A Review On OPEFB Fiber Polymer Composite Materials Vol. 31 Issue 12 Pg. 2079-2101 2010

A Review on Oil Palm Empty Fruit Bunch Fiber-Reinforced Polymer Composite Materials
Azman Hassan,1 Arshad Adam Salema,2 Farid Nasir Ani,2 Aznizam Abu Bakar1 1 Department of Polymer Engineering, Faculty of Chemical and Natural Resources Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, UTM 81310, Skudai, Johor Bahru, D Takzim, Malaysia
2
Department of Thermouid, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, UTM 81310, Skudai, Johor Bahru, D Takzim, Malaysia
Natural ber-reinforced polymer composite materials have emerged in a wide spectrum of area of the polymer science. The composite produced from these types of materials are low density, low cost, comparable specic properties, and most importantly they are environmental friendly. The composite materials produced from oil palm bers and commercially available polymers have offered some specic properties that can be comparable to conventional synthetic ber composite materials. However, these properties are greatly dependent on the compatibility of oil palm bers and matrix phase with moisture absorption as one of the critical issues that becomes the drawbacks of the oil palm ber polymer composite materials. Apparently, it greatly affects the physical as well as mechanical properties of the composite materials. The present review reports the work on oil palm empty fruit bunch (OPEFB) ber-reinforced polymer composites with some interest on the OPEFB physical structure, and chemical compositions. Finally, the incorporation of OPEFB into polymeric materials leads to several interesting consequences on the water absorption characteristics and the mechanical properties, which have been reviewed. POLYM. COMPOS., 31:20792101,
2010. 2010 Society of Plastics Engineers
INTRODUCTION During the past decades, natural bers have attracted the interest of material scientists, researchers, and industries because of their specic advantages as compared to conventional or synthetic bers. First and foremost is the environmental issue that is alarming the present scenario of the world. This issue is on the top of national and
Correspondence to: Arshad Salema; e-mail: arshadsalema@gmail.com Contract grant sponsor: Ministry of Higher Education (Malaysia); contract grant number: 78200. DOI 10.1002/pc.21006 Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com). C V 2010 Society of Plastics Engineers
international agenda. Hence, these natural or bio-based bers, which are biodegradable unlike the synthetic bers, have become the centre of attraction. In addition to this, low cost, low density, specic properties comparable to those of synthetic bers, ease of separation, carbon dioxide seizure, non-corrosive, reduced tool wear, reduced dermal and respiratory irritation [1, 2], have increased the interest in using natural or biobers with various available synthetic and natural polymeric materials. The applications of these biocomposites range from household to more sensitive and specialized areas such as in space and aircrafts. For example, glass bers are replaced with natural plant bers in some parts of [3] the car such as interior panels, etc. They also pointed out that even though natural bers enjoy some superior properties compared to synthetic bers, but they also suffer from serious problem such as polarity nature. The polarity characteristic creates incompatibility problems with many polymers. In addition to this, other study [4] has reported the limitations of poor resistance to moisture, limited processing temperature, and low dimensional stability. Hence, various chemical treatments [5] have been done to improve the adhesion or interfacial bonding between natural bers and polymers. Composites are termed as biocomposite materials when one of its phases either matrix (polymer) or reinforcement/ller (bers) comes from natural source. Plant bers including wood and non-wood such as cotton, ax, hemp, kenaf, etc., or by-products from crops comes under natural and renewable source acting as reinforcement or llers in biocomposite materials. Depending on the natural ber origin (seed, bast, leaf, and fruit), bast and leaf are the most commonly used in composite applications [6]. The mechanical strength of these natural bers is comparable to that of synthetic bers such as E-glass bers on a per weight basis [7]. Renewable or natural resins from vegetable oils and starches are gradually replacing the commonly used fossil fuel synthetic based polymers [8]. They
POLYMER COMPOSITES -2010
also have outlined the major factors inuencing the performance of the biocomposites materials, concluding that future prospect of these materials remains need of further research and development. However, the choice of suitable natural bers remains on many factors such as elongation at failure, thermal stability, adhesion of bers and matrix, dynamic and long-term behavior, nal price, and processing cost [9]. Keeping above in view and the factors such as easy availability, abundantly available resource and futuristic road to ease the commercialization, a comprehensive review has been outlined on the research and development activities done to date on OPEFB bers composite materials. The oil palm industries generate abundant amount of biomass say in million of tons per year [10], which when properly used will not only be able to solve the disposal problem but also can create value added products from these biomass. Oil palm empty fruit bunch (OPEFB) ber is one of the biomass that is presently used as a fuel in the oil palm mills itself for generation of energy. Attempts are also ongoing to convert the OPEFB bers into fertilizers for farms by burning them into ash, which is rich in potassium. However, this raise the issue of environmental pollution generated due to uncontrolled burning of OPEFB bers. The investigation of OPEFB bers characteristics such as physical and mechanical has led to diversify there applications in the area of composite materials as well. OPEFB bers have depicted a great potential in use as a reinforcing materials in a polymers [10]. This is because, Malaysia and its surrounding South East Asian countries generates large amount of OPEFB ber as waste, as mentioned earlier. Further, these OPEFB bers show specic properties that can be used by reinforcing them with polymers to develop biocomposite materials. Conversely, if these bers are not used resourcefully, it may not only lead to disposal problem and consequently the environmental problems, but could also result in forfeiture of substantial economic value, which would have been induced by its suitable applications. Hence, palm oil producing countries, in particular, can generate revenue out of this waste product which till date is considered to be challenging. The sustainable, non-hazardous, non-carcinogenic, eco-friendly, biodegradable product developed from these bers will surely benet the human kind across the globe in broad-spectrum. To our knowledge, at commercial level, companies such as Sabutek Sdn. Bhd. situated in Perak state and Ecofuture Berhad in Johore state of Malaysia are manufacturing value added products such as for packing from OPEFB bers [11, 12]. Research activities are being carried out at universities and other research institutes as well. But the pace of the activities was found to be gradual and conned. Despite many efforts, hitherto the OPEFB bers have not achieved total commercialization. One of the major reasons is the hydrophilic nature of the bers. This can lead to separation of the matrix and ber phase in the composite materials after
2080 POLYMER COMPOSITES -2010
aging due to poor adhesion between the resin matrix and the bers. Similar observation has been suggested for other natural bers such as jute ber [13]. OPEFB bers are yet to be fully used economically because of consuming unproductive cost and energy while handling it in oil palm mills. However, this waste" or by-product from the palm oil mills, which was once viewed as embarrassing liabilities are now viewed as co-products of increasing potential value due to continual effort of research and development on its applications. This will serve to promote a zero-waste" concept. Current effort on R&D for OPEFB bers and other natural bers is to minimize the production of greenhouse gasses (GHG) and all existing practices in the eld are being examined. Certainly, the reduction of GHG will assist in slowing down of climate change and reducing the carbon footprints. For example, over the past decades, the OPEFB bers have been studied for manufacturing composite materials using different synthetic polymers for instance polypropylene [14], polyester [15], poly(vinyl chloride) [16], polyurethane [17], and phenol formaldehyde [18]. Basically, in these research works, the polymeric resins were just used as binder. To our knowledge, until this article, no study was found where OPEFB ber was reinforced with natural resins or bioresin. Extensive studies based on these OPEFB bers polymer composite materials have been reported in the literature as shown in Table 1 with classication of polymers. The researchers have focused their studies on different investigations such as water absorption, thermal stability, physical and mechanical properties, and the effect of pre-treating the OPEFB bers to conrm the suitability of OPEFB ber as a reinforcing material in a different polymer matrix. Very recently, a comprehensive and general review article dealing with study on various aspects of cellulosic biobers and biocomposite materials was published [19]. The overview on biocomposite science and technology, its environmental issues and market potential were found in the literature [8]. In year 2000 and 2004, a review article [20] about structural discussion on certain biobers, biodegradable polymers, and biocomposites, and an overview article [21] on pineapple leaf and sisal ber and their biocomposite reinforced with thermoset and thermoplastic polymers was published, respectively. Nevertheless, a specic review article on OPEFB ber polymer composite materials including both thermoplastic and thermosets polymers have not been published so far to our knowledge. Indeed, it becomes essential to assess the previous and ongoing research for OPEFB ber polymer composite materials. This will surely enable the researchers, materialist, industrialists, scientist, and upcoming experts to establish the lag in till date research work and nd approach for futuristic development for OPEFB ber polymer composite materials. This might even open room for development of other natural ber polymeric composite materials.
DOI 10.1002/pc
TABLE 1.
Polymers reinforced with OPEFB bers with classication. Thermoplastics
Semi-crystalline High-density polyethylene (HDPE) Low-density polyethylene (LDPE) Linear low-density polyethylene (LLDPE) Polyamide (PA) Polybutylene terephthalate (PBT) Polyether ether ketone (PEEK) Polyoxymethylene (POM) Polyporpylene (PP) Polyphenylene sulde (PPS)
Amorphous Acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS) Cellulose acetae (CA) Cellulose acetate butyrate (CAB) Cellulose proprionate (CP) Polycarbonate (PC) Polyether sulfone (PES) Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) Polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) Polyphenylene oxide (PPO) Polystyrene (PS) Polysulfone (PSU) Polyvinyl chloride (PVC) Styrene acrylonitrile (SAN)
Elastomeric Ethylene-propylene-diene terpolymer (EPDM) Ethylene-propylene terpolymer (EPT) Nitrile butadiene rubber (NBR) Styrene-butadiene styrene (SBS) Thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU) Natural rubber SMR L
Thermosets Diallyl phthalate (DAP) Melamine formaldehyde (MF) Phenol formaldehyde (PF) Urea formaldehyde (UF) Epoxy (EP) Unsaturated polyester (UP) Polyurethane
Studies on OPEFB bers reinforced with these polymers have been done.
This review deals with the work of OPEFB ber polymer composite materials including both thermoplastic and thermosets polymers. Earlier section of the article introduces the OPEFB bers in terms of its types, physical characteristics, structure, and chemical composition. Whereas the later section of the article addresses the issues on OPEFB bers polymer composites. A particular attention has been given on the effect of reinforcing OPEFB bers with different polymers (thermoplastics and thermosets) on the water absorption characteristics and mechanical properties. OIL PALM FIBERS It was of importance to describe the types of OPEFB ber and its basic fundamental properties before going into the details of it and its composite materials. Generally, the fundamental properties of the materials can give a far insight in developing the nal products with a desired property for a specic application. This knowledge also helps in industrial processing and potential use in value-added products [22]. Empty fruit bunch and the OPEFB ber are shown in Fig. 1.
Types of Oil Palm Fibers Oil palm bers are derived from two sources of oil palm tree, that is, OPEFB and mesocarp. Among these, OPEFB bers as shown in Fig. 1b are the most commonly used for composite materials and various other applications. This is because of OPEFB consist of a bunch of bers which is readily available and at low cost [10]. OPEFB bers are extracted by retting process from empty fruit bunch whereas mesocarp bers are waste materials left after the oil extraction that needs cleaning process before its nal usage. Hereafter, the article deals with the OPEFB bers polymer composite materials.
Physical Characteristics and Structure of the OPEFB Fiber The structure and contents of the natural ber cell wall depends widely on types of species and the parts of the plants where they originate [23]. OPEFB bers are lignocellulosic bers where the cellulose and hemicellulose are reinforced in a lignin matrix similar to that of other natural bers. Cellulose, hemicellulose, and lignin that forms major constituents of the natural bers might differ (see Table 2) depending on plant age and growth conditions, soil conditions, weather effect, and testing methods used. As the chemistry of the natural bers is depended on plant they grow, it changes during the course of growth [26]. The properties of the bers such as tensile strength, exural strengths, and rigidity depend on the alignment of cellulose brils, which are generally arranged along the ber length [19]. The cellulosic brils run parallel to each other and form a crystalline structure in addition to some amorphous regions. Electron microscopy observations [25] showed that the cell walls of the biomass ber including
POLYMER COMPOSITES -2010 2081
FIG. 1. (a) OPEFB and (b) OPEFB bers. [Color gure can be viewed in the online issue, which is available at wileyonlinelibrary.com.]
DOI 10.1002/pc
TABLE 2. Chemical composition of oil palm bers from different researchers. Reference Hill and Abdul Khalil [24] Rozman et al. [10] Sabutek [11] Abdul Khalil et al. [25]a Sreekala and Thomas [18]
a
