A Review - Future Aspect of Natural Fiber Reinforced Composite

A Review - Future Aspect of Natural

Fiber Reinforced Composite
Kiran Rohit* and Savita Dixit
Department of Chemistry, Manit Bhopal, 462051, Madhya Pradesh, India

Received: 19 August 2015, Accepted: 2 November 2015

Summary
Natural fiber-reinforced polymer composite materials are rapidly growing both
in terms of their industrial applications and fundamental research as they are
renewable, low, completely or partially recyclable and biodegradable. In order
to produce cost effective polymer reinforced composites and to reduce the
destruction of ecosystem, researchers have come up with new manufacturing
trends for composite using natural fibers which are partially biodegradable, for
which plants such as flax, cotton, hemp, jute, sisal, kenaf, pineapple, banana,
wood etc., used from time immemorial as a rich source of lignocellulosic fibers
are more often applied as the reinforcement of composites. Their abundant
availability, low cost and density as well as satisfactory mechanical properties
make them an attractive ecological alternative for the manufacturing of
composites. The natural fiber based composites is more environmentally friendly
and has variety of applications in the field of transportation (automobiles, railway
coaches, aerospace) building and construction industries (ceiling paneling,
partition boards), packaging, consumer products, etc. The demand for wood
products is continuously rising in spite of rapid depletion of forest around the
world. Research in the area of green technology is being done to provide wood
substitutes which make use of wood materials mixed with a polymer to provide
a cost effective, improved performance and termite resistant material. The use
of wood flour filled polymer composites has been considerably studied from the
scientific and commercial point of view over the last decades. Wood flour is
an attractive filler for polymer due to their reduced environmental impact and
globally pleasant aesthetical properties. They are also low cost and low density
material and high specific, biodegradable and non abrasive during processing.
This article is a critical review of the most recent development natural fiber
composite and the summary of the result presented in literature.

Keywords: Natural fibers, Composites, Recycling, Polymer

*Corresponding author. Tel:+91 8871559341.

Email address:kiran.obra@gmail.com
©Smithers Information Ltd, 2016

Polymers from Renewable Resources, Vol. 7, No. 2, 2016 43

Kiran Rohit and Savita Dixit

INTRODUCTION
Natural fibers already have been used the first time 3000 years ago in composite
systems in the ancient Egypt, where straw and clay were mixed together to
build walls. Over the last decade, polymer composites reinforced with natural
fibers have received ever increasing attention, both from the academic world
and from various industries. The interest in natural fiber reinforced polymer
composite material is growing day by day [1, 2, 3]. There are a wide variety
of different natural fibers which can be applied as reinforcement or fillers. The
most important types of natural fibers used in composite materials are flax,
hemp, jute, kenaf, and sisal due to their properties and easy availability. Further
environmental suitability can be achieved by using post-consumer recycled
plastic in place of virgin polymer matrices [4]. Polymer used as a matrix material
for these composites are generally classified into two classes, thermoplastic
and thermosetting. Thermoplastic materials currently dominate, as matrices
for biofibers; the most commonly used thermoplastic for this purpose are
polypropylene, polyethylene, polyvinyl chloride (PVC); while phenolic, epoxy
and polyester resins are the most commonly used thermosetting matrices
[3]. Such composite are comparatively more environment friendly and also
has a wide range of applications in transportation industry that is in railway
coaches, automobile and aerospace sector. They have adequate use
applications, building and construction and tiles as well as in packaging,
sport and consumer products [1, 3, 5].
The major problem identified with natural fibers is the incompatibility between
the hydrophilic natural fibers and the hydrophilic thermoplastic matrices
during incorporation, which leads to undesirable properties of the resulting
composites. It is therefore necessary to alleviate this problem by various
fiber-polymer interface modification to improve the adhesion between fiber
and matrix, which results in an improvement of performance of the resulting
composite [3, 6].
Considering the ecological aspects in material selection, replacing synthetic
fibers with natural ones is only a first step. Restricting the emission of greenhouse
effect caused by gases such as CO2 into the atmosphere and an increasing
awareness of the finiteness of fossil energy resources are leading to develop
new materials that are entirely based on renewable resources.

Natural Fiber
The word natural implies a particular substance which exists naturally and
not manmade. The word fiber is defined as a hair-like or thread like structure
which has high aspect ratio. Fibers are a class of hair like materials that are

44 Polymers from Renewable Resources, Vol. 7, No. 2, 2016

 A Review - Future Aspect of Natural Fiber Reinforced Composite

continuous filaments are in discrete elongated pieces, similar to pieces of

thread. They can be spun into filaments, thread or rope and can be used as
a component of composites materials. It can also be matted into sheets to
make products such as paper or felt [7]. According to study, plant fibers are
the most popular natural fibers, used as reinforcement in fiber reinforced
composites, includes bast (or stem, soft, or sclerenchyma) fibers, leaf or hard
fibers, leaf or hard fibers, seed, fruit, wood, cereal straw [9].

