brazing AZ31B magnesium alloy by magnesium alloys. Journal of Welding in the World. 2020. November;64:233–241. doi: 10.1007/s40194-019-00809-x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.NFPA 484 Standard for Combustible Metals. NFPA: Quincy, MA, USA, 2019
  • 8. Kudo Y, Kudo Y, Torikai H, Ito A. Effects of particle size on flame spread over magnesium powder layer. Fire Safety Journal. 2010. February;45(2):122–128. doi: 10.1016/j.firesaf.2009.12.003 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 9. Manju M. Explosion characteristics of micron- and nano-size magnesium powders. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries. 2014. January;27:55–64. doi: 10.1016/j.jlp.2013.11.001 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 10. Li G, Yuan C, Zhang P, Chen B. Experiment-based fire and explosion risk analysis for powdered magnesium production methods. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries. 2008. July;21(4):461–465. doi: 10.1016/j.jlp.2008.03.003 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 11. Zhu C, Wang H, Min L. Ignition Temperature of Magnesium Powder and Pyrotechnic Composition. Journal of Energetic Materials. 2013. November;32:219–226. doi: 10.1080/07370652.2013.812162 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 12. Rao JS, Li HJ. Oxidation and ignition behavior of a magnesium alloy containing rare earth elements. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology. 2010. March;51:255–231. doi: 10.1007/s00170-010-2612-8 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.ISO 7165 Fire Fighting—Portable Fire Extinguishers—Performance and Construction. ISO: Geneva, Switzerland; 2017
  • 14. DeHaan JD, Icove DJ. Kirk’s Fire Investigation 7th. London, England: Pearson; 2012. [Google Scholar]
  • 15. Meyer E. Chemistry of Hazardous Materials 6th ed. London, England: Pearson; 2013. [Google Scholar]
  • 16. Febo HL Jr. Drying of combustible powders—Risk & mitigation. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries,. 2015. July;36:252–257. doi: 10.1016/j.jlp.2014.12.019 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 17. Yi L, Chen Y, Bu R, Luo C, Zhou Y. Visualization study on the effect of ambient wind on smoke layer height in chamber fires under natural smoke exhaust condition. Journal of Win Engineering & Industrial Aerodynamics. 2021. January;208:104458. doi: 10.1016/j.jweia.2020.104458 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 18. Nam KH, Lee JS, Park HJ. Understanding Combustion Mechanism of Magnesium for Better Safety Measures: An Experimental Study. Journal of Safety. 2022. February;8(1):11. doi: 10.3390/safety8010011 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 19. Yuan C, Yu L, Li C, Li G, Zhong S. Thermal analysis of magnesium reactions with nitrogen/oxygen gas mixtures. Journal of Hazardous Materials. 2013. September;260:707–714. doi: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2013.06.047 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Sameer Sheshrao Gajghate

23 Jun 2024

PONE-D-24-21781Thermal Phenomena and Size Effects of Mg PowderPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Jung Kyu Park,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

==============================

The author need to work on the following comments as 1. Provide the characterization study with details explanation.2. Improve the quality of the figures.3. Enlist the application of the present work.4. Add the highend characterization study images.5. Elaborate the results and discussion in details.6. Rewrite the conclusion section.7. Follow the journal template for reference section.==============================

Please submit your revised manuscript by Aug 07 2024 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Sameer Sheshrao Gajghate, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. Thank you for stating in your Funding Statement: 

"This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korean Government (MSIT) (No. 2021R1F1A1055898 & No. 2022R1F1A1074289)"

Please provide an amended statement that declares *all* the funding or sources of support (whether external or internal to your organization) received during this study, as detailed online in our guide for authors at http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submit-now.  Please also include the statement “There was no additional external funding received for this study.” in your updated Funding Statement. 

Please include your amended Funding Statement within your cover letter. We will change the online submission form on your behalf.

3. Thank you for stating the following in your Competing Interests section:  

"NO authors have competing interests"

Please complete your Competing Interests on the online submission form to state any Competing Interests. If you have no competing interests, please state ""The authors have declared that no competing interests exist."", as detailed online in our guide for authors at http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submit-now 

 This information should be included in your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

4. We note that your Data Availability Statement is currently as follows: All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files

Please confirm at this time whether or not your submission contains all raw data required to replicate the results of your study. Authors must share the “minimal data set” for their submission. PLOS defines the minimal data set to consist of the data required to replicate all study findings reported in the article, as well as related metadata and methods (https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-minimal-data-set-definition).

For example, authors should submit the following data:

- The values behind the means, standard deviations and other measures reported;

- The values used to build graphs;

- The points extracted from images for analysis.

Authors do not need to submit their entire data set if only a portion of the data was used in the reported study.

If your submission does not contain these data, please either upload them as Supporting Information files or deposit them to a stable, public repository and provide us with the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers. For a list of recommended repositories, please see https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/recommended-repositories.

