, Volume 21, Issue 5, pp 3647–3654 | Cite as

Improving the reactivity of kraft-based dissolving pulp for viscose rayon production by mechanical treatments

  • Chao Tian
  • Linqiang Zheng
  • Qingxian Miao
  • Chunyu Cao
  • Yonghao Ni
Original Paper


The capacity of dissolving pulp to react with carbon disulfide under the defined conditions, known as the “Fock reactivity,” is an important parameter in determining the processability, end-product quality, and environmental impact in downstream rayon production. This study was aimed at improving the reactivity of kraft-based dissolving pulp by mechanical treatments, such as grinding and PFI refining, which can induce additional accessible surfaces in the compact cellulose structure via fiber cutting and fibrillation, respectively. Results showed that the Fock reactivity of a kraft-based dissolving pulp was increased from 49.3 to 71.8 % by 6-min grinding treatment under the conditions studied. Such a treatment led to increases in the fines content and specific surface area while decreasing the fiber length, intrinsic viscosity, and the crystalline ratio of cellulose. PFI refining can also result in changes in the fiber morphology and cellulose structure; a 25,000 PFI revolution treatment led to an increase in the Fock reactivity from 49.3 to 58.3 % for the same dissolving pulp.


Fock reactivity Dissolving pulp Grinding Refining Cellulose Specific surface area 



The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support from the Canada Research Chairs and NSERC CRD program, and the Tianjin Municipal Science and Technology Commission (grant no. 12ZCZDGX01100).


