Polymer Testing 89 (2020) 106721

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Polymer Testing
journal homepage: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/polytest

A state-of-the-art review on particulate wood polymer composites:

Processing, properties and applications
Mohammad Z.R. Khan a, Sunil Kumar Srivastava a, M.K. Gupta, Ph.D. b, *
a
Mechanical Engineering Department, Madan Mohan Malaviya University of Technology, Gorakhpur, UP, 273 010, India
b
Mechanical Engineering Department, Motilal Nehru National Institute of Technology Allahabad, Prayagraj, UP, 211004, India

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: In the present decade, the demands for recyclable, environmentally friendly and low-cost with good strength
Hybrid wood composites composites materials have been significantly increased. In this context, the particulate wood polymer composites
Polymer composite fabrication have attracted the researchers owing to their eco-friendliness, low-cost as they are prepared using waste wood
Chemical treatment
particles, and good mechanical and physical properties. These composites were prepared by filling the waste
Characterization
Mechanical properties
wood particles into the polymers using different fabrication methods such as extrusion, hand layup, compression
Thermal properties moulding, injection moulding and additive manufacturing (3D printing). A good number of research works have
Water absorption behaviour been reported on the testing and characterization of wood composites for the various applications so far. This fact
motivated to prepare a state-of-the-art review on the recent developments in processing, characterization, and
applications of wood composites. This paper presents a discussion on the chemical structure and properties of
different types of wood species. The mechanical, thermal and water absorption behaviour of thermosets, ther­
moplastics and biopolymers based wood composites have also been discussed. Further, characterization of the
nano biocomposites prepared using nanocellulose/nanoparticles of wood are also presented. The outcomes of the
present review provide a good understanding of wood composites that will encourage the researchers for further
research works & developments of novel wood composites for the advanced applications.

1. Introduction
The wood, an orthotropic material, is an tremendous gift to human
beings from the nature. The importance of wood is due to its free
availability, good stability, renewability, low weight, and better elas­
ticity. A wide varieties of wood species are found all over the world
depending up on the geographical locations. The anatomical structure,
chemical compositions, and acoustic, physical, mechanical, and thermal
properties are different in various wood species. The cellulose, hemi­
cellulose, and lignin are major constituents of wood [1–3]. Based on the
wood anatomy and percentage of chemical constituents, the wood spe­
cies are broodily classified into hardwood and softwood [4]. The hard­
wood is obtained from the deciduous trees (broad-leafed, angiosperms)
[4,5]. Sal, Teak, Oak, Indian rosewood, Maple, Breech, Mango, Popular,
etc. come under the category of hardwood [4,6]. The softwood is ob­
tained from conifer tress (gymnosperms) such as Pine, Spruce, Cedar,
Fir, Larch, etc. Table 1 depicts the chemical composition of different
types of hardwood and softwood available in literature. Further, Table 2
shows the densities and tensile properties of important wood species.
The raw wood can be tailored in different shapes and sizes for
different types of household products and commercial applications such
as furniture, building and construction, truck bodies, sports kit, pulp and
paper, so on [26]. The wood flour waste, major biproduct of wood
processing industries such as sawmills, wood panel, plywood, building
components, particle board, furniture, joining and craft industries, were
used for the landfill. These industries generate 45–52% of wood waste in
the form of wood flour from solid wood pieces [27]. The effective uti­
lization of wood flour can minimize the adverse effects on the envi­
ronment, ecology, and human beings [28]. Several researchers have
used the wood flour with different types of polymers for the develop­
ment of next generation materials, i.e., wood polymer composites
(WPCs) [29–34].
During 1970’s, the concept of wood plastic composites (WPCs) came
into existence in Italy which was further popularised in 1990s in north
America region. This concept was extended by Asian countries (Japan,
Malaysia, Singapore, China, India, etc.) in 21st century [35,36]. The
particulate wood polymer composites (PWPCs) are developed by
amalgamating the wood particles with either thermosetting or

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: mkgupta@mnnit.ac.in, mnnit.manoj@gmail.com (M.K. Gupta).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymertesting.2020.106721
Received 5 May 2020; Received in revised form 20 June 2020; Accepted 27 June 2020
Available online 30 June 2020
0142-9418/© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
M.Z.R. Khan et al. Polymer Testing 89 (2020) 106721

Table 1 2. Particulate wood polymer composites (PWPCs)

Chemical compositions of hardwood and softwood species.
Wood species Percentage of Chemical Constituents Ref. The PWPCs are developed by amalgamating the wood particles with
Cellulose Hemicellulose Lignin Others the polymer matrix. The polymers may be either thermosets/thermo­
Hardwood plastics or bio-degradable/non-biodegradable, whereas particulate re­
Isora 74 23 1.09 [7]
–
inforcements may be either hardwood or softwood. The softwood has
Teak 49.28 29.67 30.33 – [8,9]
Maple 47 30 21 2 [10] higher cellulose per unit hemicellulose and tracheid which leads to
Beech 44–46 30–35 21–23 – [11–13] higher interfacial adhesion between wood particles and polymer matrix
Poplar 44–46 33–36 18–21 – [11–13] but possesses weak strength. The hardwood has less cellulose per unit
Oak 42–47 20–27 25–27 3–4 [10] hemicellulose compared to softwood that leads the poor interfacial
Sal 40–50 15–25 15–30 [14–16]
adhesion, but they are good in strength [39,41]. The various fabrication
–
Mango 40.19 11.47 35.96 – [14–16]
Jelutong, Terbulan, 40–44 15–35 18–25 [17] methodologies such as thermoforming, extrusion, compression
Batai, moulding, injection moulding and hand lay-up are used for the devel­
Rubberwood, opment of PWPCs [37,39]. The selection of technique depends on the
Pulai
type of polymer, geometry of the product and fibre wt. fraction [42]. The
Apple wood Shell 39.54 26.06 29.86 0.9 [18]
Bamboo 26–43 30 21–31 – [19]
PWPCs are subjected to the mechanical and thermal loadings; therefore,
Softwood require good tensile, compressive, flexural, impact, torsion, hardness,
Pine 44–46 25–28 27–29 4–5 [11–13] thermal stability, etc. Apart from these, they must be good water resis­
Spruce 44–46 25–27 27–29 – [11–13] tant; therefore, need better surface finish. These properties mainly
Picea abies (spruce) 41.0 27.5 28.1 3.0 [20]
depend up on particles wt.%, aspect ratio, geometry, type (softwood/­
Cedar 37 19 34 3 [10]
hardwood) and interfacial adhesion between the particles and matrix.
Several researchers investigated the tensile strengths and tensile moduli,
flexural strengths and flexural moduli, impact strengths, hardness, sur­
Table 2
face roughness and thermal, thermomechanical and water absorption
Density and tensile properties of wood species.
behaviour of PWPCs.
Wood Type Density Tensile Strength Young’s Modulus Ref.
(g/cm3) (MPa) (GPa)
Hardwood
2.1. Fabrication methods of PWPCs (focused on 3D printing)
Isora 1.2–1.3 500–600 – [7]
Birch 1.20 – 37.90 [21] The selection of appropriate fabrication method for wood composites
Keruing 0.74 41.20 11.20 [22] is a tough exercise which depends on the type of polymer, product ge­
Bintangor 0.74 38.80 11.90 [22]
ometry, surrounding conditions, overall cost, and weight percentage of
Sal 0.72 39.64 1.54 [14–16]
Kedondong 0.70 38.70 13.40 [22] wood particles into matrix material. The polymer type (either thermo­
Elm 0.68 186.20 9.24 [23] setting or thermoplastic) is the most influencing parameter for the se­
Oak 0.63 77.90 10.41 [24] lection of fabrication method. The conventional fabrication methods
Bamboo 0.6–1.1 140–230 11–17 [7] such as extrusion moulding, injection moulding, compression moulding,
Beech 0.56 86.20 9.51 [24]
Teak 0.55 95 1.40 [8,9]
hot press moulding, and hand lay-up are commonly used fabrication
Maple 0.54 108.20 9.58 [23,24] method that are used by different researchers as discussed in the liter­
Mango 0.52 23.65 1.17 [14–16] ature [29,43,44]. In recent years, the 3D printing is being used for the
Sweetgum 0.52 119.30 8.27 [23] preparation of PWPCs as newer and advanced fabrication methodology.
Hornbeam 0.37 15.26 [25]
–
In the present scenario, rapid prototype technologies (i.e. 3D print­
Poplar 0.33 154.40 5.86 [23,25]
Softwood ing/additive manufacturing) have been used in construction,
Spruce 1.5 84.80 18–40 [21] manufacturing and medical sectors. Further, 3D printing has also been
Cedar 0.35 78.60 7.20 [24] used for developing the polymer matrix composites. In this method, the
Pine 0.35 12–27 0.1–0.5 [10] virtual 3D model of solid object is prepared in the 3D modelling envi­
Fir 0.33 77.90 13.81 [24,25]
ronment such as computer aided design (CAD) software; thereafter, the
prepared 3D model is divided into collection of single layers as per the
thermoplastic polymers whether biodegradable or non-biodegradable capability of 3D printer. The solid object is printed as layer upon layer
[37]. Generally, breech, Sal, teak, mango, poplar, maple, oak, pine, deposition of composite materials. This technique is very much useful
spruce, cedar, fir, larch so far wood particles have been frequently used for the rapid prototyping of objects in creating and testing the product
as reinforcement in polymer matrix [38]. Thermoforming, extrusion, designs without the expensive tool and loss of materials [37]. The main
compression moulding, hand lay-up, injection moulding, and advanced advantages of this techniques is directly developing the parts in one step
manufacturing method such as 3D printing are generally used for the using CAD data. Fused deposition modelling (FDM), selective laser sin­
development of PWPCs [37,39]. The PWPCs are economical, full­ tering (SLS), stereolithography, 3D plotting, and inkjet 3D printing are
y/partially biodegradable depending on polymer types, recyclable, common 3D printing techniques for the preparation of polymer matrix
having low density, higher specific properties, and possess good me­ composites. Many other techniques are under the development phase so
chanical and thermal properties. Moreover, they are good water resis­ far [45]. Further, FDM and SLS 3D printing techniques are used for the
tant, environmentally friendly, requires less maintenance and possess development of PWPCs. Fig. 1 shows the schematic diagram of a 3D
good mouldability, good resistance to fungal attack [39,40]. The printer [46].
increasing research interest in the area of PWPCs motivated to review The FDM 3D printing technique is a material extrusion process that
the mechanical, thermal and water absorption behaviour of wood uses the prepared filaments of PWPCs. The filaments are fed into the pre-
composites, hybrid wood composites, nano wood composites and heating chamber where PWPCs filaments melt into semi-liquid state and
chemically treated wood composites. extruded layer upon layer through the nozzle in a controlled manner on
the build platform. The limitation of FDM technique depends up on the
type of polymer used that must possess the melting temperature below
the thermal degradation temperature of wood particles used in the
PWPCs. Moreover, this method is limited for the thermoplastics based