If there are ethical or legal restrictions on sharing a de-identified data set, please explain them in detail (e.g., data contain potentially sensitive information, data are owned by a third-party organization, etc.) and who has imposed them (e.g., an ethics committee). Please also provide contact information for a data access committee, ethics committee, or other institutional body to which data requests may be sent. If data are owned by a third party, please indicate how others may request data access.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Partly

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: N/A

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: 1. What is the novelty in the manuscript?

2. In title, this work focused on the results of thermal and size on Mg powder in combustion process, so, it is suggested to revise as: Thermal Phenomena and Size Effects of Mg Powder in Combustion Process.

3. In application industries, what is the range of size in Mg powder? In this manuscript, why did select the size for 75, 100, and 150 μm?

4. Figures are not clear, please label their numbers. Moreover, “Fig 4 and Fig 5 show infrared images of the highest temperature reached after ignition and thermal images depicting the Mg combustion process over time.” The images are in-situ combustion process? It should be selected different temperatures at the different stages in the combustion process, highlighting their stage characteristics and key parameters. Furthermore, the image should be described before the Mg powder (raw material) as the control group.

5. In section Results and discussion, the contents and results should be deeply described and thoroughly interpretated.

6. The references should be updated and supplemented.

7. The conclusion should be rewritten, for supplementing some quantization results.

Reviewer #2: The subject of the manuscript focused on thermal phenomena and size effects of Mg powder is in good relevance with the scope of PLOS ONE.

The introduction properly presents the issues related to post-ignition combustion and flow phenomena. Materials used as well as the experimental set-up and conditions are described. However, this description must be reorganized because some of the data regarding the research methodology was discussed in the Introduction section, and detailed data was not provided in the Materials and Methods section. This mainly concerns the characterization of the combustion product particles using SEM. A description of the conditions for testing the structure of Mg particles should be provided.

Results and discussion part concerning the results obtained for the combustion characteristics and fire development of Mg through thermal and flow visualization is sufficiently detailed. However, the caption for Fig. 9 is missing. Moreover, the description of the SEM results should also include a reference to Fig. 1 illustrating the lack of agglomeration of Mg particles, which is less visible in Fig. 9.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2024 Sep 16;19(9):e0310185. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0310185.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


21 Aug 2024

Reviewer #1:

Comment 1: What is the novelty in the manuscript?

-> Response 1: Thank you for your comments. We regret that the analysis does not have innovative analysis. We analyzed the risk depending on the particle size and the process of magnesium combustion. Through the risk analysis above, we focused on obtaining the scientific data necessary to prevent and respond to magnesium fires. The analysis was additionally written in the paper.

Comment 2: In title, this work focused on the results of thermal and size on Mg powder in combustion process, so, it is suggested to revise as: Thermal Phenomena and Size Effects of Mg Powder in Combustion Process.

-> Response 2: Thank you for your comments. We agree with this comment. We have changed the research title.

From: Thermal and flow characteristic of magnesium powder combustion

To : Thermal Phenomena and Size Effects of Mg Powder in Combustion Process.

Comment 3 In application industries, what is the range of size in Mg powder? In this manuscript, why did select the size for 75, 100, and 150 μm?

-> Response 3: We appreciate you pointing this out here. I think this point is an important part in this manuscript. Following your comments, we explain why we selected the sizes.

Comment #4 Figures are not clear, please label their numbers. Moreover, “Fig 4 and Fig 5 show infrared images of the highest temperature reached after ignition and thermal images depicting the Mg combustion process over time.” The images are in-situ combustion process? It should be selected different temperatures at the different stages in the combustion process, highlighting their stage characteristics and key parameters. Furthermore, the image should be described before the Mg powder (raw material) as the control group.

-> Response 4: Thank you for your comments. We deleted Figure 4 because it was not clear.

And we comprehensively analyzed Fig 5 and Fig 6 and wrote additional content.

Fig 4 : deleted and Fig 5 and Fig 6 is renamed to Fig 4 and Fig 5

Comment 5: In section Results and discussion, the contents and results should be deeply described and thoroughly interpretated.

-> Response 5: Thank you for your comments. We have rewritten the contents in the Results and Discussion section. We have written additional content in the Combustion Velocity subsection.

Comment 6: The references should be updated and supplemented.

-> Response 6: We add and update some references.

Manju M. Explosion characteristics of micron- and nano-size magnesium powders. J. Loss Prevent. Proc. 2014, 27, 55–64.

K.H. Nam, J.S. Lee, & H.J. Part. Understanding Combustion Mechanism of Magnesium for Better Safety Measures: An Experimental Study. Journal of Safety, 2022, 8, 11

Li, G.; Yuan, C.; Zhang, P.; Chen, B. Experiment-based fire and explosion risk analysis for powdered magnesium production methods. J. Loss Prevent. Proc. 2008, 21, 461–465.