  1. Aimin T, Hongwei Z, Gang C, Guohui X, Wenzhi L (2005) Influence of ultrasound treatment on accessibility and regioselective oxidation reactivity of cellulose. Ultrason Sonochem 12(6):467–472. doi: 10.1016/j.ultsonch.2004.07.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alvira P, Tomás-Pejó E, Ballesteros M, Negro MJ (2010) Pretreatment technologies for an efficient bioethanol production process based on enzymatic hydrolysis: a review. Bioresour Technol 101(13):4851–4861. doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2009.11.093 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bhardwaj NK, Hoang V, Nguyen KL (2007) Effect of refining on pulp surface charge accessible to polydadmac and FTIR characteristic bands of high yield kraft fibres. Bioresour Technol 98(4):962–966. doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2006.03.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bismarck A, Aranberri-Askargorta I, Springer J (2002) Surface characterization of flax, hemp and cellulose fibers; surface properties and the water uptake behavior. Polym Compos 23(5):872–894CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bui HM, Lenninger M, Manian AP, Abu-Rous M, Schimper CB, Schuster KC, Bechtold T (2008) Treatment in swelling solutions modifying cellulose fiber reactivity—Part 2: accessibility and reactivity. Macromol Symp 262(1):50–64. doi: 10.1002/masy.200850206 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Christoffersson KE (2005) Dissolving pulp: multivariate characterisation and analysis of reactivity and spectroscopic properties. Umeå University, Umeå, SwedenGoogle Scholar
  7. Christoffersson KE, Sjöström M, Edlund U, Lindgren Å, Dolk M (2002) Reactivity of dissolving pulp: characterisation using chemical properties, NMR spectroscopy and multivariate data analysis. Cellulose 9(2):159–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ciolacu D, Ciolacu F, Popa V (2011) Amorphous cellulose—structure and characterization. Cellul Chem Technol 45(1–2):13–21Google Scholar
  9. Dupon A-L (2003) Gelatine sizing of paper and its impact on the degradation of cellulose during aging: a study using size-exclusion chromatography. University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  10. Engström A-C, Ek M, Henriksson G (2006) Improved accessibility and reactivity of dissolving pulp for the viscose process pretreatment with monocomponent endoglucanase. Biomacromolecules 7(6):2027–2031CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fan J, Li Y (2012) Maximizing the yield of nanocrystalline cellulose from cotton pulp fiber. Carbohydr Polym 88(4):1184–1188. doi: 10.1016/j.carbpol.2012.01.081 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Filpponen I, Argyropoulos DS (2008) Determination of cellulose reactivity by using phosphitylation and quantitative 31P NMR spectroscopy. Ind Eng Chem Res 47:8906–8910CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gehmayr V, Sixta H (2012) Pulp properties and their influence on enzymatic degradability. Biomacromolecules 13(3):645–651CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gehmayr V, Potthast A, Sixta H (2012) Reactivity of dissolving pulps modified by TEMPO-mediated oxidation. Cellulose 19(4):1125–1134. doi: 10.1007/s10570-012-9729-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Han SO, Choi HY (2010) Morphology and surface properties of natural fiber treated with electron beam. Microsc Sci Technol Appl Educ 3:1880–1887Google Scholar
  16. He B (2010) Paper making principles and engineering, 3rd edn. China Light Industry Press, BeijingGoogle Scholar
  17. Henriksson G, Christiernin M, Agnemo R (2005) Monocomponent endoglucanase treatment increases the reactivity of softwood sulphite dissolving pulp. Ind Microbiol Biotechnol 32:211–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ibarra D, Köpcke V, Larsson PT, Jaaskelainen AS, Ek M (2010) Combination of alkaline and enzymatic treatments as a process for upgrading sisal paper-grade pulp to dissolving-grade pulp. Bioresour Technol 101(19):7416–7423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Isogai T, Yanagisawa M, Isogai A (2008) Degrees of polymerization (DP) and DP distribution of cellouronic acids prepared from alkali-treated celluloses and ball-milled native celluloses by TEMPO-mediated oxidation. Cellulose 16(1):117–127. doi: 10.1007/s10570-008-9245-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kelsey RG, Shafizadeh F (1980) Enhancement of cellulose accessibility and enzymatic hydrolysis by simultaneous wet milling. Biotechnol Bioeng 22(5):1025–1036CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kim CH, Yang JK, Park JY (2000) Quantification of crystallinity change in celluloses during refining. J Korea TAPPI 32(5):8–13Google Scholar
  22. Kline E (1954) Xanthates. In: Ott E, Spurlin HM, Grafflin MW (eds) Cellulose and cellulose derivatives, vol V. Interscience Publishers Inc., New YorkGoogle Scholar
  23. Köpcke V (2010) Conversion of wood and non-wood paper-grade pulps to dissolving-grade pulps. Doctoral Thesis, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, SwedenGoogle Scholar
  24. Krässig HA (1993) Cellulose: structure, accessibility, and reactivity. Polymer monographs, vol 11. Gordon and Breach Science, Yverdon, Switzerland; PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  25. Kunze J, Fink H-P (2005) Structural changes and activation of cellulose by caustic soda solution with urea. Macromol Symp 223(1):175–188. doi: 10.1002/masy.200550512 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kvarnlöf N, Germgård U, Jönsson LJ, Söderlund C-A (2007) Optimization of the enzymatic activation of a dissolving pulp before viscose manufacture. Tappi J 6(6):14–19Google Scholar
  27. Li Q, Gao Y, Wang H, Li B, Liu C, Yu G, Mu X (2012) Comparison of different alkali-based pretreatments of corn stover for improving enzymatic saccharification. Bioresour Technol 125:193–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lin Q (1965) Chemical fiber technology (chemical fiber technology). China financial and economic publishing house, Beijing, ChinaGoogle Scholar
  29. Miao Q, Chen L, Huang L, Tian C, Zheng L, Ni Y (2014) A process for enhancing the accessibility and reactivity of hardwood kraft-based dissolving pulp for viscose rayon production by cellulase treatment. Bioresour Technol 154:109–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Millett MA, Effland MJ, Caulfield DF (1979) Influence of fine grinding on the hydrolysis of cellulosic materials-acid vs. enzymatic. In: Ross D. Brown J, Jurasek L (eds) Hydrolysis of cellulose: mechanisms of enzymatic and acid catalysis, vol 181. pp 71–89Google Scholar
  31. Mou H, Li B, Heikkilä E, Iamazaki E, Zhan H, Fardim P (2013) Low consistency refining of eucalyptus pulp: effects on surface chemistry and interaction with FWAs. BioResources 8(4):5995–6013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Östberg L, Håkansson H, Germgård U (2012) Some aspects of the reactivity of pulp intended for high-viscosity viscose. BioResources 7(1):743–755Google Scholar
  33. Peng H, Li H, Luo H, Xu J (2013) A novel combined pretreatment of ball milling and microwave irradiation for enhancing enzymatic hydrolysis of microcrystalline cellulose. Bioresour Technol 130:81–87. doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2012.10.167 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Rajagopal S, Stepanik T, Free D, Hidasi G, Poggi T (1994) Enhancement of cellulose reactivity in viscose production using electron processing technology. Paper presented at the the Akzo Nobel sponsored conference on Challenges in Cellulosic Man-Made Fibres, StockholmGoogle Scholar
  35. Roffael E (1988) Study on reactivity of differently prepared viscose pulps. Holzforschung 42(2):135–136Google Scholar
  36. Schild G, Sixta H (2011) Sulfur-free dissolving pulps and their application for viscose and lyocell. Cellulose 18(4):1113–1128. doi: 10.1007/s10570-011-9532-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Schwanninger M, Rodrigues JC, Pereira H, Hinterstoisser B (2004) Effects of short-time vibratory ball milling on the shape of FT-IR spectra of wood and cellulose. Vib Spectrosc 36(1):23–40. doi: 10.1016/j.vibspec.2004.02.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Sixta H (2006) Handbook of pulp, vol 2. Wiley, KGaA, WeinheimCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sixta H, Harms H, Dapia S, Parajo JC, Puls J, Saake B, Fink H-P, Röder T (2004) Evaluation of new organosolv dissolving pulps. Part I: preparation, analytical characterization and viscose processability. Cellulose 11(1):73–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sixta H, Iakovlev M, Testova L, Roselli A, Hummel M, Borrega M, Heiningen A, Froschauer C, Schottenberger H (2013) Novel concepts of dissolving pulp production. Cellulose 20(4):1547–1561. doi: 10.1007/s10570-013-9943-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Strunk P (2012) Characterization of cellulose pulps and the influence of their properties on the process and production of viscose and cellulose ethers. Umeå University, Umeå, SwedenGoogle Scholar
  42. Sun Y, Cheng J (2002) Hydrolysis of lignocellulosic materials for ethanol production: a review. Bioresour Technol 83:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Tian C, Zheng L, Miao Q, Nash C, Cao C, Ni Y (2013) Improvement in the Fock test for determining the reactivity of dissolving pulp. Tappi J 12(11):19–24Google Scholar
  44. Xu M, Xu M, Dai H, Wang S, Wu W (2013) The effects of ball milling and PFI pretreatment on the cellulose structure and fibermorphology. J Cell Sci Technol 21(2):46–52Google Scholar
  45. Zhao H, Kwak JH, Wang Y, Franz JA, White JM, Holladay JE (2006) Effects of crystallinity on dilute acid hydrolysis of cellulose by cellulose ball-milling study. Energy Fuels 20:807–811CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Tianjin Key Laboratory of Pulp and PaperTianjin University of Science and TechnologyTianjinChina
  2. 2.Department of Chemical Engineering, Limerick Pulp and Paper CentreUniversity of New BrunswickFrederictonCanada
  3. 3.China National Pulp and Paper Research InstituteBeijingChina
  4. 4.College of Material EngineeringFujian Agriculture and Forestry UniversityFuzhouChina

Personalised recommendations