Skip to main content
main-content
Top

Hint

Swipe to navigate through the articles of this issue

01-08-2010 | Issue 4/2010

Cellulose 4/2010

Cellulose I crystallinity determination using FT–Raman spectroscopy: univariate and multivariate methods

Journal:
Cellulose > Issue 4/2010
Authors:
Umesh P. Agarwal, Richard S. Reiner, Sally A. Ralph

Abstract

Two new methods based on FT–Raman spectroscopy, one simple, based on band intensity ratio, and the other using a partial least squares (PLS) regression model, are proposed to determine cellulose I crystallinity. In the simple method, crystallinity in cellulose I samples was determined based on univariate regression that was first developed using the Raman band intensity ratio of the 380 and 1,096 cm−1 bands. For calibration purposes, 80.5% crystalline and 120-min milled (0% crystalline) Whatman CC31 and six cellulose mixtures produced with crystallinities in the range 10.9–64% were used. When intensity ratios were plotted against crystallinities of the calibration set samples, the plot showed a linear correlation (coefficient of determination R 2 = 0.992). Average standard error calculated from replicate Raman acquisitions indicated that the cellulose Raman crystallinity model was reliable. Crystallinities of the cellulose mixtures samples were also calculated from X-ray diffractograms using the amorphous contribution subtraction (Segal) method and it was found that the Raman model was better. Additionally, using both Raman and X-ray techniques, sample crystallinities were determined from partially crystalline cellulose samples that were generated by grinding Whatman CC31 in a vibratory mill. The two techniques showed significant differences. In the second approach, successful Raman PLS regression models for crystallinity, covering the 0–80.5% range, were generated from the ten calibration set Raman spectra. Both univariate-Raman and WAXS determined crystallinities were used as references. The calibration models had strong relationships between determined and predicted crystallinity values (R 2 = 0.998 and 0.984, for univariate-Raman and WAXS referenced models, respectively). Compared to WAXS, univariate-Raman referenced model was found to be better (root mean square error of calibration (RMSEC) and root mean square error of prediction (RMSEP) values of 6.1 and 7.9% vs. 1.8 and 3.3%, respectively). It was concluded that either of the two Raman methods could be used for cellulose I crystallinity determination in cellulose samples.

Please log in to get access to this content

To get access to this content you need the following product:

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 50.000 Bücher
  • über 380 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Umwelt
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




Testen Sie jetzt 30 Tage kostenlos.

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 69.000 Bücher
  • über 500 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Umwelt
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Testen Sie jetzt 30 Tage kostenlos.

Literature
About this article

Other articles of this Issue 4/2010

Cellulose 4/2010 Go to the issue