4.7 Article

Polymer Composite Fabrication Reinforced with Bamboo Fiber for Particle Board Product Raw Material Application

Journal

POLYMERS
Volume 13, Issue 24, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/polym13244377

Keywords

polymer; composite; bamboo fiber; particleboard; mechanical properties

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study explored the use of bamboo particle reinforced polymer composites as a substitute for particleboard products still using wood as a raw material. The optimum performance composite was found to be Tali bamboo reinforced polymer composite with a particle size of 250 mesh and a volume fraction of 30%.
Bamboo particles as reinforcement in composite materials are prospective to be applied to particleboard products in the industry. This study aimed to synthesize bamboo particle reinforced polymer composites as a substitute for particleboard products, which still use wood as a raw material. The parameters of the composite synthesis process were varied with powder sizes of 50, 100, and 250 mesh, each mesh with volume fractions of 10, 20, and 30%, matrix types of polyester and polypropylene, Tali Bamboo, and Haur Hejo Bamboo as reinforcements. Characterization included tensile strength, flexural strength, and morphology. Particleboard products were tested based on JIS A 5908-2003, including density testing, moisture content, thickness expansion after immersion in water, flexural strength in dry and wet conditions, bending Young's modulus, and wood screw holding power. The results showed that the maximum flexural and tensile strength values of 91.03 MPa and 30.85 MPa, respectively, were found in polymer composites reinforced with Tali bamboo with the particle size of 250 mesh and volume fraction 30%. Particleboard made of polypropylene and polyester reinforced Tali Bamboo with a particle size of 250 mesh and a volume fraction of 30% composites meets the JIS A 5908-2003 standard.

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