journal article·2021-07

Comparative analyses of rice husk cellulose fiber and kaolin particulate reinforced thermoplastic cassava starch biocomposites using the solution casting technique

Benjamin Agyei‐Tuffour, Joshua Tuah Asante, Emmanuel Nyankson, David Dodoo‐Arhin, Michael Oteng‐Peprah, Salifu T. Azeko, Ali Salifu Azeko, Oluwaseun K. Oyewole, Abu Yaya

Polymer Composites· Volume 42· Issue 7
Publisher page

Abstract

Abstract The potential of biodegradable packaging materials from thermoplastic cassava starch (TPS) reinforced with rice husk cellulose fibers (RHCF) and kaolin particulates (KP) using the solution casting method has been presented. This involved the blending of TPS and RHCF/KP in a plasticizer of ~4 ml of glycerol and ~45 ml of distilled water at 125°C and stirred at 60 rpm until a gel was formed. The gel was cast into sheets and bone‐shaped tensile specimens and allowed to dry for 5 days and characterized. The results show a semicrystalline structure for TPS with an ~36% increase in crystallinity after reinforcement. The O‐H bond stretching and the C‐H bending bonds due to starch–glycerol reactions were the common functional groups in TPS–RHCF biocomposites, and Si‐O‐C bonds were characteristics of the silica phase in the kaolin. The water vapor transmission rate (WVTR) reduced to ~34% with KP reinforcements from ~238 g/m.day to 177 g/m.day and to ~74 g/m.day and ~164% for TPS–RHCF. The strength increased with up to 50 wt% kaolin content; ~0.96 MPa yield strength and ~2.60 MPa ultimate tensile strength (UTS) were recorded. For the RHCF reinforced composites, TPS‐50 wt% also showed high strengths of ~0.96 MPa yield strength and ~3.50 MPa UTS. The WVTR reduced as content of kaolin was increased. Typically, from 0 to 30 wt% volume fraction of kaolin, the WVTR was reduced by ~34% to 177 g/m.day for TPS–kaolin and by ~164% to ~74 g/m.day in TPS–RHCF. The as‐prepared biocomposites have potential as good packaging materials.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Natural Fiber Reinforced Composites · Nanocomposite Films for Food Packaging · Electrospun Nanofibers in Biomedical Applications

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Department of Materials Science and Engineering School of Engineering Sciences, College of Basic and Applied Sciences, University of Ghana Legon Accra Ghana

Department of Mechanical Engineering Worcester Polytechnic Institute Worcester Massachusetts USA

Department of Water and Sanitation University of Cape Coast Cape Coast Ghana

Department of Mechanical Engineering Tamale Technical University Tamale Ghana

References (52)