Hemicellulose (%) 22 17.1 68.3 83.5
Cellulose (%) 48 47.9 41.9 49.8 65
Lignin (%) 25 24.9 13.2 20.5 19
Location Malaysia Malaysia Malaysia Malaysia India
Oil palm ber from oil palm fond.
OPEFB bers are composed of two main layers or walls. The transverse section of OPEFB ber cell wall structure is shown in Fig. 2a and b. The secondary (S1, S2, and S3) thick wall is embedded in a primary wall and consists of sub-secondary three layers. This layer consists different orientation of cellulose brils. The observations [25] proved the similarity in structure between OPEFB bers and coconut coir bers. Similar observations reported [10, 27] that the OPEFB bers are hard, tough, and analogous to that of coir bers in structure. Moreover, the crystal and amorphous nature of OPEFB ber cell structure also plays an important role in determining the mechanical properties of the nal composite products. This is because of the crystal region that gives the maximum value for the specimen modulus of materials [23]. Studies [22, 25] have reported the morphological and other detailed characteristics of the OPEFB bers. The results of these studies in connection with physical and mechanical properties of the OPEFB bers polymer composite material are needed to be explored. This is because the mechanical properties of the natural bers are dependent on the complex relations between external variables and intrinsic structural parameters that are at molecular, macro-molecular, and microscopic level [28]. Fibers from oil palm biomass are in the form of thread-like bundles. However, after processing, physically OPEFB bers are available in long as well as in short length of about 5060 mm and 1030 mm, respectively. Average ber diameter is around 200 lm. Table 3 shows the average diameter of commonly used natural bers. Except oil palm, coconut, and bagasse all other bers are
thin in width or diameter. A recent study by Mohamed Yusoff [37] has revealed the effect of single OPEFB ber diameter on the tensile property. Lengthwise, OPEFB ber is between hardwood and softwood [10]. The lengthweighted ber length of the OPEFB ber obtained directly from oil palm mill was about 0.99 mm [22]. The length to diameter ration also called as aspect ratio of ber has signicant effect on the properties of nal composite materials. The aspect ratio of OPEFB ber for various length and diameter is as shown in Table 4 in comparison with other natural bers. Flax and hemp showed highest aspect ratio, possibly may present higher mechanical properties compared to other natural bers. Aspect ratio in parallel with mechanical property of the OPEFB ber can be improved by decreasing its diameter via physical, chemical, or thermal treatments. Numerous physical as well as chemical treatments for natural bers are reviewed [38], which could modify the structural and surface properties of the bers, consequently improving the interfacial bonding with the polymer matrix. An increase (25%) in aspect ratio of bagasse from 18.63 to 23.41 using alkali treatment (1% conc.), improved the tensile and exural properties by 14% and 16%, respectively [39]. This was due to enhancement in aspect ratio by decreasing the diameter of the ber resulting in a better adhesion between ber and matrix. Similarly, the effect of aspect ratio on the mechanical properties for various types of natural bers such as wood, rice husk, straw leaf, straw stem, whole straw reinforced with HDPE was done [40]. They found an improvement in mechanical properties of the composite materials. However, to our
TABLE 3. Average diameter of natural bers. Fibers Oil palm (long) Oil palm (short) Oil palm (EFB) Banana Sisal Pineapple leaf Ramie Coconut Bagasse Jute Hemp Flax Diameters (lm) 358 151 300 120 6 5 205 6 4 50 6 6 34 397 399 20200 31.2 6 5 19 References [29] [29] [30] [31] [31] [31] [32] [33] [33] [34] [35] [36]
FIG. 2. Transverse section of oil palm ber cell wall structure [15] (ML, middle lamella; P, primary wall; S1, S2, and S3, secondary wall sublayers).
-2010 2082 POLYMER COMPOSITES
DOI 10.1002/pc
TABLE 4. Aspect ratio of oil palm and other natural bers. Length (L) (mm) Diameter (D) (mm) Aspect ratio (L/D)
Fiber type Oil palm bers Short* (Average) (Range)
17.5 10 20 30 142.3 100 200 300 50 45 20 50 80 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50
0.1515 0.12 0.15 0.16 0.358 0.105 0.358 0.777 0.2 0.15 0.08 0.15 0.25 0.205 0.05 0.034 0.397 0.399 0.100 0.031 0.019
115.5 83 133 187 397.5 952 558 386 250 300 250 333 320 244 1000 1470 126 125 500 1612 2631
Long (Average) (Range)
polymer composite materials involves the effect of ber loading or content, physical, chemical, or thermal treatments of bers, treatment of matrix, using coupling agents, etc. Few have focused on the effect of aspect ratio or geometry of the bers on the mechanical and physical properties of the natural ber polymer composite materials. Hence, controlling the physical characteristics such as length, diameter, and surface of OPEFB bers has revealed momentous changes in the physical as well as mechanical properties of the composite materials. Chemical Composition Another important internal structural component besides physical characteristics of ber that affect the overall performance of the natural ber polymer composite materials is the chemical compositions. All the nature bers consist of basic chemical building block of cellulose, hemicellulose, and lignin with varying proportions. Other components such as pectins and waxes are also present in minor quantities in the brous materials. The characteristics of cellulose, hemicellulose, and lignin and others are documented [44] and it does not need to be explained further. Generally, the OPEFB ber contains about 4050% cellulose, 2030% hemicellulose, and 2030% lignin with moisture content of about 1015%. Table 2 shows the chemical composition of OPEFB bers reported by different researchers within Malaysia and India. This shows a variation in chemistry of the OPEFB bers within the same region as well as outside the regional borders. Hence, the formation of internal chemical structure of the natural bers totally depends on the geographical and the soil conditions with other factors. Similar variation in chemical composition was observed in jute and kenaf bers [45] and other natural bers [46] based on regional and different researcher observations. Particularly, the percentage of cellulose can vary depending on the species and the age of the plant. Abdul Khalil [25] revealed that OPEFB ber from oil palm fond contain highest composition of hemicellulose compared to coir, pineapple, banana, and even soft and hardwood bers. Lignin which is also responsible for tough and stiffness properties of the ber was lower than coir bers, but still higher than other bers. In addition, the OPEFB ber contains minor components of arabinose, xylose, mannose, galactose, silica, copper, calcium, manganese, iron, and sodium. Researchers [22] have done the detailed study on the chemical composition of the OPEFB bers. They found that large number of silica bodies were attached to the surface of the OPEFB bers. According to them, this may complicate the pulping and bleaching process of the OPEFB bers because the inorganic metals and substance might react with the chemicals used for treatment, which may possibly create undesirable results. Comparative study is still lacking in the literature to show the effect of inorganic materials attached to the OPEFB
General Banana (Average) (Range)
Sisal (Average) Pineapple leaf (Average) Ramie (Average) Coconut (Average) Bagasse (Average) Jute (Average) Hemp (Average) Flax (Average)
knowledge, till date, no such detailed study has been performed for OPEFB bers reinforced polymer composite materials except the research work [37] whereby the effect of aspect ratio for OPEFB bers was taken into account to observe the young modulus only. In this study [37], about 67% decrease in aspect ratio caused a signicant decrease in Youngs modulus of OPEFB bers. As the natural ber polymer composite materials undergoes several process steps before nal products, the aspect ratio or the geometry of the bers usually gets altered. Such modication can take place during processing (injection, extrusion, etc.), swelling due to exposure to certain compounds including water or change in cellulosic structure due to chemicals [41]. Joseph [42] reported that maintaining the ber geometry during processing of natural ber polymeric composite materials is vital, in view of the fact that it has considerable effect on the property of nal composite material. They even proposed the ber aspect ratio to be in the range of 100200 for optimum results. Property such as fracture in the composite materials is also governed by aspect ratio of the bers [43] and is dened by critical ber length. Most of the research work for natural bers
DOI 10.1002/pc
FIG. 3. Properties of lignocellulosic materials [17].
bers on the chemical treatment. However, to how much extent this inorganic components can impede the nal properties of the biocomposite materials are still unknown. Besides this, OPEFB ber contains about 1.5 2.5% of ash with carbon (4550%) and oxygen (4448%) as main constituents following the silica of about 56% and others such as magnesium, calcium, and potassium in minor quantities. The properties and amount of each lignocellulosic components contribute to the properties of the ber as well as the composite materials. For example, the hydrophilic nature of the cellulose causes the absorption of water in the ber. This forms a major drawback for the natural bers since the interfacial bonding with matrix weakens resulting in a poor physical and mechanical properties of composite materials. This forms one of the major disadvantages of the natural bers reinforced polymer composite materials. Properties such as biodegradation, moisture absorption [45], and thermal degradation are shown by hemicellulose. On the other hand, lignin is thermally stable and protects the further degradation of biocomposite materials thermally. However, it is susceptible to photochemical degradation caused due to ultraviolet light [45]. Once this lignin gets degrade, the inner content becomes more prone to degradation and physically the ber starts losing the surface characteristics. The inuence of these components on the properties of the natural ber polymer composite materials is shown in Fig. 3. This clearly shows that the lignocellulosic components of the ber play a major role in determining the mechanical and physical properties of the bers. Hence, the modication of these components (cellulose, hemicellulose, and lignin)
was the focus of the research work until date to enhance the mechanical and other properties of the OPEFB ber polymer composite materials. The chemical route to modify the natural bers was found to be the most commonly used technique. The degree of polymerization (DP) determines the mechanical properties of the bers [47] and the degradation of cellulose caused by physical, chemical, or radiation damage can be assessed with the help of DP value [46]. As the structure of the natural bers components such as cellulose, hemicellulose, and lignin almost remains the same, the DP is reported [13] to differ. To our knowledge, a deep understanding of DP for OPEFB bers is still lacking in the literature. Further, its effect on the physical as well as mechanical properties needs to be evaluated. Of all the above, the OPEFB bers has very complex chemical structure which is yet to be established in detail. The deep understanding of various characteristics of OPEFB bers will improve its applicability and design criteria of composite materials with different polymeric resins. Various advantages of the OPEFB bers have been mentioned, but they also show some weakness. Nevertheless, most of its inadequacy can be prevailed through suitable treatments. Another advantage of natural bers over synthetic is the buckling during processing and fabrication rather than breaking [19]. Further, they also have reported that cellulose in the natural ber possesses a attened oval shape that is suitable for high stress due to higher aspect ratio. The present review article attempts to cover the various polymeric materials reinforced with OPEFB ber and its mechanical and water absorption properties.
DOI 10.1002/pc
OPEFB FIBER-REINFORCED THERMOPLASTIC POLYMERS Polypropylene Effect on Water Absorption. The hydroxyl group de facto is the main chemical entity for the attraction of water molecules in the natural bers. Another is the physical nature of the natural bers such as amorphous and crystalline regions plays an important role in diffusion of water in the bers with later region showing less water intake because of its relatively close packing of molecules [46]. Water absorption for different mesh size OPEFB ber lled PP (treated with maleic anhydride) composite material was measured [14]. The composite samples were periodically taken out of the water and its absorption rate was measured and was immediately immersed in the water for further evaluation. As the immersion time increased, the water absorption for untreated and treated OPEFB-PP composite material increased to a certain value and thereon remained plateau. Treated composite materials displayed lower water intake compared to untreated composite. The overall reduction in water absorption was found to be about 10% in maleic anhydride treated OPEFB bers as compared to untreated bers. This also depends on the ller size. As the lignocellulosic constituents of OPEFB bers are responsible for water absorption because of their hydroxyl groups, chemical treatment replaces these hydroxyl groups with hydrophobic groups and also form protective layer thus preventing any further intake of water. Fiber size also plays a role in low intake of water, for example in case of [14] 80 mesh size OPEFB ber lled PP composite materials showed about 55% lower water absorption rate for treated and about 25% lower for untreated composite materials as compared to 60 mesh ber size, respectively. For the same ber size, the water absorption rate was about 27% less in case of 60 mesh size treated bers and around 56% less in case of 80 mesh size treated OPEFB ber lled PP composite materials. This depicts that smaller ber size results in strong adhesion between ber-matrix which reduces any possible voids or gaps that might form capillary for water absorption in composite materials. However, the authors [14] have not mentioned the detail reasons for this effect. OPEFB berspolypropylene composite materials was produced by two compounding techniques and pre-treating the bers with Epolene 43 and poly propylene acrylic acid as compatibilizers and with 3-aminopropyltriethoxysilane as coupling agent [48]. Epolene 43 is maleic anhydride modied polypropylene (PP). The results of this study depicted that a slight reduction in water absorption was attributed by 3-aminopropyltriethoxysilane compared to other two compatibilizers. Overall, the improvement in water resistance was insignicant compared to previous study by the same author [14]. The rate of water resistance in case of polypropylene acrylic acid treated bers
