Advertisement

Development and Characterization of Wood and Non-wood Particle Based Green Composites

  • Abdul Halip JulianaEmail author
  • Seng Hua LeeEmail author
  • Md Tahir Paridah
  • Zaidon Ashaari
  • Wei Chen Lum
Chapter
  • 988 Downloads
Part of the Green Energy and Technology book series (GREEN)

Abstract

Production of green composites involve a manufacturing process that combining both renewable plant-based particles and green polymers. Characteristics of wood and non-wood particles are one of the main factors that influencing the properties of green composite, particularly particle based composite i.e., particleboard and wood plastic composite (WPC). Characterization of wood and non-wood particles are vital for properties determination of the resulting particleboard and WPC. The present work reviewed some characterization studies of particles including the size (length, width, and thickness, aspect ratio, and slenderness ratio) and geometry of the particles. This paper also highlighted the effects of particle size and geometry of wood and non-wood particle on the mechanical and physical properties of particleboard and WPC. Findings revealed that particle size exerted significant effect on the mechanical and physical properties of both particleboard and WPC. On the other hand, types of materials (wood or non-wood) are crucial factor that affects the performance of particleboard, but not a critical factor on the performance of WPC as it contained lesser amount of particles.

Keywords

Particle size Particle geometry Wood Non-wood Green composites 

References

  1. Abdul Khalil HPS, Bhat AH (2010) Oil palm biomass: fiber cultivation, production and its varied applications. In: Penna (ed) Oil palm: cultivation, production and dietary components. Nova Science Publisher, Hauppauge, New York, pp 21–34Google Scholar
  2. Abuarra A, Hashim R, Bauk S, Kandaiya S, Tousi ET (2014) Fabrication and characterization of gum Arabic bonded Rhizophora spp. particleboards. Mater Des 60:108–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Acda MN, Cabangon RJ (2013) Termite resistance and physico-mechanical properties of particleboard using waste tobacco stalk and wood particles. Int Biodeterior Biodegrad 85:354–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ackar D, Babic J, Subaric D, Kopjar M, Milicevic B (2010) Isolation of starch from two wheat varieties and their modification with Epichlorohydrin. Carbohydr Polym 81:76–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Adhikary KB, Pang S, Staiger MP (2008) Dimensional stability and mechanical behaviour of wood-plastic composites based on recycled and virgin high-density polyethylene (HDPE). Compos B 39:807–815CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Amirou S, Zerizer A, Pizzi A, Haddadou I, Zhou X (2013) Particleboards production from date palm biomass. Eur J Wood Wood Prod 71:717–723CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Arbelaiz A, Fernandez B, Ramos JA, Retegi A, Llano-Ponte R, Mondragon I (2005) Mechanical properties of short flax fibre bundle/polypropylene composites: influence of matrix/fibre modification, fibre content, water uptake and recycling. Compos Sci Technol 65:1582–1592CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ashori A (2008) Wood-plastic composites as promising green-composites for automotive industries. Bioresour Technol 99:4661–4667CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ayrilmis N, Jarusombuti S (2010) Flat-pressed wood plastic composite as an alternative to conventional wood-based panels. In: Proceedings of second international conference on sustainable construction materials and technologies, Ancona, Italy, 28–30 JuneGoogle Scholar
  10. Ayrilmis N, Kaymakci A, Dundar T, Ozdemir F, Kwon JH (2013) Mechanical and thermal properties of wood plastic composites reinforced with hexagonal boron nitride. Pro Ligno 9:435–442Google Scholar
  11. Back E, Sandstrom E (1982) Critical aspects on accelerated methods for predicting weathering resistance of wood based panels. Holz als Roh-und Werkstoff 40:61–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bajpai PK, Singh I, Madaan J (2014) Development and characterization of PLA-based green composites: a review. J Thermoplast Compos Mater 27:52–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ballerini A, Despres A, Pizzi A (2005) Non-toxic, zero emission tannin-glyoxal adhesives for wood panels. Holz Als Roh-und Werkstoff 63:477–478CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Baskaran M, Hashim R, Sulaiman O, Hiziroglu S, Sato M, Sugimoto T (2015) Optimization of press temperature and time for binderless particleboard manufactured from oil palm trunk biomass at different thickness levels. Mater Today Commun 3:87–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Bledzki