journal article·2026-10-01

Characterization of Coconut and Oil Palm Natural Fibers with Optimized Mixing Methods for Cement Composites

S. M. Iqbal S. Zainal, Wong Yee Hwa Lenny, Ahmad Nurfaidhi Rizalman, Siti Jahara Matlan, Adriana Erica Amaludin

Publisher page

Abstract

Abstract Natural fibers such as coconut and oil palm offer sustainable reinforcement for cement composites, but their variability in properties and compatibility with cement matrices present challenges. Both fibers exhibit variations and inconsistent characteristics, necessitating tailored mixing protocols to ensure consistent fiber dispersion in cement mixtures. The mixing method largely governs the dispersion of fibers within a matrix, which influences both the fresh and hardened properties of fiber-reinforced materials. Hence, this study attempts to evaluate the impact of five different mixing methods on cement composites reinforced with coconut and oil palm fibers, formulating 15 mix designs and characterizing the fibers for replication accuracy. The effects of mixing methods on water absorption, flowability, setting time, compressive, and flexural strength were assessed, along with fiber–matrix interactions in hardened samples. It was observed that the premix II produced the best flowability, improving it by approximately 3.7% for coconut and 3.0% for oil palm composites, while also reducing water absorption by 87% and 85%, respectively, without affecting setting time. For mechanical performance, coconut composites achieved the highest compressive (37.1%) and flexural (19.3%) strengths with the postmix method. In contrast, oil palm composites reached the highest compressive strength (19.2%) with comixing, and the highest flexural strength (9.1%) with premix III methods. However, some mixing methods produced more consistent performance while not achieving the highest mechanical or fresh properties because the fiber dispersion in the mix was more uniform. In conclusion, coconut and oil palm fibers are abundant, underutilized tropical agricultural wastes with demonstrated mechanical potential. They are cost-effective, sustainable, and applicable in non-load-bearing construction materials; hence, this study investigates appropriate mixing methods to optimize both fresh and hardened properties for broader construction applications.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Natural Fiber Reinforced Composites · Innovative concrete reinforcement materials · Concrete and Cement Materials Research

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

Affiliations

Universiti Malaysia Sabah

References (64)