DOI 10.1002/pc
was poor compared to 3-aminopropyltriethoxysilane treated bers. This shows the afnity of acrylic acid towards the water molecules. In another study [49], the effect of three coupling agents, namely Epolene 43, polymethylene polyphenyl isocyanate, and 3-trimethoxysilyl-propylmethaacrylate on the water absorption characteristics by OPEFB bers polypropylene composites was studied. The effect of ber loading in conjunction with concentration of chemicals used as coupling agents to modify the OPEFB bers was also taken into account. Apparently, the results showed reduction in water absorption for all the chemical treated bers. However, the water absorption rate was higher in case of higher loaded OPEFB ber in the composite material. The reason behind this was the higher possibility of water absorption by hydrophilic nature of bers, which proportionally increases the rate of water absorption with higher ber loading. PP shows very negligible or no water absorption [50] and hence, it can be assumed that 99.9% of water is absorbed by OPEFB bers. This can also be conrmed by studies performed for other natural bers reinforced with PP such as wood ber/PP composites [51], sisal ber PP composites [52], and ax ber/PP composites [53]. In fact, it has been reported [52], PP showed negligible evidence of water absorption even at higher temperatures of about 908C. The increase in concentration of chemicals for modication of bers conrmed increase in reduction of water absorption but approximately in range of 0.10.5%, which can be considered as nominal effect. Interestingly, the water absorption characteristics as shown in Fig. 4ac illustrates that higher ber loading with increased chemical concentration results in more resistance in uptake of water as was seen in case of 3-trimethoxysilyl-propylmethaacrylate and polymethylene polyphenyl isocyanate treated bers. In general, the reduction in water absorption for different chemicals treated bers followed the order: Epolene 43 [ 3-trimethoxysilyl-propylmethaacrylate [ polymethylene polyphenyl isocyanate. This variation in water absorption might be attributed either due to the nature of the chemicals or the replacement of functional groups during the reaction of bers with chemicals. Comparatively, maleic anhydride treated OPEFB bersPP composite [14] revealed high resistance to water than other chemical treatments. Likewise, in case of maleated PP reinforced with wood ber showed $38% decrease in water intake compared to untreated composites [51]. This clearly shows that chemical used for ber modications play an important role in determining the water absorption rate for composite materials. Nevertheless, other factors such as ller size, ber loading, chemical concentration, and temperature at which the treatment is done equally contribute in dening the water absorption characteristics. Tajvidi [50] reported that the water absorption depended on the type of natural bers reinforced with PP and order was kenaf [ newsprint [ wood
FIG. 4. OPEFB berpolypropylene composite treated with (a) epolene 43; (b) 3-trimethoxysilyl-propylmethaacrylate; and (c) polymethylene polyphenyl isocyanate [20].
our [ rice hulls at 50 wt% ber loading. Not only this factors but also compounding techniques such as extrusion, two-roll mills, etc., with the shape and size of the bers plays a role in water absorption characteristics [51]. It was observed that the amount of water absorption for OPEFB ber/PP composite was almost near to that of kenaf ber/PP [50] as well as hardwood ber/PP [51] at 50% ber loading. Moreover, Tayang [54] have investigated the effect of amorphous and crystallinity on the rate of water absorption by natural bers such as banana, ramie, abaca, maguey, and kenaf. They concluded that the water intake is linearly dependent on the amorphous region or content of the natural bers. Finally, the dimensional stability of the composite materials greatly depends on the amount of water or moisture absorbed, hence the thorough understanding of the effect of water absorption on the properties of the composite is vital.
TABLE 5. Percentage gain in exural and impact properties for treated OPEFB llerPP composites at 40% ller loading and ller size of Mesh 80 [14]. Chemical concentration (%) 5 Flexural strength (MPa) Flexural modulus (GPa) Flexural toughness (KPa) Impact strength (J/m) 105 36 70 13 10 123 40 120 42 15 135 59 125 44
Effect on Mechanical Properties. The effect of maleic anhydride (MAH) on OPEFB ber lled with PP composites was studied [14] to determine the mechanical properties. Flexural strength, modulus, and toughness increased for OPEFB lledPP composite material treated with MAH as shown in Table 5. This improvement was due to good adhesion and compatibility between MAH treated OPEFB llers and PP matrix. Because maleic anhydride provides polar acidbase interactions and can bound with hydroxyl group of the natural bers covalently [55]. On the other hand, increase in ller size has reverse effect on the mechanical properties, except that for exural toughness, which showed signicant increase as shown in Table 6. This indicates that OPEFB bers are tough in nature and it increases overall toughness of the composite materials. Flexural toughness increased considerably for MAH treated OPEFB ber lled with PP composite
TABLE 6. Percentage increase in exural properties for MAH-treated (10% chemical concentration) OPEFB llerPP composite at 40% ller loading [14]. Mesh 60 Flexural strength (MPa) Flexural modulus (GPa) Flexural toughness (kPa) Impact strength (J/m) 52 65 75 76 Mesh 80 123 41 125 44 Mesh 100 82 55 160 27
DOI 10.1002/pc
FIG. 5. Impact strength of rubber-lled HDPE composite materials (a) without coupling agents and (b) with coupling agents (TPM, trimethoxysilyl propyl methacrylate; APE, aminopropyl triethoxysilane) [21].
materials as compared to exural strength and modulus with varying ller size. Similar study [56] was done in more detailed for rubber ber and powder form ller in HDPE composites. It was found that rubber bers lled HDPE composites do not show good exural strength as compared to rubber powder lled HDPE composite materials. The reason stated by the researchers was the uniform dispersion of rubber powder llers in the polymer matrix as compared to rubber bers. Moreover, bers with higher degree of lignin tend to agglomerate which may subsequently create discontinuity in the matrix and stress concentration points in the composite materials. The impact strength was found to decrease in rubber HDPE composite materials, but llers with powder form depicted higher impact strength than that of rubber bers. This was due to higher surface area produced by powder form than ber which may resist the crack propagation. From our knowledge, analogous assumption could be proposed for OPEFBPP composite materials where impact strength was found to decrease as the ller size was increased as shown in Table 6. Overall, two factors were mainly emphasized for improvement in mechanical properties. First, the adhesion property between bers and matrix phase and second, the dispersion or uniformity of llers. Former factor is enhanced by either pre-treating the bers with chemical or by addition of coupling agents. As can be noticed (see Fig. 5) from the study of Rozman [56] the prole of impact strength before and after the addition of coupling agents. This conrms that the tendency of agglomeration or non uniformity and poor adhesion can be reduced to a greater extent with the help of coupling agents. The later can be improved through proper selection and care during processing techniques for composite materials. Cellulose derived from OPEFB was reinforced with PP to form composite as a potential material in packaging, building products, furniture, consumer goods, and automotive industries [57]. The mechanical properties such as tensile, exural, and impact tests for this composite was
DOI 10.1002/pc
compared with that of as received OPEFB bers reinforced with PP composite. Cellulose as well as OPEFB bers were treated with alkali (NaOH) solution prior to preparation of composite materials. Pure cellulose and OPEFB bers were blended with PP at different ratios using twin-screw compounder. PPcellulose composite was found to have higher tensile strength compared to OPEFB berPP composite for ber loading above 20%. This was also observed in case of brous cellulose ber reinforced with PP with different compatibilizers [58]. In general, increase of ber or ller loading in composite materials decreases the tensile strength. However, in case of cellulosePP composite materials an opposite trend was observed, that is, an increase in tensile strength with ller loading. Flexural modulus was seen increasing steadily with ller content. For 17.5% chemical treated OPEFB ller and 40% ber loading the exural modulus was about 2.75 GPa as compared to 3.6 GPa for previous study [14]. This also conrms that maleic anhydride treatment was more effective than alkali treatment. However, cellulosePP composite material showed similar value of modulus to that obtained by Rozman [14]. Similarly, the impact strength in case of maleic anhydride treated OPEFB berPP composite was much higher compared to alkali treated OPEFB llerPP composite. However, PPcellulose composite showed high impact strength compared to untreated OPEFB ber PP composite. High crystallinity brous cellulose of about 95% crystalline reinforced with PP showed nearly 25% lower tensile strength compared to neat PP [59]. However, it was increased by using MAPP compatibilizer. OPEFB berPP composites were produced using treated and untreated maleated PP (MAPP). In this work [60], the PP was grafted with maleic anhydride to form maleated PP with different proportions of PP and maleic anhydride. The ber loading was varied in the composite materials in the range of 2060%. The mechanical properties such as exural and impact were enchanced by treating PP with maleic anhydride and higher improvement in
properties was noted for higher maleated PP. Nevertheless, the properties were observed to decrease with increase in ber loading except exural modulus. The reason behind this was the formation of hydrogen bond, which reduced the ability to resists the stress transmitted to the ller or ber from the matrix. Moreover, according to researchers [59] maleic anhydride moieties present in MAPP can effectively interact with free OH group present in the bers. Hence, when the ber loading was increased the number of OH group apparently increased with the constant MAPP amount causing poor interfacial bounding. An improvement in tensile and exural property of kenaf/ PP composite was reported by the addition of small amount of MAPP [55]. Numerous researchers have applied MAPP as compatibilizer either for modication of matrix [53] or ber surface [61]. Nevertheless, the later authors have claimed that MAPP grafting of bers are industrially impracticable because of high expenses. Poly(vinyl chloride) PVC is usually reinforced with inorganic materials such as glass bers, calcium carbonate, and talc. However, these types of llers are characterized as high density materials which might increase the overall density of the composite materials. Hence, natural bers are gaining importance as an alternative to synthetic llers. The important aspect in the development of PVC composites by using natural bers was to achieve good combinations of properties at an economical way. PVC is found in different forms such as PVC rigid and plasticized PVC. Each has its own characteristics and differs from one another. However, among these categories, PVC rigid and plasticized PVC are used in many applications. The study of OPEFB bers reinforced with PVC was studied by present authors [16, 62] that are presented in this article. Besides OPEFB ber, other natural bers reinforced with PVC are wood [6365], bamboo and pine our [66], rice straw [67], sisal [68], sugarcane bagasse [69], and coconut [70]. Effect on Water Absorption. To our knowledge, till date, there has been no study found on the water absorption characteristics for PVC reinforced with OPEFB bers. This surely needs to be explored with its affect on mechanical and physical properties in the composite materials. Because most of the polymers particularly thermoplastics are non-polar, that is, hydrophobic in nature [71], thus, neat PVC absorbs very negligible or no water. It was reported by a company that PVC absorbed about 0.05% of water after 24 h at room temperature [72]. Hence, it can be assumed that all the water will be absorbed by the bers in the natural ber reinforced with PVC polymeric matrix. Nevertheless, the rate of absorption while using PVC as polymeric resin with OPEFB bers is needed to be investigated. This is because in the high humidity regions such as Malaysia, use of natural ber polymer composite materials for the nal application
TABLE 7. Water absorption property of steam-exploded wood our ber reinforced with PVC polymer [73]. Types of SE-wood our Beech Japanese cedar Red meranti Beech Japanese cedar Red meranti Beech Japanese cedar Red meranti Fiber/SE/polymer ratio (7/0/3) 6/1/3 Water absorption % (15.92) 13.89 10.09 22.26 15.1 7.2 11.88 10.62 6.44 11.33
5/2/3
4/3/3
must be done cautiously, because it can easily deteriorate the composite material by absorbing the moisture from the environment and even due to the weather condition. However, natural bers other than OPEFB ber reinforced with PVC composites are presented to get some insight about water absorption characteristics. PVC reinforced sisal bers composites [68] were subjected to water absorption characteristics showed increase in water intake with increase in sisal bers loading. However, modication of bers with maleic anhydride improved the resistance to water intake thereby improving the mechanical properties. A US patent [71] claimed that there was signicant reduction in water absorption in PVC oak wood and pine our composite material by using compatibilizers consisting of mixture of maleic anhydride, styrene, methyl methacrylate, azobisisobutyronitrile, and toluene. Takatani [73] have studied the effect of using steam exploded wood our and found an excellent increase in the water resistance in wood our thermoplastic polymers such as PMMA, PVC, and PS. From Table 7, it seems clear that the technique of reinforcing steam exploded wood bers in to PVC polymer resin was successful in increasing the water resistivity for the composite materials. If wood our alone were exposed to water environment, it would gain the highest amount of water intake as studied in detail by Stark [74]. His study conrmed that wood our is the only component to absorb water or moisture in wood our/PP composite, because PP does not absorb the moisture. As wood our absorbed about 16% moisture at 90% relative humidity (RH) compared to just 3.6% (for 20 wt% wood ber loading) and 5.5% (for 40 wt% wood ber loading) for the same exposure. This 77% and 65% drop for 20 wt% and 40 wt% ber loading, respectively, in water uptake in the wood our/PP composite materials was due to formation of skin layer of hydrophobic PP on the wood bers. Nevertheless, wood our reinforced PVC composites showed higher water absorption rate compared to PMMA and PS. The authors [73] concluded briey that the water resistance of the composite material dependent mainly on polymer species and not on the wood species without giving detailed reason about water absorption test.