Reinforcing Fibers
An increasing awareness of non-renewable resources becoming scarce and our
inevitable dependence on renewable resources has arisen. This century could
be called the cellulosic century, because more renewable plant resources for
products are being discovered. The living plants are renewable and sustainable
from which the natural fibers are taken, but not the fibers themselves.

Fiber Source
The plants, which produce natural fibers, are classified as primary and
secondary depending on their utilization. Primary plants are those grown
for their fiber content while secondary plants are plants in which the fibers
are produced as a by-product. Jute, hemp, kenaf, and sisal are examples
of primary plants. Pineapple, oil palm and coir are examples of secondary
plants. Table 1 shows the fibers used commercially in composites which are
now produced throughout the world.

Table 1. Commercially major fiber sources [10]

Fiber source World production (103 ton)
Bamboo 30,000
Jute 2300
Kenaf 970
Flax 830
Sisal 378
Hemp 214
Coir 100
Ramie 100
Abaca 70
Sugar cane bagasse 75,000
Grass 700

Polymers from Renewable Resources, Vol. 7, No. 2, 2016 45

Kiran Rohit and Savita Dixit

Fiber Types
There are six basic types of natural fibers. They are classified as follows:
bast fibers (jute, flax, hemp, ramie and kenaf), leaf fibers (abaca, sisal and
pineapple) seed fibers
(Coir, cotton and kapok), core fibers (kenaf, hemp and jute), grass and reed
fibers (wheat, corn and rice) and all other types (wood and roots).
Some of the important natural fibers are as follows:
Flax Fiber: Flax is one of the oldest fiber crops in the world which is grown
intemperate regions. Flax fiber-reinforced plastic composites have attracted
increasing interest because of the advantages of the flax fibers, such as
low density, relatively high toughness, high strength and stiffness, and
biodegradability. Flax fibers have specific tensile properties greater than those
of E glass fibers [11, 12, 13].
Kenaf Fiber: Kenaf is one of the natural (plant) fibers use as reinforcement
in polymer Matrix Composite (PMCs). Kenaf (Hibiscus cannabinus, L.family
Malvacea) has been found to be an important source of fiber for composites,
other industrial applications [14]. Kenaf has been as a crop to produce twine,
rope and sackcloth [15]. The kenaf plant is composed of many useful component
(e.g. stalk, leaves and seeds and within each of these there are various usable
portions e.g. fibers and fiber strands, proteins, oils and allopathic chemicals
[18]. The yield and composition of these plant components can be affected
by many factors, including cultivar, planting date, photosensitivity, length of
growing season, plant populations and plant maturity [19]. Kenaf filaments
consists of discrete individual fibers of generally 2-6 mm. Filaments and
individual fiber properties can vary depending on sources, age, separating
technique, and history of the fibers. The stem of kenaf plant is straight and
unbranched and is composed of an outer layer bark and core [20]. The bark
constitutes 30-40% of the stem dry weight and shows a rather dense structure.
On the other hand, the core is wood like and makes up the remaining 60-70%
of the stem [21]. Nowadays, there are various new application such as kenaf
including paper products, building materials, absorbents and animal feeds.
Kenaf exhibits low density, non-abrasiveness during processing, high specific
mechanical properties and biodegradability, and is also used as nonwoven
mats in the automotive industries and textiles [22].
Hemp Fiber: Another notable bast fiber crop is hemp, which belongs to the
cannabis family. It is an annual plant that grows in temperate climates. Hemp
is known to provide an excellent mechanical strength and young’s modulus,
consists of cellulose (55-72%), hemicelluloses (8-19%), lignin (2-5%), wax (<1%)
and minerals (4%). It is estimated that in recent years China has become the

