| Literature DB >> 33260830 |
Przemysław Brzyski1, Mateusz Gładecki1, Monika Rumińska1, Karol Pietrak2, Michał Kubiś2, Piotr Łapka2.
Abstract
Different fractions of hemp shives are used in the mixtures of the hemp-lime composite. The market offers shives of different granulation. It depends on the type of industrial hemp and on the capabilities of decortication machines. The aim of the research presented in the article is to check differences in the mechanical and hygro-thermal properties of composites with different shives fractions. The research part of the paper presents the preparation method and investigation on hemp-lime composites. Apparent density, total porosity, thermal conductivity, capillary uptake, vapor permeability, specific heat, mass absorptivity, flexural and compressive strength were examined. The results confirm that the shives fraction influences the individual properties of the composites. Hemp-lime composites with fine shives are characterized by higher water absorption, thermal conductivity, mechanical strength, vapor permeability as well as lower capillary-lifting capacity and specific heat than composites with thick shives.Entities:
Keywords: hemp-lime; mechanical properties; shives; thermal conductivity; vapor permeability; water absorption
Year: 2020 PMID: 33260830 PMCID: PMC7730858 DOI: 10.3390/ma13235383
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Figure 1Hemp shives used in the investigation: fine shives (a) and thick shives (b).
Sizes of the shives used in the research.
| Type of Shives | Fraction (mm) | Average Length (mm) | Average Width (mm) | Max. Length (mm) | Max. Width (mm) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fine | 0–12 | 2.74 | 1.42 | 11.78 | 4.55 |
| Thick | 0–50 | 8.40 | 2.68 | 47.38 | 11.77 |
Mass fractions of constituents in examined mixtures.
| Constituents | FHS | THS | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Binder | Hydrated lime | 80% | |
| Metakaolinite | 20% | ||
| Filler | Fine hemp shives | 100% | - |
| Thick hemp shives | - | 100% | |
| 1:2 | 1:2 | ||
| Additive | Methylcellulose | 0.5% by weight of the binder | |
| Water | Water/binder ratio | 1.72 | 1.63 |
Averaged values of apparent density, specific density and porosity of samples of hemp–lime composite with the FHS and THS.
| Parameter | Unit | FHS | THS |
|---|---|---|---|
| Apparent density | (kg/m3) | 382.4 | 376.9 |
| Specific density | (kg/m3) | 2152.6 | 2055.4 |
| Total porosity | (%) | 82.2 | 81.7 |
Figure 2Increase in the volumetric and mass water absorptivity of composite samples over time.
Figure 3Capillary uptake of tested composites.
Results of thermal conductivity test.
| Parameter | Unit | FHS | THS |
|---|---|---|---|
| Thermal conductivity coefficient | (W/(m∙K)) | 0.1050 | 0.0992 |
| ±Std dev. | (W/(m∙K)) | 0.0007 | 0.0009 |
Vapor permeability results.
| Measured Parameters | Filler/RH Condition | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| THS | FHS | ||||
| symbol (unit) | name | 0–50% | 50–94% | 0–50% | 50–94% |
| δ (kg/(m·s·Pa)) | water vapor permeability | 1.62 × 10−11 | 3.55 × 10−11 | 1.60 × 10−11 | 4.01 × 10−11 |
| μ (-) | vapor diffusion resistance factor | 12.18 | 5.57 | 12.37 | 4.94 |
Specific heat at T = 30 °C.
| Temperature of Measurement | Type | Specific Heat (J/(kg·K)) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sample 1 | Sample 2 | Sample 3 | Xavg | Std Dev. | ||
| T = 30 °C | FSH | 1667 | 1476 | 1582 | 1575 | 95.7 |
| TSH | 1537 | 1675 | 1592 | 1601 | 69.5 | |
Figure 4Specific heat vs. temperature for FHS samples.
Figure 5Specific heat vs. temperature for THS samples.
Figure 6Stress–strain relationship: all samples (a) and average values (b).
Figure 7The compressive strength test set-up and the forms of destruction of composite specimens from THS and FHS mixtures.
Figure 8Flexural force-displacement relationship: all samples (a) and average values (b).