| Literature DB >> 35566855 |
Mahmudul Hasan1, Mashiur Rahman1,2, Ying Chen2, Nazim Cicek2.
Abstract
The effect of extraction time, temperature, and alkali concentration on the physical and mechanical properties of cattail (Typha latifolia L.) fibres were investigated using five levels of time (4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 h), four levels of temperature (70, 80, 90, and 95 °C), and three levels of NaOH concentration (4, 7, 10%, w/v) in a 3 × 4 × 5 factorial experimental design. The extraction parameters were optimized for bio-composite application using a desirability function analysis (DFA), which determined that the optimum extraction time, temperature and NaOH concentration were 10 h, 90 °C, and 7%, respectively. A sensitivity analysis for optimal treatment conditions confirmed that the higher overall desirability does not necessarily mean a better solution. However, the analysis showed that the majority of optimum settings for time, temperature, and concentration of NaOH found in the sensitivity analysis matched with the optimum conditions determined by DFA, which confirmed the validity of the optimum treatment conditions.Entities:
Keywords: Typha fibre; bio-composites; desirability function analysis (DFA); optimum extraction bath parameters; waste biomass fibre
Year: 2022 PMID: 35566855 PMCID: PMC9100250 DOI: 10.3390/polym14091685
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Polymers (Basel) ISSN: 2073-4360 Impact factor: 4.967
Number of replications per treatment, and total number of samples for each response variables.
| Response Variables | No. of Replications Per Treatment | Total No. of Treatments | Total No. of Samples |
|---|---|---|---|
| Yield (%) | 4 | 60 | 240 |
| Diameter (µm) | 10 | 600 | |
| Tensile strength (MPa) | 10 | 600 | |
| Modulus of elasticity (GPa) | 10 | 600 | |
| Elongation at break (%) | 10 | 600 | |
| Moisture regain (%) | 3 | 180 |
Figure 1Fibres attached to the frames by glue.
Figure 2Fibre-frame placed between the jaws.
Summary of data and the distribution used for each response variable.
| Response Variables | Description of Data | Distribution Used |
|---|---|---|
| Yield (%) | Proportions, ranged between 0 to 1 (0 to 100 when expressed as a percentage). | Beta distribution [ |
| Diameter (µm) | Highly skewed to the right with skewness = 1.19 and kurtosis = 2.52 | Lognormal distribution [ |
| Tensile strength (MPa) | Heavily skewed to the right with skewness = 1.43 and kurtosis = 4.66. | Lognormal distribution [ |
| Modulus of elasticity (GPa) | Heavily skewed to the right with skewness = 1.57 and kurtosis = 4.18. | Lognormal distribution [ |
| Elongation at break (%) | Approximately followed the normal distribution with skewness = 0.66 and Kurtosis = 0.79 | Normal distribution [ |
| Moisture Regain (%) | Approximately followed a normal distribution with skewness = 0.88 and kurtosis = 0.49 | Normal distribution [ |
Three-way factorial ANOVA for yield (%) and fibre properties.
| Effects | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Properties | t | H | C | t × H | t × C | H × C | H × t × C |
| Yield (%) | ** | ** | ** | NS | NS | * | NS |
| Diameter (µm) | ** | ** | ** | NS | NS | ** | NS |
| Tensile Strength (MPa) | * | * | ** | NS | NS | ** | NS |
| MOD (GPa) | ** | ** | NS | NS | * | ** | NS |
| Elongation at Break (%) | * | * | ** | NS | NS | ** | NS |
| Moisture Regain (%) | * | ** | ** | NS | NS | ** | NS |
p < 0.05 = significant (*); p < 0.001 = Highly Significant (**); p > 0.05 = Not Significant (NS); MOD: Modulus of elasticity.
Figure 3Effects of interaction of temperature and concentration on fibre yield (%), diameter and moisture regain (%).
Figure 4Stress Vs Strain Curve of Cattail fibres.
Figure 5Effects of various interactions on the mechanical properties of fibres.
Comparison of cattail fibres with other natural fibres commonly used for composites [6,30,31].
| Properties | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Strength (MPa) | Modulus of Elasticity (GPa) | Elongation at Break (%) | Moisture Regain (%) | |
| Flax | 600–1200 | 27.6 | 1.2–3 | 7 |
| Hemp | 690 | 70 | 1.6–4.5 | 8 |
| Sisal | 350–370 | 9.4–19 | 1.9–3 | 11 |
| Coir | 100–175 | 6 | 15–20 | 10 |
| Cattail (Current Research) | 68–169 | 6.8–15 | 1.16–2 | 8–13 |
Optimum values of physical and mechanical properties of extracted cattail fibres.
| Response Variables | Optimum Values | Response Variables | Optimum Values |
|---|---|---|---|
| Yield (%) | 34.57 ± 0.79 | MOD (GPa) | 14.80 ± 1.26 |
| Diameter (µm) | 74.64 ± 2.79 | EAB (%) | 1.988 ± 0.10 |
| Tensile strength (MPa) | 168.5 ± 12.09 | MR (%) | 7.825 ± 0.16 |
MOD: Modulus of elasticity; EAB: Elongation at break; MR: Moisture regain.