46 Polymers from Renewable Resources, Vol. 7, No. 2, 2016

 A Review - Future Aspect of Natural Fiber Reinforced Composite

world leader in hemp fiber production, nearly one third of total production [23].
However, the application of hemp fiber is still mainly listed to the textile industry.
Jute Fiber: Jute is produced from plants of the genus Corchorus, which
includes about 100 species. The fibers are extracted from the ribbon of the
stem. Among all natural fibers, jute fibers are easily available in fabric and fiber
forms with good mechanical and thermal properties [10]. Jute has wood-like
characteristics as it is a bast fiber. Jute fiber has a high aspect ratio, high
strength to weight ratio, good insulation properties. Jute fiber reinforced
polymer composite has tested for door, window, furniture, floor tiles [24, 25].
Ramie Fiber: Ramie belongs to the family Utricaceae (Boehmeria), which
includes about 100 species. The density is much less than that of synthetics
fibers and the specific strength and specific modulus of natural fibers are
comparable or even superior to E-glass fibers [26]. Ramie popularity as a
textile fiber has been limited largely by regions of production and a chemical
composition that has required more expensive pre-treatment than is required
of the other commercially important bast fibers [27].
Bamboo Fiber: Bamboo (Bambusa Shreb) is a perennial plant, which grows
up to 40 m in height in monsoon climates. A bamboo plant tends to reach its
mature size in six to eight months with some variation between species [28].
The diversity of bamboo is itself reflected by its number of species, there are
roughly 1000 species of bamboo found world wide. Bamboo grows very fast,
rather it is better to say extremely fast growing grass. Since ancient times
bamboo has been utilized in many Asian countries as well as South America
for centuries. Bamboo can be considered an ecological viable substitute for
takes almost more than 20 years [29].
Sisal Fiber: Sisal is an agave (Agave sisalana) and commercially produced in
Brazil and East Africa. Sisal fiber is one of the most widely used natural fibers
and is very easily cultivated, it has short renewal times and grows wild in the
hedges of fields and railway tracks. The sisal fibers have many advantages,
such as high tenacity and tensile intensity, abrasion resistance, acid and
alkali resistance, sea water resistance, corrosion resistance, and so on [30].
Abaca: The abaca/banana fiber, which comes from the banana plant, is
durable and resistant to seawater. Abaca, the strongest of the commercially
available cellulose fibers, is indigenous to the Philippines and is currently
produced there and in Ecuador. It was once the preferred cordage fiber for
marine applications [27].
Bagassase: Bagassase is the fibrous residue which remain after sugarcane
stalk are crushed to extract their juice. It is currently used as a renewable
natural fiber for the manufacture of composites materials [27].

Polymers from Renewable Resources, Vol. 7, No. 2, 2016 47

Kiran Rohit and Savita Dixit

Pineapple Leaf Fiber: Pineapple (Ananas comosus) is a tropical plant

native to Brazil. Pineapple leaf fiber is rich in cellulose, relatively inexpensive
and abundantly available. Furthermore, it has the potential for polymer
reinforcement. At present, pineapple leaf fibers are a waste product of pineapple
cultivation and therefore these relatively inexpensive pineapple fibers can be
obtained for this purpose [27].
Coir Fiber: Coir comes from the husk of coconut fruit fiber. Coir has more
life compared to other natural fibers due to its high lignin content [31, 32].
Among the natural fibers, the coir fiber has remarkable usefulness owing to
its hard wearing quality and high hardness (not fragile like glass fiber), good
acoustic resistance, moth-proof, non toxic, resistance to microbial and fungi
degradation, and not easily combustible [33]. The coir fibers are also more
resistant to moisture than other natural fibers and withstand heat and salt
water [34]. The coir fiber is a thick and coarse fiber obtained from the husk
of the fruit of the coconut tree (cocos nucifera), which grow extensively in
tropical countries. Although coconut palms grow throughout the world’s tropical
regions, the vast majority of the commercially produced coir fibers come from
Indonesia, Philippines, India, Brazil, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Vietnam, and Malaysia
[35]. Coconut trees are grown in an area in an area of about 12.05 million in
the world and the total production has been 61.1 million nuts per annum in
recent years [35]. Total world coir fiber production is 250,000 tons. The coir
fiber industry is important in some areas of the developing world. India, mainly
the coastal region of Kerala State, produces 60% of the total world supply of
white coir fiber. Sri Lanka produces 36% of the total world brown fiber output.
Over 50% of the coir fiber produced throughout the world is consumed in the
countries of origin, mainly India [36].The coir fiber is used for making a wide
variety of floor furnishing materials, yarns, ropes, mats, mattresses, brushes,
sacking, rugs, geo-textiles, and insulation panels. However, production of
these traditional coir products is approximately 450 thousand tons annually
which is only a small percentage of total world production of coconut husk
[37]. Table 2 summarizes the mechanical properties of selected natural fibers.

Structure and Composition of Natural Fibers

Plant fibers are composite materials designed by nature. The chemical
composition, as well as the structure of plant fibers, is fairly complicated.
The fibers are basically comprised of a rigid, crystalline cellulose microfibril
reinforced amorphous lignin, and/or hemicelluloses lignin, waxes and several
water-soluble compounds; where cellulose, hemicelluloses and lignin are the
major constituents [9]. The schematic representation of the natural plant cell
wall is shown in Figure 1. This structure often called the microfibril, microfiber,

48 Polymers from Renewable Resources, Vol. 7, No. 2, 2016

 A Review - Future Aspect of Natural Fiber Reinforced Composite

Table 2. Properties of selected natural and man-made fibers [2, 3, 5,

38, 39-41]
Fiber Density Elongation Tensile Strength Elastic Modulus
g/cm3 (MPa) (GPa)
Cotton 1.5-1.6 7.0-8.0 400 5.5-12.6
Jute 1.3 1.5-1.8 393-773 26.5
Flax 1.5 2.7-3.2 500-1500 27.6
Hemp 1.47 2-4 690 70
Kenaf 1.45 1.6 930 53
Ramie N/A 3.6-3.8 400-938 61.4-128
Sisal 1.5 2.0-2.5 511-635 9.4-22
Coir 1.2 30 593 4.0-6.0