AK, Faruk O (2003) Wood fibre reinforced polypropylene composites: effect of fibre geometry and coupling agent on physico-mechanical properties. Appl Compos Mater 10:365–379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Boon JG, Hashim R, Sulaiman O, Hiziroglu S, Sugimoto T, Sato M (2013) Influence of processing parameters on some properties of oil palm trunk binderless particleboard. Eur J Wood Wood Prod 71:583–589CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Chen HC, Chen TY, Hsu CH (2006) Effects of wood particle size and mixing ratios of HDPE on the properties of the composites. Holz als Roh-und Werkstoff 64:172–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ciannamea EM, Stefani PM, Ruseckaite RA (2010) Medium-density particleboards from modified rice husks and soybean protein concentrate-based adhesives. Bioresour Technol 101:818–825CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Clemons C (2002) Wood-plastic composites in the United States: the interfacing of two industries. For Prod J 52:10–18Google Scholar
  20. Colak S, Colakoglu G, Kalaycioglu H, Aydin I (2009) Effects of log storage conditions and steaming process on the formaldehyde emissions of particleboard manufactured from eucalyptus (E. camaldulensis) wood. Eur J Wood Wood Prod 67:379–382Google Scholar
  21. El Mansouri N, Pizzi A, Salvado J (2007) Lignin-based wood panel adhesives without formaldehyde. Holz als Roh-und Werkstoff 65:65–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ghafari R, DoostHosseini K, Abdulkhani A, Mirshokraie SA (2016) Replacing formaldehyde by furfural in urea formaldehyde resin: effect on formaldehyde emission and physical–mechanical properties of particleboards. Eur J Wood Wood Prod. Published online. doi: 10.1007/s00107-016-1005-6
  23. Ghalehno MD, Madhoushi M, Tabarsa T, Nazerian M (2011a) The manufacture of particleboards using mixture of reed (surface layer) and commercial species (middle layer). Eur J Wood Wood Prod 69:341–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ghalehno MD, Nazerian M, Bayatkashkooli A (2011b) Influence of utilization of bagasse in surface layer on bending strength of three-layer particleboard. Eur J Wood Wood Prod 69:533–535CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ghofrani M, Haghdan S, NicKhah V, Ahmadi K (2015) Improvement of physical and mechanical properties of particleboard made of apple tree pruning and sunflower stalk using titanium oxide nanoparticles. Eur J Wood Wood Prod 73:661–666CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gozdecki C, Wilczynski A, Kociszewski M, Zajchowski S (2015) Properties of wood–plastic composites made of milled particleboard and polypropylene. Eur J Wood Wood Prod 73:87–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Guler C, Ozen R (2004) Some properties of particleboards made from cotton stalks (Gossypium hirsitum L.). Holz als Roh-und Werkstoff 62:40–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. H’ng PS, Lee SH, Loh YW, Lum WC, Tan BH (2011) Production of low formaldehyde emission particleboard by using new formulated formaldehyde based resin. Asian J Sci Res 4:264–270Google Scholar
  29. H’ng PS, Lee SH, Lum WC (2012) Effect of post heat treatment on dimensional stability of UF bonded particleboard. Asian J Appl Sci 5:299–306Google Scholar
  30. Hashim R, Saari N, Sulaiman O, Sugimoto T, Hiziroglu S, Sato M (2010) Effect of particle geometry on the properties of binderless particleboard manufactured from oil palm trunk. Mater Des 31:4251–4257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hazrati-Behnagh M, Zarea-Hosseinabadi H, Daliri-Sosefi M, Abginehchi Z, Hemmati A (2016) Mechanical and insulating performances of ultralight thick particleboard from sugarcane residues and woods planer shaving. Eur J Wood Wood Prod 74:161–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hegazy SS, Ahmed K (2015) Effect of date palm cultivar, particle size, panel density and hot water extraction on particleboards manufactured from date palm fronds. Agriculture 5:267–285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hein PRG, Campos ACM, Mendes RF, Mendes LM, Chaix G (2011) Estimation of physical and mechanical properties of agro-based particleboards by near infrared spectroscopy. Eur J Wood Wood Prod 69:431–442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Huber KC, BeMiller JN (2010) Modified starch chemistry and properties. In: Bertolini AC (ed) Starches characterization properties and applications. CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, New York, pp 145–203Google Scholar
  35. Jamaludin K, Abdul Jalil HA, Jalaludin H, Zaidon A, Abdul Latif M, Mohd Nor MY (2001) Properties of particleboard manufactured from commonly utilized Malaysian bamboo (Gigantochloa scortechinii). Pertanika J Trop Agric Sci 24:151–157Google Scholar