2
M.Z.R. Khan et al.
Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of 3D printer using PWPCs filament.
polymer materials [37,45,47,48]. The SLS 3D printing technique uses
the powder that melts at different temperature and fused together by the
laser radiation. The SLS technique for the preparation of PWPCs is under
the development phase [37]. All the 3D printing techniques for the
development of PWPCs became popular in the past few years. Due to
limitations such as high energy consumption, relatively high processing
cost, materials limitations, slow processing and harmful emission, uses
of 3D printing technology is limited in area of PWPCs so far, but in
coming time it is going to be viral for manufacturing of all types of
PWPCs. To date, very limited literature related to development and
characterization of 3D printed PWPCs are available. The FDM technique
of 3D printing has been used for the development of PWPCs objects
directly in single step. Martikka et al. [47] measured the mechanical
properties (tensile and impact) of 3D printed wood particulate PLA
composite. The tensile and impact strengths of 3D printed WPs were
found lower than the pristine PLA polymer. The tensile strength and
impact strength of developed composites were found approximately
58% and 53% lower than the PLA. The mechanical properties of 3D
printed PWPCs objects also depend up on the printing pattern, layer
thickness, nozzle diameter, feed speed and build style of composite
[49–51].
2.2. Mechanical properties of wood composites
The mechanical properties of PWPCs depend up on the physical and
mechanical properties of wood particles, properties of polymers, parti­
cles concentrations, geometry (shape and size) of particles, interfacial
adhesion, compatibility and wetability [38]. Good interfacial adhesion,
low particle weight fraction and stress concentration results into higher
tensile strength whereas higher aspect ratio, higher weight fraction of
wood particles and good wettability of particles with polymer increased
the tensile modulus of composites. The higher interfacial adhesion, fibre
pull-out and maximum energy absorption improved the impact strength
of PWPCs [38]. The following paragraphs describe the tensile, flexural,
impact and hardness properties of different types of PWPCs reported in
literature.
3
Polymer Testing 89 (2020) 106721
2.2.1. Thermoplastic-based wood composites
Thermoplastic polymers are recurrently melted or soften at elevated
temperature and moulded into the desired shapes. They are either semi-
crystalline or amorphous. Amorphous thermoplastic polymers such as
ABS, acrylic, polystyrene, polyvinyl chloride, etc. consist of randomly
oriented molecular chains, whereas, the semi-crystalline polymers such
as polyethylene, polypropylene, nylon, etc. exhibits the varying degree
of crystallinity that controls the physical and mechanical properties. The
crystalline and amorphous polymers behave differently at elevated
temperature. Amorphous polymers do not depict the true melting but
soften to a point of viscous flow [52,53]. These polymers have wide
compatibility with the conventional fibres such as glass and carbon,
require low processing energy, economical, low density, ease of fabri­
cation, etc. [54,55]. Generally, polyethylene and polypropylene were
used for the development of thermoplastic-based polymer composites
which can be used for the exterior elements due to its ease of availability
as waste and good resistance to the moisture [29,56].
It has been established that few thermoplastic polymers were used
for development of PWPCs because selected polymers should have
softening temperature less than the thermal degradation temperature of
wood, i.e., less than 200 � C [57,58]. The thermoplastic polymers such as
low density polyethylene (LDPE), high density polyethylene (HDPE),
polyvinyl chloride (PVC), polyethylene, polystyrene, polypropylene
have good wood compatibility [52]. Polypropylene polymer has been
frequently used due to its low price, low service temperature, and
excellent mechanical properties. Table 3 shows mechanical properties of
wood particulates thermoplastic polymer composites reported in liter­
ature. The investigations of mechanical properties for these composites
are carried out for different weight content of wood particles (WPs), WPs
size and aspect ratio, chemical structure, and composite fabrication
method.
Nourbakhsh et al. [59] investigated and compared the mechanical
properties of particulate polypropylene composites having different WPs
size (40,50,60 Mesh) and aspect ratios (3.5 and 4.4) for 30% weight
fraction of popular wood reinforcement. They concluded that mechan­
ical properties of composite increases with an increase in WPs mesh
M.Z.R. Khan et al. Polymer Testing 89 (2020) 106721

Table 3
Mechanical properties of wood particulates thermoplastic composites.
a
Wood particulate composites Fab. method Tensile properties Flexural properties Impact properties Elongation Ref.
Strength (MPa) Modulus (GPa) Strength (MPa) Modulus (GPa) (%)
Hardwood
Hard WPs þ PP IM 37.0 3.12 – – 15.0 J/m 3.10 [64]
Mango þ PP IM 34.1 2.19 40.7 3.34 – – [65]
Bamboo þ PVC – 32.5 2.05 – – – 7.00 [62]
Picea abies þ PP IM 25.7 – 49.8 – 2.5 kJ/m2 – [20]
Beech þ PP IM 24.0 1.59 44.2 1.44 47.5 J/m – [66]
Poplar þ PP IM 22.8 1.40 – – 9.7 J/m 4.12 [59]
Maple þ HDPE DB – – 28.9 1.92 – – [67]
Maple þ HDPE MB – – 33.5 2.72 – – [67]
Softwood
Pine þ PVC – 37.5 2.28 – – – 10.00 [62]
Pine þ PP CM 20.5 2.70 – – 8.1 kJ/m2 1.44 [61]
Others
CTMP þ HDPE IM 36.5 3.18 51.1 3.39 92.4 kJ/m2 3.28 [60]
WPs þ PP IM 28.2 1.90 65.0 2.30 – – [68]
Saw þ PP IM 26.5 3.22 50.6 2.20 – – [69]
CTMP þ HDPE EM 24.9 2.79 10.2 2.83 35.2 kJ/m2 1.95 [60]
Fiberboard þ HDPE CM 13.5 7.20 31.4 1.63 – – [70]
a
IM: Injection Moulding; EM: Extrusion Moulding; CM: Compression Moulding; PP: Polypropylene; DB: Direct blending; MB: Meld blending.

number and aspect ratio. Migneault et al. [60] studied the effects of
fabrication method (extrusion and injection moulding) and aspect ratio
on the chemi-thermo-mechanical properties of pulp (CTMP) HDPE
composites. The mechanical properties of injection moulded composite
were found higher than the same obtained for extruded composite
samples. In fact, the mechanical properties increase with an increase in
the aspect ratio. Chaharmahali et al. [29] studied the mechanical
behaviour of recycled particle sawdust filled HDPE composite. They
observed that flexural and impact strengths of composite decreased with
an increase in the filler content whereas its flexural modulus increases.
Perez et al. [61] obtained that the tensile strength, strain at fracture and
fracture toughness of red pine WPs polypropylene composites were
decreased with an increase in the content of wood particle whereas
Young’s modulus of composite was increased. The addition of MAPP
with red pine WPs enhanced the tensile properties but the effect on
fracture toughness was not significant. In another study, the tensile
strength, tensile modulus, and percentage elongation at break of pine
WPs PVC composite were 15.38%, 11.38% and 42.85%, respectively,
higher than the bamboo WPs PVC composites due to better homogeneity
in pine composites [62]. Nikmatin et al. [63] investigated the effects of
rattan nano-particles size on the thermal, mechanical and physical
properties of polypropylene based polymer composites, and compared
their properties with the pristine polypropylene (PP) and glass fibre
filled polypropylene composites. The developed composite possessed
higher hardness and better surface finish in comparison to both the glass
fibre PP and the pristine PP. The addition of 40 wt% WPs into poly­
propylene matrix increased the tensile strength and tensile modulus of
composite by 48% and 108%, respectively, whereas the impact strength
and percentage elongation at break decreased by 42% and 86%,
respectively [64]. Kim et al. [20] experimentally studied the effects of
Picea abies WPs wt.% on the tensile, flexural and impact strengths of
polypropylene composites. The tensile and impact strengths of Picea
abies composites were gradually decreased with the addition of 10–50
wt% WPs whereas its flexural strength increased with the addition of
WPs and found maximum (49.82 MPa) for 20 wt%.
2.2.2. Thermoset-based wood composites
Thermosetting polymers do not melt or soft on heating. Epoxy,
polyvinyl ester, polyester, polyurethanes, phenolic, formaldehyde, etc.
are commonly used thermosetting polymers for the development of
PWPCs. These polymers possess superior properties than the thermo­
plastics polymers in terms of durability, mechanical properties, thermal
stability, filler wettability, electrical & thermal insulation, creep resis­
tance, chemical resistance, viscosity, and molecular cross-linking. Epoxy
polymer resin is generally preferred for composites development among
the available thermosets due to several excellent advantages such as
high interfacial adhesion with the fillers, low viscosity, higher wetta­
bility, thermal stability, better mechanical performance, low shrinkage
after curing, and better chemical resistance. Several researchers have
investigated the mechanical properties of thermosets based wood com­
posites. Table 4 shows brief summary of the mechanical properties of
wood particulates thermoset composites.
Lette et al. [71] investigated the tensile and flexural properties of
cedar WPs phenolic polymer composite and rice husk phenolic polymer
composite. They obtained 1% and 33% higher tensile (34.497 MPa) and
flexural (62 MPa) strengths of cedar WPs phenolic composites, respec­
tively whereas tensile (34.09 MPa) and flexural (2.60 GPa) moduli were
11% and 29% higher than the rice husk phenolic composites. Vignesh
and Selvam [72] experimentally observed that the tensile strength,
tensile modulus, flexural strength, hardness, and impact strength of teak
WPs polyester composite were seen to be higher as compared to the
same obtained for rubber WPs polyester and Sal WPs polyester com­
posites. The tensile and flexural strengths of apple wood shell particulate
epoxy composite were increased with the addition of filler content
whereas density of composite decreased due the low density of apple
wood shell particles [18]. It was observed that the tensile strength,
tensile modulus, flexural strength and flexural modulus of 20 wt%
Shorea Robusta WPs polyester composite were increased by 13.9%,
33.2%, 9.0% and 19.8%, respectively. The further addition of WPs de­
creases above mechanical properties due to weak interfacial adhesion
and WPs agglomeration [73]. Sarikaya et al. [74] measured the tensile
strengths of birch, palm and eucalyptus WPs reinforced epoxy compos­
ites as 29.53 MPa, 42.24 MPa and 45.28 MPa, respectively and flexural
strengths as 58.83 MPa, 68.58 MPa and 79.92 MPa, respectively. Ojha
et al. [75] investigated the mechanical and tribological properties of
apple-wood epoxy and coconut shell epoxy composites. For 15 wt% of
reinforcements; the flexural strength of apple-wood epoxy composite
was measured 14.6% higher than the coconut shell epoxy composite;
moreover, the apple-wood composite showed better erosion resistance.
Kumar et al. [76] investigated the tensile and flexural properties of sundi
wood dust (SWD) particulate epoxy composites for seven different fibre
wt. % (0, 2.5, 5, 7.5, 10, 12.5 and 15) corresponding to three different
crosshead speeds (1, 2 and 3 mm/min, respectively). The composite
with 10 wt % recorded maximum tensile and flexural strengths at 1
mm/min whereas maximum modulus at 2 mm/min crosshead speeds.
2.2.3. Biopolymer based wood composites
Our environment is getting affected because non-biodegradable