Figure 1. The schematic picture of cell wall of natural plants [42]

or primary/elementary fiber [42]. The cell wall of a hollow tube with four different
layers; one primary cell wall, three secondary cell walls, and a lumen; which
is an open channel in the center of the microfibril.
Natural fibers can be considered as composites of hollow cellulose fibrils
held together by a lignin and hemicelluloses matrix [43]. The main component
of natural fibers are cellulose (α cellulose), hemicellulose, lignin, pectins,
and waxes. Cellulose is a natural linear crystalline polymer consisting of

Polymers from Renewable Resources, Vol. 7, No. 2, 2016 49

Kiran Rohit and Savita Dixit

D-anhydroglucose (C6H11O5) repeating units joined by 1-4 ß-D-glycosidic

linkages at C1 and C4 position. The hydrogen bonds play a major role in
directing the crystalline packing and also govern the physical properties of
cellulose. Hemicellulose differ from cellulose in three aspects. Firstly, they
contain several different sugar units such as xylose, mannose and galactose
whereas cellulose contains only 1,4,ß-D-glucopyranose units. Secondly, they
exhibit a considerable degree of chain branching containing pendantside
groups giving rise to its non crystalline nature, whereas cellulose is 10-100
times higher than that of hemicelluloses. Lignin is a complex hydrocarbon
polymer with both aliphatic and aromatic constituents. Lignin is generally
amorphous and hydrophobic in nature. It is believed that the structural units
of lignin, molecule are derivatives of 4-hydroxy-3-methoxy phenylpropane.
The properties of natural fibers can vary depending on the source, age and
separating technique of the fiber [44]. Table 3 [45-47] shows the range of the
average chemical constituents for a wide variety of plant types.

Table 3. The chemical composition of some common natural fibers

[45, 47]
Fiber Cellulose Hemicellulose Lignin Waxes
(wt%) (wt%) (wt%) (wt%)
Bagasse 55.2 16.8 25.3 -
Bamboo 26-43 30 21-31 -
Flax 71 18.6-20.6 2.2 1.5
Kenaf 72 20.3 9 -
jute 61-71 14-20 12-13 0.5
Hemp 68 15 10 0.8
Ramie 68.6-76.2 13-16 0.6-0.7 0.3
Abaca 56-63 20-25 7-9 3
Sisal 65 12 9.9 2
Coir 32-43 0.15-0.25 40-45 -
Wheat straw 38-45 15-31 12-20 -
Rice husk 35-45 19-25 20 14-17
Rice straw 41-57 33 8-19 8-38

Various Surface Treatment of Natural Fibers and Use

of Adhesion Promoters
The main disadvantage of natural fibers in reinforcement to composites
is the poor compatibility between fiber and matrix due to the hydrophilic
nature of fibers and hydrophobic nature of polymer macromolecules. This is
very important issue, since the simple addition of natural–organic fibers to a

50 Polymers from Renewable Resources, Vol. 7, No. 2, 2016

 A Review - Future Aspect of Natural Fiber Reinforced Composite

polymer matrix may lead to poor mechanical properties in comparison to the

neat polymer. Therefore, natural fiber modification is considered in modifying
the fiber surface properties to improve their adhesion with different matrices.
The main technique was summarized as follows [27, 48-60]:
Alkali Treatment (also called mercerization): It is one of the most used
chemical methods for natural fibers when used to reinforce thermoplastics
and thermosets. It removes a certain amount of Lignin, wax and oils covering
the external surface of the fiber cell wall. The important modification achieved
with alkaline treatment is the disruption of the hydrogen bonding in the network
structure, thereby increasing the surface roughness.
It is usually performed on short fibers, by heating at approx. 800C in 10%
NaOH aqueous solution for about 3 to 4 hrs then washing and drying in
ventilated oven. It allows disrupting fiber clusters and obtaining smaller and
better quality fibers. It should also improve fiber wetting.
Acetylation: It is another method of modifying the surface of natural fibers
and making them more hydrophobic. It involves the introduction of an acetyl
functional group into an organic compound. The main idea of acetylation is
to coat the OH groups of fibers which are responsible for their hydrophilic
character with molecules that have a more hydrophobic nature.
In acetylation the fibers are usually immersed in glacial acetic acid for 1 hr,
then immersed in a mixture of acetic anhydride and few drops of concentrated
sulphuric acid for few min, then filtrated, washed and dried in ventilated oven.
Benzylation: In this method the fibers are immersed in 10% NaOH and
then stirred with benzoyl chloride for 1 hr, filtrated, washed and dried, then
immersed in ethanol for 1 hr, rinsed and dried in oven. This method decreases
the hydrophilicity of the fibers.
Permanganate Treatment: In this method the fibers are immersed in a solution
of KMNO4 in acetone (typical concentration may range between 0.005 and
0.205%) for 1 min, then decanted and dried. Investigation shows a decreased
hydrophilic nature of the fibers upon perform this treatment.
Silane Treatment: In this method the fibers are immersed in a 3:2 alcohol-
water solution containing a silane based adhesion promoter for 2 hours at
pH ͌ 4, rinsed in water and oven dried. Silanes should react with the hydroxyl
groups of the fibers and improve their surface quality.
Peroxide Treatment: In this method the fibers are immersed in a solution of
dicumyl (or benzoyl) peroxide in acetone for about half an hour, then decanted
and dried. Recent studies have highlighted significant improvements in the
mechanical properties.