  36. Jang Y, Huang J, Li K (2011) A new formaldehyde-free wood adhesive from renewable materials. Int J Adhes Adhes 31:754–759CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Juliana AH (2013) Mechanical and physical properties of particleboard manufactured from kenaf (Hibiscus cannabinus L.) and rubberwood (Hevea brasiliensis). PhD dissertation. Universiti Putra Malaysia, SerdangGoogle Scholar
  38. Juliana AH, Paridah MT, Rahim S, Nor Azowa I, Anwar UMK (2012) Properties of particleboard made from kenaf (Hibiscus cannabinus L.) as function of particle geometry. Mater Des 34:406–411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Kaley KB, Carlisle J, Siegel D, Salinas J (2006) Health concerns and environmental issues with PVC-containing building materials in green buildings. In: Contractor’s report to the integrated waste management board. Sacramento, CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  40. Kallakas H, Poltimae T, Suld T, Kers J, Krumme A (2015) The influence of accelerated weathering on the mechanical and physical properties of wood-plastic composites. Proc Est Acad Sci 64:94–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Khosravi S, Khabbaz F, Nordqvist P, Johansson M (2010) Protein-based adhesives for particleboards. Ind Crops Prod 32:275–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Khosravi S, Nordqvist P, Khabbaz F, Johansson M (2011) Protein-based adhesives for particleboards—effect of application process. Ind Crops Prod 34:1509–1515CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Konnerth J, Hahn G, Gindl W (2009) Feasibility of particle board production using bone glue. Eur J Wood Wood Prod 67:243–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Kruse K, Dai C, Pielasch A (2000) An analysis of strand and horizontal density distributions in oriented strand board (OSB). Eur J Wood Wood Prod 58:270–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Kusumah SS, Umemura K, Yoshioka K, Miyafuji H (2016) Utilization of sweet sorghum bagasse and citric acid for manufacturing of particleboard I: effects of pre-drying treatment andcitric acid content on the board properties. Ind Crops Prod 84:34–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Lee SY, Chun SJ, Doh GH, Kang IA, Le S, Paik KH (2009) Influence of chemical modification and filler loading on fundamental properties of bamboo fibers reinforced polypropylene composites. J Compos Mater 43:1639–1657CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Lee SH, H’ng PS, Lum WC, Zaidon A, Bakar ES, Nurliyana MY, Chai EW, Chin KL (2014) Mechanical and physical properties of oil palm trunk core particleboard bonded with different UF resins. J Oil Palm Res 26:163–169Google Scholar
  48. Lee SH, Lum WC, Zaidon A, Maminski M (2015a) Microstructural, mechanical and physical properties of post heat-treated melamine-fortified urea formaldehyde-bonded particleboard. Eur J Wood Wood Prod 73:607–616Google Scholar
  49. Lee SH, Zaidon A, Lum WC, H’ng PS, Tan LP, Chow MJ, Chai EW, Chin KL (2015b) Properties of particleboard with oil palm trunk as core layer in comparison to three-layer rubberwood particleboard. J Oil Palm Res 27:67–74Google Scholar
  50. Li XJ, Cai ZY, Winandy JE, Basta AH (2010) Selected properties of particleboard panels manufactured from rice straws of different geometries. Bioresour Technol 101:4662–4666CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Loss B (2013) Wood dust. FWWA meeting/presentation. Fine Wood Work Association, Western AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  52. Maloney TM (1993) Modern particleboard & dry process fiberboard manufacturing. Hal Leonard Corporation, WisconsinGoogle Scholar
  53. Mansouri HR, Navarette P, Pizzi A, Tapin-lingua S, Benjelloun-Mlayah B, Pasch H, Rigolet S (2011) Synthetic-resin-free wood panel adhesives from mixed low molecular mass lignin and tannin. Eur J Wood Wood Prod 69:221–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Migneault S, Koubaa A, Erchiqui F, Chaala A, Englund K, Krause C, Wolcott M (2008) Effect of fiber length on processing and properties of extruded wood-fiber/HDPE composites. J Appl Polym Sci 110:1085–1092CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Migneault S, Koubaa A, Erchiqui F, Chaala A, Englund K, Wolcott MP (2009) Effects of processing method and fiber size on the structure and properties of wood-plastic composites. Compos A 40:80–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Mirbagheri J, Tajvidi M, Hermanson JC, Ghasemi I (2007) Tensile properties of wood flour/kenaf fiber polypropylene hybrid composites. J Appl Polym Sci 105:3054–3059CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Miyamoto K, Nakahara S, Suzuki S (2002) Effect of particle shape on linear expansion of particleboard. J Wood Sci 48:185–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Moslemi AA (1974) Particleboard. In: Materials, vol 1. Southern Illinois University Press, USAGoogle Scholar
