4.7 Article

Bioprocess preparation of wheat straw fibers and their characterization

期刊

INDUSTRIAL CROPS AND PRODUCTS
卷 23, 期 1, 页码 1-8

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.indcrop.2005.01.006

关键词

bio-processing; wheat straw; retting; fiber characteristics; cellulosic fibers

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Plant fiber reinforced thermoplastic composites have gained much attraction in structural applications such as building and automotive products. Agricultural residues such as wheat straw, bagasse, and corn stover can also be exploited as readily available natural fiber resources for similar applications. The objective of this study was to extract fibers from wheat straw and also to determine the usefulness of fungal retting of wheat straw before extracting the fibers. Wheat straw was mechanically defibrillated using a laboratory-scale mechanical refiner before and after fungal retting. Fiber characteristics such as physico-chemical and mechanical properties, surface characteristics, and thermal properties of the resultant fibers were measured in order to explore the possibilities of using the fibers as reinforcing materials. Retted fibers were stronger than un-retted fibers. The length and diameter of the retted fibers were lower than the un-retted fibers. FT-IR spectroscopic analysis of the wheat straw fibers indicated the fractional removal of hemicelluloses and lignin from the retted fiber. X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) of the fibers showed the partial removal of extractives from the surface of the retted fibers. Also, the oxygen to carbon ratio (O/C) of the fibers illustrated that there is more lignin type surface structure for both retted and un-retted fibers. However, slightly higher ratio of oxygen to carbon in the retted fiber indicated a more carbohydrate-rich fiber than the un-retted fiber. Thermal degradation characteristics demonstrated the suitability of processing wheat straw fibers with thermoplastics. (C) 2005 Published by Elsevier B.V.

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