Polymers from Renewable Resources, Vol. 7, No. 2, 2016 51

Kiran Rohit and Savita Dixit

Enzyme Treatment: The use of enzymes technology is becoming increasingly

substantial for the processing of natural fibers. Currently, the use of enzymes
in the field of textile and natural fiber modification are also rapidly increasing.
A major reason for embracing this technology is the fact that the application of
enzymes is environmentally friendly. The reactions catalyzed are very specific
and have a focused performance.
Isocyanate Treatment: In this treatment isocyanate group can react with
the hydroxyl groups on fiber surface, thus improving the interface adhesion
with polymer matrix. The treatment is typically performance with isocyanate
compounds at intermediate temperature (around 500C) for approximately 1 h.
Plasma Treatment: It is another physical treatment method and is, similar to
corona treatment. The property of plasma is exploited by the method to induce
changes on the surface of a material. A variety of surface modification can be
achieved depending on the type and nature of the gases used. Reactive free
radicals and groups can be produced, the surface energy can be increased
or decreased and surface crosslinking can be introduced.
Esterification: Treatment with stearic acid, the acid is added to an ethyl
alcohol solution, up to 10% of the total weight of the fibers to be treated.
The obtained solution is thus added drop wise to the fibers, which are then
dried in oven.
TDI Treatment: In this method the fibers are immersed in chloroform with
a few drops of a catalyst (based on dibutyltin dilaurate) and stirred for 2 h
after adding toluene-2-4-di isocyanate. Finally, fibers are rinsed in acetone
and dried in oven.
Corona Treatment: It is one of the most interesting physical treatment
techniques for surface oxidation activation. This process changes the surface
energy of the cellulose fibers. Corona discharge treatment on cellulose fiber
and hydrophilic matrix was found to be effective for the improvement of the
compatibilization between hydrophilic fibers and a hydrophobic matrix.

Socio Economic and Environmental Effect of Natural

Fiber Composites
The production of synthetic fiber is capital intensive, and that of the natural
fiber is labor–intensive. In most part of the world, jute, rice husk, bamboo,
coconut, banana, flax, hemp, pineapple, sisal and wheat husk are cultivated
extensively but most of their wastes are abundant and do not have any useful
utilization. If the entrepreneurs take initiatives for the collection of these
agriculture wastes for NFRPCs, the urban people as well as rural uneducated

52 Polymers from Renewable Resources, Vol. 7, No. 2, 2016

 A Review - Future Aspect of Natural Fiber Reinforced Composite

people can be appointed for the production and extraction of natural fiber.
Some natural fibers (e.g. jute, coconut) can be extracted manually. Thus the
production and extraction of natural fibers involve huge human resources.
The new application of natural fibers may present an economic interest for the
whole agricultural sector as lot of employment opportunities in urban as well
as in rural sectors would be created by this natural fiber production project,
which in turn may enhance the poverty alleviation program for developing
and moderately developed countries.
The environmental impact, in fact can be improved mainly due to the reduction
in the use of fossil-based resources (especially petroleum). Furthermore,
if biodegradable polymers are used, fully biodegradable systems may be
obtained, thus significantly reducing the problems related to the everyday
production of solid, plastic-derived waste [61-64]. Natural fibers cultivation
depends mainly on solar energy, and relatively small amount of fossil fuel
energy may be required for the fiber production, processing and extractions.
While, on the other hand, the production of synthetic fiber production. Thus,
resulting in significantly higher amount of environmental pollution as compared
to natural fiber production [66, 67].

RESULTS

Table 4. Optimization of polyester wood flour polyester composite

without metakaolin
Composition % Tensile Flexural Flexural
P.E. W.F. Strength Strength Modulus
100 0 15.43 11.64 1523.23
95 5 16.23 12.35 1854.12
90 10 18.69 13.23 2012.36
85 15 19.65 14.14 2354.58
80 20 21.54 15.01 2598.10
75 25 23.67 16.85 2798.11
70 30 25.52 17.56 3065.32
65 35 28.98 18.23 3313.21
60 40 30.69 19.06 3673.63
55 45 25.52 17.23 3254.23

After the optimization all the sample were prepared in the ratio 60:40 and
found that the addition of metakaolin decreases the mechanical properties.

