| Literature DB >> 35574263 |
Harikrishnan Pulikkalparambil1, Debabrata Nandi1, Sanjay Mavinkere Rangappa1, Sreelakshmi Prasanth2, Suchart Siengchin1.
Abstract
The crucial role of face masks is highlighted in our day-to-day life during the COVID-19 pandemic. Polypropylene (PP)-based disposable face masks are widely used to hold back viral transmission. The discarded masks can create a huge burden of contamination on the environment. The purpose of this work is to recycle and reuse discarded masks to reduce environmental pollution. A simple and innovative technique to recycle surgical masks into composites of higher mechanical strength and antimicrobial properties is explored to reuse in packaging materials and cutleries. The surgical masks composed of PP fibers are recycled to use as a matrix material to reinforce with sisal and hemp fibers. The hot compression molding technique is used to sandwich the PP masks with natural fibers. The tensile strength of the composites is remarkably increased by 197% and 305% for sisal fiber composites and hemp fiber composites, respectively. The tensile elongation also increased to 574% for sisal fiber composites. The resulting composites exhibit notable antimicrobial properties against Staphylococcus aureus, a pathogen responsible for common staphylococcal food poisoning. The composites are found to be suitable to use as food contact cutleries and packaging materials.Entities:
Keywords: COVID‐19; antimicrobial packaging; natural fibers; recycling; surgical masks
Year: 2022 PMID: 35574263 PMCID: PMC9088574 DOI: 10.1002/pc.26668
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Polym Compos ISSN: 0272-8397 Impact factor: 3.531
FIGURE 1Flow chart for fabrication of composites
Properties and parameters of sisal and hemp fibers
| Parameters | Sisal fiber | Hemp fiber |
|---|---|---|
| Cellulose content (%) | 60–67 | 72 |
| Hemicellulose (%) | 10–15 | 10 |
| Lignin content (%) | 8–12 | 3 |
| Density (g/cm3) | 1.45 | 1.48 |
| Moisture content (%) | 10 | – |
| Tensile strength (MPa) | 227–400 | 550–900 |
| Tensile elongation (%) | 2–14 | 1.6 |
Taken weight fractions to develop the composites
| Samples | Weight (g) | Weight fraction (%) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
| |
| PP | – | 14.64 | – | 100.00 |
| PP/sisal fiber | 15.96 | 9.15 | 63.56 | 36.44 |
| PP/hemp fiber | 14.97 | 9.15 | 62.06 | 37.94 |
FIGURE 2Surface morphology of (A) sisal and (B) hemp fibers using scanning electron microspcope
FIGURE 3Comparison of tensile strength and elongation percentage of pure polypropylene mask, sisal fiber/mask and hemp fiber/mask composites
FIGURE 4Degradation temperatures of pure polypropylene mask, sisal fiber/mask and hemp fiber/mask composites
Char residue, initial, final and maximum degradation temperatures of pure polypropylene mask, sisal fiber/mask and hemp fiber/mask composites
| Samples | Initial degradation temperature ( | Maximum degradation temperature ( | Final degradation temperature ( | Char residue (%) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pure mask | 419.08 | 447.57 | 459.77 | 1.08 | ||||
| Sisal fiber/mask | 300.21 | 436.61 | 323.00 | 455.83 | 332.85 | 470.47 | 48.32 | 13.25 |
| Hemp fiber/mask | 327.28 | 440.80 | 354.59 | 459.33 | 364.99 | 473.79 | 53.05 | 16.43 |
FIGURE 5Significant inhibition of Staphylococcus aureus bacterial growth by fiber/PP composites with respect to pure polypropylene in case of both sisal and hemp fibers