| Literature DB >> 31842419 |
Ferran Serra-Parareda1, Quim Tarrés1,2, Marc Delgado-Aguilar1, Francesc X Espinach3, Pere Mutjé1,2, Fabiola Vilaseca4.
Abstract
The cultivation of cereals like rye, barley, oats, or wheat generates large quantities of agroforestry residues, which reaches values of around 2066 million metric tons/year. Barley straw alone represents 53%. In this work, barley straw is recommended for the production of composite materials in order to add value to this agricultural waste. First of all, thermomechanical (TMP) fibers from barley straw are produced and later used to reinforce bio-polyethylene (BioPE) matrix. TMP barley fibers were chemically and morphologically characterized. Later, composites with optimal amounts of coupling agent and fiber content ranging from 15 to 45 wt % were prepared. The mechanical results showed the strengthening and stiffening capacity of the TMP barley fibers. Finally, a micromechanical analysis is applied to evaluate the quality of the interface and to distinguish how the interface and the fiber morphology contributes to the final properties of these composite materials.Entities:
Keywords: barley straw; bio-polyethylene; interface; thermomechanical fibers
Year: 2019 PMID: 31842419 PMCID: PMC6947177 DOI: 10.3390/ma12244182
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Figure 1Flow chart of the composites production and characterization.
Chemical composition of raw material, barley thermomechanical (TMP) fibers, and spruce TMP fibers.
| Holocellulose (%) | Klason Lignin (%) | Extractives (%) | Ash (%) | Length 1 (μm) | Diameter (μm) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Barley straw | 70.12 ± 0.54 | 16.45 ± 0.34 | 5.90 ± 0.76 | 7.1 ± 0.2 | – | – |
| Barley TMP fibers | 77.67 ± 0.61 | 15.30 ± 0.46 | 2.73 ± 0.12 | 4.3 ± 0.3 | 745 | 19.6 |
| Spruce TMP fibers | 73.75 ± 0.83 | 25.80 ± 0.22 | 0.25 ± 0.34 | 0.2 ± 0.2 | 978 | 24.7 |
1 Length weighted in length.
Figure 2Length distributions of barley TMP and spruce TMP fibers.
Tensile properties of barley TMP/ biopolyethylene (BioPE) composite with different coupling agent contents.
| MAPE (%) |
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 0 | 18.05 ± 0.74 | 1.06 ± 0.08 | 12.18 ± 0.34 | 18.05 |
| 0 | 0.233 | 18.82 ± 0.60 | 1.73 ± 0.10 | 2.88 ± 0.27 | 13.29 |
| 2 | 23.51 ± 0.39 | 1.76 ± 0.05 | 3.37 ± 0.15 | 14.19 | |
| 4 | 29.84 ± 0.19 | 1.85 ± 0.07 | 5.19 ± 0.22 | 16.27 | |
| 6 | 34.70 ± 0.90 | 2.14 ± 0.04 | 5.47 ± 0.31 | 16.44 | |
| 8 | 32.65 ± 0.69 | 1.93 ± 0.05 | 5.67 ± 0.17 | 16.55 |
Figure 3Tensile strength evolution of 30 wt % composite against maleic anhydride (MAPE) content.
Figure 4Tensile strength vs elongation diagram of BioPE polymer. Matrix contribution to tensile strength for each MAPE content is also shown.
Figure 5Axial load graphic of (a) critical length fibers, (b) subcritical length fibers, and (c) supercritical length fibers.
Figure 6(a) Fibers length distribution from 30% composite and (b) stress-strain curve of a coupled 30% composite.
Figure 7Evolution of the length and interphase factor and the interfacial shear strength as function of coupling agent content.
Tensile properties of barley TMP/BioPE composites.
| Barley TMP (%) |
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 0 | 18.05 ± 0.74 | 1.06 ± 0.08 | 12.18 ± 0.34 | 18.05 |
| 15 | 0.111 | 25.2 ± 0.64 | 1.85 ± 0.06 | 7.65 ± 0.24 | 16.37 |
| 30 | 0.233 | 34.7 ± 0.90 | 2.59 ± 0.04 | 6.45 ± 0.31 | 16.76 |
| 45 | 0.367 | 43.1 ± 0.57 | 3.55 ± 0.05 | 4.69 ± 0.33 | 15.86 |
Figure 8Evolution of the length and interphase factor and the interfacial shear strength as function of TMP barley fiber content.