4
M.Z.R. Khan et al. Polymer Testing 89 (2020) 106721

Table 4
Mechanical properties of wood particulates thermoset composites.
Particulate Wood Composites Fab. method Tensile Properties Flexural Properties Impact Hardness Ref.
Strength (MPa) Modulus (GPa) Strength (MPa) Modulus (GPa) Properties (N/mm2)
Hardwood
Apple shell þ Epoxy HL 45.6 – 78.19 – – – [18]
Shorea robusta þ Epoxy HL 21.8 3.38 38.58 4.60 2.3 kJ/m2 191.1 [77]
Teak þ Polyester HL 19.5 1.82 25.41 – 20.0 kJ/m2 191.2 [72]
Teak þ Epoxy HL 14.2 1.40 48.92 2.70 3.7 kJ/m2 – [8]
Shorea robusta þ Polyester HL 14.0 0.96 26.61 1.81 – – [73]
Sal þ Epoxy HL 13.9 1.30 44.23 2.40 3.2 kJ/m2 – [8]
Shorea robusta þ Epoxy HL 13.5 1.29 43.47 2.44 3.2 kJ/m2 – [16]
Mango þ Epoxy HL 12.0 1.28 54.15 2.21 3.1 kJ/m2 – [16]
Sal þ Polyester HL 6.75 1.78 9.60 – 14.5 kJ/m2 167.7 [72]
Rubber þ Polyester HL 5.77 5.77 4.20 – 10.5 kJ/m2 133.4 [72]
Poplar þ Epoxy HL – – 75.50 – 7.8 kJ/m2 – [78]
Softwood
Cedar þ Phenolic CM 34.5 0.024 61.82 2.60 9.7 J/m – [71]
Pine þ Epoxy HL 18.2 4.47 20.03 4.48 2.2 kJ/m2 232.7 [77]

*HL: Hand lay-up; CM: Compression Moulding.

petroleum derived polymeric materials have been frequently used in
many industries such as automobile, packaging, construction, furniture,
so on. The new policies for environmental issues aim to maximize the
utilization of products made of fully bio-degradable materials that gives
a driving force for developing the new biodegradable materials that
causes the least adverse effect on the environment and ecology. The new
biopolymer-based materials such as green composites are being devel­
oped as an alternative material that offers the renewability, recycla­
bility, biodegradability, and low greenhouse gas emission. Biopolymers
such as polylactic acid (PLA), poly (ester amide), poly­
hydroxyalkanoates (PHA), cellulose acetate, poly (vinyl alcohol)
(PVOH), starch blends, etc. and natural fibres, whisker or particulates
obtained from the waste of plants, animal proteins and minerals are
being used as matrix and reinforcement materials, respectively, for the
development of green composites [79,80]. The researchers are contin­
uously working on the sustainable development of biopolymer-based
WPs composites.
Ge et al. [81] developed and mechanically characterized the
bio-degradable bamboo WPs filled polypropylene carbonate composite
(PPC). The tensile strength of composite was 16% higher than the
pristine PPC. The SCM morphology depicted evenly distribution of
bamboo WPs into PPC matrix. Nagarajan et al. [82] developed biochar
particles filled PLA based bio-composites and studied the mechanical
properties for different size (20–75 μm) of filler particles. Teymoorzadeh
and Rodrigue [79] investigated the mechanical properties of maple WPs
PLA composites for different wt.% of WPs. They observed that flexural
modulus of composite increases with the addition of WPs and found
maximum (5.9 GPa) at 40 wt% WPs. Agnantopoulou et al. [11] exper­
imentally measured the tensile properties of different types of wood
particulates (spruce, pine, beech, and popular) filled thermoplastic
starch (TPS) composites. The tensile strength and tensile modulus of
spruce-TPS, pine-TPS, beech-TPS and poplar-TPS composites were
found 17.3 MPa, 15.5 MPa, 14.6 MPa and 13.3 MPa, respectively; and
0.95 GPa, 0.93 GPa, 0.89 GPa and 0.85 GPa, respectively.
2.2.4. Improved mechanical properties of wood composites by treatment
process
The improper interfacial adhesion between polymers (hydrophobic)
and WPs reinforcement (hydrophilic) leads to non-uniform stress
transfer thereby reduction in the mechanical properties of wood poly­
mer composites [83–85]. In order to enhance the mechanical properties
of PWPCs, different types of treatment processes such as alkali, silane,
MAPP, acylation, benzoylation, bleaching, etc.; physical treatments
(beating, thermal, plasma, corona etc.); compatibilizers (metal oxides,
silane, nano clay, etc.) and surface improvements (cleaning, roughing,
coating etc.) were applied over the constituent materials of wood
polymer composites [64,86–90]. Several researchers have investigated
the effects of treatment processes on the mechanical properties of
PWPCs.
Kord [69] experimentally measured the effects of maleic anhydride
polypropylene (MAPP) coupling on the tensile, flexural and impact
properties of sawdust filled polypropylene composites. For 2 wt% MAPP
coupling, the tensile strength, tensile modulus, flexural strength, flex­
ural modulus, and impact strength of composite were increased by 11%,
5%, 8%, 6% and 11%, respectively. Tazi et al. [91] investigated the
effects of Fusabond 226DE coupling agent on the tensile properties of
each spruce HDPE and fir HDPE composites. The tensile strength, tensile
modulus and elongation at break were increased by 145%, 6%, and 12%,
respectively, compared to uncoupled softwood HDPE composites [92].
Dairi et al. [93] showed that tensile and flexural properties of MAPP
coupled pine WPs polypropylene/polyethylene-terephthalate composite
improved significantly due to better interfacial bonding that smooth­
ened the stress transfer from particles to the polymer matrix and
vice-versa. Kajaks et al. [94] observed significant improvements in
flexural, impact and microhardness properties of pine WPs HDPE com­
posites after the MAPP coupling. In another study, effects of chemical
treatments such as MAPP, stearic acid, cellulose palmitate and benzoy­
lation on the mechanical properties and homogeneity of polypropylene
based wood composites were carried out [95].
The research showed that addition of nano-clay into wood polymer
composite reduced the tensile and impact strengths, and elongation at
break but increased the modulus of composites [96]. The tensile and
flexural strengths of nals WPs HDPE composites were approximated
doubled when blended with TiO2 nanoparticles, whereas tensile and
flexural moduli were enhanced by 151% and 34.5%, respectively [97].
Kallakas et al. [98] investigated the effects of six different types of
chemical treatments of Betula WPs such as alkali (NaOH), polyvinyl
alcohol (PVA), silane (APTES), acetylation, cyanoethylation, and ester­
ification to achieve higher interfacial adhesion and wettability with the
polymer matrix. The chemical modification improved the flexural
properties whereas impact strength of composites was reduced. Ichazo
et al. [64] investigated the effects of alkali, silane treatments of WPs on
the mechanical properties of polypropylene based composites. Kim et al.
[20] analysed the effects of silane (APTES, MPS and VTMS) treatments
over the Picea abies WPs polypropylene composites. Each silane treat­
ment showed improvements in the tensile, flexural and impact strengths
as compared to the untreated WPs composite. The VTMS silane treat­
ment showed maximum improvement in the tensile strength (85%),
flexural strength (78.4%) and impact strength (11%) of composite.
Table 5 represents the mechanical properties of chemically treated wood
particulate polymer composites.
2.2.5. Improved mechanical properties of wood composites by hybridization
The amalgamation of two or more WPs of different composition and

5
M.Z.R. Khan et al. Polymer Testing 89 (2020) 106721

Table 5
Mechanical properties of chemically treated wood particulate polymer composites.
Treatment type WPs Fab. Tensile properties Flexural Properties Impact Elong-gation Ref.
Composites method properties (%)
strength modulus strength modulus
(MPa) (GPa) (MPa) (GPa)

MAPE coupling Spruce/Fir þ IM 35.4 2.13 – – – 3.36 [91]

HDPE
MAPP coupling Pine þ HDPE IM – – 50.20 3.769 7.96 kJ/m2 – [94]
TiO2 Nals þ HDPE CM 36.03 6.53 33.85 5.07 – – [97]
nanoparticles
NaOH Betula þ PP IM – – 36.9 2.47 3.92 kJ/m2 – [98]
Polyvinyl alcohol Betula þ PP IM – – 33.3 2.53 4.72 kJ/m2 –
Silane coupling Betula þ PP IM – – 37.0 2.6 3.56 kJ/m2 –
Acetylation Betula þ PP IM – – 33.4 2.25 4.52 kJ/m2 –
Esterification Betula þ PP IM – – 38.5 0.91 0.92 kJ/m2 –
Silane WPs þ PP IM 36.1 3.20 – – 12 J/m 2.7 [64]
NaOH WPs þ PP IM 38.1 3.2 – – 15 J/m 2.7
Silane (VTMS) Picea abies þ PP IM 49.2 – 74.28 – 2.7 kJ/m2 – [20]
Silane (APTES) Picea abies þ PP IM 47.36 – 72.84 – 2.6 kJ/m2 –
Silane (MPS) Picea abies þ PP IM 48.12 – 73.0 – 2.5 kJ/m2 –
Silane (VTMS) Softwood þ HDPE EM 27.3 1.48 – – 6.9 [99]
NaOH Beech þ PP IM 29 1.75 54.92 1.62 43.51 J/m – [66]
Benzoylation Beech þ PP IM 27 1.88 47.17 1.72 41.11 J/m –
Acrylation Beech þ PP IM 27.05 1.52 49.91 1.73 42.53 J/m –
Silane (TEVS) Beech þ PP IM 28.10 1.64 53.74 1.63 40.68 J/m –

*IM: Injection Moulding; EM: Extrusion Moulding; CM: Compression Moulding; PP: Polypropylene.

