This paper reviews the pretreatment methods for wheat straw building materials and classifies the main methods according to their characteristics. The results indicate that the steam cooking and steam explosion treatment methods are relatively better than other methods and that particleboard and medium-density fiberboard manufactured using pretreated wheat straw possess correspondingly superior physical and mechanical properties. However, deficiencies in internal bonding, tensile strength, dimensional instability (swelling) and high moisture absorption remain. Thus, the present study proposes improving the pretreatment method and measurement and suggests a future development direction for the pretreatment of wheat straw building materials.
HalvarssonSEdlundHNorgrenM. Properties of medium-density fibreboard (MDF) based on wheat straw and melamine modified urea formaldehyde (UMF) resin. Ind Crops Prod2008; 28: 37–46.
2.
PanthapulakkalSSainM. Agro-residue reinforced high-density polyethylene composites: fiber characterization and analysis of composite properties. Compos – A Appl Sci Manuf2007; 38: 1445–1454.
3.
ZhuXDWangFHLiuY. Properties of wheat-straw boards with FRW based on interface treatment. Phys Procedia2012; 32: 430443–430443.
4.
PappuAPatilVJainSet al.Advances in industrial prospective of cellulosic macromolecules enriched banana biofibre resources: a review. Int J Biol Macromol2015; 79: 449–458.
5.
SampathrajanAVijayaraghavanNCSwaminathanKR. Mechanical and thermal properties of particle boards made from farm residues. Bioresour Technol1992; 40: 249–251.
Markessini E, Roffael E and Rigal L. Panels from annual plant fibers bonded with urea-formaldehyde resins. In: Proceedings of the 31st International Particleboard/Composite Materials Symposium. Washington State University, Pullman, WA, 1997, pp. 147–160.
8.
Rowell RM. Composites from agri-based resources. In: Proceedings No 7286, 1996, pp. 217–222.
9.
SchirpALogeFAustSet al.Production and characterization of natural fiber-reinforced thermoplastic composites using wheat straw modified with the fungus Pleurotus ostreatus. J Appl Polym Sci2006; 102: 5191–5201.
10.
TalebniaFKarakashevDAngelidakiI. Production of bioethanol from wheat straw: an overview on pretreatment, hydrolysis and fermentation. Bioresour Technol2010; 101: 4744–4753.
11.
AlviraPTomás-PejóEBallesterosMet al.Pretreatment technologies for an efficient bioethanol production process based on enzymatic hydrolysis: a review. Bioresour Technol2010; 101: 4851–4861.
12.
SinghaASShamaAThakurVK. X-ray diffraction, morphological, and thermal studies on methylmethacrylate graft copolymerized Saccharum ciliare fiber. Int J Polym Anal Char2008; 13: 447–462.
13.
FuSXHanGPChengWLet al.Modification of wheat straws through steam explosion and its effect on panel properties. Adv Mater Res2011; 143–144: 1429–1433.
14.
PérezGRRamírez RestrepoJJ. Fundamentos de Limnología Neotropical, 2nd ed. Medellín: Universidad de Antioquia, Colombia, 2008.
15.
Laureano-PerezLTeymouriFAlizadehHet al.Understanding factors that limit enzymatic hydrolysis of biomass: characterization of pretreated corn stover. Appl Biochem Biotechnol2005; 121–124: 1081–1099.
16.
MosierNWymanCDaleBet al.Features of promising technologies for pretreatment of lignocellulosic biomass. Bioresour Technol2005; 96: 673–686.
17.
RenYZGuYYYangXYet al.Characteristics development bottle necks and counter measures of straw-based building materials. J Funct Mater2016; 6: 010–010.
18.
ArdanuyMClaramuntJFilhoRDT. Cellulosic fiber reinforced cement-based composites: a review of recent research. Construct Build Mater2015; 79: 115–128.
19.
Fusheng L, Yuwen Z and Zeguang L. Hollow fiber concrete sandwich of compressed straw brick block. China 200910020713.3, 2009.
20.
WangLJiangH. Study on lightweight cement based straw fiber foamed wall material. New Build Mater2008; 7: 1–3.
21.
GhavamiKToledo FilhoRDBarbosaNP. Behaviour of composite soil reinforced with natural fibres. Cem Concr Compos1999; 21: 39–48.
22.
SelçukSLamannaAJ. Feasibility investigation of oriented straw cable cement composites. Compos – A Appl Sci Manuf2007; 38: 1965–1974.
23.
ThakurVKThakurMKGuptaRK. Review: raw natural fiber–based polymer composites. Int J Polym Anal Char2014; 19: 256–171–256–171.
24.
Selçuk S. A study on mechanical behavior of structural composites reinforced with wheat straw fibers and their use as building materials. Abstracts International 68(07). Dissertation, 2007.
25.
WangXZhouHFuH. An analysis of pre-treatment methods of wheat straw. Biotechnology2014; 13: 32–36.
26.
MoXChengEWangDet al.Physical properties of medium-density wheat straw particleboard using different adhesives. Ind Crops Prod2003; 18: 47–53.
27.
HanGKawaiSUmemuraKet al.Development of high-performance UF-bonded reed and wheat straw medium-density fiberboard. J Wood Sci2001; 47: 350–355.
28.
AnglèsMNFerrandoFFarriolXet al.Suitability of steam exploded residual softwood for the production of binderless panels. Effect of the pre-treatment severity and lignin addition. Biomass Bioenergy2001; 21: 211–224.
29.
ManceraCEl MansouriNEPelachMAet al.Feasibility of incorporating treated lignins in fiberboards made from agricultural waste. Waste Manag2012; 32: 1962–1967.
30.
HanGDengJZhangSet al.Effect of steam explosion treatment on characteristics of wheat straw. Ind Crops Prod2010; 31: 28–33.
31.
GhaffarSHFanM. Differential behaviour of nodes and internodes of wheat straw with various pre-treatments. Biomass Bioenergy2015; 83: 373–382.
32.
BhattaraiSBottenusDIvoryCFet al.Simulation of the ozone pretreatment of wheat straw. Bioresour Technol2015; 196: 78–87.
33.
KimSHoltzappleMT. Lime pretreatment and enzymatic hydrolysis of corn stover. Bioresour Technol2005; 96: 1994–2006.
34.
LiuXZicariSMLiuGet al.Pretreatment of wheat straw with potassium hydroxide for increasing enzymatic and microbial degradability. Bioresour Technol2015; 185: 150–157.
35.
RofiiMNYumigetaSSuzukiSet al.Effects of shelling ratio and particle characteristic on physical properties of three-layered particleboard made from different wood species. Wood Res2013; 4: 1–1.
36.
NemliGAydınA. Evaluation of the physical and mechanical properties of particleboard made from the needle litter of Pinus pinaster Ait. Ind Crops Prod2007; 26: 252–258.
37.
HalvarssonSEdlundHNorgrenM. Manufacture of non-resin wheat straw fiberboards. Ind Crops Prod2009; 29: 437–445.
38.
XuJWidyoriniRYamauchiHet al.Development of binderless fiberboard from kenaf core. J Wood Sci2006; 52: 236–243.
39.
HuangWSunX. Adhesive properties of soy proteins modified by urea and guanidine hydrochloride. J Am Oil Chem Soc2000; 77: 101–104.
40.
Chelak W and Newman WH. MDI high moisture content bonding mechanism, parameters, and benefits using MDF in composite wood products. In: Proceedings of the Washington State University International Composite Materials Series Symposium on Particleboard (USA), 1991, pp. 205–229.
41.
TonkinAAylwardPColquhounDet al.Prevention of cardiovascular events and death with pravastatin in patients with coronary heart disease and a broad range of initial cholesterol levels. N Engl J Med1998; 339: 1349–1357.
42.
KeeneyRLRaiffaHRajalaDW. Decisions with multiple objectives: Preferences and value trade-offs, Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press, 1993.
43.
DandonaPAljadaAChaudhuriAet al.Metabolic syndrome: a comprehensive perspective based on interactions between obesity, diabetes, and inflammation. Circulation2005; 111: 1448–1454.
44.
TabarsaTJahanshahiSAshoriA. Mechanical and physical properties of wheat straw boards bondedwith a tannin modified phenol–formaldehyde adhesive. Compos B Eng2011; 42: 176–180.
45.
BS EN 312-2. Particleboards specifications – Part 2: Requirements for general purpose boards for use in dry conditions, Brussels: European Standardization Committee, 1996.
46.
BoquillonNElbezGSchönfeldU. Properties of wheat straw particleboards bonded with different types of resin. J Wood Sci2004; 50: 230–235.
47.
BS EN 312-3. Particleboards specifications – Part 3: Requirements for Boards for Interior fitments (including furniture) for use in dry conditions, Brussels: European Standardization Committee, 1996.
