Professional Documents
Culture Documents
2014 1163141
2014 1163141
Summary
Coconut fibers reinforced polypropylene composites processed by extrusion
with 2% MAPP – maleic anhydride grafted polypropylene as compatibilizer show
about 10 to 20% improved tensile strength and tensile modulus as compared to
that of the polypropylene matrix due to fiber/matrix interfacial adhesion resulting
from compatibilizing effect of MAPP. Scanning electron microscopy shows
coconut fibers deeply embedded in polypropylene matrix with good interfacial
adhesion. The melting temperatures of the CNF/PP composites are same as that
of PP and are around 170°C.
Introduction
Natural fibers are being used as reinforcement materials because of their
environmental advantages, including renewable, recyclable, CO2 neutral
and biodegradable nature [1]. Natural fiber reinforced polymer composites
are offering techno-economic advantages, for example; good mechanical
and thermal properties, low cost, low energy consumption, non-abrasive to
instrument and non-toxic, and are replacing conventional synthetic or inorganic
fiber reinforced polymer composites in some applications [2].
* anshuanjaliiitr@gmail.com
©Smithers Information Ltd., 2014
Materials
Coconut fiber was obtained commercially from the local market in raw form,
and was cut into fibers of 4-5 mm length. Polypropylene was obtained from
RTP Company (USA). Maelic anhydride grafted polypropylene (MAPP) was
obtained from commercial supplier, Pluss Polymer Pvt. Ltd. (New Delhi,
India). Polypropylene composites with coconut fiber as reinforcement were
processed with 2% maleic anhydride as a compatibilizer.
degradation of the coconut fiber. The zones were set at various temperatures
depending on the fiber content, as follows: Zone 1 - 175°C, Zone 2 - 180°C,
Zone 3 - 185°C , Zone 4 - 185°C Melt temperature - 175°C, Torque - 25-
30 N. The screw speed was set at 60 rpm. The compounded materials were
collected as strands and palletized in a standard strand pelletizer used in
plastics compounding. Injection molding of the granulated PP and of the
extruded 5/95 and 10/90 CNF/PP composites were performed using TEXAIR
injection molding machine following ASTM standards. During the operation
the heating of each zone in injection molding are: Zone-1 175°C, zone-2
185°C, and zone-3 185°C.
Mechanical Properties
Tensile properties of PP matrix and of the processed 5/95 and 10/90 CNF/PP
composites with 2% MAPP were evaluated following ASTM D638. The tensile
tests were performed in a Universal Testing Machine, (Model 3382, INSTRON,
25 Ton Capacity) and values recorded were average of five samples each of
PP matrix and of the 5/95 and 10/90 CNF/PP composite compositions tested.
The cross head speed for tensile test was 50 mm/min.
Morphology Analysis
Field Emission Scanning Electron Microscope (FE-SEM Model Quanta 200F)
with an acceleration voltage of 15kV was used to study morphology of raw
coconut fiber (CNF), PP matrix, and the 5/95 and 10/90 CNF/PP composites.
The specimens were coated with a thin gold layer and mounted on the Al
stub for examination.
Thermal Properties
Thermal properties i.e; the melting temperature of the samples were evaluated
by Differential Scanning Calorimeter (DSC F3 NETZSCH). The equipment was
programmed to work at the temperature range between room temperature
(around 30°C) and 300°C, under nitrogen flow of 50 ml/min. The heating rate
was 10°C/min. The values of melting temperature (Tm) were obtained.
Tensile Properties
Table 2 indicates that in absolute terms, 5/95 and 10/90 CNF/PP composites
with 2% MAPP as a compatibilizer, respectively have a tensile modulus of
2.87 GPa and 3.01 GPa; that are higher than the tensile modulus of PP matrix
that has a value 2.62 GPa. In relative terms, compared to the modulus of
the PP matrix, the tensile modulus of 5/95 and 10/90 CNF/PP composite
compositions are higher by 10% and 15% respectively. Figure 1 shows
the effect of increasing CNF content on tensile modulus of all the CNF/PP
composite compositions with 2% MAPP. The vertical line in the Figure 1
indicates the deviations in the values.
Table 2. Tensile modulus and tensile strength of PP and
5/95 and 10/90 CNF/PP composites
Sample Tensile Modulus Tensile Strength
(GPa) (MPa)
Polypropylene (PP) 2.62 20
5/95 CNF/PP 2.87 22.91
10/90 3.01 24.59
Similarly, Table 2 indicates that in absolute terms 5/95 and 10/90 CNF/PP
composites with 2% MAPP as a compatibilizer, respectively have tensile
strength of 22.91 MPa and 24.59 MPa respectively; that are higher than the
tensile strength of PP matrix that has a value of 20 MPa. In relative terms,
compared to the tensile strength of the PP matrix, the tensile strength of 5/95
and 10/90 CNF/PP composite compositions are higher by 15%, and 23%
respectively. Figure 1 shows the effect of increasing CNF content on tensile
strength of all the CF/PP composite compositions. The vertical line in the
Figure 1 indicates the deviations in the values.
