Handbook of Natural Fibres 2020
DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-12-818782-1.00008-0
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Improving the properties of natural fibres by chemical treatments

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
17
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 108 publications
0
17
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This is confirmed, among others, by results of changes in viscosity as a function of temperature, where fibers without additional ingredients better wetted the biopolymer surface, leading to its plasticization. This is because the consequence of converting hydroxyl groups to Cellulose–Na linkages is the shortening of fiber length by up to 18% [ 83 ]. Moreover, the cellulose molecules become more exposed on the surface, which promotes the improved adhesion of the fibers to the polylactide matrix due to a greater number of possible reaction sites [ 84 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is confirmed, among others, by results of changes in viscosity as a function of temperature, where fibers without additional ingredients better wetted the biopolymer surface, leading to its plasticization. This is because the consequence of converting hydroxyl groups to Cellulose–Na linkages is the shortening of fiber length by up to 18% [ 83 ]. Moreover, the cellulose molecules become more exposed on the surface, which promotes the improved adhesion of the fibers to the polylactide matrix due to a greater number of possible reaction sites [ 84 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The identification methods based on LM or SEM were often criticized because they lack objectivity and require operators with a high level of expertise and skill, mainly for LM [34]. An additional problem arises from superficial treatments hiding the fiber's surface (e.g., antifelting treatments) [35].…”
Section: Light-and Scanning Electron Microscopymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, in the reviewed literature, with few exceptions [73], images originate from raw fibers or combed slivers; therefore, in general, they are from unprocessed fibers, not from real samples on the market or fibers at different processing stages. As an example, problems for the identifications can arise from treatments that mask the surface morphology of the fibers, such as widespread treatment to impart felt resistance, which includes chlorination and polymer adhesion [35]. Finally, some problems in fiber identification can occur from marketed recycled wool and cashmere textiles derived from post-industrial and post-consumer waste, currently produced in the frame of a green economy.…”
Section: Image Processingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this treatment, also called mercerization [108], the fibers are immersed in NaOH solutions at specific concentrations to remove lignin and surface impurities (such as pectins and oils), which act as barriers and reduce the hydrophilic behavior of the hydroxyl groups in the fibers. As a result, the roughness of the fiber surface is increased [109]. Fibers pretreated with alkaline agents, even in low proportions, have been shown to favor the mechanical properties of composites, providing higher strength, stiffness, and better interfacial ratio thanks to a higher cellulose exposure and higher surface energy, which produce better wetting and compatibility [15].…”
Section: Surface Modification Of Vegetable Fibers (Improving the Char...mentioning
confidence: 99%