DOI 10.1002/pc
FIG. 6. Effect of OPEFB ber content on the impact strength of OPEFB berPVC composites.
The rate of water absorption in wood ber reinforced with different thermoplastic polymer such as PVC, HDPE, and PP was about 1.3, 0.7, and 1.1%, respectively, which was much less than Oriented strandboard (OSB) and Medium-density berboard (MDF) which is about 16.5% and 21.2%, respectively [75]. The rate of water intake depends on numerous factors such as pre-treatment, processing method, ber orientation, ber loading, and ber nature. It seems that better understanding of water absorption characteristics for natural ber reinforced with PVC polymer composite materials needs to be carried out due to unclear data reasoning. Biober polymer composite materials faces the challenge of water absorption problems due to degradation property of biobers once exposed to rain, sea, ice, snow, or humidity with possible reactions of swelling, shrinking, and cracking of composite materials. Because lignocellulosic materials present in the natural bers such as hemicellulose is reported [20] to be a major contributor in absorbing the water or moisture followed by cellulose and lignin to be least. Addition of crosslinking agents in the natural ber polymer composite materials can also increase in water resistance of the composite materials as reported in [76] using Ca and Zr salts. This and other possible crosslinking agents have to be investigated for OPEFB berreinforced PVC polymer composite materials. Low water absorption by OPEFB ber PVC composite can be speculated due to its higher lignin and lower cellulose content compared to other natural bers. As lignin act as capsule for hemicellulose and cellulose, it can reduce the water absorption into the OPEFB bers. However, this type of studies has not been carried out as mentioned earlier in this section and needs to be taken into account. Effect on Mechanical Properties. The inuence of OPEFB content on the impact strength of the composite is as shown in Fig. 6. As the ber content was increased from 0 to 40 phr, the impact strength was reduced by about 29%. This reduction in strength was attributed due to two possible reasons. First, there is the detrimental effect of bers caused by
DOI 10.1002/pc
the volume take up. OPEFB bers, unlike the matrix, are incapable of dissipating stress through shear yielding prior to fracture. The local motions of the PVC molecules are hindered that enable the matrix to shear yield. As a result, the ability of lled composites to absorb energy during fracture propagation is decreased. In other words, the ductile portion contributed by PVC matrix is reduced and the failure mode became more brittle as the OPEFB ber content increases. Second, reason of impact strength reduction is the poor adhesion and wetting of the bers in the matrix phase. However, this is the case for OPEFB bers lled with PVC. Although the polarity of OPEFB bers makes them capable of forming a physical interaction with polar PVC, it is a relatively weak interaction. Therefore, OPEFB bers have a greater tendency to agglomerate among themselves into bundles which consequently lowers the area of contact with the matrix phase. Meanwhile, the moisture content may also contribute with the physical bounding between bers and PVC. These factors weaken the interfacial adhesion between ber and matrix due to void formation as shown in Fig. 7. Once this occurs, the crack growth may propagate because of the inability of the bers to sustain the stress transfer to the polymer matrix. Similar trend of decrease in impact strength for coconut berreinforced PVC composite was observed in [70]. However, impact strength of OPEFB ber/PVC composite had higher impact strength than coconut ber/PVC composite. Another reason for low impact strength is the dilution effect [68], that is, increases in ber loading decreases the PVC content resulting in poor toughness property. Figure 8 shows increase in exural modulus with respect to ber content. Conversely, the exural strength was seen decreasing with ber content. The increment in modulus was about 22% as the ber content increased from 0 to 40 phr, whereas exural strength decreased to about 18%. The enhancement of modulus depends on a number of factors, such as ber aspect ratio [77, 78], ber modulus, and ber content [7880]. This result indicates that although OPEFB bers have low aspect ratio, they are able to impart a signicant improvement in stiffness by hindering the movement of PVC molecules. For instance, poor strength in wood ourPP composite was reported [78] due to lower aspect ratio of wood our particles which was far below the critical ber length
FIG. 7. SEM micrograph shows the void at bermatrix interface of composite (Magnication: 20003). [Color gure can be viewed in the online issue, which is available at wileyonlinelibrary.com.]
2089
FIG. 8. Effect of OPEFB ber content on the exural properties of composites. [Color gure can be viewed in the online issue, which is available at wileyonlinelibrary.com.]
FIG. 9. Impact strength of unweathered and weathered PVCOPEFB ber composites. [Color gure can be viewed in the online issue, which is available at wileyonlinelibrary.com.]
required for reinforcement. The fact that the increase in modulus while the strength decreases with increasing ber content is in agreement with the trend observed in other natural ber-lled thermoplastics [81]. Agglomerations of bers in the matrix, moisture intake by the bers, and interfacial defects could be the main causes of the reduction in the exural strength. All these factors would have restricted the stress transfer from the PVC to the OPEFB bers during exural and impact testing. Nevertheless, whenever a natural ber composite fails, it has been assumed that the failure was caused due to lack of sufcient bounding between ber and matrix phase. Another important factor as discussed earlier is the water content in the composite materials either before, during, or after the formation of composite materials. Water is readily absorbed by cellulosic natural bers and is responsible for the poor mechanical properties of the composite materials. Better adhesion in composite materials particular natural ber polymeric components can be achieved by good wetting of one component into another. Hence, the surface energies of the components (ber and matrix) play a necessary role to reect the nal mechanical properties of the composites. To achieve this compatibility between the surface energies, either the surface of natural ber can be modied or the polymer matrix can be modied. The above hypothesis of improving mechanical properties by treating natural bers was proved by study [82]. In this study, it was observed that mechanical properties such as tensile and bending of the alkali treated rice straw reinforced with PVC was signicantly improved compared to untreated rice straw composite materials.
and moisture in the amorphous regions of PVC was the main cause for the decrease in impact strength of weathered lled composites [83]. The rate of permeability of oxygen and moisture is greater in amorphous region because the molecular packing was less dense that the degradation process was able to take place. Some photooxidation processes lead to scission of the polymer chain, while others to intermolecular crosslinking. This intermolecular crosslinking is dened as the joining of two chains or more [84], which causes material embrittlement [83]. Most researchers agreed that crosslinking and chain scission contribute to the deterioration of the impact strength and other mechanical properties [8587]. The suggested reaction scheme for photo-oxidative degradation (similar to photo degradation) is shown in Fig. 10 [8688]. The action of UV radiation on PVC produces the singlet-excited state of polyene sequence, which resulted from the absorption of conjugated double bonds and carbonyl groups. The most likely bond to be broken in the excited singlet polyene sequence is the allylic CCl linkage, due to its low dissociation energy. This results in the
Effect of Accelerated Weathering on PVCOPEFB Fiber Composite. Impact Properties. The impact strength of weathered composites for all ber contents slightly decreased compared to unweathered composites as depicted in Fig. 9. The effect of photo-oxidative degradation process which was initiated by UV irradiation in the presence of oxygen
FIG. 10. Reaction scheme for the accelerated photo-oxidation degradation [3335].
DOI 10.1002/pc
FIG. 11. FTIR spectra of (a) unweathered (red line) and (b) weathered (black line) composites containing 30 phr of OPEFB ber. [Color gure can be viewed in the online issue, which is available at wileyonlinelibrary. com.]
chlorine radical being released from the excited singlet polyene sequence and produces a polyenyl radical. The radical then reacts with the oxygen to produce peroxy radicals on the chain and leads to chain scission (degradation) or/ and crosslinking of PVC molecular chains. The lignin of the incorporated OPEFB ller primarily broke down under UV irradiation leading to the generation of the chromophoric functional groups (impurities) such as carbonyl and hydroperoxy radicals, which accelerated the degradation of PVC. The increase in the intensity of the C O stretching bands at around 1,7351,731 cm21 as shown in FTIR spectra (see Fig. 11) provided good evidence of the incorporation of carbonyl groups into the PVC matrix during processing. The presence of these groups explained the pronounced degradation observed in the lled composites as compared to unlled composites [86]. As a result, the brittleness of the lled composites increased with increasing OPEFB ber content as given in Table 8. Flexural Properties. The weathered composites showed slight increase in the exural strength as shown in Fig. 12 while exural modulus decreased (see Fig. 13) compared to unweathered composites. The increase in the properties of weathered samples was similar with the ndings of other researcher [85] whereby the tensile strength of PVC/lignin blend increased after undergoing 120 h and 480 h of accelerated weathering. The increase in exural strength indicated that the inuence of crosslinking and chain scission of PVC molecular chains might cause a
TABLE 8. Percentage of impact strength reduction for lled impactmodied composites after weathered for 504 h. OPEFB ber content (phr) Impact strength reduction (%) 0 3 10 4 20 4 30 6 40 6
slight increase in the exural strength. However, this evidence was not conclusive because of the uctuation and small magnitude of increase in the exural strength and exural modulus as well (see Table 9), which fell within the experimental error. Furthermore, other factors such as ller agglomerations and llermatrix interaction bonding as mentioned earlier might also inuence the exural properties results. The detailed work on effect of accelerated weathering on the mechanical properties of OPEFB ber lled PVC composite is published elsewhere [62]. OPEFB FIBER-REINFORCED THERMOSET POLYMERS Polyurethane Effect on Water Absorption. High density rigid PU prepared from palm kernel oil based resin with diphenyl-
FIG. 12. Flexural strength of unweathered and weathered OPEFB berPVC. [Color gure can be viewed in the online issue, which is available at wileyonlinelibrary.com.]
DOI 10.1002/pc
2091
FIG. 13. Flexural modulus of unweathered and weathered OPEFB berPVC composites. [Color gure can be viewed in the online issue, which is available at wileyonlinelibrary.com.]
methane diisocyanate was reinforced with OPEFB bers at different weight ratios in a hot press machine [17]. In this, analysis of water absorption for the composite materials was done according to ASTM D570-8 method. Composite samples were immersed in water for 7 days and the reading was taken every 24 h. As expected, the composite material with high ber loading of 25:75 (matrix:ber ratio) showed higher water absorption compared to 30:70 and 35:65. The water absorption rate for 25:75 composite materials was about 12.5% and 23% higher compared to 30:70 and 35:65 composite samples, respectively, at seventh day. The water absorption prole was much higher at initial 3 days but reached a stable value after 3 days for all composite samples. This indicated that composite materials prepared with OPEFB bers are poor resistance of water and can cause dimensional instability during their applications. Another interesting study of the above authors [89], but incorporation of additional ller known as kaolinite with OPEFB ber in a PU matrix was done to study the mechanical as well as water absorption behavior. However, the ratio of PU to OPEFB bers was xed at 35:65 and the amount of kaolinite was varied by 5, 10, 15, and 20% by weight. Comparing the water absorption from the previous study [17], the present hybrid composite material of kaolinite and OPEFB ber showed about 9% lower water intake. Kaolinite ller might have lled the void space between the OPEFB bers and PU matrix thus decreasing the possibility of direct exposure of OPEFB bers to water. As a result of this, the hybrid biocomposites materials became compact and dense thus reducing the water intake. This has to be conrmed by comparing the present data with that of PU and kaolinite composite material which will further conrm the degree of hygroscopic nature of the both the individual llers. Effect on Mechanical Properties. Flexural and impact properties of PU and OPEFB ber composites was found
