Cellulose Fiber/Bentonite Clay/Biodegradable Thermoplastic Composites

Cellulose Fiber/Bentonite Clay/Biodegradable Thermoplastic Composites

Adding cellulose fiber reinforcement can improve mechanical properties of biodegradable plastics, but fiber must be well dispersed to achieve any benefit. The approach to dispersing fiber in this study was to use aqueous gels of sodium bentonite clay. These clay-fiber gels were combined with powdere...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of polymers and the environment Vol. 15; no. 4; pp. 251 - 257
Main Authors: Ludvik, C. N, Glenn, G. M, Klamczynski, A. P, Wood, D. F
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: Dordrecht Boston : Springer US 01-10-2007
Springer Nature B.V
Subjects:
Bentonite
Biodegradable materials
Biodegradation
Bioplastics
Calcium carbonate
Cellulose
Clay
Experimental design
Plastics
Polylactic acid
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Adding cellulose fiber reinforcement can improve mechanical properties of biodegradable plastics, but fiber must be well dispersed to achieve any benefit. The approach to dispersing fiber in this study was to use aqueous gels of sodium bentonite clay. These clay-fiber gels were combined with powdered compostable thermoplastics and calcium carbonate filler. The composite was dried, twin-screw extruded, and injection molded to make thin parts for tensile testing. An experimental design was used to determine the effect of fiber concentration, fiber length, and clay concentration. Polybutylene adipate/terephthalate copolymer (PBAT) and 70/30 polylactic acid (PLA)/PBAT blend were the biodegradable plastics studied. The composite strength decreased compared to the thermoplastics (13 vs. 19 MPa for PBAT, 27 vs. 38 MPa for the PLA/PBAT blend). The composite elongation to break decreased compared to the thermoplastics (170% vs. 831% for PBAT, 4.9% vs. 8.7% for the PLA/PBAT blend). The modulus increased for the composites compared to the thermoplastic standards (149 vs. 61 MPa for PBAT, 1328 vs. 965 MPa for the PLA/PBAT blend). All composite samples had good water resistance.
Bibliography:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10924-007-0072-5
ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ObjectType-Article-2
ObjectType-Feature-1
ISSN:1566-2543
1572-8919
1572-8900
DOI:10.1007/s10924-007-0072-5