Comparison of Mechanical Properties of Biocomposites between Polybutylene Succinate/Corn Silk and Polybutylene Succinate/Cellulose Extracted from Corn Silk

Article Preview

Abstract:

Corn silk (CS) is agricultural wastes with high cellulose content and polybutylene succinate (PBS) now is more interesting in production of plastic products due to be biopolymer and high flexibility but it is lack of stiffness and strength. Therefore, the goal of this work was to study the possibility of cellulose extraction from CS fiber which was characterized by Fourier Transform Infrared Spectrometer (FTIR) for using cellulose as a reinforcing filler in PBS. Moreover, the mechanical properties (e.g. flexural and impact testing) of PBS/cellulose biocomposite were investigated and compared with that of neat PBS and PBS biocomposite adding various amounts of sodium hydroxide (NaOH) treated CS. The FTIR results showed the contents of hydroxyl (-OH) and ketone (C=O) groups in extracted CS were lower than ones of virgin CS. It was indicated that hemicellulose and lignin were more removed during extraction process, finally obtained ‘cellulose’. For mechanical testing, both cellulose and treated CS filled in PBS affect the decreased impact strength of PBS biocomposites while flexural strength and flexural modulus were increased. Furthermore, the flexural properties were reduced with enhancing filler contents from 1-15 phr for both fillers. By comparison, the flexural properties of PBS/cellulose were slightly lower than that of PBS/treated CS whereas its impact property was quite higher, especially for 10 phr cellulose loading. Therefore, cellulose can be taken more advantage for composite production by ductile property retention of PBS compared with treated CS. In addition, both cellulose and treated CS can be use as reinforcing filler for polymer to improve stiffness and strength.

You might also be interested in these eBooks

Info:

Periodical:

Pages:

275-280

Citation:

Online since:

June 2017

Export:

Price:

* - Corresponding Author

[1] H. S. Kim, H. S. Yang, H. J. Kim, Biodegradability and mechanical properties of agro-flour-filled polybutylene succinate biocomposites, J. Appl. Polm. Sci. 97(4) (2005) 1513-1521.

DOI: 10.1002/app.21905

Google Scholar

[2] Z. Liang, P. Pan, B. Zhu, T. Dong, Y. Inoue, Mechanical and thermal properties of poly(butylenes succinate)/plant fiber biodegradable composites, J. App. Polym. Sci. 115(6) (2010) 3559-3567.

DOI: 10.1002/app.29848

Google Scholar

[3] A. G. Supri, B. Y. Lim, Effect of treated and untreated filler loading on the mechanical, morphological, and water absorption properties of water hyacinth fibers-low density polyethylene composite, J. Phys. Sci. 20(2) (2009) 85-96.

Google Scholar

[4] B. P. Calabia, F. Ninomiya, H. Yagi, A. Oishi, K. Taguchi, M. Kunioka, M. Funabashi, Biodegradable poly(butylene succinate) composites reinforced by cotton fiber with silane coupling Agent, Polymers. 5(1) (2013) 128-141.

DOI: 10.3390/polym5010128

Google Scholar

[5] G. V. Prasanna, K. V. Subbaiah, Modification, flexural, impact, compressive properties & chemical resistance of natural fibers reinforced blend composites, Malaysian Polym. J. 8 (2013) 38-44.

Google Scholar

[6] S. Jayabal, U. Natarajan, Influence of fiber parameters on tensile, flexural, and impact properties of nonwoven coir–polyester composites, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 54(5) (2011) 639-648.

DOI: 10.1007/s00170-010-2969-8

Google Scholar

[7] T. H. Nam, S. Ogihara, S. Kobayashi, Mechanical properties of short coir/PBS biodegradable composites: Effect of alkali treatment and fiber content: proceeding in The 18th International Conference on Composite materials, Korea, (2011).

Google Scholar

[8] E. Bodros, I. Pillin, N. Montrelay, C. Baley, Could biopolymers reinforced by randomly scattered flax fibre be used in structural applications?, Compos. Sci. Technol. 67(3-4) (2007) 462-470.

DOI: 10.1016/j.compscitech.2006.08.024

Google Scholar

[9] R. L. Crawford, Lignin Biodegradation and Transformation, John Wiley and Sons, New York, (1981).

Google Scholar

[10] D. M. Updegraff, Semimicro determination of cellulose in biological materials, Anal. Biochem. 32(3) (1969) 420-424.

Google Scholar

[11] D. Klemm, B. Heublein, H. -P. Fink, A. Bohn, Cellulose: fascinating biopolymer and sustainable raw material, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 44(22) (2005) 3358-3393.

DOI: 10.1002/anie.200460587

Google Scholar

[12] J. M. Berg, J. L. Tymoczko, L. Stryer, Biocheimistry, fifth ed., W. H. Freeman, New York, (2002).

Google Scholar

[13] H. V. Scheller, P. Ulvskov, Hemicelluloses, Annu. Rev. Plant. Biol. 61 (2010) 263-289.

DOI: 10.1146/annurev-arplant-042809-112315

Google Scholar

[14] A. Lehmann, B. Volkert, S. Fischerb, A. Schraderc, H. Nerenzc, Starch based thickening agents for personal care and surfactant systems, Colloid. Surface. A. 331(1-2) (2008) 150-154.

DOI: 10.1016/j.colsurfa.2008.09.055

Google Scholar

[15] A. A. Ragheb, S. H. Nassar, I. Abd El-Thalouth, M. A. Ibrahim, A. A. Shahin, Preparation, characterization and technological evaluation of CMC derived from rice-straw as thickening agents in discharge, discharge–resist and burn-out printing, Carbohydr. Polym. 89(4) (2012).

DOI: 10.1016/j.carbpol.2012.03.054

Google Scholar

[16] S. H. Lee, T. Ohkita, Mechanical and thermal flow properties of wood fiber-biodegradable polymers composites, J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 90(7) (2003) 1900-(1905).

DOI: 10.1002/app.12864

Google Scholar