4.2 Article

UTILIZATION OF CELLULOSE NANOFIBERS AND CATIONIC POLYMERS TO IMPROVE BREAKING LENGTH OF PAPER

Journal

CELLULOSE CHEMISTRY AND TECHNOLOGY
Volume 53, Issue 7-8, Pages 767-774

Publisher

EDITURA ACAD ROMANE
DOI: 10.35812/CelluloseChemTechnol.2019.53.75

Keywords

papermaking; breaking length; cellulose nanofibers; cationic starch; cationic polyacrylamide

Funding

  1. Behbahan Khatam Alanbia University of Technology [6.24670]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

One of the key properties of paper is its breaking length, which is usually controlled in many paper products. To achieve this, several natural and synthetic polymers are used in paper industries in accordance with paper grades and customer needs. In this study, the combination of cationic starch (CS) and/or polyacrylamide (CPAM) as common additives, and cellulose nanofibers (CNFs), were added to a short-fiber pulp suspension to investigate the reinforcement effects and to compare such properties with those of paper prepared with 20% softwood long-fiber. The breaking length was measured on the prepared handsheets. The results showed that adding 1% CS significantly improves paper breaking length, which was well comparable to the handsheets reinforced with 15% softwood pulp. The results showed that adding less CS (0.5%) along with 3% CNFs significantly increased the paper breaking length, while reducing process difficulties associated with CS. The same result was also achieved adding 3% CNFs along with 0.03% CPAM. Furthermore, a triple system of CNFs, CS, and CPAM additives significantly enhanced the paper breaking length and surpassed the breaking length of paper made with 20% softwood pulp. Using this triple system led to the least changes in handsheet thickness as well. Therefore, this triple system of additives can replace softwood pulp, thereby significantly expanding the spectrum of paper products for the countries with limited softwood pulp sources.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available