Yuan, C.; Yu, L.; Li, C.; Li, G.; Zhong, S. Thermal analysis of magnesium reactions with nitrogen/oxygen gas mixtures. J. Hazard. Mater. 2013, 260, 707–714

Comment 7: The conclusion should be rewritten, for supplementing some quantization results.

-> Response 6: We have written a new paragraph that can supplement the content in the conclusion.

Fig 1, 3, 8 Replaced with high-resolution image (eps format)

Fig 5. Create a new graph (eps format)

Reviewer #2:

Comment 1: However, this description must be reorganized because some of the data regarding the research methodology was discussed in the Introduction section, and detailed data was not provided in the Materials and Methods section.

-> Response 1: Additional information on the experimental substance magnesium and the experimental method were explained.

Comment 2: This mainly concerns the characterization of the combustion product particles using SEM. A description of the conditions for testing the structure of Mg particles should be provided.

-> Response #2: We added a detailed description of the experimental equipment including SEM used in the experiment.

Comment 3: Results and discussion part concerning the results obtained for the combustion characteristics and fire development of Mg through thermal and flow visualization is sufficiently detailed.

-> Response 3: We have rewritten the contents in the Results and Discussion section. We have written additional content in the Combustion Velocity subsection. We have written a new paragraph that can supplement the content in the conclusion.

Comment 4: However, the caption for Fig. 9 is missing. Moreover, the description of the SEM results should also include a reference to Fig. 1 illustrating the lack of agglomeration of Mg particles, which is less visible in Fig. 9.

-> Response #4: Thank you for your comments. We comprehensively analyzed Fig 1 and Fig 8 and wrote additional content.

Fig 9 is renamed Fig 8.

Fig 1, 3, 8 Replaced with high-resolution image (eps format)

Fig 5. Create a new graph (eps format)

Thank you for your consideration. We look forward to hearing from you.

Attachment

Submitted filename: reviewer-2.pdf

pone.0310185.s003.pdf (102.8KB, pdf)

Decision Letter 1

Sameer Sheshrao Gajghate

27 Aug 2024

Thermal Phenomena and Size Effects of Mg Powder in Combustion Process

PONE-D-24-21781R1

Dear Dr. Jung Kyu Park,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice will be generated when your article is formally accepted. Please note, if your institution has a publishing partnership with PLOS and your article meets the relevant criteria, all or part of your publication costs will be covered. Please make sure your user information is up-to-date by logging into Editorial Manager at Editorial Manager® and clicking the ‘Update My Information' link at the top of the page. If you have any questions relating to publication charges, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Sameer Sheshrao Gajghate, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: N/A

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: My comments have been responded in detailed, this manuscript can be recommended to publish in PLOS ONE.

Reviewer #2: The subject of the manuscript focused on thermal phenomena and size effects of Mg powder is in good relevance with the scope of PLOS ONE.

The introduction properly presents the issues related to post-ignition combustion and flow phenomena. Materials used as well as the experimental set-up and conditions are described. The characterization of the combustion product particles using SEM was completed. A description of the conditions for testing the structure of Mg particles was provided.

Results and discussion part concerning the results obtained for the combustion characteristics and fire development of Mg through thermal and flow visualization is sufficiently detailed. In the Results and Discussion section, the figures were reorganized and appropriate descriptions and comments were added.

The quality of the manuscript is good.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: Yes: Maria Zielecka

**********

Acceptance letter

Sameer Sheshrao Gajghate

4 Sep 2024

PONE-D-24-21781R1

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Park,

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now being handed over to our production team.

At this stage, our production department will prepare your paper for publication. This includes ensuring the following:

* All references, tables, and figures are properly cited

* All relevant supporting information is included in the manuscript submission,

* There are no issues that prevent the paper from being properly typeset

If revisions are needed, the production department will contact you directly to resolve them. If no revisions are needed, you will receive an email when the publication date has been set. At this time, we do not offer pre-publication proofs to authors during production of the accepted work. Please keep in mind that we are working through a large volume of accepted articles, so please give us a few weeks to review your paper and let you know the next and final steps.

Lastly, if your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at customercare@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Sameer Sheshrao Gajghate

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 File. MSDS of Mg powder.

    Material Safety Data Sheet of Magnesium Powder.

    (PDF)

    pone.0310185.s001.pdf (1.3MB, pdf)
    S2 File. Graph data.

    Raw graph data of Figs 5 and 7.

    (XLSX)

    pone.0310185.s002.xlsx (10.5KB, xlsx)
    Attachment

    Submitted filename: reviewer-2.pdf

    pone.0310185.s003.pdf (102.8KB, pdf)

    Data Availability Statement

    All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting information files. In our experiments, commercial Mg powder was used. The following link contains information on the powder used in the experiment. https://hanaamt.com/metal-powder/mg-metal-powder/.


    Articles from PLOS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES