| Literature DB >> 35808652 |
Tej Singh1, Punyasloka Pattnaik2, Amit Aherwar3, Lalit Ranakoti4, Gábor Dogossy5, László Lendvai5.
Abstract
Based on the criteria importance through inter-criteria correlation (CRITIC) and the multi-attributive border approximation area comparison (MABAC), a decision-making algorithm was developed to select the optimal biocomposite material according to several conflicting attributes. Poly(lactic acid) (PLA)-based binary biocomposites containing wood waste and ternary biocomposites containing wood waste/rice husk with an overall additive content of 0, 2.5, 5, 7.5 and 10 wt.% were manufactured and evaluated for physicomechanical and wear properties. For the algorithm, the following performance attributes were considered through testing: the evaluated physical (density, water absorption), mechanical (tensile, flexural, compressive and impact) and sliding wear properties. The water absorption and strength properties were found to be the highest for unfilled PLA, while modulus performance remained the highest for 10 wt.% rice husk/wood-waste-added PLA biocomposites. The density of PLA biocomposites increased as rice husk increased, while it decreased as wood waste increased. The lowest and highest density values were recorded for 10 wt.% wood waste and rice husk/wood-waste-containing PLA biocomposites, respectively. The lowest wear was exhibited by the 5 wt.% rice husk/wood-waste-loaded PLA biocomposite. The experimental results were composition dependent and devoid of any discernible trend. Consequently, prioritizing the performance of PLA biocomposites to choose the best one among a collection of alternatives became challenging. Therefore, a decision-making algorithm, called CRITIC-MABAC, was used to select the optimal composition. The importance of attributes was determined by assigning weight using the CRITIC method, while the MABAC method was employed to assess the complete ranking of the biocomposites. The results achieved from the hybrid CRITIC-MABAC approach demonstrated that the 7.5 wt.% wood-waste-added PLA biocomposite exhibited the optimal physicomechanical and wear properties.Entities:
Keywords: CRITIC–MABAC; PLA biocomposite; physicomechanical; rice husk; wear; wood waste
Year: 2022 PMID: 35808652 PMCID: PMC9269307 DOI: 10.3390/polym14132603
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Polymers (Basel) ISSN: 2073-4360 Impact factor: 4.967
Ingredients and composition variation.
| Ingredients | Composition (wt.%) of Biocomposite Alternatives | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| p-1 | p-2 | p-3 | p-4 | p-5 | p-6 | p-7 | p-8 | p-9 | |
| PLA | 100 | 97.5 | 95 | 92.5 | 90 | 97.5 | 95 | 92.5 | 90 |
| Rice husk | 0 | 1.25 | 2.5 | 3.75 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Wood waste | 0 | 1.25 | 2.5 | 3.75 | 5 | 2.5 | 5 | 7.5 | 10 |
Figure 1The fabricated specimens.
The test conditions and implications of selected performance attributes.
| Attribute | Test Condition | Performance Implication |
|---|---|---|
| q-1: Tensile strength (MPa) | EN ISO 527 | Higher-the-better |
| q-2: Compressive strength (MPa) | EN ISO 604 | Higher-the-better |
| q-3: Impact strength (kJ/m2) | EN ISO 179 | Higher-the-better |
| q-4: Flexural strength (MPa) | EN ISO 178 | Higher-the-better |
| q-5: Tensile modulus (GPa) | EN ISO 527 | Higher-the-better |
| q-6: Compressive modulus (GPa) | EN ISO 604 | Higher-the-better |
| q-7: Flexural modulus (GPa) | EN ISO 178 | Higher-the-better |
| q-8: Density (g/cm3) | Archimedes’ principle | Lower-the-better |
| q-9: Water absorption (%) | ASTM D570-98 | Lower-the-better |
| q-10: Wear (g) | Load = 50 N, sliding distance = 2.5 km, sliding velocity = 3 m/s | Lower-the-better |
Figure 2Proposed CRITIC–MABAC algorithm.
Experimental data of the alternatives.
