4.7 Article

Characterization of natural cellulose fiber from corn stalk waste subjected to different surface treatments

Journal

CELLULOSE
Volume 26, Issue 8, Pages 4707-4719

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10570-019-02429-6

Keywords

Corn stalk; Surface treatment; Fiber extraction; Cellulose fiber; Natural fiber; XRD

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51875242, 51505259]
  2. China-EU H2020 FabSurfWAR project [2016YFE0112100, 644971]
  3. Natural Science Foundation of Jilin Province of China [20190302129GX]
  4. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2016M601383]
  5. Jilin Province Science and Technology Development Plan Item [20170101173JC, 20170204015NY]
  6. 111 project [B16020]
  7. Jilin Province Development and Reform Commission Plan Item [2018C044-3]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Crop stalk is a valuable source of cellulosic biomass and has attracted increasing attention as one kind of renewable resource. Cellulose fibers have potential as a reinforcement material to replace synthetic fibers used in biopolymer composites. This study addresses the modification and characterization of corn stem fibers extracted from corn stalk waste. The corn stem fibers were treated with alkali, silane and NaOH-silane solutions, and then, the chemical properties, surface morphology, mechanical behaviors and thermal stability of the corn stem fibers were characterized. The surface treatments improved the chemical and mechanical properties of the corn stem fibers. The fibers had rougher surfaces after the surface treatments. EDX and FTIR analysis confirmed that the surface treatments removed a certain amount of hemicelluloses, lignin and pectin from the natural fiber surface. XRD analysis results showed that the surface treatments had a positive impact on the crystallinity index of the natural fibers. The mechanical properties and thermal stability of the treated corn stem fibers were also found to be improved.

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