4.7 Article

Preparation, Characterization and Mechanical Properties of Bio-Based Polyurethane Adhesives from Isocyanate-Functionalized Cellulose Acetate and Castor Oil for Bonding Wood

期刊

POLYMERS
卷 9, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/polym9040132

关键词

biosourced adhesives; castor oil; cellulose acetate; isocyanate; polyurethane; rheology

资金

  1. MINECO-FEDER programme [CTQ2014-56038-C3-1R]
  2. Junta de Andalucia programme [TEP-1499]
  3. Ministerio de Educacion [FPU13/01114]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Nowadays, different types of natural carbohydrates such as sugars, starch, cellulose and their derivatives are widely used as renewable raw materials. Vegetable oils are also considered as promising raw materials to be used in the synthesis of high quality products in different applications, including in the adhesive field. According to this, several bio-based formulations with adhesion properties were synthesized first by inducing the functionalization of cellulose acetate with 1,6-hexamethylene diisocyanate and then mixing the resulting biopolymer with a variable amount of castor oil, from 20% to 70% (wt). These bio-based adhesives were mechanically characterized by means of small-amplitude oscillatory torsion measurements, at different temperatures, and standardized tests to evaluate tension loading (ASTM-D906) and peel strength (ASTM-D903). In addition, thermal properties and stability of the synthesized bio-polyurethane formulations were also analyzed through differential scanning calorimetry and thermal gravimetric analysis. As a result, the performance of these bio-polyurethane products as wood adhesives were compared and analyzed. Bio-polyurethane formulations exhibited a simple thermo-rheological behavior below a critical temperature of around 80-100 degrees C depending on the castor oil/cellulose acetate weight ratio. Formulation with medium castor oil/biopolymer weight ratio (50:50 % wt) showed the most suitable mechanical properties and adhesion performance for bonding wood.

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