48.
NemliGHizirogluSUstaMet al.Effect of residue type and tannin content on properties of particleboard manufacture from black locust. Forest Prod J2004; 54: 36–40.
49.
PizziAMittalKL. Handbook of adhesive technology, New York: Marcel Dekker, 1994.
50.
LiXLiYZhongZet al.Mechanical and water soaking properties of medium density fiberboard with wood fiber and soybean protein adhesive. Bioresour Technol2009; 100: 3556–3562.
51.
PanthapulakkalSZereshkianASainM. Preparation and characterization of wheat straw fibers for reinforcing application in injection molded thermoplastic composites. Bioresour Technol2006; 97: 265–272.
52.
KhalilHPSAHanidaSKangCWet al.Agro-hybrid composite: the effects on mechanical and physical properties of oil Palm Fiber (EFB)/Glass hybrid reinforced polyester composites. J Reinf Plast Compos2007; 26: 203–218.
53.
BS EN 317. Particleboards and fiberboards, determination of swelling in thickness after immersion, Brussels: European Standardization Committee, 1993.
54.
LiangRYuanHXiGet al.Synthesis of wheat straw-g-poly (acrylic acid) superabsorbent composites and release of urea from it. Carbohydr Polym2009; 77: 181–187.
55.
AziziKTabarsaTAshoriA. Performance characterizations of particleboards made with wheat straw and waste veneer splinters. Compos B: Eng2011; 42: 2085–2089.
56.
StaigerMPTuckerNNatural-fiber composites in structural applications. In: PickeringK (ed). Properties and performance of natural-fibre composites, Cambridge UK: Woodhead Publishing, 2008.
57.
AliAl-MohamadawiKarimBenhabibRose-MarieDheillyAdelineGoullieux. Influence of lignocellulosic aggregate coating with paraffin wax on flax shive and cement-shive composite properties. Constr Build Mater2016; 102: 94–104.
58.
SapuanSMPuaFEl-ShekeilYAet al.Mechanical properties of soil buried kenaf fibre reinforced thermoplastic polyurethane composites. Mater Des2013; 50: 467–470.
59.
KuangXKuangRZhengXet al.Mechanical properties and size stability of wheat straw and recycled LDPE composites coupled by waterborne coupling agents. Carbohydr Polym2010; 80: 927–933.
60.
HornsbyPRHinrichsenETarverdiK. Preparation and properties of polypropylene composites reinforced with wheat and flax straw fibers. Part II analysis of composite microstructure and mechanical properties. J Mater Sci1997; 32: 1009–1015.
61.
ReddyCRSardashtiAPSimonLC. Preparation and characterization of polypropylene–wheat straw–clay composites. Compos Sci Technol2010; 70: 1674–1680.
62.
ZhouDGZhangY. Materials industry of China's crop stalks the formation and development. Timber Ind2007; 21: 5–8.
63.
TahaAshourHansjörgWielandHeikoGeorgFranz-JosefBockischWeiWue. The influence of natural reinforcement fibres on insulation values of earth plaster for straw bale buildings. Mater Design2010; 31: 4676–4685.
64.
KhedariJWatsanasathapornPHirunlabhJ. Development of fiber-based soilecement block with low thermal conductivity. Cem Concr Compos2005; 27: 111116–111116.
65.
GoodhewSGriffithsR. Sustainable earth walls to meet the building regulation. Energy Build2005; 37: 451459–451459.
66.
ObinnaOBanthiaN. Plant-based natural fibre reinforced cement composites: a review. Cem Concr Compos2016; 68: 96108–96108.
67.
Ashour TH. The use of renewable agricultural by-products as building materials. PhD thesis, Benha University, Egypt, 2003.
68.
Al-Oqla FM, Sapuan SM and Ishak MR. Postgraduate symposium on biocomposite technology, Serdang, Malaysia, 2015.
69.
Al-OqlaFMSapuanSM. Natural fiber reinforced polymer composites in industrial applications: feasibility of date palm fibers for sustainable automotive industry. J Clean Product2014; 66: 347–354.
70.
MillogoYMorelJCAubertJEGhavamiK. Experimental analysis of pressed Adobe Blocks reinforced with Hibiscus cannabinus fibers. Constr Build Mater2014; 52: 71–78.
71.
AliMChouwN. Experimental investigations on coconut-fibre rope tensils strength and pullout from coconut fibre reinforced concrete. Constr Build Mater2013; 41: 681–690.
