Bio-composites produced from plant microfiber bundles with a nanometer unit web-like network
Source abstract
Abstract
Using plant microfiber bundles with a nanometer unit web-like network, a moulded product with a bending strength of 250 MPa was obtained without the use of binders. High interactive forces seem to be developed between pulp fibers owing to their nanometer unit web-like network. In other words, the area of possible contact points per fiber are increased, so that more hydrogen bonds might be formed or van der Waals forces increased. When 2% oxidized tapioca starch, by weight, was added, the yield strain doubled and the bending strength reached 310 MPa. The starch mixed moulded product had a similar stress strain curve to that for magnesium alloy, and three to four times higher Young's modulus and bending strength values than polycarbonate and GFRP (chopped). The mouldings have a combination of environmentally friendly and high strength properties.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Natural Fiber Reinforced Composites · Advanced Cellulose Research Studies · Nanocomposite Films for Food Packaging
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (16)
Show source-provided references
1. D. Fengel and G. Wegener, in “WOOD—Chemistry Ultrastructure Reactions” (Walter de Gruyter, Belrin, New York, 1983) p. 93.10.1515/9783110839654 ↗
2. I. Sakurada, Y. Nukushima and T. Ito, J. Polym. Sci. 57 (1962) 651.10.1002/pol.1962.1205716551 ↗
3. D. H. Page and F. El-Hosseiny, J. Pulp Pap. Sci. 9 (1983) 99.
4. L. H. Sperling, “Introduction to Physical Polymer Science” (John Wiley & Sons Inc., New York, 2001) p.499.
5. L. Lundquist, B. Marque, P. O. Hagstrand, Y. Leterrier and J.-A. E. Manson, Compos. Sci. Technol. 63 (2003) 137.10.1016/S0266-3538(02)00192-6 ↗
6. T. G. Rials, M. P. Wolcott and J. M. Nassar, J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 80 (2001) 546.10.1002/1097-4628(20010425)80:4<546::AID-APP1129>3.0.CO;2-0 ↗
7. M. A. Svoboda, R. W. Lang, R. Bramsteidl, M. Ernegg and W. Stadlbauer, Mol. Cryst. Liq. Cryst. 47 (2000) 353.
8. X. Y. Chen, Q. P. Guo and Y. L. Mi, J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 69 (1998)1891.10.1002/(SICI)1097-4628(19980906)69:10<1891::AID-APP1>3.0.CO;2-9 ↗
9. J. Simonsen, Forest Prod. J. 47 (1997) 74.
10. O. Y. Mansour, S. Kamel and M. A. Nassar, J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 69 (1998) 845.10.1002/(SICI)1097-4628(19980801)69:5<845::AID-APP2>3.0.CO;2-M ↗
11. M. Wollerdorfer and H. Bader, Ind. Crop. Prod. 8 (1998) 105.10.1016/S0926-6690(97)10015-2 ↗
12. D. G. Hepworth, J. F. V. Vincent, G. Jeronimidis and D. M. Bruce, Compos. Part A-Appl. S. 31 (2000) 599.10.1016/S1359-835X(99)00097-4 ↗
13. F. W. Herrick, R. L. Casebier, J. K. Hamilton and K. R. Sandberg, J. Appl. Polym. Sci.: Appl. Polym. Symp. 37 (1983) 797.
14. T. Taniguchi and K. Okamura, Polym. Int. 47 (1998) 291.10.1002/(SICI)1097-0126(199811)47:3<291::AID-PI11>3.0.CO;2-1 ↗
15. Y. Matsuda, Sen-i Gakkaishi 56 (2000) 192.10.2115/fiber.56.P_192 ↗
16. S. Yamanaka, K. Watanabe, N. Kitamura, M. Iguchi, S. Mitsuhashi, Y. Nishi and M. Uryu, J. Mater. Sci. 24 (1989) 3141.10.1007/BF01139032 ↗