sizes in a single polymer matrix results a hybrid composite that coun­
terbalance the capability of each type of wood particles. Generally, the
purpose of hybridization is to maximize the merits and minimize the
demerits of both type of WPs. Very limited literature is available on the
effects of hybridization of wood particles on the mechanical, thermal,
water uptake, crystalline, characteristics of PWPCs.
Saxena and Gupta [16] studied the mechanical, thermal, and water
uptake behaviour of hybrid Sal and Mango WPs epoxy composites and
observed the positive impact of hybridization on the mechanical prop­
erties when equal proportions of each type of WPs were amalgamated.
The hybrid mango and shorea robust wood particles epoxy composite
showed more crystallinity than the individual WPs based epoxy com­
posite [100]. Jain and Gupta [8] observed that the hybridization of teak
and sal WPs epoxy composite showed an improvement in the mechan­
ical properties. The hybridization of agave and pine fibres in HDPE
composite improved the tensile, flexural, and impact properties by 13%,
22%, 41%, respectively [101]. Khan et al. [77] investigated the tensile,
flexural, impact and microhardness properties of hybrid pine (softwood)
and shorea robusta (hardwood) particulates epoxy composites for
different weight proportions of WPs. The hybrid composite with equal
proportion of WPs showed best mechanical properties as compared to
the same obtained for individual wood particle composites. The tensile
strengths of hybrid composite were found 54% and 28%, tensile moduli
10% and 12%, flexural strengths 200% and 56%, flexural moduli 6%
and 3%, impact strengths 18% and 14% and microhardness’s 14% and
52% higher than the single pine wood particulates epoxy composite and
shorea robusta particulates epoxy composites, respectively.
2.3. Water absorption behaviour of wood composites
The studies on the water absorption behaviour of wood polymer
composites are very important because the hydrophilic WPs are sus­
ceptible to moisture and water. Generally, PWPCs were less susceptible
to moisture absorption and possess better dimensional accuracy as
compared to natural fiber reinforced polymer composites [102]. The
water absorption depends on different parameters such as WPs wetta­
bility with the polymer matrix, interfacial adhesion, fabrication method,
WPs shape, size and content, voids content, temperature, chemical
structure of wood, etc. [102–106]. The hygroscopicity and hydrophi­
licity phenomena adversely affect the mechanical properties of PWPCs
and accelerates the fungal decay. The composite starts swelling when
exposed to moisture leading to the local strain in polymer matrix that
result into micro-cracks; consequently, reduces the mechanical proper­
ties of composites [107,108]. The wood particles regain their original
shape and size when dried; however, polymer matrix does not regain its
shape and size due to the localised strain leading to the partial
debonding between particles and matrix. This causes a poor interfacial
adhesion that deteriorates the mechanical properties [109]. The water
absorption mechanism in PWPCs is shown in Fig. 2 [110].
Bhaskar et al. [111] investigated the water absorption behaviour of pine
wood flour filled virgin polypropylene (vPP) composite and pine wood flour
filled recycled polypropylene (rPP) composite. The water absorption in­
creases with an increase in wt.% of wood flour. The rPP composite showed
15–20% lower water absorption than the vPP composite. The MAPP
coupled rPP composite showed reduction in water absorption up to 70%
compared to the pristine rPP composite whereas thickness swelling index
was found minimum (1.09%) that further reduced to 0.43–0.55% with the
MAPP coupling. The water absorbed by cedar WPs phenolic composite was
found 57% more than the rice husk phenolic composite [71]. The MAPP
coupling improved the water absorption resistance of pine WPs
polypropylene/polyethylene-terephthalate composite [93]. Chen et al.
[112] investigated the moisture absorption behaviour of both extracted
wood flour HDPE composite and delignified wood flour pine wood HDPE
composite. They observed that the extracted pine wood flour HDPE com­
posite shows less moisture absorption than the delignified pine wood flour
HDPE composites. The investigations showed that injection moulded
composite and composites reinforced with low aspect ratio wood particles
have good water/moisture resistance [113]. However, the mechanical
properties of PWPCs were adversely affected when exposed to the mois­
ture/water [114]. The size of wood particles highly influences the hygro­
scopic behaviour of composites [115].
The resistance to moisture of PWPCs can be improved through
various types of chemical treatment of wood particles such as alkaline
treatment, benzoylation, sialylation, peroxide, acetylation, esterifica­
tion, etc. The chemical treatment of reinforcements modifies the
chemical composition of wood particles surfaces by removing the hy­
droxyl group, lignin and unwanted contents [116]. The amalgamation of
wood particles with polyvinylchloride (PVC) decreases the moisture
resistant properties of composite [117]. The results showed that pine
(softwood) particulate polypropylene composite possesses higher
moisture resistance than the beech (hardwood) polypropylene com­
posites due to higher hemicellulose and lignin content in beech wood

6
M.Z.R. Khan et al.
Fig. 2. Water absorption mechanism in PWPCs.
particles than the pine wood particles [118]. It was experimentally
observed that water uptake by hybrid wood flour/charcoal flour poly­
propylene composite decreased with an increase in the charcoal wt.%.
The wood flour polypropylene composite absorbed 38% excess water
than the charcoal polypropylene composite [119]. Saxena and Gupta
[16] found higher moisture resistance of hybrid mango/sal wood epoxy
composite as compared to single wood epoxy composite. The sal wood
epoxy composite showed 24% higher water uptake than the mango
wood epoxy composite. Jain and Gupta also [8] experimentally studied
that water resistance behaviour of hybrid teak/sal WPs epoxy composite
was higher than each single teak and single sal WPs epoxy composites.
Khan et al. [110] found that water absorbed by shorea robusta WPs
epoxy composite was 23.64% higher than the pine WPs epoxy com­
posite. The water absorbed by hybrid wood epoxy composite was sup­
pressed by 26.6% and 40.7% as compared to pine wood particle epoxy
composite and shorea robusta wood particle epoxy composite,
respectively.
The blending of TiO2 nanoparticles with nals WPs HDPE composites
measured 40% decrement in water absorption behaviour because TiO2
act as the barrier for water sorption [97]. Ichazo et al. [64] observed the
reduced water absorption by the silane and alkali treated WPs poly­
propylene composites. Tazi et al. [91] found in their study that water
resistance of softwood (spruce, fir) HDPE composites was enhanced by
employment of Fusabond 226DE coupling agent. The resistance to water
absorption and crystallinity of beech WPs polypropylene composite
were positively affected by the MAPP coupling and organoclay insertion
[92]. Danyadi et al. [95] studied the effects of various types of chemical
treatments such as MAPP, stearic acid, cellulose palmitate, and ben­
zoylation on the water uptake resistance of softwood WPs polypropylene
composite. The MAPP coupling did not affect the water uptake resis­
tance of composite whereas benzoylation and cellulose palmitate
treatments showed positive impact over the water resistance behaviour
of composites.
The PWPCs must have good water resistance; however, the low water
absorption resistance of PWPCs compared to the pristine polymer is the
drawback of PWPCs that developed the dimension instability and
reduction in mechanical properties. The hybridization of wood particles
has significantly improved the water resistance behaviour as compared
to individual wood particulate composites. The researchers have used
different types of chemical treatments and compatibilizers for enhancing
the water absorption resistance of composites.
7
Polymer Testing 89 (2020) 106721
2.4. Thermal properties of wood composites
The thermal analysis includes the investigations of glass transition
temperature, storage and loss modulus, damping, thermal conductivity,
melting point, specific heat capacity, crystallization temperature, etc of
the composites. The dynamic mechanical analysis (DMA), differential
scanning calorimetry (DSC), thermogravimetric analysis (TGA), differ­
ential thermal analysis (DTA), thermal imaging techniques have been
commonly used for the thermal characterization of the composites.
The DMA measures the viscous behaviour of the composites as a
function of temperature or frequency and records the storage modulus,
loss modulus, glass transition temperature and damping. The storage
modulus represents the maximum amount of energy stored per cycle of
oscillation in the composite whereas loss modulus indicates the amount
of energy dissipated from composites in the form of heat. The ratio of
loss modulus to storage modulus measures the damping property of
composite that represents the degree of mobility of molecules in the
composites. The investigations of above properties is essential for the
components used in automobiles, industrial and structural applications
subjected to dynamic loading [120]. As compared to polymer matrix and
single reinforced composites, a higher storage modulus and glass tran­
sition temperature was seen for hybrid pine/shorea robusta composites.
A smooth Cole-Cole plot of hybrid composite represented homogeneous
and uniform dispersion of hybrid wood particles into epoxy matrix [77].
The DMA concluded that amalgamation of apple wood cell particles into
epoxy resin approximately doubled the storage modulus that indicated
the enhancement of viscoelastic behaviour of composites [118]. Saxena
and Gupta [100] observed significant improvement in viscoelastic
behaviour of hybrid composites having equal proportions of sal and
mango wood particles. The storage modulus, damping and glass tran­
sition temperature of hybrid composite showed significant improve­
ment. Jain and Gupta [8] concluded that the dynamic mechanical
properties of hybrid teak/sal composites were superior as compared to
individual teak and sal WPs based epoxy composites. Vimalanathan
et al. [73] observed that the storage modulus, glass transition temper­
ature and damping factor of shorea robusta/polyester composite were
significantly improved up to 20 wt% of reinforcements. The smooth
Cole-Cole plot of composite established homogeneous dispersion of WPs
into polyester matrix. Ge et al. [81] revealed that the storage modulus
and glass transition temperature of biodegradable bamboo WPs rein­
forced polypropylene composite increased with the addition of bamboo
WPs.
M.Z.R. Khan et al.
The thermal degradation of wood takes place at relatively low tem­
perature, around 200 � C [58]; therefore, it is required to analyse and
predict the thermal properties of PWPCs. The thermal stability of PWPCs
depend on the degradation of structural element of WPs such as cellu­
lose, hemicellulose, lignin, waxes, ashes and other extractives [121].
The sensitivity towards thermal decomposition of these structural ele­
ments attributed to their chemical structure. The hemicellulose loses its
thermal stability around 180–300 � C because of its random amorphous
structure [19,122]. The thermal degradation of cellulosic starts around
275–350 � C because of crystalline structure [122]. The structure of
lignin is different from the hemicellulose and cellulose; it consists of
three types of benzene-propane units which are highly crossed-linked
and possess higher molecular weight that leads to higher stability.
Thus, the thermal degradation of lignin begins around 250–500 � C [19,
58,122,123]. Generally, the thermal stability of softwood is higher than
the hardwood because of higher hemicellulose contents in the hardwood
[121,124]. An exhaustive literature is available on the investigations of
thermal behaviour of PWPCs.
Lette et al. [71] carried out TGA of cedar WPs phenolic composite
and rice husk phenolic composite and observed higher thermal stability
of rice husk composite than the cedar composite. The thermal stability of
polyester polymer was improved by amalgamating the shorea robusta
WPs into polyester resin [73]. Ge et al. [62] found that the thermal
stability of pine WPs PVC composite was significantly higher than the
bamboo WPs PVC composite. The investigations carried out by Khan
et al. [77] showed that thermal stability of pine WPs epoxy composite
was higher than the shorea robusta WPs epoxy composite; however, its
hybrid composite did not show significant improvement. Saxena and
Gupta [16] observed significant improvement in thermal properties of
hybrid WPs epoxy composites having equal proportions of sal and
mango wood particles. Jain and Gupta [8] concluded that the thermal
properties of hybrid teak/sal WPs epoxy composites were superior as
compared to individual teak and sal WPs based epoxy composites. Ge
et al. [81] developed the biodegradable bamboo WPs reinforced poly­
propylene carbonate (PPC) composite. The thermal stability of bamboo
WPs PPC composite was significantly higher than the pristine PPC.
Teymoorzadeh and Rodrigue [79] observed that the thermal decom­
position temperature of PLA increased with the addition of maple WPs
and found maximum (342.7 � C) for 40 wt%, which was 21.39% higher
than the pristine PLA whereas the glass transition, crystallization,
melting temperature were reduced with the addition of maple WPs.
Deka [97] carried out thermal analysis of TiO2 nanoparticles blended
nals WPs HDPE composite. The thermal stability and melting tempera­
ture of composite were enhanced by 12.64% and 13%, respectively, as
compared to nonblended composite mainly due to higher thermal
diffusivity of TiO2 nanoparticles. The crystallization temperature of each
alkali and silane treated composites was improved by approximately 5%
but melting temperature was unaffected [64]. The thermal decomposi­
tion temperatures (at 5% & 50% wt. decomposition) of APTES, VTMS
and MPS silane coupled Picea abies WPs polypropylene composites were
improved for all type of silane coupling. The maximum 5% wt.
decomposition temperature was observed at 308.7 � C for APTES coupled
composites. This temperature was 297.5 � C, 306.2 � C and 306.6 � C for
the untreated, VTMS coupled and MPS coupled composites, respec­
tively. However, the effect of silane coupling for 50% wt. decomposition
temperature was insignificant [20]. Tazi et al. [91] observed that the
maleic anhydride polyethylene (MAPE: Fusabond 226DE) coupled
softwood (spruce, fir) HDPE composite showed significant improvement
in thermal stability and crystallinity of the composites.
3. Wood nanocomposites
Nanocellulose/nanoparticles, a new class of reinforcements, extrac­
ted from the wood biomass are gaining attention for the development of
nano biocomposites [125]. In order to achieve better performance by
biocomposites, using of nanocellulose as reinforcement is given
8
Polymer Testing 89 (2020) 106721
preference because cellulose imparts the high strength. It has been
established that the cellulose content in wood was found maximum
(approximately 40–50%) as compared to the other elements such as
hemicellulose, lignin, and pectin [126,127]. The pure cellulose fibre is
extracted by removing the hemicellulose, lignin, and pectin contents
from wood using either chemical, chemo mechanical or enzymatic
methods [128]. Nanocellulose/nanoparticles possess low density, nat­
ural renewability, biodegradability, biocompatibility, high aspect ratio,
high crystallinity, large surface area, high thermal resistance, good
electrical and mechanical properties [129]. The strength, stiffness,
toughness, barrier properties, and flame retardancy of the nano bio­
composites were found higher than the pristine polymer. Moreover, due
to the large surface area of nanocellulose particles, blending a very small
amount of nanocellulose into the polymer matrix results in a remarkably
better mechanical properties. The reason behind this occurrence is the
hydrogen crosslinking into the polymer matrix [125,130]. The nano
biocomposites are being used in the automotive, electronics, paper and
packaging and biomedical industries and advanced applications such as
flexible screens, hydrogels, coating additives, nano food packaging,
biomedical implants and drug delivery [125].
Abdollahi et al. [131] experimentally found an improvement of 24%
in the tensile strength for nano biocomposite than the neat biopolymer
matrix. However, the percentage elongation at break was found 8.2%,
which was 29% lower than that of neat biopolymer matrix. The
improvement in tensile properties of was due to the homogeneous dis­
tribution of nanocellulose content in the polymer matrix. The tensile
strength and tensile modulus of polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) was increased
by 48.9% and 79.1%, respectively, with the reinforcement of 1 wt% and
5 wt% nanocellulose particles [132]. Lu et al. [133] reported that the
nanocellulose starch composite showed drastic enhancement in the
tensile strength (212%) and tensile modulus (736%) of pristine starch,
respectively. The tensile strength, tensile modulus, and strain at break of
epoxy polymer was increased by 82%, 21%, and 198%, respectively,
with the reinforcement of hydrophobic nanocellulose [134]. The ther­
mal stability of nanocellulose reinforced PVA composite was found
higher than the neat PVA due to the strong hydrogen bonding between
the hydroxyl groups of nanocellulose and the polymer matrix [132]. The
enhancement in mechanical and thermal properties of polymer matrix
composite with the nanocellulose fillers were due to the high surface
area to volume ratio and suitable surface functionalisation [135].
3.1. Applications of particles and nano wood composites
The first commercial application of PWPCs started with gearshift
knobs for Rolls Royce [136,137]. The specific applications of PWPCs
include manufacturing of different types of automotive parts [25,26,38,
118] (e.g., dashboards, door panels, rear storage, spare tyre lining, noise
insulation panels, boot lining, headliner panels, engine cover, bumper,
mudguards, wheel box, spare tire liners, knobs, sun visor, etc.); casing
and cabinets of electronics and electrical appliances (e.g., laptop, mo­
bile, inverter, projector, stabilizers, etc.); sports kits (e.g., safety hel­
mets, surfing boats, rackets, etc.), packaging of various goods [118];
building interior (e.g., door panels, decking, railing, fencing, sliding
panels, window frames, decorative panels, racks, roof tiles, etc.) [138];
other useful household products (e.g., mail box, mirror casings, toys,
plastic lumbers, wastepaper basket, floor parquet, flower vases, park
benches, picnic tables etc.) and low cost housing for rehabilitation [25,
29,36,39,139–141]. The PWPCs based products have good market po­
tential in North America and Europe with an annual growth rate 18%
and 14%, respectively [36,142]. Table 6 shows the worldwide applica­
tion potential of PWPCs available in literature. Fig. 3 shows few popular
applications of wood particles polymer composites.
The wood polymer composites were most exploited by the automo­
tive industries due to great concern of government towards the envi­
ronmental protection that promoted the automotive industries to utilize
the recyclable and biodegradable materials such as wood particles in the
M.Z.R. Khan et al. Polymer Testing 89 (2020) 106721

Table 6 By 2025, the total PWPCs market will achieve a business of $8.15 billion
Worldwide application potential of PWPCs. USD [143]. Presently, the market of PWPCs is multibillion dollars
World, 2002 European countries, USA, 2015 business [144].
2012 After successful developments of nanocellulose or nanoparticles of
Consumer products (8%) Decking (67%) Decking (43%) biomass, applications of their polymer based nano biocomposites has
Appliances (8%) Auto interior parts Moulding/Trim (28%) been increasingly increased. The nano biocomposites are being used in
Electronics components (23%) Fencing (14%) building and construction (for structural components); automotive (for
(10%) Sliding/Fencing (6%) Building & Construction making parts having micropatterns); electronics (as membrane for
Aerospace (1%) Technical Applications (11%)
Marine (12%) (29%) Others (43%)
electroacoustic devices), pharma (biomedical use); cosmetics, pack­
Building & Construction Furniture (19%) aging (for food packaging) and other (conductive films, 3D printing, ion
(26%) Consumer Goods (1%) exchange membrane, coating application, etc.) industries [125]. The
Automobiles (31%) followings are the major application potentials are nano biocomposites.
Others (4%)

development of automotive parts. As per the guidelines 2000/53/EG of
European commission, 85 wt% of total vehicle should be made up of
recyclable materials. By 2015, this weight percentage was increased to
95% [36]. Almost all the German Car manufacturers such as Opel,
Daimler Chrysler, Volkswagen, Audi, Ford, Mercedes, and BMW are
using the PWPCs for manufacturing interior and exterior parts of auto­
mobiles [36]. The manufacturing of PWPCs is one of the fastest and
dynamic growing sectors of wood industries worldwide. In Europe, the
production of PWPCs raised from 220,000 tonnes to 260,000 tonnes
from 2010 to 2012. In US, the demand of PWPCs is continuously
increasing at a rate of 6.9% and expected to reach $5.9 billion in 2020.
3.2. Food packaging industry
The nano biocomposites possess suitable mechanical and barrier
properties required for the food packaging containers. The primary
function of food packaging is to protect and preserve the food, reduce
food waste, and maintain its quality and safety [145,146]. These bio­
composites contribute to the environment by reducing the conventional
petrochemical waste disposal. The cellophane or regenerated cellulose
film is used as a most popular food packaging. Cellulose acetate,
hydroxyethyl cellulose, hydroxypropyl cellulose, ethyl cellulose, methyl
cellulose, carboxymethyl cellulose, etc. cellulose derivatives were used
for developing the nano biocomposites for the packaging industries

Fig. 3. Applications of wood particles polymer

composites (WPPCs).
(courtesy: JELU-WERK J. Ehrler
GmbH & Co.
KG.,
Germany).

