4.7 Review

Waste Natural Polymers as Potential Fillers for Biodegradable Latex-Based Composites: A Review

期刊

POLYMERS
卷 13, 期 20, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/polym13203600

关键词

extractions; cellulose; crosslink mechanism; biodegradable; waste materials; natural filler; latex; composite; mechanical properties; surface modifications

资金

  1. Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia under the Fundamental Research Grant Scheme [FRGS/1/2020/TK0/USM/01/2]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In recent years, waste natural polymers have gained much attention as renewable, biodegradable, non-toxic, and low-cost fillers in polymer composites, due to the increasing awareness of the global environment. Various surface modification techniques have been applied to exploit the potential of residual natural loading in latex composites. This review focuses on the preparation and characterization of modified waste natural fillers for latex-based composites, exploring the potential of these fillers in terms of mechanical, thermal, biodegradability, and filler-latex interaction aspects for a more sustainable future.
In recent years, biodegradable composites have become important in various fields because of the increasing awareness of the global environment. Waste natural polymers have received much attention as renewable, biodegradable, non-toxic and low-cost filler in polymer composites. In order to exploit the high potential for residual natural loading in latex composites, different types of surface modification techniques have been applied. This review discusses the preparation and characterization of the modified waste natural fillers for latex-based composites. The potency of the waste natural filler for the latex-based composites was explored with a focus on the mechanical, thermal, biodegradability and filler-latex interaction. This review also offers an update on the possible application of the waste natural filler towards the biodegradability of the latex-based composites for a more sustainable future.

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