2016
DOI: 10.1002/vnl.21542
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Compressive mechanical properties of sawdust/high density polyethylene composites under various strain rate loadings

Abstract: This article is concerned with the static and dynamic mechanical properties of high-density polyethylene (HDPE) reinforced with sawdust (SD) at a strain rate of up to 10 3 s 21 . In this study, the static and dynamic properties of HDPE/SD composites with different filler loadings of 5, 10, 15, 20, and 30 wt% SD were deliberated at different levels of strain rates (0.001, 0.01, 0.1, 650, 900, and 1100 s 21 ) using a conventional universal testing machine and the split Hopkinson pressure bar apparatus. The resul… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

1
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 39 publications
(45 reference statements)
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Further, as shown in Figure 2(c), the composites with a polyurethane content of 0.17-0.20 (w/w) show some parts of polyurethane not binding to the filler, appear many voids from polyurethane polymer, teak leaves would tend to agglomerate and not bond properly which can reduce compressive strength. [22][23][24] According to Jaya et al, when the polymer was added much more than the filler there will be a very poor adhesion force between surfaces because polyurethane is a hydrophobic matrix and teak leaves powder is a hydrophilic filler. 24 Further, the raising of the strength until certain fraction is related to the maximum contact amount between the polymer and solid waste particle.…”
Section: Compressive Strength Testmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Further, as shown in Figure 2(c), the composites with a polyurethane content of 0.17-0.20 (w/w) show some parts of polyurethane not binding to the filler, appear many voids from polyurethane polymer, teak leaves would tend to agglomerate and not bond properly which can reduce compressive strength. [22][23][24] According to Jaya et al, when the polymer was added much more than the filler there will be a very poor adhesion force between surfaces because polyurethane is a hydrophobic matrix and teak leaves powder is a hydrophilic filler. 24 Further, the raising of the strength until certain fraction is related to the maximum contact amount between the polymer and solid waste particle.…”
Section: Compressive Strength Testmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[22][23][24] According to Jaya et al, when the polymer was added much more than the filler there will be a very poor adhesion force between surfaces because polyurethane is a hydrophobic matrix and teak leaves powder is a hydrophilic filler. 24 Further, the raising of the strength until certain fraction is related to the maximum contact amount between the polymer and solid waste particle. 25 The most important interaction in the composite is predominantly emerged between the polyurethane and the cellulose in teak leaves.…”
Section: Compressive Strength Testmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…7. Specific bands characteristic to the functional groups of aromatics in cellulose [27], and bonded C-C groups in sawdust were identified at 897 cm -1 and 896 cm -1 [28]. The transmission bands under 720 cm -1 are assigned to C-H groups in cellulose [29].…”
Section: Infrared Spectroscopymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Portland cement is composed of four primary oxides which are tricalcium silicate (C 3 S), dicalcium silicate (C 2 S), tricalcium aluminate (C 3 A), and tetracalcium aluminiferrite (C 4 AF) [27]. During the hydration process, C 3 S and C 2 S react with water to form calcium-silicatehydrate (C-S-H) gels and calcium hydroxide where these gels provide the strength to mortars or concretes [33,34,35]. Anyway, the hydration products from four oxides is Ca(OH) 2 will react with silica of bottom ash and form more C-S-H.…”
Section: Ternary Phase Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%