9
M.Z.R. Khan et al.
[147].
3.3. Electronics industry
The enhanced conductivity and flexibility of nano biocomposites/
film makes them suitable for the electronics industries. It has been re­
ported that polyaniline based nano biocomposites were used in elec­
tronics industries for the development of paper-based sensors,
conducting adhesives and flexible electrodes [148–150]. Razaq et al.
[151] used the polypyrol based nanocellulose/carbon filament in the
manufacturing of electrodes, paper-based storage device, high cell ca­
pacitances, etc. [152]. High electrically conductive flexible membranes
made up of poly-(3,4) ethylenedioxythiophene nanocellulose compos­
ites were used in the development of flexible organic electronics [153].
3.4. Biomedical products
The nano biocomposites were frequently used in the biomedical
applications such as drug delivery, antibacterial activity, disease di­
agnostics, tissue engineering, body implants, etc. due to its hemo­
compatibility, cytocompatibility and biodegradability properties. Drug
delivery system is a program in which required quantity of drugs is
released at specific time for the targeted organ of the human body. For
this purpose, various nanocellulose biopolymer films were used in the
form of tablet/capsule coating by different pharmaceutical companies
[154]. Biocompatibility, porosity, nontoxic nature, low cost, availabil­
ity, and network like structure are the fascinating properties of nano­
cellulose that are best suited for the drug delivery carrier [155]. The
starch based nano biocomposites has been used for developing the
artificial cartilages as biological implants in the treatment of osteoar­
thritis disease [156].
4. Conclusions
The present review is focused on the investigations of mechanical,
thermal and water absorption properties, and application potential of
wood composites as well. The followings major conclusions are drawn
based on the present review:
� A good number of literatures are available on effect of shape and size,
concentrations and aspect ratio of wood particles on the mechanical
properties of their polymer based composites. It was suggested that
optimal concentration, size and aspect ratio are required to achieve
better mechanical performance. The wood composites having 20–30
wt% wood particles of smaller size showed the best mechanical
properties.
� In order to improve the moderate mechanical performance of wood
composites, several techniques such as hybridization of different
type of wood particles, chemical pre-treatments of wood particles
and addition of compatibilizers have been used.
� In the current decades, demands of environmental friendly biode­
gradable composites are dramatically increased to save our envi­
ronment. Researchers are trying hard to develop the such materials
which have no any impact to the environment. However, research on
characterization of biopolymer based wood composites are still
limited which motivates the researchers for further research in this
area.
� Nano biocomposites have been very popular in area nano technology
on account of its outstanding characteristics. These materials offers
the improved mechanical, thermal and barrier properties, so they
can be considered as the future materials of tomorrow. These ma­
terials can be used in advanced applications, which would show the
best utilization of waste materials. The isolation of nanocellulose/
nanoparticles and their homogeneous dispersion into polymer ma­
trix is a challenge for the researchers in the development of nano
10
Polymer Testing 89 (2020) 106721
biocomposites. Hence, there is a good scope for developing the films
and composites of nanocellulose for new applications.
� The mechanical properties of 3D printed wood composites were
found inferior than the pristine polymers due to lack of pressure in
manufacturing. The lower strength of 3D printed composites and
materials limitations are still challenge which encourage the re­
searchers for further research to overcome limitations of 3D printing.
� The development of a cost-effective fabrication processes for the
mass production of wood composites must be carried out. This
method might be useful in production of various types of the bio­
composites products to be used in various applications.
Declaration of competing interest
There is no any kind of conflict of interest.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Mohammad ZR Khan: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Investi­
gation, Writing - original draft, Writing - review & editing. Sunil Kumar
Srivastava: Supervision, Writing - review & editing. M.K. Gupta: Su­
pervision, Writing - review & editing.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data related to this article can be found at https://do
i.org/10.1016/j.polymertesting.2020.106721.
References
[1] K. Sewda, S.N. Maiti, Mechanical properties of teak wood flour-reinforced HDPE
composites, J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 112 (2009) 1826–1834.
[2] Q. Li, L.M. Matuana, Effectiveness of maleated and acrylic acid-functionalized
polyelefin coupling agents for hdpe-wood-flour composites, J. Thermoplast.
Compos. Mater. 16 (2003) 551–564.
[3] N.M. Stark, L.M. Matuana, C.M. Clemons, Effect of processing method on surface
and weayhering characteristics of wood-flour/HDPE composites, J. Appl. Polym.
Sci. 93 (2004) 1021–1030.
[4] A.K. Bledzki, V.E. Sperber, O. Faruk, Natural and Wood Fibre Reinforcement in
Polymers, Rapra Technology ltd, UK, 2002.
[5] B. K. Lavine, C. E. Davidson, A. J. moores and P. R. Griffiths, Raman spectroscopy
and genetic algorithms for the classification of wood types. Appl. Spectrosc.; 55
(8): 960-966.
[6] A.H. Wong, S.Y. Kim, A.P. Singh, C.W. Ling, Natural Durability of Tropical
Species with Emphasis on Malaysian Hardwoods-Variations and Prospects, IRG
Secretariat, Bangalore, INDIA, 2005.
[7] M.J. John, R.D. Anandjwala, Recent developments in chemical modification and
characterization of natural fiber-reinforced composites, Polym. Compos. 29 (2)
(2007) 187–207.
[8] N.K. Jain, M.K. Gupta, Hybrid teak/sal wood flour reinforced composites:
mechanical, thermal and water absorption properties, Mater. Res. Express 5
(2018), 125306.
[9] G. Lukmandaru, Chemical characteristics of teak wood attacked by neotonae
tectonae, Bio Resourc. 10 (2015) 2094–2102.
[10] C. Clemons, Raw materials for wood -polymer composites, in: Wood-polymer
Composites, Woodhead Publishing Limited, North America, 2008, pp. 1–20.
[11] E. Agnantopoulou, V. Tserki, S. Marras, J. Philippou, C. Panayiotou, Development
of bodegradable composites based on wood waste flour and thermoplastic
strarch, J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 126 (S1) (2012) 273–281.
[12] R.C. Pettersen, The chemical composition of wood, in: The Chemistry of Solid
Wood, Advances in Chemistry Series, American Chemical Society, Washington
DC, 1984, pp. 57–126.
[13] D. Fengel, G. Wegener, Wood Chemistry: Ultrastructure, Reactions, Walter de
Gruyler, Berlin, 1984.
[14] M. A. Khan and K. M. Ali, Studies of physico-mechanical properties of wood and
wood plastic composite (WPC). J. Appl. Polym. Sci.; 45: 167-172.
[15] E. Okoroigwe, S. Enibe, S. Onyegegbu, Determination of oxidation characteristics
and decomposition kinetics of some nigerian biomass, J. Energy South Afr. 27
(2016) 39–49.
[16] M. Saxena, M. Gupta, Mechanical, thermal, and water absorption properties of
hybrid wood composites, J. Mater. Des. Appl. 233 (9) (2018) 1914–1922.
[17] M.S. Islam, S. Hamdan, I. Jusoh, M.R. Rahman, A.S. Ahmed, The effect of alkali
pretreatment on mechanical and morphological properties of tropical wood
polymer composites, Mater. Des. 33 (2012) 419–424.
[18] O. Shakuntala, G. Raghavendra, K.A. Samir, Effect of filler loading on mechanical
and tribological properties of wood apple shell reinforced epoxy composite, Adv.
Mater. Sci. Eng. 2014 (2014) 1–9.
M.Z.R. Khan et al.
[19] M.J. John, S. Thomas, Biofibres and biocomposites, Carbohydr. Polym. 71 (3)
(2008) 343–364.
[20] T.-W. Kim, S.-Y. Lee, S.-J. Chun, G.-H. Doh, K.-H. Paik, Effect of silane coupling
on the fundamental properties of wood flour reinforced polypropylene
composites, J. Compos. Mater. 45 (5) (2010) 1595–1605.
[21] S.S. H S, M. Ramachandra, Green composites: a review, Mater. Today: Proc. 5
(2018) 2518–2526.
[22] Z. Ahmad, Y.C. Bon, E.S. Abd Wahab, Tensile strength properties of tropical
hardwoods in structural size testing, Int. J. Basic Appl. Sci. 10 (3) (2010) 1–6.
[23] B.A. Bendtsen, R.L. Ethington, Mechanical Properties of 23 Species of Estern
Hardwood, USDA Forest Service, Madison, Wisconsin, 1975.
[24] D.E. Kretschmann, Mechanical properties of wood, in: Wood Handbook- Wood as
an Engineering Material, 2010. Madison, USDA.
[25] S. Aydin, M.Y. Yardimci, Mechanical properties of four timber species commonly
used in Turkey, Turk. J. Eng. Environ. Sci. 31 (2007) 19–27, 2007.
[26] M.R. Peaez-Samaniego, V. Yadama, E. Lowell, R. Espinoza-Herrera, A review of
wood thermal pretreatments to improve wood composite properties, Wood Sci.
Technol. 47 (6) (2013) 1321–1322.
[27] V.K. Shrama, G. Braccio, D. Barisano, G. Cornacchia, S.K. Srivastava, J. Singh,
L. Yadav, P. Saini, Comprehensive Overview of the Biomass Based R&D Activities
to Avert an Impending Future Energy Crisis and Safe-Guard Enviroment with
Reduced Carbon Emissions, Madan Mohan Malaviya University of Technology,
Gorakhpur, INDIA, 2019.
[28] H. Green, Wood: Craft, Culture, History, Penguin Books, New York, 2006.
[29] M. Chaharmahali, J. Mirbagheri, M. Tajvidi, Mechanical and physical properties
of wood plastic composite panels, J. Reinforc. Plast. Compos. 29 (2) (2010)
310–319.
[30] J.A. Youngquist, G.E. Myers, T.M. Harten, Emerging Technologies for Materials
and Chemicals from Biomass, American Chemical Society, Washington DC, 1990.
[31] T.H. Wenger, J.A. Youngquist, R.M. Rowell, Materials Interactions Relevant to
Recycling of Wood-Based Materials, Materials Research Society, Pittsburg PA,
1992.
[32] J.A. Youngquist, G.E. Myers, J.H. Muchi, A.M. Krzysik, C.M. Clemons, Composites
from Recycled Wood and Plastics (Project Summary), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH, 1994.
[33] A. F. Avila and M. V. Duaret, A mechanical analysis on recycled pet/hdpe
composites, Polym. Degrad. Stabil.; 80: 373-382.
[34] N. S. Kazemi, E. Hamidinia and M. Tajvidi, Mechanical properties of composites
from sawdust and recycled plastics. J. Appl. Polym. Sci.; 100: 3641-3645.
[35] G. Pritchard, Two technologies merge: wood plastic composites, Plastics, Addit.
Compd. 6 (4) (2004) 18–21.
[36] A. Ashori, Wood_plastic composites as promising green-composites for
automotives industries, Bioresour. Technol. 99 (2008) 4661–4667.
[37] M.J. Schwarzkopf, M.B. Burnard, Wood-plastic composites—performance and
environmental impacts. Environmental Impacts of Traditional and Innovative
Forest-based Bioproducts, Springer, Singapore, 2016, pp. 19–43.
[38] N. Chand, M. Fahim, Wood reinforced polymer composites. Tribology of Natural
Fiber Polymer Composites, Woodhead Publishing Limited, Cambridge, England,