to decrease as the OPEFB ber content increased [17]. At higher ber loading such as in case of 25:75 where 75% of ber was incorporated leads to weak bonding between bers and matrix. Void formation, adhesion properties, ber distribution, and other factors might also contribute in diminishing the mechanical properties of the composite materials. Similar effect of loading natural amorphous silica ber (NASF) on tensile strength and elongation for PU/NASF composite was reported to be optimum at 17 wt% of ber content in PU [90]. After this, value reduction in mechanical properties was observed. It should be noted that in former case [17], the PU was formed from palm kernel oil polyester with crude isocyanate. This also affects the overall mechanical properties of the composite materials. Hence, development of hybrid composite materials improved the mechanical as well as dimensional stability of the composite [89]. Hybridizing of kaolinite ller in PUOPEFB ber composite material decreased the exural strength until 15%. However, it increased for 15% and thereon again decreased for 20%. The trend was different for exural modulus where the loading of kaolinite increased the exural modulus linearly until 15% and dropped thereafter. It was reported that at 20% loading, problem of over packing occurs and lowers the plasticizing effect of the composite materials. Impact strength showed similar trend that of exural strength and maximum value was found at 15% loading. Among the mechanical properties, only exural modulus, that is, elasticity was observed to increase on addition of hybrid ller with PUOPEFB ber composite materials. Investigation of tensile properties revealed that a threshold point or maximum value occurs for PU OPEFB ller composite materials [91]. This value was reported to depend on the ller loading, ller size, as well as % of OH group in OPEFB ller. The tensile properties increased with ller loading and % of OH groups in OPEFB ller to a certain point and decreased thereon. The maximum value for tensile properties was found at 5060% of ller loading and at 60% with varying OH groups present in OPEFB ller with former depending on ller size. It appeared that smaller ller particle size showed lower tensile strength in PU OPEFB composite materials. However, the tensile properties were higher in this case as compared to study done by [90]. This could be because of higher ber content in the PU.
TABLE 9. Percentage of exural modulus reduction and percentage of exural strength increment of the lled composites after 504 h exposure to accelerated weathering. OPEFB ber content (phr) Flexural modulus reduction (%) Flexural strength increment (%) 0 13 13 10 9 4 20 10 0 30 0 11 40 15 0
DOI 10.1002/pc
FIG. 14. (a) Flexural modulus and (b) exural strength prole with increasing OPEFB ber loading in a PU matrix.
In another study by the above authors [92], the effect of using OPEFB mat with PU polymer to produce composite was investigated. Further, the OPEFB ber was chemically modied with isocyanates namely hexamethylene diisocyanate (HMDI) and toluene diisocyanate (TDI). Chemically treated bers composite materials showed increase in tensile strength as compared to untreated ber composite and followed the order as HMDI treated composite (highest) [ TDI treated composite [ untreated. An exactly opposite order was observed for tensile modulus, that is, highest for untreated [ TDI [ HMDI. This might be attributed due to increase in exibility of the bers which might also result in easy mobility of bers in the matrix phase thus decreasing the tensile modulus or stiffness of the composite materials. The chemical bounding between the ber and matrix via chemical used for treatment also plays a major role in determining the mechanical properties. On the other hand, the tensile toughness of the isocyanate treated OPEFB ber-reinforced PU composite materials was enhanced signicantly compared to untreated composite. This indicates substantial requirement of energy is necessary to fail the treated ber composites than untreated ber composites. Moreover, exural properties (strength, modulus, and toughness) followed the same order as of tensile properties. Impact strength of composite material was improved on chemical modication of bers, but decreased with maximum value observed at 35% ber loading. Figure 14a shows the probable combined exural modulus prole of studies done by Badri [17] and Rozman [92]. The optimum or maximum value of exural property can be in the range of 3555% ber loading, though this value can not be conclusive. Similarly, the possible exural strength characteristic with respect to ber loading is shown in Fig. 14b. The studies revealed that always an optimum or maximum value of exural properties is observed in the particular range of ber loading. The value for exural properties increases linearly before this optimum value and drops after it has reached the optimum value. Hence, while designing the composite materials particularly reinforcement with natural bers, ber loading becomes a vital parameter to maximize the mechanical property.
DOI 10.1002/pc
Polyester Effect on Water Absorption. Recently, in study [93] it was proved that neat polyester resin shows very low water absorption compared to its composite reinforced with natural banana ber. There was about 260% increase in water intake by polyester/banana ber composite material compared to neat polyester resin at 308C temperature. The rate of water absorption mechanism was also found to change with respect to temperature condition, besides other factors such as ber loading, diffusivity, etc. Very recently Akil [94] and his coworkers revealed that water absorption characteristics in unsaturated polyester reinforced with empty fruit bunch banana bers composite also depended on the type of water. For example, in their study, the polyester composite materials were immersed in three types of water, distilled, sea and acidic solution. A pseudo-Fickian diffusion characteristic of water absorption was reported for their study with higher diffusion rate and moisture absorption in distilled water followed by acidic solution and sea water. However, no such study was carried out for OPEFB ber polyester composite materials till date. Several methods were implemented to minimize the water absorption rate by modifying the natural bers with chemicals. For instances, chemically modied OPEFB bers were reinforced with polyester matrix to investigate the mechanical and water absorption properties of the composite materials [15]. The composite material of desired volume was immersed in de-ionized water at ambient temperature and weighted at regular interval of time in days to determine the percentage of moisture absorption. The results for moisture absorption for the composite material were in the order of highest for unmodied bers [ succinic [ propionic [ acetic treated bers. For unmodied bers, the rate of water absorption was about 10.5% while that for chemically treated was about 6% (Succinic), 5% (Propionic), and 4% (acetic) after 100 days of composite immersion. Acetylation or acetic anhydride showed the lowest rate of water absorption due to fast rate of reaction and ultimate substitution [95] between OPEFB bers and acetic anhydride. Comparison
TABLE 10. Percentage gain or loss in mechanical properties for chemically treated OPEFB ber polyester composite materials. Tensile OPEFB bers Acetylated Silane Titanate Strength 7 5 21.7 Modulus 12.5 9.4 1.2 Elongation at break 27.2 24 23 Strength 0.5 26.7 28 Flexural Modulus 19 16 5 Impact strength 12 2 21
with previous studies [48, 49] it seems that the present chemicals were found to be more effective in making the composite materials resistance to water uptake, since the previous studies reported about 13% reduction in water absorption between unmodied and treated bers. However, the study of Abdul Khalil [15] revealed about 46% reduction in moisture absorption between unmodied and treated bers. This concludes that anhydrides are effective among the chemicals to reduce the moisture absorption in OPEFB ber polymer composite materials. Hill and Abdul Khalil [96] exposed polyester composite reinforced with modied and chemically treated OPEFB bers in a soil of 90% water holding capacity and 50% moisture content for a period of 12 months. Investigation on moisture absorption in composite samples was done at 3, 6, and 12 month intervals. Apparently, chemical treated OPEFB bers composite material showed lowest rate of moisture intake after duration of composite immersion in sterile and unsterile soils. Among the chemicals used for modication, acetylated bers showed the lowest uptake of moisture compared to titanate and silane treated bers. Since acetylation of OPEFB bers, results in an increase of hydrophobicity of the bers. The study was done [95] by reacting OPEFB bers with acetic anhydride that replaces the OH group of the ber with acetyl group. Moreover, the chemical treatment such as acetylation changes the surface morphology of the bers and makes the surface much smoother. The change in surface morphology and nature of the OPEFB bers can be observed using FT-IR and SEM methods. The chemical method used to reduce the moisture absorption is not only useful in increasing the hydrophobicity of the OPEFB bers polymer composites but also improves its physical and mechanical properties. In other words, the removal or reduction in moisture creates the possibility of better adhesion between the bers and matrix phase consequently in better physical and mechanical properties.
Effect on Mechanical Properties. A specic mechanical property shows certain behavior when composite materials are analyzed at different parameters. For example, study [96] on mechanical properties for polyester lled OPEFB bers composite materials revealed different proles for specic mechanical properties such as tensile, exural, and impact. In their studies, OPEFB bers were modied via different chemicals (acetic anhydride, silane, and titanate) to determine any improvement in the
mechanical properties of the composite materials. Table 10 clearly shows the improvement in the mechanical properties for chemical treated OPEFB ber polyester composite materials. The negative sign in Table 10 signies the reduction in the property. Hence, elongation at break reduced for all chemically treated bers. All other properties particularly acetylated treated ber composites showed much better mechanical performance than other treated composite material. Silane and titanate treatment does not seem to give encouraging results for mechanical properties. Another remarkable study by the above author [24] was performed on the mechanical properties of OPEFB ber reinforced with polyester upon exposure to different environmental condition. These types of studies are important from the point of view that after exposure of composite materials at different environment, whether or not the mechanical properties gets affected and if so to what extent. Because focusing only on the mechanical performance at normal conditions might sometime impetuous the results. Hence, the study on different environmental exposure on mechanical properties of composite materials particularly natural bers composites are of great interest and few studies have been accomplished. In the research work done by Hill and Abdul Khalil [24], the polyester OPEFB ber composite materials were completely buried in soils having 90% water holding capacity and 50% moisture content at 298C temperature. Composite materials were exposed to the soil conditions and its effect was analyzed as percentage gain or loss on the tensile and exural property as tabulated in Tables 11 and 12, respectively. Hence, acetylation treatment of OPEFB bers was very effective as compared to silane and titanate treatments. This might be because of good bonding linkage between OPEFB bers and polyester matrix by acetylation treatment. However, the authors [24] have recommended that the silane treatment should be used because of lower cost option. Tensile strength and tensile modulus characteristics followed the order as acetic (highest) [ propionic [ succinic (lowest) for OPEFB ber reinforced with polyester composite [15]. On the other hand, elongation at break followed opposite order as succinic (highest) [ propionic [ acetic (lowest). However, compared to unmodied bers composite material, the elongation at break for modied OPEFB bers composite materials was lower. This was due to change in property of bers to brittleness after chemical modications which might easily break
DOI 10.1002/pc
TABLE 11. Percentage change in tensile properties of composite materials after burial in soil. Tensile OPEFB bers Acetylated Time (months) 0 3 6 12 0 3 6 12 0 3 6 12 Strength 7 9 21 44 5 2 14 37 22 23 8 6 Modulus 12 11 27 48 9 11 26 55 1 25 7 10 Elongation at break 27 210 12 33 24 0 7 41 23 20.3 3 17
Hence, it was found that still there is not a good agreement about the properties of OPEFB bers and its polymer composites which might have hold its further development into a commercial bers even though it is generated abundantly with inherent advantages.
Phenol Formaldehyde Effect on Water Absorption. A comprehensive study [99] on water absorption in OPEFB ber reinforced with phenol formaldehyde composite materials was done. Water absorption rate at four different temperatures (30, 50, 70, and 908C), and modifying the OPEFB bers by using different chemicals (alkali, silane, acrylation, isocyanate, peroxide, permanganate, latex, acetylation, and acrylonitrile) and also radiating with Co c radiation was analyzed. Effect of ber loading (10, 20, 30, 40, and 50%) on water uptake by the composite was also determined. As the temperature increases, the water absorption rate reduces with ber loading till the equilibrium state of water uptake was reached. However, the characteristic of water absorption at equilibrium were also dependent on ber loading and it decreased as the ber loading was increased till 40 wt% loading and thereon it increased signicantly. The prole of water absorption for OPEFBphenol formaldehyde composite material at different temperatures is as shown in Fig. 15. Hence, the lowest water absorption was found at 40 wt% ber loading. In terms of temperature, lowest intake of water was showed at 508C. The result reported [99] that water absorption decreases on increase in temperature, for instance, 50% ber loading showed highest water absorption at 908C and lowest at 508C. The lowest water absorption at 40% ber loading followed the temperature order: 30 (highest) [ 90 [ 70 [ 50 (lowest). However, this order is contradicting with the observation made. Hence, a general conclusion on water absorption cannot
TABLE 12. Percentage change in exural properties of composite materials after burial in soil. Flexural OPEFB bers Acetylated Time (months) 0 3 6 12 0 3 6 12 0 3 6 12 Strength 0.5 3 3 42 27 23 26 34 28 28 28 23 Modulus 19 27 49 63 16 25 48 55 5 11 27 21
Silane
Titanate
