Advertisement

Cellulose

, Volume 27, Issue 1, pp 511–530 | Cite as

Effects of oxygen and tetravinylsilane plasma treatments on mechanical and interfacial properties of flax yarns in thermoset matrix composites

  • Maria Carolina SeghiniEmail author
  • Fabienne Touchard
  • Fabrizio Sarasini
  • Laurence Chocinski-Arnault
  • Jacopo Tirillò
  • Maria Paola Bracciale
  • Milan Zvonek
  • Vladimir Cech
Original Research
  • 72 Downloads

Abstract

This work is focused on the assessment of the effect of oxygen and polymer plasma tetravinylsilane (pp-TVS) treatments on the adhesion of flax yarns with epoxy and vinylester thermoset matrices. These low temperature plasma processes have been selected as more environmentally friendly alternatives to traditional chemical treatments. Tensile tests performed on single flax yarns revealed a reduction in their mechanical properties after plasma treatments. In particular, a tensile strength reduction of 36.4% was detected after the oxygen plasma treatment using 100 W of plasma power. The morphological analysis highlighted that this result is mainly ascribed to the ablation action produced by oxygen plasma process. In the case of pp-TVS, both morphological and Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy analysis confirmed the presence of a homogeneous tetravinylsilane film on the surface of the yarns. The interfacial adhesion of untreated, oxygen plasma treated, and plasma-polymer coated flax yarns has been determined by single fibre fragmentation test. The plasma polymer deposition can produce a significant improvement of the adhesion property of flax yarns with both epoxy and vinylester matrices. An increase of the interfacial shear strength values of 114% and 71% was found after the TVS film deposition in epoxy and vinylester composites, respectively. These results were confirmed by high-resolution micro-CT, photoelasticity analysis and FE-SEM observations.

Graphic abstract

Keywords

Plant fibres Interface/interphase Fragmentation Plasma treatment Micro-CT 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The plasma treatments were supported by the Czech Science Foundation, Grant No. 16-09161S.

References

  1. Abidi N, Manike M (2017) X-ray diffraction and FTIR investigations of cellulose deposition during cotton fiber development. Text Res J 88:719–730Google Scholar
  2. Abidi N, Cabrales L, Haigler CH (2014) Changes in the cell wall and cellulose content of developing cotton fibers investigated by FTIR spectroscopy. Carbohydr Polym 100:9–16PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Amiandamhen SO, Meincken M, Tyhoda L (2018) The effect of chemical treatments of natural fibres on the properties of phosphate-bonded composite products. Wood Sci Technol 52:653–675Google Scholar
  4. Baltazar-y-Jimenez A, Bistritz M, Schulz E, Bismarck A (2008) Atmospheric air pressure plasma treatment of lignocellulosic fibres: impact on mechanical properties and adhesion to cellulose acetate butyrate. Compos Sci Technol 68:215–227Google Scholar
  5. Beggs KM, Servinis L, Gengenbach TR, Huson MG, Fox BL, Henderson LC (2015) A systematic study of carbon fi bre surface grafting via in situ diazonium generation for improved interfacial shear strength in epoxy matrix composites. Compos Sci Technol 118:31–38Google Scholar
  6. Bozaci E, Sever K, Sarikanat M, Seki Y, Demir A, Ozdogan E (2013) Effects of the atmospheric plasma treatments on surface and mechanical properties of flax fiber and adhesion between fiber—matrix for composite materials. Compos Part B 45:565–572.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesb.2012.09.042 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bulut Y, Aksit A (2013) A comparative study on chemical treatment of jute fiber: potassium dichromate, potassium permanganate and sodium perborate trihydrate. Cellulose 20:3155–3164Google Scholar
  8. Cech V, Studynka J, Janos F, Perina V (2007) Influence of oxygen on the chemical structure of plasma polymer films deposited from a mixture of tetravinylsilane and oxygen gas. Plasma Process Polym 4:S776–S780Google Scholar
  9. Cech V et al (2014) Enhanced interfacial adhesion of glass fibers by tetravinylsilane plasma modification. Compos Part A 58:84–89.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesa.2013.12.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cech V, Marekb A, Knobc A, Valterb J, Braneckya M, Plihalb P, Vyskocil J (2019) Continuous Surface Modification of Glass Fibers in a Roll-to-Roll Plasma-Enhanced CVD Reactor for Glass Fiber/Polyester Composites. Compos Part A: Appl Sci Manuf 121:244–253Google Scholar
  11. Davidson G (1971) The vibrational spectrum of tetravinylsilane. Spectrochim Acta Part A Mol Spectrosc 27A:1161–1169Google Scholar
  12. De Almeida Mesquita R G et al (2017) Polyester composites reinforced with corona-treated fibers from pine, eucalyptus and sugarcane bagasse. J Polym Environ 25:800–811Google Scholar
  13. De Farias J, Cavalcante R, Canabarro B, Viana H, Scholz S, Simao R (2017) Surface lignin removal on coir fibers by plasma treatment for improved adhesion in thermoplastic starch composites. Carbohydr Polym 165:429–436PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. De Oliveira DM, Cioffi MOH, De Carvalho Benini K C C, Voorwald HJC (2017) Effects of plasma treatment on the sorption properties of coconut fibers. Procedia Eng 200:357–364Google Scholar
  15. De Souza Lima MM, Borsali R (2004) Rodlike cellulose microcrystals: structure, properties, and applications. Macromol Rapid Commun 25:771–787Google Scholar
  16. Demirkir C, Colak S, Ozturk H (2017) Effects of plasma surface treatment on bending strength and modulus of elasticity of beech and poplar plywood. Maderas Cienc Tecnol 19:195–202Google Scholar
  17. Donaldson L, Frankland A (2004) Ultrastructure of iodine treated wood. Holzforschung 58:219–225Google Scholar
  18. Dong Z, Ding R, Zheng L, Zhang X, Yu C (2015) Thermal properties of flax fiber scoured by different methods. Therm Sci 19:939–945Google Scholar
  19. Fiore V, Scalici T, Valenza A (2017) Effect of sodium bicarbonate treatment on mechanical properties of flax-reinforced epoxy composite materials. J Compos Mater 52:1061–1072Google Scholar
  20. Fu J et al (2019) Applied Surface Science Enhancing interfacial properties of carbon fi bers reinforced epoxy composites via Layer-by-Layer self assembly GO/SiO2 multilayers fi lms on carbon fi bers surface. Appl Surf Sci 470:543–554Google Scholar
  21. Gao X, Gillespie JW Jr, Jensen RE, Li W, Haque BZG, Mcknight SH (2015) Effect of fiber surface texture on the mechanical properties of glass fiber reinforced epoxy composite. Compos Part A 74:10–17Google Scholar
  22. George J, Sreekala MS, Thomas S, George J, Sreekala MS, Thomas S (2001) A review on interface modification and characterization of natural fiber reinforced plastic composites. Polym Eng Sci 41:1471–1485Google Scholar
  23. Guillebaud-Bonnafous C, Vasconcellos D, Touchard F, Chocinski-Arnault L (2012) Experimental and numerical investigation of the interface between epoxy matrix and hemp yarn. Compos Part A 43:2046–2058.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compositesa.2012.07.015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jamali A, Evans PD (2011) Etching of wood surfaces by glow discharge plasma. Wood Sci Technol 45:169–182Google Scholar
  25. Joffe R, Andersons JA, Wallström L (2003) Strength and adhesion characteristics of elementary flax fibres with different surface treatments. Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf 34:603–612Google Scholar
  26. Joffe R, Andersons J, Wallström L (2005) Interfacial shear strength of flax fiber/thermoset polymers estimated by fiber fragmentation tests. J Mater Sci 40:2721–2722Google Scholar
  27. John MJ, Anandjiwala RD (2008) Recent developments in chemical modification and characterization of natural fiber-reinforced composites. Polym Compos 29:187–207Google Scholar
  28. Kafi AA, Magniez K, Fox BL (2011) A surface-property relationship of atmospheric plasma treated jute composites. Compos Sci Technol 71:1692–1698Google Scholar
  29. Kalia S, Kaith BS, Kaur I (2009) Pretreatments of natural fibers and their application as reinforcing material in polymer composites—a review. Polym Eng Sci 49:1253–1272Google Scholar
  30. Ke G, Yu W, Xu W, Cui W, Shen X (2007) Effects of corona discharge treatment on the surface. J Mater Process Technol 7:125–129Google Scholar
  31. Kelly A, Tyson WR (1965) Tensile properties of fibre-reinforced metals: copper/tungsten and copper/molybdenum. J Mech Phys Solids 13:329–350Google Scholar
