DataVXCellulose Chemistry and TechnologyPaper
journal article·2022-03-01Open access

DEGUMMING AND CHARACTERIZATION OF PALM FIBERS

College of Textiles Science and Engineering, Wuhan Textile University, Wuhan 430200, China, FANGWEI FAN, MENGTING ZHU, College of Textiles Science and Engineering, Wuhan Textile University, Wuhan 430200, China, YINZHI YANG, College of Textiles Science and Engineering, Wuhan Textile University, Wuhan 430200, China, KAIYANG FANG, College of Textiles Science and Engineering, Wuhan Textile University, Wuhan 430200, China, XINWANG CAO, College of Textiles Science and Engineering, Wuhan Textile University, Wuhan 430200, China, ZHONGMIN DENG, College of Textiles Science and Engineering, Wuhan Textile University, Wuhan 430200, China, WEI KE, College of Textiles Science and Engineering, Wuhan Textile University, Wuhan 430200, China, JINPENG XIE, College of Textiles Science and Engineering, Wuhan Textile University, Wuhan 430200, China, ZHEN ZHANG, College of Textiles Science and Engineering, Wuhan Textile University, Wuhan 430200, China, YIREN CHEN, College of Textiles Science and Engineering, Wuhan Textile University, Wuhan 430200, China

Cellulose Chemistry and Technology· Volume 56· Issue 1-2
Publisher pageOpen full text
Source abstract

Abstract

Palm fiber is an abundantly available, low-cost fibrous material that is not sufficiently valorized through the development of value-added products. Herein, palm fibers were degummed by acid treatment combined with alkali-peroxide bath. To explore the influence of various factors on the degumming results, the efficiency of degumming was assessed through single factor and orthogonal experiments. The optimal scheme for the preparation of palm fibers was obtained: the samples were pretreated with 0.06% sulfuric acid solution in an 80 °C water bath for 30 min, then treated with 20.0 g/L of NaOH, 40 mL/L of H2O2 and 2% Na2SiO3 for 2.5 h in a 95 °C water bath. The optimal degumming rate was 65.50%. The results showed that, after degumming, impurities, such as hemicelluloses and lignin, were basically removed, the main component of the fiber after degumming was cellulose. The crystallinity and thermal stability were improved, which was beneficial for the further development and utilization of the palm fiber.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Advanced Cellulose Research Studies · Natural Fiber Reinforced Composites · Nanocomposite Films for Food Packaging

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

References (31)