upon stress. Effect of anhydride modications on OPEFB bers composite materials showed smaller improvement in exural strength and modulus. The results of exural modulus were signicant compared to exural strength. The main reason behind this effect was the adhesion property of the bers and matrix phase. This was also proved by impact testing done on chemically modied OPEFB ber polyester composite material. Increase of about 2035% in impact strength was observed in modied ber composite materials compared to unmodied composite material above 20% ber loading. But the impact strength starts to decline above 50% ber loading. An interesting investigation done by [97] on the mechanical properties for roselle and sisal bers hybrid polyester composite by taking into account the effect of moisture condition. It clearly revealed that mechanical properties are greatly affected due to presence of moisture in the composite materials. In case of dry condition or without moisture, the mechanical properties showed improvement whereas at wet condition or with the presence of moisture in the composite it diminished the mechanical properties. Such study in case of OPEFB bers polyester composite materials has to be carried out to understand the moisture absorption characteristics of natural ber-reinforced polymer composite material to develop optimized material [97]. Even though the tensile strength of pure OPEFB ber [27] was found to be higher than rice straw bers [98], the composite material of later with polyester showed higher tensile strength at 40 wt% bers loading compared to former with polyester [96]. This contradiction might be due to the method used to test the specimen, preparation technique, method of testing standards, manufacture techniques of composite materials, ber physical properties, bers aspect ratio, etc. Surprisingly, the tensile properties of OPEFB bers were found differing from one study to another. For instance, the tensile strength of OPEFB bers reported by [27] was 248 MPa, which was about 250% more than what reported by [37] which was just 71 MPa.
DOI 10.1002/pc
Silane
Titanate
2095
FIG. 15. Water absorption rate in OPEFB ber-reinforced phenol formaldehyde composite at different ber loading and at various temperatures [42].
be drawn based on temperature since it varies with ber loading as well. Water absorption rate can be minimized in the composite materials via chemical treatment of ber surface. The free hydroxyl groups in natural bers which are responsible to attach with water molecules and thereby increases the rate of water uptake can be occupied by the chemical entities. Therefore, study [99] showed that chemical modication of OPEFB bers improved the resistance to water absorption in the composite materials. Like alkali treatment showed the lower rate of water absorption as compared to untreated composite material at all temperatures as shown in Fig. 16. While other chemicals depicted higher water absorption rate than untreated composite materials. This is because the alkali treatment creates a stronger bond between ber and matrix thus reducing the formation of void and possible gaps which resists the water to ow inside the composite materials and gets absorbed into the bers. From Fig. 16 it can also be revealed that temperature of 508C shows lowest water absorption intake at equilibrium except for radiated and isocyanate treated bers. Latex treated bers exhibited highest water absorption rate. There was not much difference in water absorption rate for isocyanate treated bers at all temperatures. This was because of the extent that a particular chemical reacts with OPEFB bers and occupies the hydroxyl groups of the bers. Hence, any reduction in water absorption by the composite material is due to decrease in number of hydroxyl groups of the bers. Therefore, the strong interface or adhesion between ber and matrix is established when almost all of the hydroxyl groups are occupied and there is a little or no room for the water to be absorbed through the capillary action which might have been created due to weak interface bounding. As in most cases, the water absorption was observed to be independent of temperature. The kinetic study also [99] exhibited that the untreated OPEFB ber phenol formaldehyde composite material followed the Fickian diffusion mechanism,
while chemically treated composites deviated from the Fickian diffusion curve. Interestingly, incorporation of glass bers in OPEFB and phenol formaldehyde composite to form a hybrid composite material reduced the water absorption rate as the volume of glass bers was increased in the composite material. Similar results were reported by Amin and Badri [89] while incorporating kaolinite as hybrid ller with OPEFB-PU composite material. Study of Abdul Kahlil [80] showed $ 36% and 29% decrease in water absorption for acetylated and propionylated treated OPEFB bers reinforced with phenol formaldehyde respectively. This, if compared to results of Sreekala [99], showed an increase in water absorption rate of about 166% for acetylated treated OPEFB ber phenol formaldehyde composite material. However, both the studies [80, 99] used acetic anhydride chemical to modify the OPEFB bers except that later [99] treated the bers with sodium hydroxide for about half an hour with sulfuric acid as catalyst before nal treatment with acetic anhydride. This difference in water absorption characteristics might arise due to the chemical used during treatment, the composite preparation technique, the treatment technique, and testing or analysis procedures. Very recently, instead of using OPEFB bers, Lai [100] used OPEFB shell llers of different sizes lled with novolak phenol formaldehyde resin to form composite materials and its detailed water absorption study was done. When compared to other biomass ller such as rice husk and coconut shell, oil palm shell exhibited the lowest water absorption rate. This was due to two reasons, rst the lignocellulosic content of the biomass llers such as hemicellulose and cellulose and second the hydroxyl groups present in that particular biomass ller. They concluded that the water absorption rate was not much dependent on ller size and it becomes independent after certain ller sizes. This study encourages to hybrid the OPEFB bers with oil palm shell llers in a polymer
FIG. 16. Water absorption at equilibrium in treated and untreated OPEFB ber-reinforced phenol formaldehyde composite material at different temperatures. [Color gure can be viewed in the online issue, which is available at wileyonlinelibrary.com.]
DOI 10.1002/pc
matrix for further investigation on water absorption and its related work. Water absorption characteristic is also found to be affected due to ber loading [101]. In their study, they concluded that at higher ber loading the water absorption is mainly because of diffusion mechanism, while percolation mechanism is dominant at lower ber loading in the natural ber composite materials. Basically, the water absorption test provides important information regarding the adhesion property between the bers and the matrix [102]. This is because the higher the adhesion between bers and matrix, the probability for the water to absorb through the sites becomes limited. Therefore, most of the researchers have repeatedly stressed the interface or adhesion property while discussing the water absorption issue. Hence, various techniques and methods have been used to reduce the water intake by the natural bers polymer composite materials. For instance, Hydroxyl Terminated Polybutadine (HTPB) Rubber was used [102] as coating for phenol formaldehyde resin and sisal bers to decrease the water intake. Water absorption study in fact became important for natural bers polymer composite materials because of hydrophilic nature of natural bers compared to synthetic bers. For example, in study of Joseph [103], clearly the glass/phenol formaldehyde composite absorbed lower water than banana/phenol formaldehyde composite material. Effect on Mechanical Properties. Considerable work has been accomplished on mechanical properties of OPEFB ber phenol formaldehyde composite materials. However, further evaluation needs to be done for complete exposure of the OPEFB ber composite materials to different applications. The mechanical performance of composite material being exposed to different temperatures and other related studies needs to be investigated. Acetylated OPEFB bers showed the highest tensile strength and modulus followed by propionylated, extracted and non-extracted OPEFB ber phenol formaldehyde composite materials [80]. However, elongation at break was lowest for modied ber composite materials compared to non-modied composite. The reason for the former improvement in tensile properties was due to more hydrophobic nature of the bers and better bonding nature between bers and matrix. Whereas the drop in elongation at break for modied bers was due to crystalline nature of the bers which easily gets tear or split. Moreover, chemical treatments remove the amorphous part from the bers or might change the amorphous to crystalline phase thus bringing signicant reduction in the elongation at break value. Flexural properties of modied (acetylated and propionylated) OPEFB bers phenol formaldehyde composite materials was enhanced than those of unmodied bers composite. This clearly shows increase in strength and stiffness of OPEFB ber composite materials. Furthermore, impact strength or toughness of the OPEFB
DOI 10.1002/pc
ber phenol formaldehyde composite materials was also increased particularly for acetylated treated bers composites. Finale, acetylation treatment overall improves the mechanical properties of the OPEFB ber PF composite materials signicantly except elongation at break. Effects of ber length and loading on mechanical properties were evaluated for OPEFB ber reinforced with phenol formaldehyde composite materials [104]. An untreated OPEFB ber of 20, 30, 40, and 50 mm length was prepared and loading was varied by 29, 38, and 53 wt% in the phenol formaldehyde resin. Fiber length of 40 mm showed maximum tensile strength and modulus and thereafter it decreases with increase in ber length. Here, the critical length of the bers to be used in the composite materials becomes important. For elongation at break the peak value was observed at 30 mm ber length. The study of ber length was conducted with the ber loading maintained at 38%. On the other hand, the ber loading was varied by maintaining the ber length at 40 mm. Both tensile strength and modulus depicted the peak value at 38 wt% of ber loading and further increase in ber loading decreases the tensile properties. There are no peak observed for elongation at break property and it increased with increase in ber loading. Similar was in case of exural property whereby 40 mm ber length and 38 wt% ber loading showed peak values. This indicates that the optimum or best value for mechanical properties can be considered as 40 mm for ber length and 38 wt% for ber loading. Comprehensive study on the modication of OPEFB bers and reinforcing with phenol formaldehyde resin to form a composite material was done [105]. Chemicals such as acrylic acid, acrylonitrile monomer, NaOH, KMnO4, acetic anhydride, and benzoyl peroxide were used. Besides this OPEFB bers were also radiated to Co c radiation and modied by latex to study the mechanical property of its composite materials. Coupling agents such as triethoxy vinyl silane and toluene 2, 4diisocyanate was used as interfacial bounding agent. Table 13 shows the physical modication of the OPEFB bers after various chemical treatments. Almost all the treatments results in a physical change in the OPEFB bers. Mostly, the porous structure of the bers is exposed by the treatments thereby increasing the possibility of the mechanical interlocking nature of the bers with the polymer matrices. The authors [105] have reported that the chemical compositions, chemical structure, and cellular arrangements determine the mechanical performance of the bers. Figures 17 and 18 shows the tensile properties of untreated and treated OPEFB bers incorporated with phenol formaldehyde resin with 40% ber loading in all cases. Whereas Figs. 19 and 20 depicts the exural properties of untreated and treated OPEFB bers composite materials. Poor performance of tensile strength was observed by OPEFB treated bers composite materials except in case
TABLE 13. Physical modications of the OPEFB bers after various chemical treatments [45]. Chemical process Mercerization
Procedure 5% NaOH at different time intervals at room temperature Acetic anhydride in acetic acid with concentrated H2SO4 as a catalyst Benzoyl peroxide from acetone
Physical modications Pores on bers become clear. Fiber surface roughness increases and it becomes curly and soft Waxy layer is removed. Becomes stiffer
Chemical modications Increase amorphous cellulose. Removal of hydrogen bounding Acetyl groups gets attached to cellulose and lignin present in bers Higher temperatures are needed to decompose the peroxides MnO3 ions add to the ber to form cellulose radical Crystalline regions changes. Interactions between bounds CO groups replaces the OH N groups of cellulose and lignin in bers Alkoxy from silanes form bound with OH groups. Hydrolysis, condensation, and bond formations steps takes place with the bers It removes the hydrogen from OH group and acrylation group is attached Nitrile groups are grafted on the ber and lignin plays an important role in acrylonitrile process Fibers become more elastic. Peaks of C stretching are observed H due to presence of natural rubber
Acetylation
Peroxide
Permanganate Radiation Isocyanate
Silane
Permanganate solution (0.01, 0.05, and 0.1% conc.) in acetone for 23 min 60Co c radiation at dose of 0.1 Mrad for about 30 h Toluene isocyanate was added to bers soaked in chloroform containing dibutyl tin dilaurate catalyst for 2 h Tri ethoxy vinyl silane with pH of 3.54
Leaching out of wax, gums, and pectic substances. Very rough due to protruding structures and pores Color changes and bers become soft with more porous structure Elimination of porous structure and disintegration of bers. Cracks develop Irregular surface of bers and is the major change Surface coatings
Acrylation
Acrylic acid of different concentrations for about 1 h at 508C Oxidation of bers with KMnO4 for 10 min. Washed ber are again put into 1% H2SO4 containing acrylonitrile in ratio of 30:1. After this, the sample is kept at 508C for 2 h without disturbance Dipping bers into natural rubber latex of 10% dry rubber
Surface coatings
Acrylonitrile
Fibrillation and porous structure
Latex
Smooth surface with reduction in brillation. Hydrophobicity is increased due to lling of pores with rubber
of permanganate treatment. The possibility might be effective ber-matrix bounding nature due to its physical (more porous) and chemical (radical formation leading to rm attachments) modication as stated in Table 13. Other chemical modication might have led to increase in more hydrophobic nature of the bers resulting in a loose bonding mechanism between OPEFB bers and phenolic
resin. This might cause weak bounding or adhesion property between ber and matrix. The detailed explanation regarding the poor performance of OPEFB treated bers composite materials was reported by Sreekala [105]. Highest elongation at break was observed by latex treated ber composite material and it decreased for alkali, per-
FIG. 17. Tensile strength and elongation at break of untreated and treated OPEFB ber-reinforced phenol formaldehyde composite material. [Color gure can be viewed in the online issue, which is available at wileyonlinelibrary.com.]
FIG. 18. Tensile modulus of untreated and treated OPEFB ber-reinforced phenol formaldehyde composite material. [Color gure can be viewed in the online issue, which is available at wileyonlinelibrary.com.]
DOI 10.1002/pc