| Attributes | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| q-1: Tensile Strength (MPa) | q-2: Compressive Strength (MPa) | q-3: Impact Strength (kJ/m2) | q-4: Flexural Strength (MPa) | q-5: Tensile Modulus (GPa) | q-6: Compressive Modulus (GPa) | q-7: Flexural Modulus (GPa) | q-8: Density (g/cm3) | q-9: | q-10: Wear (g) | ||
| Biocomposite alternatives | p-1 | 57.96 ± 0.27 | 105.67 ± 1.06 | 15.25 ± 1.66 | 99.53 ± 0.21 | 2.56 ± 0.04 | 2.71 ± 0.11 | 3.43 ± 0.02 | 1.240 ± 0.032 | 0.36 ± 0.015 | 0.1652 ± 0.004 |
| p-2 | 51.13 ± 0.97 | 101.40 ± 1.95 | 11.42 ± 0.88 | 99.67 ± 0.61 | 2.77 ± 0.05 | 3.25 ± 0.17 | 3.58 ± 0.02 | 1.263 ± 0.008 | 0.78 ± 0.026 | 0.1142 ± 0.002 | |
| p-3 | 51.19 ± 1.44 | 100.84 ± 1.58 | 11.25 ± 1.32 | 99.33 ± 0.87 | 2.79 ± 0.04 | 3.36 ± 0.13 | 3.69 ± 0.07 | 1.266 ± 0.012 | 1.16 ± 0.012 | 0.1014 ± 0.002 | |
| p-4 | 50.06 ± 0.31 | 102.12 ± 3.27 | 8.75 ± 1.50 | 97.84 ± 0.52 | 2.89 ± 0.06 | 3.45 ± 0.13 | 3.92 ± 0.03 | 1.272 ± 0.010 | 1.44 ± 0.021 | 0.1644 ± 0.003 | |
| p-5 | 50.23 ± 0.51 | 101.86 ± 1.63 | 9.63 ± 1.05 | 97.36 ± 1.44 | 3.02 ± 0.05 | 3.58 ± 0.11 | 4.03 ± 0.03 | 1.277 ± 0.010 | 1.74 ± 0.032 | 0.2047 ± 0.003 | |
| p-6 | 53.01 ± 0.62 | 99.44 ± 2.42 | 12.31 ± 2.25 | 100.20 ± 0.67 | 2.66 ± 0.04 | 2.94 ± 0.06 | 3.51 ± 0.01 | 1.225 ± 0.030 | 0.94 ± 0.021 | 0.1176 ± 0.003 | |
| p-7 | 51.87 ± 0.54 | 100.86 ± 2.44 | 10.44 ± 0.52 | 100.43 ± 0.59 | 2.78 ± 0.04 | 3.36 ± 0.09 | 3.74 ± 0.03 | 1.211 ± 0.022 | 1.56 ± 0.035 | 0.1646 ± 0.005 | |
| p-8 | 51.52 ± 1.31 | 100.68 ± 1.72 | 9.38 ± 1.79 | 99.96 ± 1.08 | 2.94 ± 0.04 | 3.43 ± 0.08 | 3.90 ± 0.04 | 1.198 ± 0.020 | 1.90 ± 0.040 | 0.2017 ± 0.005 | |
| p-9 | 50.90 ± 0.41 | 99.98 ± 2.07 | 9.63 ± 1.80 | 99.01 ± 0.66 | 2.97 ± 0.04 | 3.46 ± 0.27 | 4.03 ± 0.02 | 1.183 ± 0.028 | 1.92 ± 0.035 | 0.2618 ± 0.006 | |
Figure 3Worn micrographs of biocomposite alternatives; (a) p-1, (b) p-2, (c) p-8 and (d) p-9.
Figure 4Preference order of biocomposite alternatives for selected attributes.
Normalized matrix.
| Attributes | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| q-1: Tensile Strength | q-2: Compressive Strength | q-3: Impact Strength | q-4: Flexural Strength | q-5: Tensile Modulus | q-6: Compressive Modulus | q-7: Flexural Modulus | q-8: Density | q-9: | q-10: Wear | ||
| Biocomposite alternatives | p-1 | 1.0000 | 1.0000 | 1.0000 | 0.7030 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | 0.3936 | 1.0000 | 0.6022 |
| p-2 | 0.1354 | 0.3146 | 0.4031 | 0.7591 | 0.4565 | 0.6207 | 0.2500 | 0.1489 | 0.7308 | 0.9202 | |
| p-3 | 0.1430 | 0.2247 | 0.3876 | 0.6271 | 0.5000 | 0.7471 | 0.4333 | 0.1170 | 0.4872 | 1.0000 | |
| p-4 | 0.0000 | 0.4302 | 0.0000 | 0.1320 | 0.7174 | 0.8506 | 0.8167 | 0.0532 | 0.3077 | 0.6072 | |
| p-5 | 0.0215 | 0.3884 | 0.1240 | 0.0000 | 1.0000 | 1.0000 | 1.0000 | 0.0000 | 0.1154 | 0.3560 | |
| p-6 | 0.3722 | 0.0000 | 0.5442 | 0.9241 | 0.2174 | 0.2644 | 0.1333 | 0.5532 | 0.6282 | 0.8990 | |
| p-7 | 0.2291 | 0.2279 | 0.2543 | 1.0000 | 0.4783 | 0.7471 | 0.5167 | 0.7021 | 0.2308 | 0.6060 | |
| p-8 | 0.1848 | 0.1990 | 0.0899 | 0.8449 | 0.8261 | 0.8276 | 0.7833 | 0.8404 | 0.0128 | 0.3747 | |
| p-9 | 0.1063 | 0.0867 | 0.1287 | 0.5314 | 0.8913 | 0.8621 | 1.0000 | 1.0000 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 | |
Results of CRITIC method.
| q-1: Tensile Strength | q-2: Compressive Strength | q-3: Impact Strength | q-4: Flexural Strength | q-5: Tensile Modulus | q-6: Compressive Modulus | q-7: Flexural Modulus | q-8: Density | q-9: | q-10: Wear | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 2.5713 | 2.5996 | 2.6361 | 3.0507 | 3.6803 | 3.643 | 4.1872 | 3.5011 | 3.0887 | 3.1114 |
|
| 0.0802 | 0.0810 | 0.0822 | 0.0951 | 0.1148 | 0.1136 | 0.1306 | 0.1092 | 0.0963 | 0.0970 |
Weighted normalized matrix.