  59. Nemli G, Aydın A (2007) Evaluation of the physical and mechanical properties of particleboard made from the needle litter of Pinus pinaster Ait. Ind Crops Prod 26:252–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Nemli G, Kalaycoglu H (2001) Suitability of date palm (Phoenix dactyliferia) branches for particleboard production. Holz als Roh-und Werkstoff 59:411–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Nimz HH (1983) Lignin-based wood adhesives. In: Pizzi A (ed) Wood adhesives chemistry and technology, vol 2. Marcel Dekker, New York, pp 247–288Google Scholar
  62. Nonaka S, Umemura K, Kawai S (2013) Characterization of bagasse binderless particleboard manufactured in high-temperature range. Eur J Wood Wood Prod 59:50–56Google Scholar
  63. Ong CL (1981) The influence of wood density and flake dimensions on particleboard properties of five hardwood species. Malays Forester 44:508–515Google Scholar
  64. Papadopoulos AN, Hague JR (2003) The potential for using flax (Linum usitatissimum L.) shiv as a lignocellulosic raw material for particleboard. Ind Crops Prod 17:143–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Papadopoulos AN, Traboulay EA, Hill CAS (2002) One layer experimental particleboard from coconut chips—(Cocos nucifera L.). Holz als Roh-und Werkstoff 60:394–396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Papadopoulos AN, Hill CAS, Gkaraveli A, Ntalos GA, Karastergiou SP (2004) Bamboo chips (Bambusa vulgaris) as an alternative lignocellulosic raw material for particleboard manufacture. Holz als Roh-und Werkstoff 62:36–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Paridah MT, Juliana AH, Zaidon A, Abdul Khalil HPS (2015) Nonwood-based composites. Curr Forestry Rep 1:221–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Pedieu R, Riedl B, Pichette A (2009) Properties of mixed particleboards based on white birch (Betula papyrifera) inner bark particles and reinforced with wood fibres. Eur J Wood Wood Prod 67:95–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Piao C, Cai Z, Stark NM, Monlezun CJ (2014) Dimensional stability of wood–plastic composites reinforced with potassium methyl siliconate modified fiber and sawdust made from beetle-killed trees. Eur J Wood Wood Prod 72:165–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Pichelin F, Nakatani M, Pizzi A, Wieland S, Despres A, Rigolet S (2006) Thick wood panels bonded industrially with formaldehyde free tannin adhesives. For Prod J 56:31–36Google Scholar
  71. Pizzi A (1980) Tannin-based adhesives. J Macromol Sci—Rev Macromol Chem 18:247–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Pizzi A (1991) An assessment of the future industrial prospects for panel adhesives from renewable natural materials. Holzforschung Holzverwertung 43:83–87Google Scholar
  73. Pizzi A (2006) Developments in biobased adhesives for wood bonding: opportunities and issues. J Adhes Sci Technol 20:829–846CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Pritchard G (2004) Two technologies merge: wood plastic composites. Plast Addit Compd 6(4):18–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Rafighi A, Dorostkar A, Madhoushi M (2014) Investigation on mechanical properties of composite made of sawdust and high density polyethylene. Int J Lignocellulosic Prod 1:134–141Google Scholar
  76. Reddy N, Yang Y (2011) Completely biodegradable soyprotein–jute biocomposites developed using water without any chemicals as plasticizer. Ind Crops Prod 33:35–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Rowell RM (2008) Natural fibres: types and properties. In: Pickering KL (ed) Properties and performance of natural-fibre composites. CRC Press LLC, Florida, p 4Google Scholar
  78. Rowell RM, Tillman A, Simomson RM (1986) A simplified procedure for the acetylation of hardwood and softwood flakes for flakeboard production. J Wood Chem Technol 6:427–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Rowell RM, Sanadi AR, Caulfield DF, Jacobson RE (1997) Utilization of natural fibers in plastic composites: problems and opportunities. In: Leao AL, Carvalho FX, Frollini E (eds) Lignocellulosic-plastics composites. Universidade de Sao Paulo Press, Sao Paulo, pp 23–52Google Scholar
  80. Saffari M (2011) Effects of hardener type and particles size on formaldehyde emission pollution. In: Proceedings of international conference on environmental science and engineering, Bali, Indonesia, 1–3 April 2011Google Scholar