The objectives of different properties, their relative weights, target values and tolerance values for automobile applications.
| Properties | Objectives | Target Value | Tolerance Value | Weights | Importance Coefficients | Reference Values |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yield (%) | Maximize | 34 | 20 | 1 | 1 | - |
| MR (%) | Minimize | 8 | 11 | 1 | 1 | a 11 (sisal) |
| Diameter (µm) | Minimize | 75 | 120 | 1 | 2 | - |
| TS (MPa) | Maximize | 168 | 100 | 2 | 3 | b 100–200 (coir) |
| MOD (GPa) | Maximize | 15 | 10 | 2 | 3 | b 9.4–19 (sisal) |
MR: Moisture regain; TS: Tensile strength; MOD: Modulus of elasticity; a: reference [29], b: reference [36].
Parameter settings with upper and lower edges for sensitivity analysis.
| Parameters | Property (Designation) | Levels | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Upper (+1) | Lower (−1) | ||
| Weight | Yield (%) (A) | 2 | 0.5 |
| Diameter (B) | 2 | 0.5 | |
| Strength (C) | 2 | 0.5 | |
| Modulus (D) | 2 | 0.5 | |
| Moisture (E) | 2 | 0.5 | |
| Importance of coefficient | Yield (%) (F) | 5 | 1 |
| Diameter (G) | 5 | 1 | |
| Strength (H) | 5 | 1 | |
| Modulus (I) | 5 | 1 | |
| Moisture (J) | 5 | 1 | |
| Range | Yield (%) (K) | 15–34 | 25–34 |
| Diameter (L) | 75–140 | 75–100 | |
| Strength (M) | 80–168 | 120–168 | |
| Modulus (N) | 8–14 | 12–14 | |
| Moisture (O) | 8–13 | 8–9 | |
The 20 run Plackett–Burman experimental design for 15 factors.
| Run | Coded Values for Selected Factors | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | Desirability | |
| 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | −1 | 1 | −1 | 1 | −1 | −1 | −1 | −1 | 1 | 1 | −1 | −1 | 0.21 |
| 2 | −1 | −1 | −1 | 1 | 1 | −1 | −1 | 1 | −1 | −1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | −1 | 0.76 |
| 3 | 1 | 1 | −1 | −1 | 1 | −1 | −1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | −1 | 1 | −1 | 1 | 0.81 |
| 4 | 1 | −1 | −1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | −1 | 1 | −1 | 1 | −1 | −1 | −1 | −1 | 0.54 |
| 5 | −1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | −1 | 1 | −1 | 1 | −1 | −1 | −1 | −1 | 1 | 1 | 0.49 |
| 6 | 1 | 1 | −1 | 1 | −1 | 1 | −1 | −1 | −1 | −1 | 1 | 1 | −1 | −1 | 1 | 0.83 |
| 7 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0.67 |
| 8 | 1 | −1 | −1 | 1 | −1 | −1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | −1 | 1 | −1 | 1 | −1 | 0.46 |
| 9 | 1 | −1 | 1 | −1 | −1 | −1 | −1 | 1 | 1 | −1 | −1 | 1 | −1 | −1 | 1 | 0.46 |
| 10 | −1 | −1 | 1 | 1 | −1 | −1 | 1 | −1 | −1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | −1 | 1 | 0.93 |
| 11 | −1 | −1 | 1 | −1 | −1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | −1 | 1 | −1 | 1 | −1 | −1 | 0.85 |
| 12 | −1 | −1 | −1 | −1 | 1 | 1 | −1 | −1 | 1 | −1 | −1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0.69 |
| 13 | −1 | 1 | −1 | −1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | −1 | 1 | −1 | 1 | −1 | −1 | −1 | 0.27 |
| 14 | −1 | 1 | 1 | −1 | −1 | 1 | −1 | −1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | −1 | 1 | −1 | 0.73 |
| 15 | 1 | −1 | 1 | −1 | 1 | −1 | −1 | −1 | −1 | 1 | 1 | −1 | −1 | 1 | −1 | 0.45 |
| 16 | −1 | −1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | −1 | 1 | −1 | 1 | −1 | −1 | −1 | −1 | 1 | 0.45 |
| 17 | 1 | −1 | −1 | −1 | −1 | 1 | 1 | −1 | −1 | 1 | −1 | −1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0.34 |
| 18 | −1 | 1 | −1 | 1 | −1 | −1 | −1 | −1 | 1 | 1 | −1 | −1 | 1 | −1 | −1 | 0.23 |
| 19 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | −1 | 1 | −1 | 1 | −1 | −1 | −1 | −1 | 1 | 1 | −1 | 0.06 |
| 20 | −1 | 1 | −1 | −1 | −1 | −1 | 1 | 1 | −1 | −1 | 1 | −1 | −1 | 1 | 1 | 0.95 |
ANOVA for Plackett–Burman experiment.
| Source | DF | Sum of Squares | Mean Sum of Squared | F-Ratio | Probability |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model | 15 | 1.214 | 0.080 | 6.154 | 0.0038 |
| Error | 4 | 0.055 | 0.013 | ||
| Total | 19 | 1.269 |