4.7 Article

Preparation and modification of nano calcium carbonate filler from waste marble dust and commercial limestone for papermaking wet end application

期刊

POWDER TECHNOLOGY
卷 279, 期 -, 页码 290-300

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.powtec.2015.04.006

关键词

Nano-calcium carbonate filler; Surface modification; Waste marble; Commercial limestone; Paper properties

资金

  1. Egyptian Science and Technology Development Fund (STDF) [ID 737]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The objective of this work was to prepare low cost CaCO3 nanofillers for wet end papermaking application. CaCO3 nanofillers were successfully prepared from commercial limestone and white waste marble dust using wet carbonation technique. Anionic (sodium oleate) and cationic surfactants (CTAB) were used to modify the size, morphology and surface property of CaCO3. The prepared CaCO3 fillers were applied in paper handsheets and their effect on paper quality was systematically investigated. The results obtained from XRD and FTIR revealed that the prepared CaCO3 particles were typically calcite. The presence of surfactant during the preparation significantly reduced the particle size and changed the morphology from scalenohedral to rhombohedral as illustrated from TEM results. The surfactant modification of filler improved the retention and consequently all the paper optical properties significantly increased. However, the strength properties were practically unchanged despite the high retention values obtained compared with GCC, indicating improved affinity of the filler particles to the fibres. Oleate modified CaCO3 showed higher effect on retention, apparent density, opacity, and mechanical properties than the CTAB modified CaCO3. The SEM images of paper handsheets confirmed the results and indicated that the modified nano CaCO3 are highly retained and more effectively adhered and bonded to pulp fibre, in addition to their uniform distribution on paper surface. (C) 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据