  81. Sedano-Mendoza M, Navarrete P, Pizzi A (2010) Effect of layers relative moisture content on the IB strength of pine tannin bonded particleboard. Eur J Wood Wood Prod 68:355–357CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Shiue CY, Chen TY, Chen HC, Hsu CH (2001) Effect of LLDPE-MA addition on the properties of wood particle-LDPE composites and rice hull-LDPE composites. For Prod Ind 20:295–302Google Scholar
  83. Stark N, Berger MJ (1997) Effect of species and particle size on properties of wood-flour-filled polypropylene composites. In: Proceedings of functional fillers for thermoplastics and thermosets, Intertech conferences, San Diego, pp 1–16, 8–10 Dec 1997Google Scholar
  84. Stark N, Rowlands R (2003) Effects of wood fiber characteristics on mechanical properties of wood/polypropylene composites. Wood Fiber Sci 35:167–174Google Scholar
  85. Sulaiman NS, Hashim R, Mohamad Amini MH, Sulaiman O, Hiziroglu S (2013) Evaluation of the properties of particleboard made using oil palm starch modified with Epichlorohydrin. Bioresources 8:283–301Google Scholar
  86. Takatani M, Ito H, Ohsugi S, Kitayama T, Saegusa M, Kawai S, Okamoto T (2000) Effect of lignocellulosic materials on the properties of thermoplastic polymer/wood composites. Holzforschung 54:197–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Tondi G, Wieland S, Wimmer T, Schnabel T, Petutschnigg A (2012) Starch-sugar synergy in wood adhesion science: basic studies and particleboard production. Eur J Wood Wood Prod 70:271–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Trosa A, Pizzi A (2001) A no-aldehyde emission hardener for tannin-based wood adhesives for exterior panels. Holz als Roh-und Werkstoff 59:266–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Turku I, Karki T (2014) The effect of carbon fibers, glass fibers and nanoclay on wood flour-polypropylene composite properties. Eur J Wood Wood Prod 72:73–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Umemura K, Sugihara O, Kawai S (2015) Investigation of a new natural adhesive composed of citric acid and sucrose for particleboard II: effects of board density and pressing temperature. J Wood Sci 61:40–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Valenzuela J, von Leyser E, Pizzi A, Westermeyer C, Gorrini B (2012) Industrial production of pine tannin-bonded particleboard and MDF. Eur J Wood Wood Prod 70:735–740CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Warmbier K, Wilczynski A, Danecki L (2013) Properties of one-layer experimental particleboards from willow (Salix viminalis) and industrial wood particles. Eur J Wood Wood Prod 71:25–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Wechsler A, Hiziroglu S, Ballerini A (2008) Some of the properties of wood plastic composites. In: Proceedings of the 51st international convention of society of wood science and technology, Concepción, Chile, 10–12 NovGoogle Scholar
  94. Wechsler A, Zaharia M, Crosky A, Jones H, Ramirez M, Ballerini A, Nunez M (2013) Macadamia (Macadamia integrifolia) shell and castor (Rícinos communis) oil based sustainable particleboard: a comparison of its properties with conventional wood based particleboard. Mater Des 50:117–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Wibowo AC, Mohanty AK, Misra M, Drzal LT (2004) Chopped industrial hemp fiber reinforced cellulosic plastic biocomposties: thermomechanical and morphological properties. Ind Eng Chem Res 43:4883–4888CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Widyorini R, Umemura K, Isnan R, Putra DR, Awaludin A, Prayitno TA (2016) Manufacture and properties of citric acid-bonded particleboard made from bamboo materials. Eur J Wood Wood Prod 74:57–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Wiedenhoeft AC, Miller RB (2005) Structure and function of wood. In: Rowell RM (ed) Handbook wood chemistry and wood composites. CRC Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  98. Wolcott MP (2003) Production methods and platforms for wood plastic composites. In: Proceedings of the non-wood substitutes for solid wood products conference, Melbourne, p 12, October 2003Google Scholar
  99. Xu J, Sugawara R, Widyorini R, Han G, Kawai S (2004) Manufacture and properties of low-density binderless particleboard from kenaf core. J Wood Sci 50:62–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Xu J, Widyorini R, Kawai S (2005) Properties of kenaf core binderless particleboard reinforced with kenaf bast fiber-woven sheets. J Wood Sci 51:415–420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Xu HN, Ma S, Lv W, Wang Z (2011) Soy protein adhesives improved by SiO2 nanoparticles for plywoods. Pigm Resin Technol 40:191–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Tropical Forestry and Forest Products, Universiti Putra MalaysiaUPM SerdangMalaysia
  2. 2.Faculty of ForestryUniversiti Putra MalaysiaUPM SerdangMalaysia
  3. 3.Institute for Infrastructure Engineering and Sustainable Management (IIESM)UiTM Cawangan Shah AlamShah AlamMalaysia

Personalised recommendations