FIG. 19. Flexural strength and exural break of untreated and treated OPEFB ber-reinforced phenol formaldehyde composite material. [Color gure can be viewed in the online issue, which is available at wileyonlinelibrary.com.]
oxide, permanganate, and radiation. Increment in tensile modulus was depicted (see Fig. 18) by mercerization treatment and slightly by permanganate treated OPEFB bers composite materials while other treatment showed poor performance. Mainly, the failure of the composite materials was attributed due to ber breakage. Improvement in exural strength was observed in mercerization and peroxide treated OPEFB bers composite material as shown in Fig. 19. Latex treatment showed the lowest exural strength. The reason for this varying property characteristic under chemical treatment was same as those given under tensile properties. Isocyanate, silane, acrylated, and latex treatment showed improved exural at break property. This was due to gradual propagation of crack in the ber during stress. Conversely, radiated bers were observed to easily break under given exural stress. Peroxide and permanganate treatments showed improvement in exural modulus while a moderate decrease was showed by alkali or mercerization treatment. It was evident from this study that chemical modication plays an important role in determining the mechanical properties of the OPEFB ber composite materials. In short, the property of the natural ber composite materials depends on the interfacial or adhesion strength between bermatrix and interfacial property is dependent on the ber and matrix individual properties and the properties of the bers are dependent on the types of the chemicals used to modify its physical and chemical structures. Signicant increase in impact strength was shown by latex, acetylation, silane, and isocyanate treatments. Main factor that contributes to such improvements as reported by the author [105] was the ber-matrix bounding nature after chemical treatments. CONCLUSIONS An OPEFB bers polymeric composite material nds wide applications on account of its comparable specic properties with that of conventional ber polymer comDOI 10.1002/pc
posite materials. But at present its usage is limited and has not taken a complete hold in the market to compete with the synthetic bers. This can only be done with constant development and an optimized conclusive outcome about the properties of OPEFB bers and its composite materials. The mechanical properties of the OPEFB ber polymer composites were observed to vary considerably and depend on various factors. The impediments regarding the fundamental and applied area have to be overcome before a more rapid advancement of the OPEFB bers and its composite materials is taken into account. The complex nature of the OPEFB bers and its composites, entitles for more data on the properties to establish the condence in their nal end use. First of all is their thermal degradation at low temperatures, which restricts for various applications. This issue is not well studied and needs a substantial amount of further work, particularly for OPEFB bers and its composite materials at high temperature. Being a hydrophilic in nature, generally OPEFB bers absorb water, which disturbs the interfacial bonding between bers and matrices in the composite material leading to poor mechanical properties. Hence, it was found that water absorption and mechanical properties are inter-related to each other. Therefore, various physical, chemical, or thermal treatments are necessary to overcome such disadvantages of OPEFB ber polymer composite materials. This OPEFB bers can be used as reinforcement with synthetic polymers as well as biodegradable or bioresin including thermoplastics and thermosets. Hybrid composites can also be prepared with synthetic bers to overcome the demerits of OPEFB bers. Even though signicant amount of research has been done, still the critical evaluation remains the question of its further usage. Nevertheless, industries has been established to tailor the OPEFB ber composite and other application such as ber board, medium density board, ber mat, and others, but the collaboration between industries, research institutes, and universities has been found to be lacking.
FIG. 20. Flexural modulus of untreated and treated OPEFB ber-reinforced phenol formaldehyde composite material. [Color gure can be viewed in the online issue, which is available at wileyonlinelibrary. com.]
2099
REFERENCES
1. A.K. Mohanty, M. Misra, and L.T. Drzal, J. Polym. Environ., 10, 19 (2002). 2. A.S. Singha and V.K. Thakur, Bull. Mater. Sci., 31, 791 (2008). 3. B. Nadzai, J.V. Tesha, and E.T.N. Bisanda, J. Mater. Sci., 41, 6984 (2006). 4. G. Bogoeva-Gaceva, M. Avella, M. Malinconico, A. Buzarovska, A. Grozdanov, G. Gentile, and M.E. Errico, Polym. Compos., 28, 98 (2007). 5. X. Li, L.G. Tabil, and S. Panigrahi, J. Polym. Environ., 15, 25 (2007). 6. G.I. Williams and R.P. Wool, Appl. Compos. Mater., 7, 421 (2000). 7. A.N. Netravali and S. Chabba, Mater. Today, 6, 22 (2003). 8. P.A. Fowler, J.M. Hughes, and R.M. Elias, J. Sci. Food. Agric., 86, 1781 (2006). 9. J. Nickel and U. Riedel, Mater. Today, 6, 44 (2003). 10. H.D. Rozman, Z.A. Mohd Ishak, and U.S. Ishiaku, in Natural Fibers: Biopolymers and Biocomposites, A. Mohanty, M. Misra, and L.T. Drzal, Eds., Taylor and Francis, Boca Raton, 407 (2005). 11. Sabutek, SDN BHD, Available at: www.berx.com. Accessed on 5 September 2008. 12. Ecofuture, BHD, Available at: www.ecofuture.com.my/ main.htm, Accessed on 15 October 2008. 13. A.K. Mohanty and M. Misra, Polym. Plast. Technol. Eng., 34, 729 (1995). 14. H.D. Rozman, M.J. Saad, and Z.A. Mohd Ishak, J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 87, 827 (2003). 15. H.P.S. Abdul Khalil, H. Ismail, M.N. Ahmad, A. Arifn, and K. Hassan, Polym. Int., 50, 395 (2001). 16. A. Abu Bakar, A. Hassan, and A.F. Mohd Yusof, Polym. Polym. Compos., 13, 607 (2005). 17. K.H. Badri and K.A.M. Amin, J. Oil Palm Res., 103 (2006). 18. M.S. Sreekala and S. Thomas, J. Polym. Eng., 16, 265 (1997). 19. M.J. John and S. Thomas, Carbohydr. Polym., 71, 343 (2008). 20. A.K. Mohanty, M. Misra, and G. Hinrichsen, Macromol. Mater. Eng., 276/277, 1 (2000). 21. S. Mishra, A.K. Mohanty, L.T. Drzal, M. Misra, and G. Hinrichsen, Macromol. Mater. Eng., 289, 955 (2004). 22. K.-N. Law, W.R.W. Daud, and A. Ghazali, BioResources, 2, 351 (2007). 23. T. Nishino, in Green Composites: Polymer Composites and the Environment, C. Baillie, Ed., Woodhead Publishing Limited, Boca Raton, 49 (2004). 24. C.A.S. Hill and H.P.S. Abdul Khalil, J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 77, 1322 (2000). 25. H.P.S. Abdul Khalil, M. Siti Alwani, and A.K. Mohd Omar, BioResources, 1, 220 (2006). 26. R.M. Rowell, in Properties and Performance of NaturalFiber Composites, K.L. Pickering, Ed., Woodhead Publishing Limited, Cambridge, 3 (2008).
27. M.S. Sreekala, M.G. Kumaran, and S. Thomas, J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 66, 821 (1997). 28. T.G. Rials and M.P. Wolcott, in Paper and Composites from Agro-Based Resources, R.M. Rowell, R.A. Young, and J.K. Rowell, Eds., Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, 63 (1997). 29. R. Muniandy, S. Ishak, and R.S. Radin Umar, REAAA J., 7, 19 (1997). 30. R. Zulkii, M.J. Mohd Nor, A.R. Ismail, M.Z. Nuawi, S. Abdullah, M.F. Mat Tahir, and M.N. Ab. Rahman, Eur. J. Sci. Res., 33, 144 (2009). 31. M. Idicula, A. Boudenne, L. Umadevi, L. Ibos, Y. Candau, and S. Thomas, Comput. Sci. Technol., 66, 2719 (2006). 32. Y. Li, M.S. Sreekala, and M. Jacob, in Natural Fiber Reinforced Polymer Composites: Macro to Nanoscale, Old City Publishing, Philadelphia, PA, 202 (2009). 33. N.G. Justiz-Smith, G.J. Virgo, and V.E. Buchanan, Mater. Char., 59, 1273 (2008). 34. S. Kalia, B.S. Kaith, and I. Kaur, Polym. Eng. Sci., 49, 1253 (2009). 35. S.J. Eichhorn and R.J. Young, Compos. Sci. Technol., 64, 767 (2004). 36. C. Baley, Compos. Part A: Appl. Sci. Manuf., 33, 939 (2002). 37. M.Z. Mohamed Yusoff, M.S. Salit, and N. Ismail, Sains Malaysiana, 38, 525 (2009). 38. J. George, M.S. Sreekala, and S. Thomas, Polym. Eng. Sci., 41, 1471 (2001). 39. Y. Cao, S. Shibata, and I. Fukumoto, Compos. Part A, 37, 423 (2006). 40. F. Yao, Q. Wu, Y. Lei, and Y. Xu, Ind. Crop. Prod., 28, 63 (2008). 41. P.J.H. Franco and A. Valadez-Gonzalez, in Natural Fibers: Biopolymers and Biocomposites, A. Mohanty, M. Misra, and L.T. Drzal, Eds., Taylor and Francis, Boca Raton, 177 (2005). 42. S. Joseph, M. Jacob, and S. Thomas, in Natural Fibers: Biopolymers and Biocomposites, A. Mohanty, M. Misra, and L.T. Drzal, Eds., Taylor and Francis, Boca Raton, 435 (2005). 43. M. Sain and S. Panthapulakkal, in Green Composites: Polymer Composites and the Environment, C. Baillie, Ed., Woodhead Publishing Limited, Boca Raton, 181 (2004). 44. M.J. John and R.D. Anandjiwala, Polym. Comp., 29, 187 (2008). 45. R.M. Rowell and H.P. Stout, in Handbook of Fiber Chemistry, M. Lewin, Ed., CRC Press, Taylor and Francis, Boca Raton, 405 (2007). 46. S.K. Batra, in Handbook of Fiber Chemistry, M. Lewin, Ed., CRC Press, Taylor and Francis, Boca Raton, 453 (2007). 47. K.E. Cabradilla and S.H. Zeronian, J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 19, 503 (1975). 48. H.D. Rozman, G.B. Peng, and Z.A. Mohd Ishak, J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 70, 2647 (1998). 49. H.D. Rozman, C.Y. Lai, H. Ismail, and Z.A. Mohd Ishal, Polym. Int., 49, 1273 (2000).
DOI 10.1002/pc
50. M. Tajvidi, S.K. Naja, and N. Moteei, J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 99, 2199 (2006). 51. A.K. Bledzki, M. Letman, A. Viksne, and L. Rence, Compos. Part A., 36, 789 (2005). 52. C.P.L. Chow, X.S. Xing, and R.K.Y. Li, Compos. Sci. Technol., 67, 306 (2007). 53. A. Arbelaiz, B. Fernandez, J.A. Ramos, A. Retegi, R. Llano-Ponte, and I. Mondragon, Compos. Sci. Technol., 65, 1582 (2005). 54. C.E. Tayang, Y. Watanabe, and T. Hatakeyama, Sen-I Gakkaishi, 47, 434 (1991). 55. R.M. Rowell, A. Sanadi, R. Jacobson, and D. Cauleld, in Kenaf Properties, Processing and Products, T. Sellers and N.A. Reichert, Eds., Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, MS, USA. 381 (1999). 56. H.D. Rozman, B.K. Kon, A. Abusamah, R.N. Kumar, and Z.A. Mohd Ishak, J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 69, 1993 (1998). 57. M. Khalid, C.T. Ratnam, T.G. Chuah, S. Ali, and T.S.Y. Choong, Mater. Des., 29, 173 (2008). 58. K. Miyazaki, K. Moriya, N. Okazaki, M. Terano, and H. Nakatani, J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 111, 1835 (2009). 59. W. Qiu, F. Zhang, T. Endo, and T. Hirotsu, Polym. Compos., 26, 448 (2005). 60. S. Mohamad Jani, H.D. Rozman, A. Abusamah, Z.A. Mohd Ishak, and S. Rahim, J. Oil Palm Res., 18, 260 (2006). 61. C. Chuai, K. Almdal, L. Poulsen, and D. Plackett, J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 80, 2833 (2001). 62. A. Abu Bakar, A. Hassan, and A.F. Mohd Yusof, Iran. Polym. J., 14, 627 (2005). 63. F. Mengeloglu, L. Mauana, and J. King, J. Vinyl Add. Technol., 6, 153 (2000). 64. H. Jiang and D. Kamdem, J. Vinyl Add. Technol., 10, 59 (2004). 65. H. Jiang and D. Kamdem, J. Vinyl Add. Technol., 10, 70 (2004). 66. X. Ge, X. Li, and Y. Meng, J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 93, 1804 (2004). 67. S. Kamel, Polym. Adv. Technol., 15, 612 (2004). 68. H. Djidjelli, A. Boukerrou, R. Founas, A. Rabouhi, M. Kaci, and J. Farenc, J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 103, 3630 (2007). 69. Y.-T. Zheng, D.-R. Cao, D.-S. Wang, and J.-J. Chen, Compos. Part A, 38, 20 (2007). 70. J.L. Leblanc, C.R.G. Furtado, M.C.A.M. Leite, L.L.Y. Visconte, and A.M.F. de Souza, J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 106, 3653 (2007). 71. X. Shen, T. Bole, R.A. Iezzi, Z. Cygan, R.M. Hu, B.L. Stainbrook, P.A. Callais, and J.S. Ness, U. S. Patent No. US 2008/0261019 A1 (2008). 72. Harvel, Available at: http://www.harvel.com/piping-pvc. asp. Accessed on 16 October 2009. 73. M. Takatani, O. Kato, T. Kitayama, T. Okamoto, and M. Tanahashi, J. Wood Sci., 46, 210 (2000). 74. N. Stark, J. Thermoplast. Compos. Mater., 14, 421 (2001). 75. H. Jiang and D.P. Kamdem, J. Vinyl Add. Technol., 10, 59 (2004). 76. R.L. Shogren, J.W. Lawton, K.F. Tiefenbacher, and L. Chen, J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 68, 2129 (1998).
77. J. Junkasem, J. Menges, and P. Supaphol, J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 101, 3291 (2006). 78. H. Li and M.M. Sain, Polym. Plast. Technol. Eng., 42, 853 (2003). 79. S. Joseph, M.S. Sreekala, Z. Oommen, P. Koshy, and S. Thomas, Compos. Sci. Technol., 62, 1857 (2002). 80. H.P.S. Abdul Khalil, A.M. Issam, M.T. Ahmad Shakri, R. Suriani, and A.Y. Awang, Ind. Crop. Prod., 26, 315 (2007). 81. N.D. Saheb and J.P. Jog, Adv. Polym. Technol., 18, 351 (1999). 82. S. Kamel, Polym. Adv. Technol., 15, 612 (2004). 83. D. Gardiner, G. Pepperl, and J.D.W. Wisse, Plast. Rub. Compos. Proc. Appl., 26, 59 (1997). 84. C. Sarmoria and V. Enrique, Polymer, 45, 5661 (2004). 85. S.E. Raghi, R.R. Zahran, and B.E. Gebril, Mater. Lett., 46, 332 (2000). 86. L.M. Matuana, D.P. Kamdem, and J. Zhang, J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 80, 1943 (2001). 87. E.D. Owen, Degradation and Stabilization of PVC, Elsevier Applied Science, New York (1989). 88. A. Torikai and H. Hirose, Polym. Degrad. Stab., 63, 441 (1999). 89. K.A.M. Amin and K.H. Badri, J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 105, 2488 (2007). 90. G.M.O. Barra, M.C. Fredel, H.A. Al-Qureshi, A.W. Taylor, and C. Clemenceau Jr., Polym. Comp., 27, 582 (2006). 91. H.D. Rozman, K.R. Ahmad Hilme, and A. Abubakr, J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 106, 2290 (2007). 92. H.D. Rozman, K.R. Ahmadilmi, and A. Abubakar, Polym. Test., 23, 559 (2004). 93. P.A. Sreekumar, P. Albert, G. Unnikrishnan, K. Joseph, and S. Thomas, J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 109, 1547 (2008). 94. H.M. Akil, L.W. Cheng, Z.A.M. Ishak, A.A. Bakar, and M.A. Abd Rahman, Compos. Sci. Technol., 69, 1942 (2009). 95. C.A.S. Hill, H.P.S. Abdul Khalil, and M.D. Hale, Ind. Crop. Prod., 8, 53 (1998). 96. C.A.S. Hill and H.P.S. Abdul Khalil, J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 78, 1685 (2000). 97. A. Athijayamani, M. Thiruchitrambalam, U. Natarajan, and B. Pazhanivel, Mater. Sci. Eng., 517, 344 (2009). 98. A.V. Ratna Prasad, K.M.M. Rao, K.M. Rao, and A.V.S.S.K.S. Gupta, Ind. J. Fiber Text. Res., 32, 399 (2007). 99. M.S. Sreekala, M.G. Kumaran, and S. Thomas, Compos. Part A, 33, 763 (2002). 100. J.C. Lai, F.N. Ani, and A. Hassan, Polym. Polym. Comp., 16, 379 (2008). 101. W. Wang, M. Sain, and P.A. Cooper, Compos. Sci. Technol., 66, 379 (2006). 102. J.D. Megiatto Jr., E.C. Ramires, and E. Frollini, Ind. Crop. Prod., 31, 178 (2010). 103. S. Joseph, Z. Oommen, and S. Thomas, J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 100, 2521 (2006). 104. A.K. Mohanty and M. Mishra, Polym. Plast. Technol. Eng., 34, 729 (1995). 105. M.S. Sreekala, M.G. Kumaran, S. Joseph, M. Jocob, and S. Thomas, Appl. Compos. Mater., 7, 295 (2000).
DOI 10.1002/pc
2101

