| Literature DB >> 35477970 |
Adrien Rigobello1, Phil Ayres2.
Abstract
Mycelium based composites (MBC) exhibit many properties that make them promising alternatives for less sustainable materials. However, there is no unified approach to their testing. We hypothesise that the two-phase particulate composite model and use of ASTM D1037 could provide a basis for systematisation. An experimental series of MBC were produced using four substrate particle sizes and subjected to compression testing. We report on their effect over Young's modulus and ultimate strength. We extend the study by investigating three anisotropic substrate designs through orientated fibre placement as a strategy for modifying compressive behaviour. We find that the two-phase particulate model is appropriate for describing the mechanical behaviour of MBC and that mechanical behaviour can be modified through anisotropic designs using orientated fibres. We also confirm that fibre orientation and particle size are significant parameters in determining ultimate strength.Entities:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35477970 PMCID: PMC9046257 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-10930-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.996
Figure 1FTIR spectra of hemp-based hessian, beech wood, rattan, and common reed fibres.
Figure 2FTIR spectra of G. lucidum colonised beech wood, G. lucidum mycelium, and beech wood. Green areas represent increased values in mycelium-colonised specimens (peaks 1 to 8), red areas are decreased values in mycelium-colonised specimens (peaks 9 to 12).
Figure 3Fibre placement strategies and their sectional CT scan (left to right): control (BS), jacketing coaxial to load (BM_H), fibres perpendicular to load (BS_R), fibres coaxial to load (BS_V).
Summary of specimen types parameters, resulting dried densities, and compressive properties.
| Specimen type | Granulate size (mm) | Fibre composition | Mean density (s.d.) | Mean Young’s modulus (s.d.) | Mean ultimate strength (s.d.) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BS | 0.5–1.0 | Control | 209.67 kg/m | 1.79 MPa (0.41) | 171.86 kPa (36.54) |
| BS_H | 0.5–1.0 | Hessian jacketing | 230.48 kg/m | 1.58 MPa (0.42) | 175.79 kPa (34.38) |
| BS_R | 0.5–1.0 | Rattan perpendicular to load | 196.59 kg/m | 0.66 MPa (0.42) | 89.06 kPa (58.49) |
| BS_V | 0.5–1.0 | Common reed coaxial to load | 194.12 kg/m | 3.88 MPa (2.51) | 146.85 kPa (39.26) |
| BM | 0.75–3.0 | Control | 233.87 kg/m | 3.32 MPa (0.80) | 306.38 kPa (57.64) |
| BM_H | 0.75–3.0 | Hessian jacketing | 248.70 kg/m | 2.99 MPa (0.54) | 298.85 kPa (35.47) |
| BM_R | 0.75–3.0 | Rattan perpendicular to load | 226.77 kg/m | 4.02 MPa (4.45) | 232.30 kPa (62.85) |
| BM_V | 0.75–3.0 | Common reed coaxial to load | 198.14 kg/m | 9.21 MPa (6.42) | 270.93 kPa (79.76) |
| BL | 4.0–12.0 | Control | 217.60 kg/m | 2.96 MPa (1.04) | 245.60 kPa (30.31) |
| BL_H | 4.0–12.0 | Hessian jacketing | 264.05 kg/m | 3.01 MPa (0.46) | 223.93 kPa (25.88) |
| BL_R | 4.0–12.0 | Rattan perpendicular to load | 240.98 kg/m | 2.24 MPa (0.58) | 180.88 kPa (64.75) |
| BL_V | 4.0–12.0 | Common reed coaxial to load | 209.47 kg/m | 8.50 MPa (4.56) | 290.86 kPa (100.83) |
| BSML | 0.5–12.0 | Control | 220.59 kg/m | 2.17 MPa (0.36) | 237.09 kPa (31.73) |
| BSML_H | 0.5–12.0 | Hessian jacketing | 246.85 kg/m | 2.20 MPa (1.04) | 194.48 kPa (48.47) |
| BSML_R | 0.5–12.0 | Rattan perpendicular to load | 224.09 kg/m | 1.87 MPa (0.30) | 171.44 kPa (26.13) |
| BSML_V | 0.5–12.0 | Common reed coaxial to load | 203.08 kg/m | 7.89 MPa (2.41) | 338.75 kPa (65.39) |
Figure 4Box plots for Young’s modulus results (a) and ultimate strength results (b).
Figure 5Box plots for dried specimen densities.
Figure 6Parameters interaction graph for Young’s modulus (a) and ultimate strength (b).
Figure 7Beech wood particles of small (a), medium (b) and large (c) granulation used in this study.
Figure 8Specific strength results as a function of specific stiffness. Labelled data points: results from this study; unlabelled data points: reports from the state-of-the-art.
Figure 9Young’s modulus results as a function of density. Circled data points: results from this study; uncircled data points: reports from the state-of-the-art.