| Attributes | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| q-1: Tensile Strength | q-2: Compressive Strength | q-3: Impact Strength | q-4: Flexural Strength | q-5: Tensile Modulus | q-6: Compressive Modulus | q-7: Flexural Modulus | q-8: Density | q-9: | q-10: Wear | ||
| Biocomposite alternatives | p-1 | 0.1604 | 0.1620 | 0.1644 | 0.1620 | 0.1148 | 0.1136 | 0.1306 | 0.1522 | 0.1926 | 0.1554 |
| p-2 | 0.0911 | 0.1065 | 0.1153 | 0.1673 | 0.1672 | 0.1841 | 0.1633 | 0.1255 | 0.1667 | 0.1863 | |
| p-3 | 0.0917 | 0.0992 | 0.1141 | 0.1547 | 0.1722 | 0.1985 | 0.1872 | 0.1220 | 0.1432 | 0.1940 | |
| p-4 | 0.0802 | 0.1158 | 0.0822 | 0.1077 | 0.1972 | 0.2102 | 0.2373 | 0.1150 | 0.1259 | 0.1559 | |
| p-5 | 0.0819 | 0.1125 | 0.0924 | 0.0951 | 0.2296 | 0.2272 | 0.2612 | 0.1092 | 0.1074 | 0.1315 | |
| p-6 | 0.1100 | 0.0810 | 0.1269 | 0.1830 | 0.1398 | 0.1436 | 0.1480 | 0.1696 | 0.1568 | 0.1842 | |
| p-7 | 0.0986 | 0.0995 | 0.1031 | 0.1902 | 0.1697 | 0.1985 | 0.1981 | 0.1859 | 0.1185 | 0.1558 | |
| p-8 | 0.0950 | 0.0971 | 0.0896 | 0.1754 | 0.2096 | 0.2076 | 0.2329 | 0.2010 | 0.0975 | 0.1333 | |
| p-9 | 0.0887 | 0.0880 | 0.0928 | 0.1456 | 0.2171 | 0.2115 | 0.2612 | 0.2184 | 0.0963 | 0.0970 | |
The border approximation area () matrix.
| Attributes | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| q-1: Tensile Strength | q-2: Compressive Strength | q-3: Impact Strength | q-4: Flexural Strength | q-5: Tensile Modulus | q-6: Compressive Modulus | q-7: Flexural Modulus | q-8: Density | q-9: | q-10: Wear |
| 0.0976 | 0.1049 | 0.1067 | 0.1499 | 0.1759 | 0.1845 | 0.1967 | 0.1509 | 0.1303 | 0.1518 |
The distance () matrix.
| Attributes | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| q-1: Tensile Strength | q-2: Compressive Strength | q-3: Impact Strength | q-4: Flexural Strength | q-5: Tensile Modulus | q-6: Compressive Modulus | q-7: Flexural Modulus | q-8: Density | q-9: | q-10: Wear | ||
| Biocomposite alternatives | p-1 | 0.0628 | 0.0571 | 0.0577 | 0.0121 | −0.0611 | −0.0709 | −0.0661 | 0.0013 | 0.0623 | 0.0036 |
| p-2 | −0.0065 | 0.0016 | 0.0086 | 0.0174 | −0.0087 | −0.0004 | −0.0334 | −0.0254 | 0.0364 | 0.0345 | |
| p-3 | −0.0059 | −0.0057 | 0.0074 | 0.0048 | −0.0037 | 0.0140 | −0.0095 | −0.0289 | 0.0129 | 0.0422 | |
| p-4 | −0.0174 | 0.0109 | −0.0245 | −0.0422 | 0.0213 | 0.0257 | 0.0406 | −0.0359 | −0.0044 | 0.0041 | |
| p-5 | −0.0157 | 0.0076 | −0.0143 | −0.0548 | 0.0537 | 0.0427 | 0.0645 | −0.0417 | −0.0229 | −0.0203 | |
| p-6 | 0.0124 | −0.0239 | 0.0202 | 0.0331 | −0.0361 | −0.0409 | −0.0487 | 0.0187 | 0.0265 | 0.0324 | |
| p-7 | 0.0010 | −0.0054 | −0.0036 | 0.0403 | −0.0062 | 0.0140 | 0.0014 | 0.0350 | −0.0118 | 0.0040 | |
| p-8 | −0.0026 | −0.0078 | −0.0171 | 0.0255 | 0.0337 | 0.0231 | 0.0362 | 0.0501 | −0.0328 | −0.0185 | |
| p-9 | −0.0089 | −0.0169 | −0.0139 | −0.0043 | 0.0412 | 0.0270 | 0.0645 | 0.0675 | −0.0340 | −0.0548 | |
Figure 5Ranking of PLA biocomposite alternatives.