Show source-provided references
1. 10.1016/j.aiepr.2019.11.00310.1016/j.aiepr.2019.11.003 ↗
2. Ashok A. · Int. J. Bio. & Biomats · 2016 · 2 · 1
3. 10.1016/j.tifs.2008.07.00310.1016/j.tifs.2008.07.003 ↗
4. Sahari J. · Fibr. Tex. East. Eur. · 2012 · 2 · 23
5. Pérez‐Pacheco E. · Intech Open Books · 2016 · 11
6. 10.32604/JRM.2018.0012710.32604/JRM.2018.00127 ↗
7. 10.26656/fr.2017.2(6).11010.26656/fr.2017.2(6).110 ↗
8. 10.3390/polym1210221610.3390/polym12102216 ↗
9. 10.3390/polym1205107110.3390/polym12051071 ↗
10. Huang L. · New J. Chem. · 2019
11. Frackowiak S. · J. Polym. & Env. · 2018
12. 10.1088/1742-6596/953/1/01202110.1088/1742-6596/953/1/012021 ↗
13. Fahma F. · Int. Jr. Polym. Sci · 2017 · 2745721
14. 10.1142/9789814566469_001810.1142/9789814566469_0018 ↗
15. J.Gironès J. P.López P.Mutjé A. J. F.Carvalho A. A. S.Curvelo F.Vilaseca 2012 72(7) 858. ISSN 0266‐3538.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2012.02.019.10.1016/j.compscitech.2012.02.019 ↗
16. ASTM E96‐00 2000.www.astm.org. Accessed 13thDecember 2020.
17. 10.1016/B978-0-12-182552-2.50014-010.1016/B978-0-12-182552-2.50014-0 ↗
18. Griffith P. R. · 1986
19. 10.1063/1.492266510.1063/1.4922665 ↗
20. 10.1063/1.495514110.1063/1.4955141 ↗
21. 10.1016/j.foodhyd.2015.09.02510.1016/j.foodhyd.2015.09.025 ↗
22. 10.1155/2010/60874910.1155/2010/608749 ↗
23. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2007.10.01510.1016/j.carbpol.2007.10.015 ↗
24. 10.1007/s10924-011-0366-510.1007/s10924-011-0366-5 ↗
25. G.Gündüz O.Ali Mehmet Wood. Cerne.2016 22 43.https://doi.org/10.1590/01047760201622012101.10.1590/01047760201622012101 ↗
26. 10.1080/0360255090299493810.1080/03602550902994938 ↗
27. 10.1016/S0167-6636(00)00045-410.1016/S0167-6636(00)00045-4 ↗
28. Marfo K. K. · Case Stud. Constr. Mats., Els · 2020 · 11
29. R.Suryana Y.Iriani F.Nurosyid D.Fasquelle IOP Conf.: Mat. Sci. & Eng. 2018 367(1) 012008.10.1088/1757-899X/367/1/012008 ↗
30. 10.1016/j.carbpol.2010.04.05710.1016/j.carbpol.2010.04.057 ↗
31. 10.1016/j.foodhyd.2010.07.02310.1016/j.foodhyd.2010.07.023 ↗
32. 10.1002/ppap.20180016710.1002/ppap.201800167 ↗
33. Pantano A. · Proc. Struct. Int. · 2018 · 8 · 517
34. C.DeArmitt Functional fillers for plastics inApplied Plastic Engineering Handbook William Andrew Publishing Delmar NY USA 2011 p.455. ISBN 9781437735147.10.1016/B978-1-4377-3514-7.10026-1 ↗
35. Duan Z. · J. Appl. Phy. · 115
36. 10.1002/pc.2280410.1002/pc.22804 ↗
37. 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2012.08.01410.1016/j.ijbiomac.2012.08.014 ↗
38. 10.1007/978-1-4471-4108-2_1110.1007/978-1-4471-4108-2_11 ↗
39. 10.3390/jcs402003810.3390/jcs4020038 ↗
40. Cyras V. P. · Carbohydr. Polym · 2007 · 106 · 749
41. 10.1007/s11356-017-8987-410.1007/s11356-017-8987-4 ↗
42. 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2017.04.00310.1016/j.ijbiomac.2017.04.003 ↗
43. 10.3144/expresspolymlett.2017.5210.3144/expresspolymlett.2017.52 ↗
44. 10.1002/star.1992044070310.1002/star.19920440703 ↗
45. Zhou Z. · Int. Jnr. Food Sci.& Tech · 2014 · 49
46. N. H.Mondol J.Jens B.Knut The Leading Edge Soc. Expl. Geophys. OK USA 2008 27(6) 1.https://doi.org/10.1190/1.2944161.10.1190/1.2944161 ↗
47. 10.1007/s10570-017-1453-010.1007/s10570-017-1453-0 ↗
48. 10.1016/0378-5173(94)90463-410.1016/0378-5173(94)90463-4 ↗
49. 10.1515/ntrev-2020-006910.1515/ntrev-2020-0069 ↗
50. 10.1007/s00170-019-03838-410.1007/s00170-019-03838-4 ↗
51. Saravana Bavan D. · Jr. Eng · 2013 · 7 · 450381
52. 10.5923/j.ijme.20120204.0310.5923/j.ijme.20120204.03 ↗