Polymers from Renewable Resources, Vol. 7, No. 2, 2016 53

Kiran Rohit and Savita Dixit

Table 5. Wood flour polyester filled with metakaolin

Composition % Tensile Flexural Flexural
Strength Strength Modulus
Polyester Wood flour Metakaolin MPa
60 30 10 23.69 17.25 2365.21
60 20 20 19.27 15.65 1523.12
60 10 30 10.9 13.67 979.89

Application of Natural Fiber Composites

Due to low density and satisfactorily high specific properties of natural fibers, the
composites based on natural fibers have very good implication in the automotive
and transportation industry. The first car maker to use polymers filled with natural
fiber was Mercedes-Benz in the 90s, by manufacturing door panels containing
jute fibers [68], already explored industrial application include window and door
frames, furniture, railroad sleepers, automotive panels and gardening items,
packaging, shelves and in general those application which do not require very
high mechanical resistance but, instead low purchasing and maintenance costs
[69-73]. Furthermore, it is possible and convenient to use recycled polymers in
place of virgin ones, thus assuring improved cost efficiency and introduced as
reinforcement in both thermoplastic and thermoset polymer based composites and
have found extensive applications in transportation (automobile and railway coach
interior, boat etc.), applications can be easily found on the technical literature and
on the internet; these include, for instance, indoor furniture panels, footboards and
platforms, automotive panels and noise insulating panels etc. mainly produced by
American, German, Japanese, British and Italian firms [68, 69, 70]. In particular,
the role of automotive industry in this field is of primary importance. Bulletproof
panels were made from ramie fiber reinforced composites by hand lay-up process
with epoxy as a matrix [71]. These prototype bulletproof panels were believed to
be lighter in weight and more economical than conventional bulletproof panels.

Conclusions
This review has provided a concise summary of the major material attributes
of natural fiber composites. These include: good specific – but variable –
mechanical properties, environmental credentials (renewable, biodegradable,
low embodied energy, non-toxic), Low cost, high water absorption, low durability
and biocompatibility. After reviewing the existing literature available on natural
fiber composite the particulate matter such as coconut coir, Lantana camara,
sisal have been already used.

54 Polymers from Renewable Resources, Vol. 7, No. 2, 2016

 A Review - Future Aspect of Natural Fiber Reinforced Composite

Nowadays a lot of attention is paid to environmentally-friendly materials. This

resulted in growing interest in natural lignocellulosic materials and composites
based on them. Inclusion of wood flour in polyester improved the load bearing
capacity (tensile strength) and the ability to withstand bending (flexural strength
and modulus) but with the incorporation of metakaolin in wood flour polyester
composite dramatically decrease the tensile, flexural modulus and strength
and increases the water absorption.
It is concluded from Table 4 and Table 5 that wood flour polyester composite is
used with some reinforcing material so that it would be helpful for the material
to increase its tensile and flexural strength and modulus.
Further research and investigation are required to overcome obstacles such as
moisture absorption, inadequate toughness, and reduced long-term stability
for outdoor application. Even now natural fiber composites have a potential
to be used in many application that do not require very high load bearing
capabilities or high temperature working capacity.

References
1. T. Prakash, ”Processing and characterization of natural fiber reinforced
polymer composites,“ Bachelor’s Thesis, National Institute of Technology,
Rourkela, 2009.

2. Li X., Tabil L.G., Panigrahi Screrar W.J., Biocomposites. Can Biosyst. Eng.,
8-148, 2009, 1-10.

3. Malkapuram R., Kumar V., Yuvraj Sn. J. Reinf. Plast. Compos., 28, 2008,
1169-89.

4. La Mantia F.P., Morreale M., Compos A: Applied Science Manufacturing,

42(6), 2011, 579-88.

5. Wambua P., Ivens J., Verpoest I., Composite Science Technology, 63, 2003,
1259-64.

6. Geethamma V.G., Kalaprasad G., Gabriel G., Sabu T., Composites, 36,
2005, 1499-506.

7. Bongarde U.S., Shinde V.D., International Journal of Eng. Sci. Innovation

Technology. 3, 2014, 431-436.

8. Rajesh Gunti and Ratna Prasad Atluri V., Advanced Materials Manufacturing
and Characterization, 3(1), 2013, 395-398.

9. Akil H.M., Omar M.F., Mazuki A.A.M., Safiee S., Ishak Z.A.M., Abu Bakar A.,
Material Design, 32, 2011, 4107-21.

Polymers from Renewable Resources, Vol. 7, No. 2, 2016 55

Kiran Rohit and Savita Dixit

10. M.P. Staiger, and N. Tucker, Natural-fiber composites in structural

applications. In: Pickering K., editor. Properties and performance of natural-
fibre composites. Cambridge, UK: Woodhead Publishing; 2008.

11. Hassan E., Wei Y., Jiao H., Huo Y.M., International Journal Eng. Science
and Technology, 4, 2012, 4429-39.

12. K. Charlet, C. Baley, C. Morvan, J.P. Jernot, M. Gomina, J. Breard, Composite

A: Applied Science Manufacturing, 38, 1912 (2007).