  32. Kiruthika AV (2017) A review on physico-mechanical properties of bast fibre reinforced polymer composites. J Build Eng 9:91–99Google Scholar
  33. Koronis G, Silva A, Fontul M (2013) Green composites: a review of adequate materials for automotive applications. Compos Part B 44:120–127Google Scholar
  34. Li X, Tabil LG, Panigrahi S (2007) Chemical treatments of natural fiber for use in natural fiber-reinforced composites: a review. J Polym Environ 15:25–33Google Scholar
  35. Liu M et al (2016) Effect of pectin and hemicellulose removal from hemp fibres on the mechanical properties of unidirectional hemp/epoxy composites. Compos Part A 90:724–735Google Scholar
  36. Liu M et al (2017) Oxidation of lignin in hemp fibres by laccase: effects on mechanical properties of hemp fibres and unidirectional fibre/epoxy composites. Compos Part A 95:377–387Google Scholar
  37. Lucintel (2015) Growth opportunities in the global natural fiber composites market, Lucintel Insights that Matter, 1–170Google Scholar
  38. Mazian B, Bergeret A, Benezet J, Malhautier L (2018) Influence of field retting duration on the biochemical, microstructural, thermal and mechanical properties of hemp fibres harvested at the beginning of flowering. Ind Crop Prod 116:170–181Google Scholar
  39. Mohanty AK, Misra M, Drazal LT (2001) Surface modifications of natural fibers and performance of the resulting biocomposites: an overview. Compos Interfaces 8:313–343Google Scholar
  40. Molina S (2016) Modification of natural fibers using physical technologies and their applications for composites. In: Belgacem N, Pizzi A (eds) Lignocellulosic fibers and wood handbook: renewable materials for today’s environment, pp 323–344Google Scholar
  41. Mukhopadhyay S, Fangueiro R (2009) Physical modification of natural fibers and thermoplastic films for composites—a review. J Thermoplast Compos Mater 22:135–162Google Scholar
  42. Ng YR, Shahid SNAM, Nordin NIAA (2018) The effect of alkali treatment on tensile properties of coir/polypropylene biocomposite. In: The Wood and biofiber international conference (WOBIC 2017), pp 1–7Google Scholar
  43. Ohsawa T, Nakayama A, Miwa M, Hasegawa A (1978) Temperature dependence of critical fiber length for glass fiber—reinforced thermosetting resins. J Appl Polym Sci 22:3203–3212Google Scholar
  44. Ragoubi M et al (2012) Effect of corona discharge treatment on mechanical and thermal properties of composites based on miscanthus fibres and polylactic acid or polypropylene matrix. Compos Part A 43:675–685Google Scholar
  45. Reddy KO, Maheswari CU, Reddy KR, Shukla M, Muzenda E, Rajulu AV (2015) Effect of chemical treatment and fiber loading on mechanical properties of borassus (toddy palm) fiber/epoxy composites. Int J Polym Anal Charact 20:612–626Google Scholar
  46. Sarasini F, Tirillò J, Seghini MC (2018) Influence of thermal conditioning on tensile behaviour of single basalt fibres. Compos Part B 132:77–86Google Scholar
  47. Scalici T, Fiore V, Valenza A (2016) Effect of plasma treatment on the properties of Arundo Donax L. leaf fibres and its bio-based epoxy composites: a preliminary study. Compos Part B 94:167–175Google Scholar
  48. Seghini MC, Touchard F, Sarasini F, Chocinski-arnault L, Mellier D, Tirillò J (2018) Interfacial adhesion assessment in flax/epoxy and in flax/vinylester composites by single yarn fragmentation test: correlation with micro-CT analysis. Compos Part A 113:66–75Google Scholar
  49. Shanmugasundaram N, Rajendran I, Ramkumar T (2018) Characterization of untreated and alkali treated new cellulosic fiber from an Areca palm leaf stalk as potential reinforcement in polymer composites. Carbohydr Polym 195:566–575Google Scholar
  50. Sun D, Stylios GK (2006) Fabric surface properties affected by low temperature plasma treatment. Mater Process Technol 173:172–177Google Scholar
  51. Thomason JL, Yang L, Minty RF (2018) Are silanes the primary driver of interface strength in glass fibre composites?: exploring the relationship of the chemical and physical parameters which control composite interfacial strength. In: ECCM18—18th European conference on composite materials Athens, Greece, 24–28th June 2018, pp 1–8Google Scholar
  52. Titok V, Leontiev V, Yurenkova S, Nikitinskaya T, Barannikova T, Khotyleva L (2010) Infrared spectroscopy of fiber flax. J Nat Fibers 7:61–69Google Scholar
  53. Van De Velde K, Baetens E (2001) Thermal and mechanical properties of flax fibres as potential composite reinforcement. Macromol Mater Eng 286:342–349Google Scholar
  54. Wang B, Panigrahi S, Tabil L, Crerar W, Sokansanj S, Braun L (2003) Modification of flax fibers by chemical treatment., in CSAE/SCGR 2003 Meeting Montréal, Québec July 6–9, 2003, pp 1–15Google Scholar
  55. Wang X, Zhang B, Du S, Wu Y, Sun X (2010) Numerical simulation of the fiber fragmentation process in single-fiber composites. Mater Des 31:2464–2470.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2009.11.050 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Warner SB, Uhlmann DR, Peebles LH Jr (1975) Ion etching of amorphous and semicrystalline fibres. J Mater Process Technol 10:758–764Google Scholar
  57. Yachmenev VG, Blanchard EJ, Lambert AH (1998) Use of ultrasonic energy in the enzymatic treatment of cotton. Mater Interfaces 37:3919–3923Google Scholar
  58. Yasuda H, Matsuzawa Y (2005) Economical advantages of low-pressure plasma polymerization coating. Plasma Process Polym 2:507–512Google Scholar
  59. Zafeiropoulos NE (2007) On the use of single fibre composites testing to characterise. Compos Interfaces 14:807–820Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Maria Carolina Seghini
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Fabienne Touchard
    • 2
  • Fabrizio Sarasini
    • 1
  • Laurence Chocinski-Arnault
    • 2
  • Jacopo Tirillò
    • 1
  • Maria Paola Bracciale
    • 1
  • Milan Zvonek
    • 3
  • Vladimir Cech
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Chemical Engineering Materials Environment and UdR INSTMSapienza-Università di RomaRomeItaly
  2. 2.Département Physique et Mécanique des Matériaux, ENSMA, Institut PPRIMECNRS-ENSMA-Université de PoitiersFuturoscope CedexFrance
  3. 3.Institute of Materials Chemistry, Faculty of ChemistryBrno University of TechnologyBrnoCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations