4.0 Article

Optimization of Chitin Nanofiber Preparation by Ball Milling as Filler for Composite Resin

期刊

JOURNAL OF COMPOSITES SCIENCE
卷 6, 期 7, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/jcs6070197

关键词

chitin nanofiber; ball milling; reinforcing material; nanocomposite

资金

  1. Japanese ministry of education, culture, sports, science, and technology (MEXT)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Chitin nanofibers were prepared by mechanically grinding chitin using a ball mill. The optimal conditions for efficient preparation were determined by analyzing the resulting water dispersion and cast film. The length and width of the nanofibers were measured, and it was found that the size of the balls, total ball weight, and milling time all had an impact on the grinding efficiency and fiber properties.
Chitin nanofiber is a nanomaterial produced by pulverizing chitin, the main component of crab shells. Since it has excellent mechanical properties, it is expected to be used as a reinforcing material to strengthen materials. Chitin was mechanically ground in water using a ball mill to prepare nanofibers. The ball size, total ball weight, and milling time were varied, and the resulting water dispersion and the cast film were analyzed to optimize the conditions for efficient preparation. The length and width of the nanofibers were also measured by SEM and AFM observations. The size of the balls affected the level of grinding and the intensity of impact energy on the chitin. The most efficient crushing was achieved when the diameter was 1 mm. The total ball weight directly affects the milling frequency, and milling proceeds as the total weight increases. However, if too many balls occupy the container, the grinding efficiency decreases. Therefore, a total ball weight of 300 g was optimal. Regarding the milling time, the chitin becomes finer depending on the increase of that time. However, after a specific time, the shape did not change much. Therefore, a milling time of approximately 150 min was appropriate.

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

4.0
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