72.
RamliMKwanWHAbasNF. Strength and durability of coconut-fiber-reinforced concrete in aggressive environments. Constr Build Mater2013; 38: 554–566.
73.
MarwenBNaimaBiDashnorHMuzahimA. Physical characterization of natural straw fibers as aggregates for construction materials applications. Materials2014; 7: 3034–3048. doi:10.3390/ma7043034.
74.
BergadoDTLongPVMurthyBRS. A case study of geotextile-reinforced embankment on soft ground. Geotext Geomembr2002; 20: 343365–343365.
75.
MostafaMUddinN. Experimental analysis of Compressed Earth Block (CEB) with banana fibers resisting flexural and compression forces. Case Stud Constr Mater2016; 5: 53–63.
Wei, MeyerC. Degradation of natural fiber in ternary blended cement composites containing metakaolin and montmorillonite. Corros Sci2017; 120: 42–60.
78.
JoshiSVDrzalLTMohantyAKAroraS. Are natural fiber compositesenvironmentally superior to glass fiber reinforced composites?Compos Part A: Appl Sci Manuf2004; 35: 371–376.
79.
CouttsRSP. Flax fibres as a reinforcement in cement mortars. Int J Cem Compos Lightweight Concr1983; 5: 257–262.
80.
MertaITscheggEK. Fracture energy of natural fibre reinforced concrete. Constr Build Mater2013; 40: 991–997.
81.
RamakrishnaGSundararajanT. Impact strength of a few natural fibrereinforced cement mortar slabs: a comparative study. Cem Concr Compos2005; 27: 547–553.
82.
De SilvaFAZhuDMobasherBFilhoRDT. Impact behavior of sisal fibercement composites under flexural load. ACI Mater J2011; 108: 168–177.
83.
MindessSBenturA. Technical notes: the fracture of wood fibre reinforcedcement. Int J Cem Compos Lightweight Concr1982; 4: 245–249.
84.
de Andrade SilvaFMobasherBFilhoRDT. Cracking mechanisms in durable sisalfiber reinforced cement composites. Cem Concr Compos2009; 31: 721–730.
85.
de Andrade SilvaFMobasherBSoranakomCFilhoRDT. Effect of fiber shape andmorphology on interfacial bond and cracking behaviors of sisal fiber cementbased composites. Cem Concr Compos2011; 33: 814–823.
86.
de Andrade SilvaFMobasherBFilhoRDT. Fatigue behavior of sisal fiberreinforced cement composites. Mater Sci Eng A2010; 527: 5507–5513.
87.
AzizMAParamasivamPLeeSL. Prospects for natural fibre reinforcedconcretes in construction. Int J Cem Compos Lightweight Concr1981; 3: 123–132.
88.
AgopyanVSavastanoHJohnVMCincottoMA. Developments on vegetable fibre–cement based materials in São Paulo, Brazil: an overview. Cem Concr Compos2005; 27: 527–536.
89.
AssararMScidaDEl MahiAet al.Influence of water ageing on mechanical properties and damage events of two reinforced composite materials: flax–fibres and glass–fibres. Mater Des2011; 32: 788–795.
90.
LanzoniLNobiliATarantinoAM. Perforamance evaluation of a polypropylene-based draw-wired fibre for concrete structures. Constr Build Mater2012; 28: 798–806.
91.
NobiliALanzoniLTarantinoAM. Experimental investigation and monitoring of a polypropylene-based fiber reinforcedconcrete road pavement. Constr Build Mater2013; 47: 888–895.
92.
OlaruAMBlûmichBAdamsA. Water transport in cement-in-polymer dispersion at variable temperature studied by magnetic resonance imaging. Cem Concr Res2013; 44: 55–68.
93.
CollinsMPaulsonWHFinnerMFJorgensenNAKeulerCR. Moisture and storage effects on dry matter and quality losses of alfalfa in round bales. Trans ASAE1987; 30: 913–917.
94.
Fiorini J, John VM, Tango CES. Developing of cladding boards of fibre reinforced gypsum. Proceedings of ENTAC-95, vol. 2 Rio de Janeiro: Antac; 1995. p. 467–472 [in Portuguese].
95.
SavastanoHJrWardenPGCouttsRSP. Brazilian waste fibres as reinforcement for cement based composites. Cem Concr Compos2000; 22(5): 379–384.