2008, pp. 180–196.
[39] D.J. Gardner, Y. Han, L. Wang, Wood-plastic composite technology, Curr.
Forestory Rep. 1 (2015) 139–150.
[40] Y. Geng, J. Simonsen, Further investigation of polyaminoamide-epichlorohydrin/
stearic anhydride compatibilizer system for wood -polyethylene composites,
J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 99 (3) (2005) 712–718.
[41] V. Kumar, L. Tayagi, S. Sinha, Wood flour–reinforced plastic composites: a
review, Rev. Chem. Eng. 27 (5-6) (2011) 253–264.
[42] M.Z.R. Khan, S.K. Srivastava, Development, characterization and application
potential of bio-composites: a review, IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 404 (2018),
012-028.
[43] U.K. Komal, M.K. Lila, S. Chaitanya, I. Singh, Fabrication of short FIber reinforced
polymer composites. Reinforced Polymer Composites, Wiley-VCH, Weinheim,
Germany, 2020, pp. 21–36.
[44] S. Biswas, J. Anurag, Fabrication of composite laminates. Reinforced Polymer
Composite, Willey-VCH, Weinheim, Germany, 2020, pp. 39–50.
[45] X. Wang, M. Jiang, Z. Zhou, J. Gou, D. Hui, 3D printing of polymer matrix
composites: a review and prospective, Compos. B Eng. 110 (2017) 442–458.
[46] T. Peng, Analysis of energy utilization in 3D printing processes, Procedia CIRP 40
(2016) 62–67.
[47] O. Martikka, T. Karki, Q. Wu, Mechanical properties of 3D-printed wood-plastic
composites, Key Eng. Mater. 777 (2018) 499–507.
[48] S. Kain, J.V. Ecker, M. Musso, A. Petutschnigg, Effects of the infill pattern on
mechanical properties of fused layer modeling (FLM) 3D printed wood/polylactid
acid (PLA) composites, Eur. J. Wood Wood Prod. 78 (2020) 65–74.
[49] B. Tisserat, Z. Liu, V. Finkenstadt, B. Lewandowski, S. Ott, L. Reifschneider, 3D
printing biocomposites, Plast. Res. Online 10 (2015).
[50] M. Kariz, M. Sernek, M. Obucina, M.K. Kuzman, Effect of wood content in FDM
filament on properties of 3D printed parts, Mater. Today: Commun. 14 (2018)
135–140.
[51] A. Arivazhagan, S. Masood, Dynamic mechanical properties of ABS material, Int.
J. Eng. Res. Afr. 2 (2012) 2009–2014.
[52] M.P. Wolcott, K. Englund, A Technology Review of Wood-Plastic Composites in
33rd International Particleboard/Composite Materials Symposium, Pullman,
Washington, 1999.
[53] L.H. Sperling, Introduction to Physical Polymer Science, John Wiley and Sons,
INC., New York, 1986.
11
Polymer Testing 89 (2020) 106721
[54] R.M. Rowell, A.R. Sanadi, D.F. Caulfield, R.E. Jacobson, Utilization of natural
fibers in plastic composites: problems and opportunities. Lignocellulosic-Plastics
Composites, Rio de Janeirp, University of Rio de Janeirp, 1997, pp. 23–51.
[55] A. Espert, F. Vilaplana, S. Karisson, Comparison of water absorption in natural
cellulosic fibres from wood and one-year crops in polypropylene composites and
its influence on their mechanical properties, Compos. Appl. Sci. Manuf. 35 (11)
(2004) 1267–1276.
[56] I. Ahmad, D.R. Abu Bakar, S.N. Mokhilas, A. Rami, Direct usage of products of
poly (ethylene terephthalate) glycolysis for manufacturing of rice husk/
unsaturated polyester composite, Iran. Polym. J. (Engl. Ed.) 16 (4) (2007)
233–239.
[57] M. Brebu, C. Vasile, Thermal degradation of lignin-a review, Cellolose Chem.
Technol. 44 (9) (2010) 353–363.
[58] M. Poletto, A.J. Zattera, M.M. Forte, R.M. Santana, Thermal decomposition of
wood: influence of wood components and cellulose crystallite size, Bioresour.
Technol. 109 (2012) 148–153.
[59] A. Nourbakhsh, A. Karegarfard, A. Ashori, A. Nourbakhsh, Effect of particle size
and coupling agent concentration on mechanical properties of particulate-filled
polymer composites, J. Thermoplast. Compos. Mater. 23 (2010) 169–174.
[60] S. Migneault, A. Koubaa, F. Erchiqui, A. Chaala, K. Englund, M.P. Wolcott, Effects
of processing method and fiber size on the structure and properties of wood
-plastic composites, Compos. Appl. Sci. Manuf. 40 (2009) 80–85.
[61] E. Perez, L. Fama, S.G. Pardo, M.J. Abad, C. Bernal, Tensile and fracture
behaviour of PP/wood flour composites, Compos. B Eng. 43 (2012) 2795–2800.
[62] X.C. Ge, H.X. Li, Z.Y. Meng, Tensile properties, morphology, and thermal
behaviour of PVC composite containing pine flour and bamboo flour, J. Appl.
Polym. Sci. 93 (2004) 1804–1811.
[63] S. Nikmatin, A. Syafiuddin, A.B.H. Kuch, A. Maddu, Physical, thermal, and
mechanical properties of polypropylene composites filled with rattan
nanoparticles, J. Appl. Res. Technol. 15 (2017) 386–395.
[64] M.N. Ichazo, C. Albano, J. Gonzalez, R. Perera, M.V. Candal, Polypropylene/
wood flour composites: treatments and properties, Compos. Struct. 54 (2-3)
(2001) 207–214.
[65] S. Haq, R. Srivastava, Wood polypropylene (pp) composites manufactured by
mango wood waste with virgin or recycled pp: mechanical, morphology, melt
flow index and crystalline behaviour, J. Polym. Enviorn. 25 (2017) 640–648.
[66] M. Farsi, Wood–plastic composites: influence of wood flour chemical
modification on the mechanical performance, J. Reinforc. Plast. Compos. 29 (24)
(2010) 3587–3592.
[67] O. Faruk, L.M. Matuana, Nanoclay reinforced HDPE as a matrix for wood -plastic
composites, Compos. Sci. Technol. 68 (2008) 2073–2077.
[68] S.M. Yadav, Mechanical and physical properties of wood-plastic composites made
of polypropylene, wood flour and nanoclay, Int. J. Agric., Forest. Plant. 1 (2015)
52–58.
[69] B. Kord, Influence of maleic anhydride on the flexural, tensile and impact
characteristics of sawdust flour reinforced polypropylene composites, World
Appl. Sci. J. 12 (7) (2011) 1014–1016.
[70] N. Narioglu, T. Salan, E. Karaogul, M.H. Alma, Evaluation of potassium humate
material in wood-plastic composite production, J. Forest. Faculty 18 (2) (2018)
189–202.
[71] M.J. Lette, B.E. Ly, D. Ndiaye, A. Takasaki, O. Toshihiro, Evaluation of sawdust
and rice husks as fillers for phenolic resin based wood-polymer composites, Open
J. Compos. Mater. 8 (2018) 124–137.
[72] J. Vignesh, C.M. Selvam, Experimental evaluation of wood dust particulate
reinforced polymer composites, Eng. Sci. Technol.: Int. J. 5 (4) (2015) 226–229.
[73] P. Vimalanathan, N. Venkateshwaran, V. Santhanam, Mechanical, dynamic
mechanical and thermal analysis of shorea robusta dispersed polyester composite,
Int. J. Polym. Anal. Char. 21 (4) (2016) 314–326.
[74] E. Sarikaya, H. Callioglu, H. Demirel, Production of epoxy composites reinforced
by different natural fibers and their mechanical properties, Compos. B Eng. 167
(2019) 461–466.
[75] S. Ojha, G. Raghavendra, S.K. Acharya, A comparative investigation of bio waste
filler (wood apple-coconut) reinforced polymer composites, Soc. Plast. Eng. 35 (1)
(2013) 180–185.
[76] R. Kumar, K. Kumar, P. Sahoo, S. Bhowmik, Study of mechanical properties of
wood dust reinforced epoxy composite, Procedia Mater. Sci. 6 (2014) 551–556.
[77] M.Z.R. Khan, S.K. Srivastava, M.K. Gupta, Hybrid wood particulates composites:
mechanical and thermal properties, Mater. Res. Express 6 (2019), 105323.
[78] S. He, T. Liu, M. Di, Preparation and Properties of wood flour reinforced lignin-
Epoxy resin composite, BioResources 11 (1) (2016) 2319–2333.
[79] H. Teymoorzadeh, D. Rodrigue, Biocomposite of wood flour and polylactic acid:
processing and properties, J. Biobased Mater. Bioenergy 9 (2) (2015) 1–6.
[80] A.K. Mohanty, M. Misra, G. Hinrichsen, Biofibers, biodegradable polymers and
biocomposites : an overview, Macromol. Mater. Eng. 276 (2000) 1–24.
[81] X.C. Ge, Q. Zhu, Y.Z. Meng, Fabrication and characterization of biodegradable
poly (propylene carbonate)/wood flour composites, J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 99
(2006) 782–787.
[82] V. Nagarajan, A.K. Mohanty, M. Misra, Biocomposites with size-fractionated
biocarbon: influence of the microstructure on macroscopic properties, ACS
Omega 1 (4) (2016) 636–647.
[83] O. Hosseinaei, S. Wang, A.A. Enayati, T.G. Rials, Effects of hemicellulose
extraction on properties of wood flour and wood-plastic composites, Compos.
Appl. Sci. Manuf. 43 (2012) 686–694.
[84] D.N. Saheb, J.P. Jog, Natural fiber polymer composites: a review, Adv. Polym.
Technol. 18 (4) (1999) 351–363.
M.Z.R. Khan et al.
[85] A. Schirp, M.P. Wolcott, Influence of fungal decay and moisture absorption on
mechanical properties of extruded wood-plastic composites, Wood Fiber Sci. 37
(4) (2005) 643–652.
[86] L.Y. Mwaikambo, M.P. Ansell, The effect of chemical treatment on the properties
of hemp, sisal, jute, and kapok for composite reinforcement, Die Angewandte
Makromolekulare 272 (1) (1999) 108–116.
[87] M. Kazayawok, J.J. Balatinecs, L.M. Matuana, Surface modification and adhesion
mechanisms in wood fiber-polypropylene/veneer composites, Holzals Rohund
Werkstoff 272 (1) (2001) 319–326.
[88] J.M. Fleix, P. Gatenholm, The nature of adhesion in composites of modified
cellulose fibers and polypropylene, J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 42 (3) (1991) 609–620.
[89] S.H. Lee, S. Wang, Biodegradable polymers/bamboo fiber biocomposite with
biobased coupling agent, Compos. Appl. Sci. Manuf. 37 (1) (2006) 80–91.
[90] F.P. Liu, M.P. Wolcott, D.J. Gardner, T.G. Rails, Characterization of the interface
between cellulosic fibers and a thermoplastic matrix, J. Compos. Interfac. 2 (6)
(1994) 419–432.
[91] M. Tazi, F. Erchiqui, H. Kaddami, Influence of softwood -fillees content on the
biodegradability and morphological properties of wood -polyethylene, Polym.
Compos. 39 (1) (2018) 29–37.
[92] I. Ghasemi, B. Kord, Long-term water absorption behaviour of polypropylene/
wood flour/organoclay hybrid nanocomposite, Iran. Polym. J. (Engl. Ed.) 18 9
(2009) 683–691.
[93] B. Dairi, H. Djidjelli, A. Boukerrou, S. Migneault, A. Koubaa, Morphological,
mechanical and physical properties of composites made with wood flour-
reinforced polypropylene/recycled poly (ethylene terephthalate) blends, Polym.
Compos. 38 (8) (2015) 1749–1755.
[94] J. Kajaks, A. Zagorska, A. Mezinskis, Some exploitation properties of wood plastic
composites (wpc), based on high density polyethylene and timber industry waste,
Mater. Sci. 21 (3) (2015) 396–399.
[95] L. Danyadi, J. Moczo, B. Pukanszky, Effect of various surface modification of
wood flour on the properties of pp/wood composites, Compos. Appl. Sci. Manuf.
41 (2010) 199–206.
[96] R. Gu, B.V. Kokta, D. Michalkova, B. Dimzoski, I. Fortelny, M. Slouf, Z. Krulis,
Characteristics of wood-plastic composites reinforced with organo-nanoclays,
J. Reinforc. Plast. Compos. 29 (24) (2010) 3566–3586.
[97] B.K. Deka, Effect of Tio2 and nanoclay on the properties of wood polymer
nanocomposite, Compos. Appl. Sci. Manuf. 42 (2001) 2117–2125.
[98] H. Kallakas, M.A. Shamim, T. Olutubo, T. Poltimae, T.M. Suld, A. Krumme,
J. Kers, Effect of chemical modification od wood flour on the mechanical
properties of wood-plastic composites, Agron. Res. 13 (3) (2015) 639–653.
[99] M. Bengtsson, P. Gatenholm, K. Oksman, The effect of crosslinking on the
properties of polyethylene/wood flour composites, Compos. Sci. Technol. 65
(2005) 1468–1479.
[100] M. Saxena, M.K. Gupta, Hybrid mango/shorea robusta wood reinforced epoxy
composites: crystalline behaviour and dynamic mechanical analysis, Mater.
