4.7 Article

Improving the mechanical resistance of waterborne wood coatings by adding cellulose nanofibres

Journal

REACTIVE & FUNCTIONAL POLYMERS
Volume 85, Issue -, Pages 214-220

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.reactfunctpolym.2014.07.020

Keywords

Cellulose; Nanofibres; Wood coating; Additive; Mechanical resistance

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In the present study, microfibrillated cellulose (MFC) and nanocrystalline cellulose (NCC) were applied as additives for a waterborne acrylate/polyurethane-based wood coating in order to improve the mechanical resistance of coated wood surfaces. Coating mixtures containing up to 5 wt% nanocellulose were prepared by high-shear mixing and applied to wood substrates. The optical, mechanical and chemical properties of cured coatings were characterized. Surface roughness, gloss, scratch resistance, abrasion resistance and resistance against chemicals were determined according to the relevant European standards. Additionally, nanoindentation (NI) was used to assess the micromechanical properties of modified and unmodified coatings. Owing to a higher surface roughness, cellulose-filled coatings showed significantly lower levels of gloss than the unmodified coating indicating that nanocellulose acts as a matting agent. NI experiments revealed a slightly positive effect of nanocellulose addition on the hardness and modulus of the coatings. While scratch resistance improved consistently with increasing nanocellulose addition, abrasion resistance was found to improve only sporadically. Tensile tests on free-standing coating films revealed a significantly higher tensile strength and modulus for cellulose-filled coatings. Overall, the results suggest that the addition of cellulose nanofibres primarily improves the internal cohesion of the coating layer whereby MFC was more effective than NCC. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available