Advertisement

Journal of Polymers and the Environment

, Volume 26, Issue 7, pp 2720–2729 | Cite as

Cure, Mechanical and Swelling Properties of Biocomposites from Chicken Feather Fibre and Acrylonitrile Butadiene Rubber

  • Divia P. Sreenivasan
  • A. Sujith
  • C. Rajesh
Original Paper
  • 118 Downloads

Abstract

Biocomposites of acrylonitrile butadiene rubber (NBR) reinforced with chicken feather fibre (CF) were prepared using dicumyl peroxide (DCP) as vulcanizing agent. Composites with three series of chicken feather fibres were studied i.e., raw (RCF), sterilized (SCF) and alkali treated (ACF). The cure characteristics of composites were studied. The mechanical properties of NBR were found to be improved by the incorporation of chicken feather fibre in all forms. Surface modification of the fibre was done by alkaline treatment to improve the interfacial adhesion and it characterised by FTIR. Better properties are shown by the composites with ACF. The swelling behaviour of the composites in N,N-dimethylformamide, acetonitrile, dimethyl sulfoxide and water were analyzed for the swelling coefficient values. The biodegradable characteristics of CF reinforced NBR composites were studied by soil burial test which indicated that it is an eco-friendly and acceptable material. Scanning electron microscopy studies support the results of mechanical properties. The outcome obtained from this study is believed to assist the development of environmentally–friendly composites especially for specific product applications like oil seals, hoses and automobile bushes etc.

Keywords

Chicken feather fibre Nitrile rubber Interfacial adhesion Mechanical properties 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by Kerala State Council for Science, Technology and Environment (KSCSTE), Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala, India. [Grant No. 228/2015/KSCSTE dated 22-6-2015]. Authors are thankful to Dr. T. A. Sajesh, Asst. Professor, Dept. of Statistics, St. Thomas College, Thrissur, Kerala, India, for his valuable help during ANOVA analysis.

References

  1. 1.
    Hsie M, Tu C, Song PS (2008) Mechanical properties of polypropylene hybrid fiber-reinforced concrete. Mater Sci Eng A 494:153–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Faruk O, Bledzki AK, Fink HP, Sain M (2012) Biocomposites reinforced with natural fibres: 2000–2010. Prog Polym Sci 37:1552–1596CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mohanty AK, Misra M, Drzal LT (2002) Sustainable bio-composites from renewable resources: opportunities and challenges in the green materials world. J Polym Envir 10:19–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Li X, Tabil LG, Panigrahi S (2007) Chemical treatments of natural fiber for use in natural fiber-reinforced composites: a review. J Polym Envir 15:25–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Yakubu MK, Gumel MS, Umar A, Kamp R (2010) Physico-mechanical effects of surface-modified sorgum stalk powder on reinforced rubber. J Reinf Polym Compos 6:2853–2867Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rokbi M, Osmania H, Imad A, Benseddiq N (2011) Effect of chemical treatment on flexure properties of natural fiber-reinforced polyester composite. Proc Eng 10:2092–2097CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Barone JR, Schmidt WF, Liebner FE (2005) Compounding and molding of polyethylene composites reinforced with keratin feather fiber. Compos Sci Technol 65:683–692CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Huda S, Yang Y (2008) Composites from ground chicken quill and polypropylene. Compos Sci Technol 68:790–798CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Schmidt WF (2002) Microcrystalline keratin: from feathers to composite products. In: Wallenberger FT, Weston NE, Ford R, Wool RP, Chawla K (eds) Proceedings Material Research Symposium, 2–6 December 2002, Boston, MA, pp U1.5.1–U1.5.5Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Harrar BS, Woods EF (1963) Soluble derivatives of feather keratin 1. Isolation, fractionation and amino acid composition. Biochem J 92:8–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Poole AJ, Church JS, Huson MG (2009) Environmentally sustainable fibers from regenerated protein. Biomacromolecules 10:1–8CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Aluigi A, Vineis C, Ceri A, Tonin C (2008) Composite biomaterials from fibre wastes: characterization of wool–cellulose acetate blends. Compos A 39:126–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Barone JR, Gregoire NT (2006) Characterization of fibre-polymer interactions and transcrystallity in short keratin fiber-polypropylene composites. Plast Rubber Compos 35:287–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Subramani T, Krishnan S, Ganesan SK, Nagarajan G (2014) Investigation of mechanical properties in polyester and phenyl-ester composites reinforced with chicken feather fiber. Int J Eng Res Appl 12:93–104Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Salehuddin SMF, Wahit MU, Kasim NHA (2014) Mechanical and morphology properties of feather fiber composite for dental post application. Malays J Anal Sci 18:368–375Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Oladele IO, Omotoyimbo JA, Ayemidejor SH (2014) Mechanical properties of chicken feather and cow hair fibre reinforced HDPE composites. Int J Sci Technol 3:66–71Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zhan M, Wool RP (2016) Mechanical properties of composites with chicken feather and glass fibers. J Appl Polym Sci 133:1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Egwaikhide PA, Akporhonor EE, Okieimen EE (2007) Effect of coconut fibre filler on the cure characteristics, physic-mechanical and swelling properties of natural rubber vulcanisates. Int J Phys Sci 2:39–46Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Dasan KP, Haseena AP, Unnikrishnan G, Alex R, Purushothaman E (2008) Solvent transport through carbon black filled through poly(ethylene-co-vinyl acetate) composites. Xpress Polym Lett 2:382–390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Chigondo F, Shoko P, Nyamunda BC, Guyo U, Moyo M (2013) Maize Stalk as reinforcement in natural rubber composites. Int J Sci Technol Res 2:63–71Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Madhusoodhanan KN (2006) Siby Varghese, Technological and processing properties of NR layered silicate—nanocomposite by melt interaction process. Appl Polym Sci 102:2537CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Coran AY, Patel R, Williams D (1985) Rubber-plastic composition: blends of dissimilar rubbers and plastic with technological compatibilization. Rubber Chem Technol 58:1014CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rajesh C, Unnikrishnan G, Purushothaman E, Thomas S (2004) Cure characteristics and mechanical properties of short nylon fiber reinforced nitrile rubber composites. J Appl Polym Sci 93:1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Osabohien E, Egboh S (2007) Cure characteristics and physico-mechanical properties of natural rubber filled with the seed shells of cherry (Chrysophyllumalbidum). J Appl Environ Manage 11(2):43–48Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Shaniba V, Sreejith MP, Aparna KB, Purushothaman E (2017) Mechanical and thermal behaviour of SBR composites reinforced with silane treated peanut shell powder. Polym Bull 74(10):3977–3994CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Oladele IO, Olajide JM, Ogunbadejo AS (2015) Effect of chemical treatments on the physicochemical and tensile properties of cow hair fibre for low load bearing composite development., Int J Mater Sci Appl 4(3):189–197Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Khosa MA, Wu J, Ullah A (2013) Chemical modification, characterisation and application of chicken feather as novel biosorbents. RSC Adv 3:20800–20810CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of ChemistryMES Keveeyam CollegeValancheryIndia
  2. 2.Department of ChemistryNational Institute of TechnologyCalicutIndia

Personalised recommendations