13. E. Bodros and C. Baley, Material Letters, 62, 2007, 2143-2145.

14. H.S. Sankari, Industrial Crops and Products, 11, 2000, 73-84.

15. Karnani R., Krishnan M., Narayan R., Polymer Engineering Science, 37,
1997, 476-83.

16. A.M.M. Edeerozey, H.M. Akhil, A.B. Azhar, M.I.Z. Ariffin, Material Letters, 61,
2007, 2023.

17. Aziz S.H., Ansell M.P., Clarke S.J., Panteny Sr., Composite Science
Technology, 65, 2005, 525-35.

18. Nishino T., Green Composites: polymer composites and the environment.
United Kingdom, 2004.

19. Webber III C.L., Bledsoe V.K., Kenaf yield components and plant composition.
Trends in new crops and new uses. Alexandria, VA, EUA:ASHS Press; 2002.
p.348-57.

20. Ayerza R., Coates W., Industrial Crops Products, 5, 1996, 223-8.

21. Ogobonnaya C., Roy–Macauley H., Nwalozie M., Annerose D., Industrial
Crops Products, 7, 1997, 9-18.

22. Lee S.A., Eiteman M.A., Industrial Crops Production, 13, 2001, 155-61.

23. A. Magurno, Die Angewandte Makromolekulare Chemie, 272, 1999, 99-

107.

24. Abhilash N. and Sivapragash M., International Journal of application or

innovation in engineering and management (IJAIEM), 2(1), 2013,53-59.

25. Siddiquee, American Journal of Engineering Research, (1), 2014, 200-206.

26. M.Q. Zhang, M.Z. Rong, and X. Lu, Composite Science and Technology,
65, 2005, 2514-2525.

27. E. Marsyahyo, Soekrisno H.S., B. Rochardjo, and Jamarsi, J. Indus. Text.,

38, (2008).

28. Omar Faruk, Andrzej K. Bledzki, Hans–Peter Fink, Mohini Sain, Prog. in Poly.
Sci., 37, 2012, 1552-96.

56 Polymers from Renewable Resources, Vol. 7, No. 2, 2016

 A Review - Future Aspect of Natural Fiber Reinforced Composite

29. X. Chen, Q. Guo and Y. Mi, Journal of Applied Polymer Science, 69, 1998,
1891-1899.

30. Lobovikov M., Shyam P., Piazza M., Ren H., Wu J., Non wood Forest products
18 world bamboo resources. A thematic study prepared in the framework
of the global forest resources assessment. Rome: Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations; 2007.

31. Y. Li, Y.W. Mai, and L. Ye, Composite Science Technology, 60, 2000, 2037-
2055.

32. Verma D., Gope P.C., Shandilya A., Gupta A., Maheshwari M.K., Journal of
Material Environment Science, 4, 2013, 263-276.

33. Khan Md Nuruzzaman, Roy K. Juganta, Akter Nousin, Zaman Haydar D.,
Islam Tuhidul, Open Journal of Composite Materials, 2, 2012, 40-47.

34. A.K. Mohanty, M. Misra, and L.T. Drzal, Natural fibers - Biopolymers and
Biocomposites, Boca Ranton, Taylor & Francis, 2005.

35. K.V. Rijswijk, W.D. Brouwer, and A. Beukers, ”Natural fiber Composites”, FAQ
Economic and Social Development Department, Rome, Italy, 2001.

36. R.N. Arancon, ”Natural fiber Production and Food Security: Coir in Asia and
the Pacific”, p.63, Asian and Pacific Coconut Community, Jakarta, 2007.

37. S. Harish, D. Peter Michael, A. Bensely, D. Mohan Lal, A. Rajadurai.

Mechanical Property evaluation of natural fiber coir composite. Materials
Characterization, 60, 2009, 44-49.

38. FAO, ”International Year of Natural Fibers, International year of Natural Fibers
Coordinating Unit, Trade and Markets Division, Rome, 2009.

39. Nabi Saheb D., Jog J.P., Natural fiber polymer composites: a review. Advance
Polymer Technology, 18, 1999, 351-63.

40. Ahmad I., Baharum A., Abdullah I., Effect of extrusion rate and fiber loading
on mechnanical properties of Twaron fiber-thermoplastic natural rubber
(TPNR) composites. Journal Reinforcement Plastic Composite, 25, 2006,
957-65.

41. Holbery J., Houston D., JOM, 58(11), 2006, 1627-1639.

42. Hajnalka H., Racz I., Anandjiwala R.D., Journal of Thermoplastic Composite
Material, 21, 2008, 165-74.

43. Rouison D., Sain M., Couturier M., Resin transfer molding of natural fiber
composites: cure simulation. Composite Science Technology. 64, 2004,
629-44.

