4.1 Article

Natural weathering studies of oil palm trunk lumber (OPTL) green polymer composites enhanced with oil palm shell (OPS) nanoparticles

期刊

SPRINGERPLUS
卷 2, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

SPRINGER INTERNATIONAL PUBLISHING AG
DOI: 10.1186/2193-1801-2-592

关键词

Impregnation; IR-spectra; SEM; Wave number; Weight loss; Phenol formaldehyde

资金

  1. Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM), Penang, Malaysia [RU-1001/PTEKIND/811195]
  2. Ministry of Education, Malaysia [FRGS-203/PTE-KIND/6711325]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, a green composite was produced from Oil Palm Trunk Lumber (OPTL) by impregnating oil palm shell (OPS) nanoparticles with formaldehyde resin. The changes of physical, mechanical and morphological properties of the OPS nanoparticles impregnated OPTL as a result of natural weathering was investigated. The OPS fibres were ground with a ball-mill for producing nanoparticles before being mixed with the phenol formaldehyde (PF) resin at a concentration of 1, 3, 5 and 10% w/w basis and impregnated into the OPTL by vacuum-pressure method. The treated OPTL samples were exposed to natural weathering for the period of 6 and 12 months in West Java, Indonesia according to ASTM D1435-99 standard. Physical and mechanical tests were done for analyzing the changes in phenol formaldehyde-nanoparticles impregnated (PF-NPI) OPTL. FT-IR and SEM studies were done to analyze the morphological changes. The results showed that both exposure time of weathering and concentration of PF-NPI had significant impact on physical and mechanical properties of OPTL. The longer exposure of samples to weathering condition reduced the wave numbers during FT-IR test. However, all these physical, mechanical and morphological changes were significant when compared with the untreated samples or only PF impregnated samples. Thus, it can be concluded that PF-NP impregnation into OPTL improved the resistance against natural weathering and would pave the ground for improved products from OPTL for outdoor conditions.

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

4.1
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