This study examined the influences of alkali concentration on the interfacial characteristics of bamboo–polyester. Pull-out tests were carried out using a newly designed jig to minimise the fibre breakage during clamping. Bamboo bundles were embedded at 3, 5, 7 and 10 mm and alkali concentrations ranged from 0, 1, 3, 5 to 7 wt-%. The attenuated total reflectance-Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy spectra revealed hemicelluloses was observed at ∼1030 cm−1. The pull-out results showed that interfacial characteristics were not influenced by the embedded length. Furthermore, the highest apparent interfacial shear strength was attained at 3 wt-% concentration, with approximately three times higher compared to the untreated one. A comparison with data from the literature showed that both untreated and treated bamboo/polyester composites have the weakest interfacial bonding. Scanning electron micrographs revealed that alkali treatment has resulted in interface enhancement through chemical modification, mechanical interlocking and frictional contact.
Herrera-FrancoPJ, Valadez-GonzálezA.Mechanical properties of continuous natural fibre-reinforced polymer composites. Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf. 2004;35(3):339–345. doi: 10.1016/j.compositesa.2003.09.012
2.
Herrera-FrancoPJ, Valadez-GonzálezA.A study of the mechanical properties of short natural-fiber reinforced composites. Compos B Eng. 2005;36(8):597–608. doi: 10.1016/j.compositesb.2005.04.001
3.
FuentesCA, TranLQN, Van HellemontM, Effect of physical adhesion on mechanical behaviour of bamboo fibre reinforced thermoplastic composites. Colloids Surf A Physicochem Eng Asp. 2013;418(0):7–15. doi: 10.1016/j.colsurfa.2012.11.018
4.
KimH, OkuboK, FujiiT, Influence of fiber extraction and surface modification on mechanical properties of green composites with bamboo fiber. J Adhes Sci Technol. 2013;27(12):1348–1358. doi: 10.1080/01694243.2012.697363
5.
NaharS, KhanRA, DeyK, Comparative studies of mechanical and interfacial properties between jute and bamboo fiber-reinforced polypropylene-based composites. J Thermoplast Compos Mater. 2012;25(1):15–32. doi: 10.1177/0892705711404725
6.
WongKJ, YousifBF, LowKO.The effects of alkali treatment on the interfacial adhesion of bamboo fibres. Proc IME J Mater Des Appl. 2010;224(3):139–148. doi: 10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.33.139
7.
CzigányT.Special manufacturing and characteristics of basalt fiber reinforced hybrid polypropylene composites: mechanical properties and acoustic emission study. Compos Sci Technol. 2006;66(16):3210–3220. doi: 10.1016/j.compscitech.2005.07.007
8.
HuberT, MüssigJ.Fibre matrix adhesion of natural fibres cotton, flax and hemp in polymeric matrices analyzed with the single fibre fragmentation test. Compos Interfaces. 2008;15(2-3):335–349. doi: 10.1163/156855408783810948
9.
BaleyC, BusnelF, GrohensY, Influence of chemical treatments on surface properties and adhesion of flax fibre–polyester resin. Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf. 2006;37(10):1626–1637. doi: 10.1016/j.compositesa.2005.10.014
10.
JoffeR, AndersonsJ, WallströmL.Interfacial shear strength of flax fiber/thermoset polymers estimated by fiber fragmentation tests. J Mater Sci. 2005;40(9-10):2721–2722. doi: 10.1007/s10853-005-2115-4
11.
JoffeR, AndersonsJ, WallströmL.Strength and adhesion characteristics of elementary flax fibres with different surface treatments. Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf. 2003;34(7):603–612. doi: 10.1016/S1359-835X(03)00099-X
12.
StamboulisA, BaillieC, PiacesiM, Interfaces in flax fibre-polymer composites. Proceedings of 12th International Conference on Composite Materials; 1999 July; Paris, France.
13.
StamboulisA, BaillieC, SchulzE.Interfacial characterisation of flax fibre-thermoplastic polymer composites by the pull-out test. Angew Makromol Chem. 1999;272(1):117–120. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1522-9505(19991201)272:1<117::AID-APMC117>3.0.CO;2-9
14.
WongS, ShanksRA, HodzicA.Effect of additives on the interfacial strength of poly(l-lactic acid) and poly(3-hydroxy butyric acid)-flax fibre composites. Compos Sci Technol. 2007;67(11–12):2478–2484. doi: 10.1016/j.compscitech.2006.12.016
15.