Show source-provided references
1. Abdalla, J. A., R. A. Hawileh, A. Bahurudeen, G. Jyothsna, A. Sofi, V. Shanmugam, and B. S. Thomas. 2023. “A comprehensive review on the use of natural fibers in cement/geopolymer concrete: A step towards sustainability.” Case Stud. Constr. Mater. 19 (Dec): e02244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscm.2023.e02244.
2. ACI (American Concrete Institute). 2002. State-of-the-art report on fiber reinforced concrete. ACI Committee 544. Farmington Hills MI: ACI.
3. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.12735310.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.127353 ↗
4. 10.1007/BF0248052910.1007/BF02480529 ↗
5. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.12895710.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.128957 ↗
6. 10.1016/j.colsurfa.2014.11.03410.1016/j.colsurfa.2014.11.034 ↗
7. 10.1016/j.rineng.2022.10033510.1016/j.rineng.2022.100335 ↗
8. 10.1016/j.matpr.2023.03.82010.1016/j.matpr.2023.03.820 ↗
9. ASTM. 2002. Standard specification for standard sand. ASTM C778-02. West Conshohocken PA: ASTM.
10. ASTM. 2006. Standard specification for mixing water used in the production of hydraulic cement concrete. ASTM C1602/C1602M-06. West Conshohocken PA: ASTM.
11. ASTM. 2008. Standard test method for time of setting of concrete mixtures by penetration resistance. ASTM C403/C403M-08. West Conshohocken PA: ASTM.
12. ASTM. 2020. Standard test method for flow of hydraulic cement mortar. ASTM C1437-20. West Conshohocken PA: ASTM.
13. ASTM. 2021. Standard test method for flexural strength of hydraulic-cement mortars. ASTM C348-21. West Conshohocken PA: ASTM.
14. ASTM. 2022. Standard specification for portland cement. ASTM C150/C150M-22. West Conshohocken PA: ASTM.
15. ASTM. 2023. Standard specification for fiber-reinforced concrete. ASTM C1116/C1116M-23. West Conshohocken PA: ASTM. https://doi.org/10.1520/C1116_C1116M-23.10.1520/C1116_C1116M-23 ↗
16. ASTM. 2024. Standard test method for compressive strength of hydraulic cement mortars [using 50 mm (2 in.) cube specimens]. ASTM C109/C109M-23. West Conshohocken PA: ASTM.
17. 10.15554/pcij.06012012.33.4610.15554/pcij.06012012.33.46 ↗
18. 10.1016/j.rineng.2020.10015010.1016/j.rineng.2020.100150 ↗
19. 10.1016/j.compstruct.2008.03.00610.1016/j.compstruct.2008.03.006 ↗
20. BSI (British Standard Institution). 2002. Testing hardened concrete. Part 3: Compressive strength of test specimens. BS EN 12390-3:2019. London: BSI.
21. BSI (British Standards Institution). 2006a. Fibres for concrete—Polymer fibres. Definitions specifications and conformity. BS EN 14889‑2:2006. London: BSI.
22. BSI (British Standards Institution). 2006b. Fibres for concrete—Steel fibres. Definitions specifications and conformity. BS EN 14889‑1:2006. London: BSI.
23. 10.3390/fib806003710.3390/fib8060037 ↗
24. 10.1680/macr.2007.59.5.36710.1680/macr.2007.59.5.367 ↗
25. 10.1016/j.proeng.2016.08.03010.1016/j.proeng.2016.08.030 ↗
26. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.03.28210.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.03.282 ↗
27. 10.1016/j.cemconres.2004.07.02610.1016/j.cemconres.2004.07.026 ↗
28. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.10.12010.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.10.120 ↗
29. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.12.04710.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.12.047 ↗
30. 10.1617/s11527-017-1030-x10.1617/s11527-017-1030-x ↗
31. 10.1016/j.jobe.2024.11014710.1016/j.jobe.2024.110147 ↗
32. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.09.11810.1016/j.conbuildmat.2016.09.118 ↗
33. 10.3390/ma1503087410.3390/ma15030874 ↗
34. 10.1016/S0958-9465(00)00072-X10.1016/S0958-9465(00)00072-X ↗
35. 10.1016/j.compositesa.2010.05.00710.1016/j.compositesa.2010.05.007 ↗
36. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.11931510.1016/j.conbuildmat.2020.119315 ↗
37. Kurien, R. A., M. Maria Anil, S. L. Sharan Mohan, and J. Anna Thomas. Forthcoming. “Natural fiber composites as sustainable resources for emerging applications—A review.” Mater. Today Proc. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2023.04.363.
38. Lawler J. S. 2001. “Hybrid fiber-reinforcement in mortar and concrete.” Ph.D. thesis Dept. of Civil Engineering Northwestern Univ.
39. 10.1080/15440478.2014.98404810.1080/15440478.2014.984048 ↗
40. 10.1007/s10924-006-0042-310.1007/s10924-006-0042-3 ↗
41. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.12619310.1016/j.conbuildmat.2021.126193 ↗
42. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.13116910.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.131169 ↗
43. 10.1016/j.cemconres.2009.08.03210.1016/j.cemconres.2009.08.032 ↗
44. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2015.02.02310.1016/j.compositesb.2015.02.023 ↗
45. 10.1007/s11709-019-0576-910.1007/s11709-019-0576-9 ↗
46. 10.1016/S0263-8223(01)00101-510.1016/S0263-8223(01)00101-5 ↗
47. 10.1016/j.clema.2022.10014410.1016/j.clema.2022.100144 ↗
48. 10.1016/j.cemconres.2015.06.00310.1016/j.cemconres.2015.06.003 ↗
49. 10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2019.10349810.1016/j.cemconcomp.2019.103498 ↗
50. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.13010510.1016/j.jclepro.2021.130105 ↗
51. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.13436410.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.134364 ↗
52. 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4628(19971031)66:5<821::AID-APP2>3.0.CO;2-X10.1002/(SICI)1097-4628(19971031)66:5<821::AID-APP2>3.0.CO;2-X ↗
53. 10.1016/j.cemconres.2020.10622110.1016/j.cemconres.2020.106221 ↗
54. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.12749710.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.127497 ↗
55. 10.1016/j.hybadv.2023.10003510.1016/j.hybadv.2023.100035 ↗
56. 10.1088/1742-6596/1637/1/01205010.1088/1742-6596/1637/1/012050 ↗
57. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2024.13489010.1016/j.conbuildmat.2024.134890 ↗
58. Wattanakornsiri, A., K. Pachana, S. Kaewpirom, P. Sawangwong, and C. Migliaresi. 2011. “Green composites of thermoplastic corn starch and recycled paper cellulose fibers.” Songklanakarin J. Sci. Technol. 33 (4): 461–467.
59. 10.1016/j.cemconres.2015.02.01910.1016/j.cemconres.2015.02.019 ↗
60. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.13826510.1016/j.jclepro.2023.138265 ↗
61. Yang, Y. P., Y. Zhang, Y. X. Lang, and M. H. Yu. 2017. “Structural ATR-IR analysis of cellulose fibers prepared from a NaOH complex aqueous solution.” IOP Conf. Ser.: Mater. Sci. Eng. 213 (1): 012039. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/213/1/012039.10.1088/1757-899X/213/1/012039 ↗
62. 10.1007/s12043-024-02870-810.1007/s12043-024-02870-8 ↗
63. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.13007510.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.130075 ↗
64. 10.1617/s11527-022-01976-y10.1617/s11527-022-01976-y ↗