Show source-provided references
1. "1 S. Siddika, F. Mansura, M. Hasan and A. Hassan, Fiber. Polym., 15, 1023 (2014), https://doi.org/10.1007/s12221-014-1023-010.1007/s12221-014-1023-0 ↗
2. 2 J. Rocha-Martín, C. Martinez-Bernal, Y. Pérez-Cobas, F. M. Reyes-Sosa and B. D. García, Bioresour. Technol., 244, 48 (2017), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2017.06.13210.1016/j.biortech.2017.06.132 ↗
3. 3 D. L. Vinayaka, V. Guna, D. Madhavi and R. Arpitha, Ind. Crop. Prod., 100, 126 (2017), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2017.02.01910.1016/j.indcrop.2017.02.019 ↗
4. 4 Z. Xia, J. Li, J. Zhang, X. Zhang and J. Zhang, J. Biores. Bioprod., 5, 79 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobab.2020.04.00110.1016/j.jobab.2020.04.001 ↗
5. 5 X. Cao, B. Ding, J. Yu and S. S. Al-Deyab, Carbohyd. Polym., 90, 1080 (2013), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2012.06.04610.1016/j.carbpol.2012.06.046 ↗
6. 6 X. Cao, M. Zhu, F. Fan, Y. Yang and Q. Zhang, Cellulose, 27, 1391 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-019-02880-510.1007/s10570-019-02880-5 ↗
7. 7 D. Zhen, X. Hou, F. Sun, Z. Li and Y. Yang, Cellulose, 21, 3860 (2014), https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-014-0401-510.1007/s10570-014-0401-5 ↗
8. 8 Y. Zhang, Y. Song, W. Jiang and G. Han, Text. Res. J., 89, 1258 (2018), https://doi.org/10.1177/004051751876715310.1177/0040517518767153 ↗
9. 9 A. Kriker, G. Debicki, A. Bali, M. M. Khenfer and M. Chabannet, Cem. Concr. Compos., 27 564 (2005), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2004.09.01510.1016/j.cemconcomp.2004.09.015 ↗
10. 10 X. S. Fan, Z. W. Liu, Z. T. Liu and J. Lu, Text. Res. J., 80, 2051 (2010), https://doi.org/10.1177/004051751037363210.1177/0040517510373632 ↗
11. 11 S. K. Paramasivam, D. Panneerselvam, D. Sundaram, K. N. Shiva and U. Subbaraya, J. Nat. Fibers, (2020), https://doi.org/10.1080/15440478.2020.176445610.1080/15440478.2020.1764456 ↗
12. 12 Y. Wang, D. Yin, Y. Ji, Q. Zhang, Z. Yu et al., Funct. Mater., 23, 501 (2016), https://doi.org/10.15407/fm23.03.49610.15407/fm23.03.496 ↗
13. 13 C. Li, S. Liu, Y. Song, K. Nie and W. Jiang, Ind. Crop. Prod., 151, 112443 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2020.11244310.1016/j.indcrop.2020.112443 ↗
14. 14 Y. Guo and S. Zhao, Appl. Phys. Res., 2, 139 (2010), https://doi.org/10.5539/apr.v2n1p13910.5539/apr.v2n1p139 ↗
15. 15 R. Y. Ding, X. Q. Zhang and C. W. Yu, J. Nat. Fibers, 11, 24 (2014), https://doi.org/10.1080/15440478.2013.82485110.1080/15440478.2013.824851 ↗
16. 16 F. Fan, M. Zhu, K. Fang, J. Xie, Z. Deng et al., Cellulose, 28, 8375 (2021), https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-021-04090-410.1007/s10570-021-04090-4 ↗
17. 17 Y. Yang, M. Zhu, F. Fan, K. Fang and X. Cao, Cellulose Chem. Technol., 55, 675 (2021), https://doi.org/10.35812/CelluloseChemTechnol.2021.55.5610.35812/CelluloseChemTechnol.2021.55.56 ↗
18. 18 Z. L. Li and C. W. Yu, J. Text. Inst., 106, 1251 (2015), https://doi.org/10.1080/00405000.2014.98588910.1080/00405000.2014.985889 ↗
19. 19 J. J. Zhou, Z. L. Li and C. W. Yu, Fiber. Polym., 18, 1891 (2017), https://doi.org/10.1007/s12221-017-6489-010.1007/s12221-017-6489-0 ↗
20. 20 U. Lins, C. F. Barros, M. Da Cunha and F. C. Miguens, Protoplasma, 220, 89 (2002), https://doi.org/10.1007/s00709-002-0036-510.1007/s00709-002-0036-5 ↗
21. 21 M. Y. Hashim, A. M. Amin, O. M. F. Marwah, M. H. Othman, M. R. M. Yunus et al., J. Phys. Conf. Series, 914, 012030 (2017), https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/914/1/01203010.1088/1742-6596/914/1/012030 ↗
22. 22 N. Shanmugasundaram, I. Rajendran and T. Ramkumar, Carbohyd. Polym., 195, 566 (2018), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2018.04.12710.1016/j.carbpol.2018.04.127 ↗
23. 23 M. Kathirselvam, A. Kumaravel, V. P. Arthanarieswaran and S. S. Saravanakumar, Carbohyd. Polym., 217, 178 (2019), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2019.04.06310.1016/j.carbpol.2019.04.063 ↗
24. 24 A. D. French, Cellulose, 21, 885 (2014), https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-013-0030-410.1007/s10570-013-0030-4 ↗
25. 25 Y. Qu, W. Yin, R. Y. Zhang, S. Zhao, L. Liu et al., Cellulose, 27, 1225 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-019-02835-w10.1007/s10570-019-02835-w ↗
26. 26 L. Y. Mwaikambo and M. P. Ansell, J. Mater. Sci., 41, 2497 (2006), https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-006-5075-410.1007/s10853-006-5075-4 ↗
27. 27 I. M. D. Rosa, J. M. Kenny, D. Puglia, C Santulli and F. Sarasini, Compos. Sci. Technol., 70, 116 (2010), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compscitech.2009.09.01310.1016/j.compscitech.2009.09.013 ↗
28. 28 I. M. D. Rosa, J. M. Kenny, M. Maniruzzaman, M. Moniruzzaman, M. Monti et al., Compos. Sci. Technol., 71, 254 (2011), https://doi.org//j.compscitech.2010.11.02310.1016/j.compscitech.2010.11.023 ↗
29. 29 W. Liu, A. K. Mohanty, L. T. Drzal, P. Askel and M. Misra, J. Mater. Sci., 39, 1054 (2004), https://doi.org/10.1023/B:JMSC.0000012942.83614.7510.1023/B:JMSC.0000012942.83614.75 ↗
30. 30 S. M. Izwan, S. M. Sapuan, M. Y. M. Zuhri and A. R. Mohamed, J. Mater. Res. Technol., 9, 5805 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmrt.2020.03.10510.1016/j.jmrt.2020.03.105 ↗
31. "