GraupnerN, RößlerJ, ZiegmannG, Fibre/matrix adhesion of cellulose fibres in PLA, PP and MAPP: a critical review of pull-out test, microbond test and single fibre fragmentation test results. Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf. 2014;63(0):133–148. doi: 10.1016/j.compositesa.2014.04.011
16.
Le DuigouA, DaviesP, BaleyC.Interfacial bonding of Flax fibre/Poly(l-lactide) bio-composites. Compos Sci Technol. 2010;70(2):231–239. doi: 10.1016/j.compscitech.2009.10.009
17.
SawpanMA, PickeringKL, FernyhoughA.Effect of fibre treatments on interfacial shear strength of hemp fibre reinforced polylactide and unsaturated polyester composites. Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf. 2011;42(9):1189–1196. doi: 10.1016/j.compositesa.2011.05.003
18.
IslamMS, PickeringKL, ForemanNJ.Influence of alkali treatment on the interfacial and physico-mechanical properties of industrial hemp fibre reinforced polylactic acid composites. Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf. 2010;41(5):596–603. doi: 10.1016/j.compositesa.2010.01.006
19.
Valadez-GonzalezA, Cervantes-UcJM, OlayoR, Effect of fiber surface treatment on the fiber–matrix bond strength of natural fiber reinforced composites. Compos B Eng. 1999;30(3):309–320. doi: 10.1016/S1359-8368(98)00054-7
20.
ChoD, SeoJM, LeeHS, Property improvement of natural fiber-reinforced green composites by water treatment. Adv Compos Mater. 2007;16(4):299–314. doi: 10.1163/156855107782325249
21.
ParkJ-M, KimP-G, JangJ-H, Interfacial evaluation and durability of modified Jute fibers/polypropylene (PP) composites using micromechanical test and acoustic emission. Compos B Eng. 2008;39(6):1042–1061. doi: 10.1016/j.compositesb.2007.11.004
22.
AdusumalliR-B, ReifferscheidM, WeberHK, Shear strength of the lyocell fiber/polymer matrix interface evaluated with the microbond technique. J Compos Mater. 2012;46(3):359–367. doi: 10.1177/0021998310382312
23.
LuoS, NetravaliAN.Interfacial and mechanical properties of environment-friendly “green” composites made from pineapple fibers and poly(hydroxybutyrate-co-valerate) resin. J Mater Sci. 1999;34(15):3709–3719. doi: 10.1023/A:1004659507231
24.
OrueA, JauregiA, Peña-RodriguezC, The effect of surface modifications on sisal fiber properties and sisal/poly (lactic acid) interface adhesion. Compos B Eng. 2015;73(0):132–138. doi: 10.1016/j.compositesb.2014.12.022
25.
TowoAN, AnsellMP, PastorM-L, Weibull analysis of microbond shear strength at sisal fibre–polyester resin interfaces. Compos Interfaces. 2005;12(1-2):77–93. doi: 10.1163/1568554053542142
26.
KarlssonJO, GatenholmP, BlachotJF, Improvement of adhesion between polyethylene and regenerated cellulose fibers by surface fibrillation. Polym Compos. 1996;17(2):300–304. doi: 10.1002/pc.10614
27.
KellyA, TysonWR.Tensile properties of fibre-reinforced metals: copper/tungsten and copper/molybdenum. J Mech Phys Solids. 1965;13(6):329–350. doi: 10.1016/0022-5096(65)90035-9
28.
PickeringKL, BeckermannGW, AlamSN, Optimising industrial hemp fibre for composites. Compos Part A Appl Sci Manuf. 2007;38(2):461–468. doi: 10.1016/j.compositesa.2006.02.020
29.
JayabalS, SathiyamurthyS, LoganathanKT, Effect of soaking time and concentration of NaOH solution on mechanical properties of coir–polyester composites. Bull Mater Sci. 2012;35(4):567–574. doi: 10.1007/s12034-012-0334-2
30.
YanL, ChouwN, YuanX.Improving the mechanical properties of natural fibre fabric reinforced epoxy composites by alkali treatment. J Reinforc Plast Compos. 2012;31(6):425–437. doi: 10.1177/0731684412439494
31.
KumarR, ObraiS, SharmaA.Chemical modifications of natural fiber for composite material. Chem Sin. 2011;2(4):219–228.
32.
MishraS, MohantyAK, DrzalLT, Studies on mechanical performance of biofibre/glass reinforced polyester hybrid composites. Compos Sci Technol. 2003;63(10):1377–1385. doi: 10.1016/S0266-3538(03)00084-8