A Review On OPEFB Fiber Polymer Composite Materials Vol. 31 Issue 12 Pg. 2079-2101 2010

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

A Review On OPEFB Fiber Polymer Composite Materials Vol. 31 Issue 12 Pg. 2079-2101 2010

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

A Review on Oil Palm Empty Fruit Bunch Fiber-Reinforced Polymer Composite Materials

POLYMER COMPOSITES -2010

Polymers reinforced with OPEFB bers with classication. Thermoplastics

Hemicellulose (%) 22 17.1 68.3 83.5

Cellulose (%) 48 47.9 41.9 49.8 65

Lignin (%) 25 24.9 13.2 20.5 19

Location Malaysia Malaysia Malaysia Malaysia India

Oil palm ber from oil palm fond.

-2010 2082 POLYMER COMPOSITES

Fiber type Oil palm bers Short* (Average) (Range)

17.5 10 20 30 142.3 100 200 300 50 45 20 50 80 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50

Long (Average) (Range)

General Banana (Average) (Range)

FIG. 3. Properties of lignocellulosic materials [17].

-2010 2086 POLYMER COMPOSITES

POLYMER COMPOSITES -2010

POLYMER COMPOSITES -2010

POLYMER COMPOSITES -2010

Permanganate Radiation Isocyanate

Fibrillation and porous structure

-2010 2098 POLYMER COMPOSITES

POLYMER COMPOSITES -2010

POLYMER COMPOSITES -2010

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen