journal article·2026-04

Influence of resin composition on mechanical properties of eco-friendly jute-mesquite gum and POP composites

Sathiyamoorthy Dhamodharan, G Gopalarama Subramaniyan

Publisher page

Abstract

This study focuses on developing and characterizing eco-friendly jute-reinforced composites using natural Mesquite gum (Prosopis juliflora) and Plaster of Paris (POP) as the matrix material. Composites with varying POP content (20%, 30%, 40%, and 50%) were evaluated for mechanical and structural properties, including tensile, flexural, and impact performance. G60P40 (60% Mesquite gum, 40% POP) emerged as the optimal composition, achieving the highest tensile strength (17.13 MPa) and flexural strength (18.67 MPa), along with a high flexural modulus (10.49 MPa) and tensile modulus (1.39 MPa). This composition also demonstrated exceptional energy absorption with a flexural toughness of 100.67 J/m 3 and near-maximum tensile toughness of 121.07 J/m 3 , reflecting its balanced stiffness and resilience. G80P20 (80% Mesquite gum, 20% POP) exhibited the highest impact strength, absorbing 22 J of energy, making it suitable for applications requiring high toughness. Microstructural analysis through FTIR and SEM confirmed enhanced fibre-matrix bonding in G60P40, minimizing voids and improving load transfer efficiency. This research highlights the potential of Mesquite gum-based composites as sustainable alternatives to synthetic materials, offering a pathway toward eco-friendly structural and engineering applications.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Natural Fiber Reinforced Composites · biodegradable polymer synthesis and properties · Nanocomposite Films for Food Packaging

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

Affiliations

St. Peter’s College of Engineering and Technology

Saveetha Engineering College

References (65)

Show source-provided references
1. 10.1038/s41529-022-00277-710.1038/s41529-022-00277-7 ↗
2. 10.1007/s10924-011-0317-110.1007/s10924-011-0317-1 ↗
3. 10.1177/0731684421107060910.1177/07316844211070609 ↗
4. 10.1002/pc.2641310.1002/pc.26413 ↗
5. Ernesto DM, Salvatore I. Biodegradable composites. Wiley encyclopedia of composites. New Jersey: Wiley, 2011, pp. 1–18.
6. 10.1007/s10853-019-03990-y10.1007/s10853-019-03990-y ↗
7. 10.3390/polym1312191710.3390/polym13121917 ↗
8. 10.1080/23311916.2018.144666710.1080/23311916.2018.1446667 ↗
9. 10.18311/jsst/2016/660010.18311/jsst/2016/6600 ↗
10. 10.1007/s10924-019-01534-810.1007/s10924-019-01534-8 ↗
11. 10.3390/ijms2403215310.3390/ijms24032153 ↗
12. 10.5772/5623010.5772/56230 ↗
13. 10.3390/pharmaceutics1503075910.3390/pharmaceutics15030759 ↗
14. 10.30638/eemj.2018.29910.30638/eemj.2018.299 ↗
15. 10.3390/ma1422677510.3390/ma14226775 ↗
16. 10.1016/j.est.2023.10672510.1016/j.est.2023.106725 ↗
17. 10.1177/0954408923115271410.1177/09544089231152714 ↗
18. 10.3390/polym1415317510.3390/polym14153175 ↗
19. Vinayagamoorthy R, Venkatakoteswararao G. Development and characterization of bio-composites using Senegalia catechu resin. Polym Polym Compos 2021; 29(9_suppl): S1268–S1279.
20. 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2020.05.15310.1016/j.ijbiomac.2020.05.153 ↗
21. 10.1007/978-3-319-03751-6_14-110.1007/978-3-319-03751-6_14-1 ↗
22. 10.4102/ajod.v9i0.50310.4102/ajod.v9i0.503 ↗
23. 10.1088/1755-1315/1103/1/01200810.1088/1755-1315/1103/1/012008 ↗
24. 10.1007/s10765-022-03086-x10.1007/s10765-022-03086-x ↗
25. 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e1814710.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e18147 ↗
26. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2009.10.02210.1016/j.jclepro.2009.10.022 ↗
27. Ling D Weidong Y. Review of recent research in nano cellulose preparation and application from jute fibers. In: Proceedings of the international conference on materials engineering and manufacturing technology 2016 pp. 742–748. DOI: 10.2991/ICMEMTC-16.2016.148.10.2991/ICMEMTC-16.2016.148 ↗
28. 10.1002/tcr.20210013510.1002/tcr.202100135 ↗
29. Suriya F, Sarwar H. Natural fibre composite (NFC): new gateway for jute, kenaf and allied fibres in automobiles and infrastructure sector. Fibers Text East Eur 2017; 5(3): 35–42.
30. 10.1002/pc.2627810.1002/pc.26278 ↗
31. 10.1007/978-981-13-6412-9_4510.1007/978-981-13-6412-9_45 ↗
32. 10.1002/mabi.20040005510.1002/mabi.200400055 ↗
33. 10.1007/s10765-020-02780-y10.1007/s10765-020-02780-y ↗
34. Touil M Lachheb A Saadani R et al. Influence of the mixing water rate on the plaster thermo physical properties: experimental and dynamic study. In: E3S web of conferences 2022. EDP Sciences Vol. 336 p. 00012.10.1051/e3sconf/202233600012 ↗
35. 10.3390/jcs505013010.3390/jcs5050130 ↗
36. 10.1088/1757-899X/1123/1/01200510.1088/1757-899X/1123/1/012005 ↗
37. 10.1007/s12034-016-1343-310.1007/s12034-016-1343-3 ↗
38. 10.1016/j.msec.2018.08.01010.1016/j.msec.2018.08.010 ↗
39. 10.1016/j.matdes.2012.11.02510.1016/j.matdes.2012.11.025 ↗
40. 10.1007/s10924-014-0679-210.1007/s10924-014-0679-2 ↗
41. 10.14419/ijet.v7i3.12.1590610.14419/ijet.v7i3.12.15906 ↗
42. 10.1016/j.tbench.2024.10018310.1016/j.tbench.2024.100183 ↗
43. Lindström T Wågberg L Larsson T. On the nature of joint strength in paper-A review of dry and wet strength resins used in paper manufacturing. In: 13th Fundamental research symposium Cambridge September 2005 Vol. 32.
44. 10.3390/polym1603042310.3390/polym16030423 ↗
45. 10.1007/s44290-024-00149-w10.1007/s44290-024-00149-w ↗
46. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.12.16810.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.12.168 ↗
47. 10.3390/su1416979710.3390/su14169797 ↗
48. 10.1007/s43939-025-00198-710.1007/s43939-025-00198-7 ↗
49. Aladenika AK, Olanrewaju OM, Olaitan SK. Comparative investigation of the mechanical properties of coconut coir fibre and synthetic fibre reinforced plaster of paris (POP) based composites for celling applications. J Mater Sci Res Rev 2021; 7(3): 1–6.
50. Anowai S, Toy DY, Sunday AY. Comparative study of performance of plaster of paris ceiling boards reinforced with imported sisal fibre and locally sourced okra fibre. Int J Mod Trends Eng Res 2020; 7(6): 4–9.
51. 10.1002/adfm.20160535010.1002/adfm.201605350 ↗
52. 10.1016/j.compositesa.2004.07.01110.1016/j.compositesa.2004.07.011 ↗
53. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.13162510.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.131625 ↗
54. 10.1080/00219592.2024.243811110.1080/00219592.2024.2438111 ↗
55. Srikanth V, Reddy KRN, Rao DKN. Dielectric and mechanical characteristics of oil palm mesocarp fiber-kondagogu gum composites. Inter J Adv Eng Arch Sci Technol 2023; 1: 9–22.
56. 10.1007/s10570-021-03816-810.1007/s10570-021-03816-8 ↗
57. 10.1016/j.jobe.2022.10564010.1016/j.jobe.2022.105640 ↗
58. 10.1155/ijps/812008210.1155/ijps/8120082 ↗
59. 10.1080/15440478.2024.238556310.1080/15440478.2024.2385563 ↗
60. 10.1177/0954408924123932610.1177/09544089241239326 ↗
61. 10.1007/s11458-008-0069-110.1007/s11458-008-0069-1 ↗
62. 10.1080/15440478.2020.178868610.1080/15440478.2020.1788686 ↗
63. 10.1016/j.foodhyd.2011.05.00610.1016/j.foodhyd.2011.05.006 ↗
64. López-Franco YL, Toledo-Guillén AR, Lizardi-Mendoza J. Biopolymers from mesquite tree (Prosopis spp.). Adv Physicochem Prop Biopolymers 2017; 1: 273.
65. 10.3390/cryst1407057710.3390/cryst14070577 ↗