4.4 Article

Starch-based nanocomposites reinforced with flax cellulose nanocrystals

Journal

EXPRESS POLYMER LETTERS
Volume 2, Issue 7, Pages 502-510

Publisher

BUDAPEST UNIV TECHNOL & ECON
DOI: 10.3144/expresspolymlett.2008.60

Keywords

nanocomposites; reinforcements; starch; flax; mechanical properties

Funding

  1. Agricultural Bioproducts Innovation Program (ABIP) of Canada via Pulse Research Network (PURENET)
  2. Next Generation BioProducts for Health and Wellness Network (NGBHW)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this study, the cellulose crystals, prepared by acid hydrolysis of flax fiber, consisted of slender rods with lengths ranging from 100 to 500 nm and diameters ranging from 10 to 30 nm, respectively. After mixing the suspension of flax cellulose nanocrystals (FCNs) and plasticized starch (PS), the nanocomposite films were obtained by the casting method. The effects of FCNs loading on the morphology, thermal behaviour, mechanical properties and water sensitivity of the films were investigated by means of wide-angle X-ray diffraction, differential scanning calorimetry, tensile testing, and water absorption testing. Scanning electron microscopy photographs of the failure surfaces clearly demonstrated a homogeneous dispersion of FCNs within the PS matrix and strong interfacial adherence between matrix and fillers, which led to an increase of glass transition temperature ascribed to the starch molecular chains in the starch-rich phase. In particular, these nanocomposite films exhibited a significant increase in tensile strength and Young's modulus from 3.9 to 11.9 MPa and from 31.9 to 498.2 MPa, respectively, with increasing FCNs content from 0 to 30 wt%. Also, with a loading of FCNs, the resulting nanocomposite films showed a higher water resistance. Therefore, FCNs played an important role in improving the mechanical properties and water resistance of the starch-based materials.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available