journal article·2022-01Open access

The properties of starch/cellulose/polyvinyl alcohol composite as hydrodegradable film

Mieow-Kee Chan, Tung-Hao Tang

Abstract

Hydrodegradable material as the replacement for plastic could be a better option than biodegradable material due to its solubility in water, which could extend the landfill’s lifespan. On the other hand, biodegradable material requires tightly controlled waste management and proper facilities for degradation purposes. The starch film is highly soluble in water, exhibiting poor mechanical strength. This study aims to improve the strength of starch film by adding cellulose, which was isolated from rice husk and polyvinyl alcohol (PVA). Results showed that Type 1 – cellulose was extracted from rice husk. With the addition of PVA to the starch/cellulose film, the homogeneity of the mixture improved, as illustrated in FESEM images. The mechanical strength of film also greatly improved from 2 MPa to 4.2 MPa when 3 g of PVA was used. The film showed the sign of degradation after being immersed in water for 24 h due to its high-water uptake property (∼89%). This starch/cellulose/starch film could be used as an edible wrap and single-use material for varied applications such as disposable plates.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Advanced Cellulose Research Studies · Nanocomposite Films for Food Packaging · biodegradable polymer synthesis and properties

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

Affiliations

Centre for Bioprocess Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Built Environment and Information Technology, SEGi University, Petaling Jaya, Malaysia

Funding

SEGi University

References (52)

Show source-provided references
1. 10.3390/polym1308122910.3390/polym13081229 ↗
2. 10.1016/j.crgsc.2020.05.00110.1016/j.crgsc.2020.05.001 ↗
3. 10.1039/D0GC01647K10.1039/D0GC01647K ↗
4. 10.3390/su1215603010.3390/su12156030 ↗
5. Jia MZ · 2020
6. 10.1039/C7CS00149E10.1039/C7CS00149E ↗
7. 10.1016/S0141-3910(03)00129-010.1016/S0141-3910(03)00129-0 ↗
8. 10.1016/j.eurpolymj.2017.07.01210.1016/j.eurpolymj.2017.07.012 ↗
9. 10.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2018.05.00910.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2018.05.009 ↗
10. 10.15414/jmbfs.2015.5.2.120-12610.15414/jmbfs.2015.5.2.120-126 ↗
11. 10.3390/polym1107108410.3390/polym11071084 ↗
12. 10.3390/ma1405114610.3390/ma14051146 ↗
13. 10.1016/j.phpro.2014.07.03210.1016/j.phpro.2014.07.032 ↗
14. 10.13057/nusbiosci/n08022310.13057/nusbiosci/n080223 ↗
15. 10.1177/096739112092242910.1177/0967391120922429 ↗
16. 10.1177/096739111985995210.1177/0967391119859952 ↗
17. Jiang T · Adv Ind Eng.Polym Res · 2020 · 3 · 8
18. 10.3390/ma1323551910.3390/ma13235519 ↗
19. Daud S, Oo YH, Azura AR. The effects of nano-cellulose filler on tensile and thermal properties of natural rubber latex films. In: AIP Conference Proceeding, Penang, Malaysia, 31 October–1 November 2019, Jaafar M, Mohd N (eds), pp. 020079–1–020079–8. paper no. 2267. United State: AIP.10.1063/5.0016167 ↗
20. 10.1016/j.indcrop.2020.11262710.1016/j.indcrop.2020.112627 ↗
21. 10.1016/j.jmrt.2020.12.02710.1016/j.jmrt.2020.12.027 ↗
22. 10.3390/su1215601510.3390/su12156015 ↗
23. Bodîrlău R · BioResources · 2014 · 9 · 39
24. Alias NF · Adv Environ Stud · 2018 · 2 · 98
25. 10.1088/1757-899X/204/1/01202510.1088/1757-899X/204/1/012025 ↗
26. Désiré YA · Heliyon · 2021 · 7 · e0680410.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e06804 ↗
27. 10.1016/j.nfs.2020.06.00210.1016/j.nfs.2020.06.002 ↗
28. 10.1038/s41598-021-93094-y10.1038/s41598-021-93094-y ↗
29. ASTM D882-02. Standard Test Method for Tensile Properties of Thin Plastic Sheeting. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM International.
30. ASTM D570-98 · 2018
31. 10.1051/matecconf/2016470501310.1051/matecconf/20164705013 ↗
32. 10.3390/polym1202048510.3390/polym12020485 ↗
33. 10.1088/1757-899X/352/1/01201910.1088/1757-899X/352/1/012019 ↗
34. 10.3746/pnf.2018.23.2.16610.3746/pnf.2018.23.2.166 ↗
35. Khazraji A · J Nanomater · 2013 · 2013 · 40967610.1155/2013/409676 ↗
36. Socrates G · 2004
37. 10.1038/s41598-019-53412-x10.1038/s41598-019-53412-x ↗
38. 10.7455/ijfs/7.1.2018.a310.7455/ijfs/7.1.2018.a3 ↗
39. 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2016.11.01610.1016/j.ijbiomac.2016.11.016 ↗
40. Kim S · J Biomed Eng Res · 2020 · 41 · 1
41. 10.1016/j.polymertesting.2022.10751610.1016/j.polymertesting.2022.107516 ↗
42. 10.1016/j.jobab.2021.02.00910.1016/j.jobab.2021.02.009 ↗
43. 10.1016/j.matpr.2016.11.01410.1016/j.matpr.2016.11.014 ↗
44. 10.3390/pr809114910.3390/pr8091149 ↗
45. 10.1016/j.eti.2020.10131210.1016/j.eti.2020.101312 ↗
46. 10.1080/19476337.2018.151834310.1080/19476337.2018.1518343 ↗
47. 10.1515/jmbm-2017-002710.1515/jmbm-2017-0027 ↗
48. 10.1063/1.497546010.1063/1.4975460 ↗
49. Juhari FA · Int J Mech Prod Eng · 2015 · 3 · 56
50. 10.15414/jmbfs.2015.5.1.1-610.15414/jmbfs.2015.5.1.1-6 ↗
51. 10.1016/j.fbio.2020.10072210.1016/j.fbio.2020.100722 ↗
52. U.S. Food and Drug Administration · 2018