This significant increase in the tensile strength and tensile modulus of the CNF/
PP composites with 2% MAPP as a compatibilizer, comparing to PP matrix,
is attributed to the reinforcing effect of coconut fibers due to their adhesion
Figure 1. Effect of increasing coconut fiber content on the tensile modulus and tensile
strength of CNF/PP composites
Morphology
Scanning electron micrograph of coconut fibers (CNF) and of the PP matrix
and of the 5/95 and 10/90 CNF/PP composite compositions with 2% MAPP
as a compatibilizer, are shown in Figure 2a-d. The micrographs of the CNF/
PP composites composition (Figure 2c-d) show the reinforcing coconut fibers
(CNF) deeply embedded in, and covered with PP matrix with no noticeable
voids and gaps, confirming proper adhesion between CNF and PP matrix
due to the presence of 2% MAPP as a compatibilizer.
Thermal Characterization
Figures 3 and 4 show melting temperatures of polypropylene (PP) matrix and
of the 10/90 CNF/PP composite respectively. The melting temperature of the
PP matrix and of 10/90 CNF/PP composites are recorded in Figures 2 and
3 respectively. The peak melting temperature (Tm) of PP matrix and of the
10/90 CNF/PP composites evaluated from the DSC curves indicate that the
melting temperature of the PP is 170.2°C and of the 10/90 CNF/PP is 170.6°C.
This indicates that the Tm of the composite are not exactly the same (170.2°C)
as that of the PP matrix, but are within the limits of experimental errors,
(a) (b)
(c) (d)
Figure 2. Scanning electron micrograph of (a) coconut fiber, (b) PP matrix, (c) 5/95
CNF/PP, (d) 10/90 CNF/PP composites
Conclusions
Coconut fibers reinforced polypropylene (CNF/PP) composites have been
successfully processed by extrusion with 2% MAPP – maleic anhydride
grafted polypropylene as compatibilizer. CNF/PP composites show up to
15% improved tensile modulus and unto 23% improved tensile strength as
compared to that of the polypropylene matrix due to fiber/matrix interfacial
adhesion resulting from compatibilizing effect of MAPP that is evident from the
scanning electron micrographs showing coconut fibers deeply embedded in
polypropylene matrix with good interfacial adhesion. The melting temperatures
of the CNF/PP composites are same as that of PP and are around 170°C.
References
1. Mohanty A.K., Misra M., and Drzal L.T., Journal of Polymer and Environment,
10(1-2) (2002) 19-26.
2. Paul Wambua, Jan Ivens, and Ignaas Verpoest. Composites Science and
Technology, 63 (2003) 1259-1264.
3. Bledzki A.K. and Gassan J., Progress in Polymer Science, 24 (1999) 221-274.
5. Singh A.A. and Palsule Sanjay, Journal of Composite Materials, December 10,
2013 doi: 10.1177/0021998313513045
6. Gelfuso M.V., Silva P.V.G.D., and Thomazini D., Materials Research, 14(3)
(2011) 360-365.
7. Mir S.S., Nafsin N., Hasan M., Hasan N., and Hassan A., Materials and Design,
52 (2013) 251-257.
8. Lai C.Y., Sapuan S.M., Ahmad M., Yahya N., and Dahlan K.Z.H.M., Polymer-
Plastic Technology and Engineering, 44 (2005) 619-632.
10. Arrakhiz F.Z., Malha M., Bouhfid R., Benmoussa K., and Qaiss A., Composites
Part B: Engineering, 47 (2013) 35-41.
11. Rozman H.D., Tan K.W., Kumar R.N., Abubakar A., Ishak Z.A.M., and Ismail H.,
European Polymer Journal, 36 (2000) 1483-1494.
12. Ishizaki M.H., Maciel P.D.M.C., Visconte L.L.Y., Furtado C.R.G., and Leblanc
J.L., International Journal of Polymeric Materials, 58 (2009) 267-277.
13. Ayrilmis N., Jarusombuti S., Fueangvivat V., Bauchongkol P., and White R.H.,
Fiber and Polymers, 12(7) (2011) 919-926.
14. Bettini S.H.P., Bicudo A.B.L., Augusto I.S., Antunes L.A., Morassi P.L., Condotta
R., and Bonse B.C., Journal of Applied Polymer Science, 118 (2010) 2841-
2848.