44. Jayaraman K., Manufacturing sisal polypropylene composites with minimum

fiber degradation. Composite Science and Technology, 63, 2003, 367-74.

Polymers from Renewable Resources, Vol. 7, No. 2, 2016 57

Kiran Rohit and Savita Dixit

45. Singha A.S., Thakur V.K., Mechanical properties of natural fiber reinforced
polymer composites. Bulletin of Material Science, 31, 2008, 791-99.

46. Hattallia S., Benaboura A., Ham–Pichavant F., Nourmamode A., Castellan A.,
Polymer Degradation and Stability, 86, 2004, 567-657.

47. Hoareau W., Rindade W.G., Siegmund B., Castellan A., Frollini E., Sugar
cane bagasse and curaua linens oxidized by chlorine di oxide and reacted
with furfuryl alcohol: characterization and stability. Polymer Degradation and
Stability, 86, 2004, 567-657.

48. Marti Ferrer F., Vilaplana F., Ribes–Greus A., Benedito-Borras A., Sanz–Box
C., Flour rice husk as filler in block copolymer polypropylene: effect of different
coupling agents. Journal of Applied Polymer Science, 99, 2006, 1823-31.

49. Joseph K., Thomas S., Pavithran C., Effect of chemical treatment on the
tensile properties of short sisal fiber-reinforced polyethylene composites.
Polymer, 37, 1996, 5139-49.

50. Lovely M., Joseph K.U., Rani J., Isora fibers and their composites with natural
rubber. Prog Rubber Plastics Recycl. Technol., 20, 2004, 337-49.

51. Belgacem M.N., Bataille P., Sapieha S., J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 53, 1994, 379-
85.

52. Gassan J., Gutowski V.S., Compos. Sci. Technol., 60, 2000, 2857-63.

53. Khalil H.P.S.A., Ismail H., Rozman H.D., Ahmad M.N., European Polymer
Journal, 37, 2001, 1037-45.

54. Valadez-Gonzalez A., Cervantes–Uc J.M., Olayo R., Herrera–Franco P.J.,

Composite Part B, 30, 1999, 309-20.

55. Dipa R., Sarkar B.K., Rana A.K., Bose N.R. Bull. Mater. Sci., 24, 2001, 129-
35.

56. Samal R.K., Mohanty M., Panda B.B., J. Polym. Mater., 12, 1995, 235-40.

57. Raj R.G., Kokta B.V., Daneault C., Adhesive Science Technology, 3, 1989,
55-64.

58. Sapieha S., Allard P., Zhang Y.H., J. Applied Polymer Science, 41, 1990,
20339-48.

59. Dominkovics Z., Danyadi L., Pukanszky B., Composite Part A, 38, 2007,
1893-901.

60. Kalia S., Kaith B.S., Kaur I., Polymer Engineering Science, 49, 2009, 1253-
72.

61. Bledzki A.K., Mamun A.A., Jaszkiewicz A., Erdmann K., Composites Science
and Technology, 70, 2010, 854-60.

58 Polymers from Renewable Resources, Vol. 7, No. 2, 2016

 A Review - Future Aspect of Natural Fiber Reinforced Composite

62. Biswas S., Kindo S. and Patnaik A., Fiber. Polym., 12, 2011, 73-78.

63. Maleque M.A., Belal F.Y. and Sapuan S.M, Arab. J. Sc. Eng., 32(2B), 359-
364 (2007).

64. Acharya S.K., Mishra P. and Mehar, Bioresources, 6, 2011, 3155-3165.

65. Payae Y. and Lopattananon A., Journal of Science Technol., 31(2), 189-194
(2009).

66. Roe P.J. and Ansell M.P, J. Mater. Sci, 20, 4015-4020 (1985).

67. Devi L.U., Bhagawan S.S. and Thomas S., J. Appl. Polym. Sci, 64(9), 1739-
1748 (1997).

68. Srinivasababu N., Murali M.R.K. and Suresh K.J., Int. J. Eng. (IJE), 3(4),
2009, 403-412.

69. Rout J., Misra M., Tripathy S.S., Nayak S.K. and Mohanty A.K., J. Polym.
Compos, 22(4), 2001, 468-476.

70. Cao Y., Shibata S. and Fukumoto I., Compos. Part A-Appl. S, 37(3), 2006,
423-429.

71. Thielemans W., Can E., Morye S.S., and Wool R.P., J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 83,
2002, 323-331.

72. Joseph P.V., Kuruvilla J. and Thomas S, Compos. Sci. Technol., 59, 1625-
1640 (1999).

73. Kalaprasad G., Joseph K. and Thomas S., J. Mater. Sci., 32, 4261-4267.

74. Bing L. Yuhui H. and Guangmin C., J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 66, 1561-1568
(1997).

Polymers from Renewable Resources, Vol. 7, No. 2, 2016 59

Kiran Rohit and Savita Dixit

60 Polymers from Renewable Resources, Vol. 7, No. 2, 2016