Today: Proc. 5 (2018) 19359–19366.
[101] A.A. Perez-Fonseca, J.R. Robledo-Ortiz, D.E. Ramirez-Arreola, P. Ortega-Gudino,
D. Rodrigue, R. Gonzalez-Nunez, Effect of hybridization on the physical and
mechanical properties of high density polyethylene-pine/agava composites,
Mater. Des. 64 (2014) 35–43.
[102] D.F. Caulfield, C. Clemons, R.E. Jacohson, R.M. Rowell, Wood thermoplastic
composites. Handbook of Wood Chemistry and Wood Composites, CRC Press,
Boca Raton, 2005, pp. 365–378.
[103] B. Li, J. He, Investigation of mechanical property, flame retardancy and thermal
degradation of LLDPE–wood-fibre composites, Polym. Degrad. Stability 83 (2)
(2004) 241–246.
[104] A.A. Klyosov, Wood-plastic Composites, John Wiley & Sons, New Jersey, 2007.
[105] E. Ana, F. Vilaplana, S. Karlsson, Comparison of water absorption in natural
cellulosic fibres from wood and one-year crops in polypropylene composites and
its influence on their mechanical properties, Compos. Appl. Sci. Manuf. 35 (11)
(2004) 1267–1276.
[106] Q. Lin, X. Zhou, G. Dai, Effect of hydrothermal environment on moisture
absorption and mechanical properties of wood flour-filled polypropylene
composites, J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 85 (2002) 2824–2832.
[107] K. Joseph, S. Thomas, Effect of aging on the physical and mechanical properties of
sisal-fibre-reinforced polyethylene composites, Compos. Sci. Technol. 53 (1)
(1995) 99–110.
[108] S. Tamrakar, R.A.L. Anido, Water absorption of wood polypropylene composite
sheet plies and its influence on the mechanical properties, Construct. Build.
Mater. 25 (2011) 3977–3988.
[109] N.M. Stark, D.J. Gardner, Outdoor durability of wood-polymer composites. Wood-
polymer Composites, Woodhead Publishing Limited, Cambridge, UK, 2008,
pp. 142–165.
[110] M.Z.R. Khan, S.K. Srivastava, M.K. Gupta, Water absorption and its effect on
mechanical properties of hybrid wood particulates composites, Mater. Res.
Express 6 (10) (2019), 105305.
[111] J. Bhaskar, S. Haq, A.K. Pandey, N. Srivastava, Evaluation of properties of
polypropylene-pine wood Plastic composite, J. Mater. Environ. Sci. 3 (3) (2012)
605–612.
[112] Y. Chen, M. Stark, M.A. Tshabalala, J. Gao, Y. Fan, Moisture performance of
wood-plastic composites reinforced with extracted and delignified wood flour.
ANTEC 2014, Las Vegas, Nevada, 2014.
[113] S. Migneault, A. Koubaa, F. Erchiqui, A. Chaala, K. Englund, M.P. Wolcott, Effects
of processing method and fiber size on the structure and properties of wood-
plastic composites, Compos. A: Appl. Sci. Manufac. 40 (2009) 80–85.
12
Polymer Testing 89 (2020) 106721
[114] N.M. Stark, L.M. Matuana, Surface chemistry and mechanical property changes of
wood-flour/high-density-polyethylene composites after accelerated weathering,
J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 94 (2004) 2263–2273.
[115] V. Steckel, C.M. Clemons, H. Thoemen, Effects of material parameters on the
diffusion and sorption properties of wood-flour/polypropylene composites,
J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 103 (2007) 752–763.
[116] S. Kalia, A. Dufresne, B.M. Cherian, B.S. Kaith, L. Averous, J. Njugana,
E. Nassiopoulus, Cellulose-based bio- and nanocomposites: a review, Int. J.
Polym. Sci. 2011 (2011) 1–35.
[117] G. lullianelli, M.B. Tavares, L. Luetkmeyer, Water absorption behaviour and
impact strength of PVC//Wood flour composites, Chem. Chem. Technol. 4 (2010)
225–239.
[118] N. Ayrilmis, M. Tasdemir, T. Akbulut, Water absorption and mechanical
properties of PP/HIPS hybrid composites filled with wood flour, Polym. Compos.
38 (5) (2017) 863–869.
[119] N. Ayrilmis, J.H. Kwon, T.H. Han, A. Durmus, Effect of wood-derived charcoal
content on properties of wood plastic composites, Mater. Res. 18 (3) (2015)
654–659.
[120] K. Sewda, S.N. Maiti, Dynamic mechanical properties of high density
polyethylene and teak wood flour composites, Polym. Bull. 70 (10) (2013)
2657–2674.
[121] Z. He, Z. Wang, L. Qu, J. Qian, S. Yi, Gaseous decomposition products from wood
degradation via thermogravimetric and fourier transform infrared analysis during
thermal modification of beech and pine woods, BioResources 14 (3) (2019)
6883–6894.
[122] H. Yang, R. Yan, H. Chen, C. Zheng, D.H. Lee, D.T. Liang, In-depth investigation of
biomass pyrolysis based on three major components: hemicellulose, cellulose, and
lignin, Energy Fuels 20 (2006) 388–393.
[123] H.-S. Kim, S. Kim, H.-J. Kim, H.-S. Yang, Thermal properties of bio-flour-filled
polyolefin composites with different compatibilizing agent type and content,
Thermochim. Acta 451 (2006) 181–188.
[124] D.K. Shen, S. Gu, A.V. Bridgwater, The thermal performance of the
polysaccharides extracted from hardwood: cellulose and hemicellulose,
Carbohydr. Polym. 82 (1) (2010) 39–45.
[125] A. Sharma, M. Thakur, M. Bhattacharya, T. Mandal, S. Goswami, Commercial
application of cellulose nano-composites-a review, Biotechnol. Rep. 21 (2019),
e00316.
[126] A. Dufresne, Nanocellulose: a new ageless bionanomaterials, Mater. Today 16
(2013) 220–227.
[127] A. Isogai, Wood nanocelluloses: fundamentals and applications as new bio-based
nanomaterials, J. Wood Sci. 59 (2013) 449–459.
[128] R. Singla, A. Guliani, A. Kumari, S.K. Yadav, Nanocellulose and nanocomposites.
Nanoscale Materials in Targeted Drug Delivery, Theragnosis and Tissue
Regeneration, Springer, Singapore, 2016, pp. 103–125.
[129] R. Ilyas, S. Sapuan, M. Ishak, E. Zainudin, M. Atikah, Nanocellulose reinforced
starch polymer composites: a review of preparation, properties and application,
in: Proceeding: 5th International Conference on Applied Sciences and
Engineering, 2018. Malaysia.
[130] R.A. Ilyas, S.M. Sapuan, M.L. Sanyang, M.R. Ishak, E.S. Zainudin, Nanocrystalline
cellulose as reinforcement for polymeric matrix nanocomposites and its potential
applications: a review, Curr. Anal. Chem. 14 (3) (2018) 203–225.
[131] M. Abdollahi, M. Alboofetileh, R. Behrooz, M. Rezaei, R. Miraki, Reducing water
sensitivity of alginate bio-nanocomposite film using cellulose nanoparticles, Int. J.
Biol. Macromol. 54 (2013) 166–173.
[132] S.-Y. Lee, D.J. Mohan, I.-A. Kang, G.-H. Doh, S. Lee, S.O. Han, Nanocellulose
reinforced PVA composite films: effects of acid treatment and filler loading, Fibers
Polym. 10 (1) (2009) 77–82.
[133] Y. Lu, L. Weng, X. Cao, Biocomposites of plasticized starch reinforced with
cellulose crystallites from cottonseed linter, Macromol. Biosci. 5 (11) (2005)
1101–1107.
[134] W.J. Wang, W.W. Wang, Z.Q. Shao, Surface modification of cellulose
nanowhiskers for application in thermosetting epoxy polymers, Cellulose 21
(2014) 2529–2538.
[135] K. Spence, Y. Habibi, A. Dufresne, Nanocellulose-based composites. Cellulose
Fibers: Bio- and Nano-Polymer Composites, Springer, Berlin, 2011, pp. 179–213.
[136] J.E. Gordon, The New Science of Strong Materials, Princeton University Press,
New Jersey, 2019.
[137] C.M. Clemons, D.F. Caufield, Wood flour. Functional Fillers for Plastics, Willey,
Germany, 2005, pp. 249–270.
[138] S. Borysiak, Determination of nucleating ability of wood for non-isothermal
crystallisation of polypropylene, J. Therm. Anal. Calorim. 88 (2007) 455–462.
[139] A.K. Mohanty, M. Misra, L.T. Drzal, S.E. Selke, B.R. Harte, G. Hinrichsen, Natural
fibers, biopolymers, and biocomposites: an introduction, in: Natural Fibers,
Biopolymers, and Biocomposites, Taylor & Fracis group, United States of
America, 2005, pp. 15–50.
[140] M.Z.R. Khan, S.K. Srivastava, M. Gupta, Tensile and flexural properties of natural
fiber reinforced polymer composites: a review, J. Reinforc. Plast. Compos. 37 (24)
(2018) 1435–1455.
[141] M.D. Beg, K.L. Pickering, Accelerated weathering of unbleached and bleached
Kraft wood fibre reinforced polypropylene composites, Polym. Degrad. Stabil. 93
(2008) 1939–1946.
[142] B.S. Gupta, I. Reiniati, M.-P.G. Laborie, Surface properties and adhesion of wood
fiber reinforced thermoplastics composites, Colloid. Surface. Physicochem. Eng.
Aspect. 302 (1-3) (2007) 388–395.
[143] Anonymous, Wood Plastic Composite Market Analysis Report by Type
(Polyethylene, Polypropylene, Polyvinylchloride), by Application (Automotive,
M.Z.R. Khan et al.
Construction, Industrial & Consumer Goods), and Segment Forecasts, Grand View
Research, US, 2018, 2018 – 2025.
[144] G.A. Ormondroyd, J. Kers, Wood plastic composites. Performance of Bio-Based
Building Materials, Woodhead Publishing, Cambridge, United States, 2017,
pp. 61–68.
[145] H. Yousefi, M. Faezipour, S. Hedjazi, M.M. Mousavi, Y. Azusa, A.H. Heidari,
Comparative study of paper and nanopaper properties prepared from bacterial
cellulose nanofibers and fibers ground cellulose nanofibers of canola straw, Ind.
Crop. Prod. 43 (2013) 732–737.
[146] E.L. Bradley, L. Castle, Q. Chaudhry, Application of nanomaterials in food
packaging with a consideration of opportunities for developing countries, Trends
Food Sci. Technol. 22 (11) (2011) 604–610.
[147] S. Paunonen, Strength and Barrier enhancements of cellophane and cellulose
derivative films: a review, BioResources 8 (2) (2013) 3098–3121.
[148] P. Tammela, Z. Wang, S. Frykstrand, P. Zhang, I.- Maria Sintorn, L. Nyholm,
M. Stromme, Asymmetric supercapacitors based on carbon nanofibre and
polypyrrole/nanocellulose composite electrodes, RSC Adv. 5 (21) (2015)
16405–16413.
[149] Z. Wang, P. Tammela, P. Zhang, J. Huo, F. Ericson, M. Stromme, L. Nyholm,
Freestanding nanocellulose-composite fibre reinforced 3D polypyrrole electrodes
for energy stage applications, Nanoscale 6 (21) (2014) 13068–13075.
13
Polymer Testing 89 (2020) 106721
[150] D. Zhang, Q. Zhang, X. Gao, G. Piao, A nanocellulose polypyrrole composite based
on tunicate cellulose, Int. J. Polym. Sci. 2013 (2013) 1–6.
[151] A. Razaq, L. Nyholm, M. Sajodin, M. Stromme, Mihranyan, A paper-based energy-
storage devices comprising carbon fibre -reinforced polypyrrolecladophora
nanocellulose composite electrodes, Adv. Energy Mater. 2 (2012) 445–454.
[152] Z. Wang, P. Tammela, P. Zhang, M. Stromme, L. Nyholm, Efficient high active
mass paper-based energy-storage devices containing free-standing additiveless
polypyrrole-nanocellulose electrodes, J. Mater. Chem. 2 (2014) 1711–1716.
[153] D. Muller, R. Cercena, A.J.G. Aguayo, L.M. Porto, C.R. Rambo, G.M.O. Barra,
Flexible PEDOT-nanocellulose composites produced by in situ oxidative
polymerization for passive components in frequency filters, J. Mater. Sci. Mater.
Electron. 27 (2016) 8062–8067.
[154] J. K Jackson, K. Letchford, B.Z. Wasserman, L. Ye, W.Y. Hamad, H.M. Burt, The
use of nanocrystalline cellulose for the binding and controlled release of drugs,
Int. J. Nanomed. 6 (2011) 321–330.
[155] E. Trovatti, N.H.C.S. Silva, I.F. Duarte, C.F. Rosado, I.F. Almeida, P. Costa, C.S.
R. Freire, A.J.D. Silvestre, C.P. Neto, Biocellulose membranes as supports for
dermal release of lidocaine, Biomacromolecules 12 (2011) 4162–4168.
[156] B. Nasri-Nasrabadi, M. Mehrasa, M. Rafienia, S. Bonakdar, T. Behzad, S. Gavanji,
Porous starch/cellulose nanofibers composite prepared by salt leaching technique
for tissue engineering, Carbohydr. Polym. 108 (2014) 232–238.