Green Composites: Versatile Material

for Future

Anshu A. Singh, Sadaf Afrin and Zoheb Karim

Abstract The growing concern towards environmental problems and the urgent
need for more versatile environmental friendly materials has led to increasing
attention about polymer composites, i.e. fillers/reinforcing materials coming from
renewable sources and biodegradable, especially from forest. The composites usually
referred to as “green”, can find several industrial applications as discussed in this
chapter. Biodegradable polymers coming from natural resources are also one
important constituent of green composites. This chapter provides tactic for readers
regarding the materials used for the fabrication and specific application of green
composites in various fields. Furthermore, a discussion of the major material attri-
butes of green composites is provided. From these focuses, a series of balancing
application properties are explained. The chapter concludes that green composites
have potential for use in a number of applications, but as with all design, one must
carefully match the material to the application.

Keywords Reinforcing materials
Green composites
Biodegradable polymers

Plant fibers

1 Introduction

Man has been using materials since the beginning of the recorded history. Initially
only natural materials like stone, clay, wood etc. were used. Materials have an
important role in the life of modern man and have been making significant

A.A. Singh
Department of Polymer and Process Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology,
Saharanpur 247001, India
S. Afrin
Department of Chemistry, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh 202002, India
Z. Karim (&)
Division of Process Technology, MoRe Research AB, Box 70, 891 22 Örnsköldsvik,
Sweden
e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017 29

M. Jawaid et al. (eds.), Green Biocomposites,
Green Energy and Technology, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-49382-4_2
30 A.A. Singh et al.

contribution to the techno-economic development of the modern world. Materials

have been divided into three broad categories: (i) metals, (ii) ceramics, and
(iii) polymers (Buschow et al. 2001). Composites based on metal, ceramic and
polymer matrices have also been developed. Polymers (synthetic and biopolymers)
and polymer composites have emerged as important materials. The two main
constituents of a polymeric composite are: (i) a polymeric matrix, and (ii) a rein-
forcing material. A composite offers better properties than those of its constituent
materials, due to synergistic properties of its constituent materials. In a composite,
one of the constituent materials is in continuous phase, and is termed as the matrix,
and the other is discontinuous or dispersed phase and is termed as the reinforcement
or the reinforcing material. Polymeric composite include, mica or any other particle
reinforced polymer composites; short aramid fibers or any other short fiber rein-
forced polymer composites; continuous carbon fiber reinforced epoxy or any other
thermoset or thermoplastic polymer composites; nanoparticles or nanofibers rein-
forced polymer composites. Properties of a polymeric composite are governed by
properties and amount of the polymeric matrix; properties (for example; aspect
ratio, chemical nature, purity, distribution, orientation and geometry) and amount of
the reinforcement; and the interfacial adhesion between the two. Thus, the prop-
erties of a composite are strongly influenced by the properties of their constituent
materials, their amounts and distribution, and the fiber/matrix interfacial adhesion
(Herrera-Franco and Valadez-Gonzalez 2004).
There are several advantages of such polymeric composite; however, the main
limitation is the problem of suitable removal or recycling after the end of life and
reuse of both the components quite difficult. Furthermore, the synthetic polymers
(like polypropylene, polyethylene etc.) production requires a remarkable con-
sumption of oil-based resources, which are notoriously non-renewable and as a
result of declining oil reserves and increase in cost of production of fossil fuels;
scientists and researchers are now exploring alternative sources that are renewable,
environment friendly and are sustainable. Energy Information Administration
(EIA) reported that the oil production is expected to decline at the rate of 4% per
annum after year 2010 and therefore great effort has been made in the policy and
promotion in search of engineering sustainable solutions in energy and the envi-
ronment (Nirma et al. 2015; Holbery and Houston 2006).
In view of this, the concept of “green composites” is gaining more and more
importance these days because of increasing environmental awareness, decreasing
oil reserves and demands of legislative authorities. This green composite consists of
biodegradable polymers as matrix materials and natural fibers as reinforcement
materials. Recent advances in polymer composites offer significant opportunities for
improved materials from renewable resources with enhanced support for global
sustainability. The green composites from natural fibers and biodegradable poly-
mers will render a major contribution in the 21st century due to environmental
problem as this composite gives a possible solution to waste disposal problems
associated with traditional petroleum derived polymers. Green composites are
emerging as new eco-friendly polymeric composite material and are offering
commercial and engineering applications along with techno-economic advantages
Green Composites: Versatile Material for Future 31

(Mohanty et al. 2002). Green composites deriving from renewable resources bring
very promising potential to provide benefits to companies, natural environment and
end-customers due to dwindling petroleum resources. Nevertheless these materials
have very high pressure from the global market. In present day it is a challenge for
scientists and researcher to find out the properties and suitability of various poly-
mers available in current market to make sure whether they are right to be used as a
matrix material for green composite or not (Paul et al. 2003).

2 Constituents of Green Composite

One of the main components of the green composite is the use of natural/bio-fiber
as reinforcement materials. Reinforcing material or reinforcement are embedded in
the matrix of the composite, and form the discontinuous or the dispersed phase of
the composite material. It carries the applied load and stress, and imparts improved
mechanical properties, including stiffness and strength, to the composite. Another
important constituent of green composites are biodegradable polymers which act as
a matrix or continuous phase and plays an important role in determining the
demanding properties of the green composite. It provides protection to the com-
posite against environmental and chemical attack, and holds and binds the rein-
forcing materials together and transfers load and stress to the reinforcement (Thakur
et al. 2014; Karim and Afrin 2015; Karim et al. 2016a).

2.1 Reinforcing Bio-Fibers

Bio-fibers are renewable fibers that can be obtained from plant, animal and mineral
resources and can be used as reinforcements in manufacturing of green composite
in the same way as the synthetic fibers. The classification of bio-fibers based on
their origin is shown in Table 1.

Table 1 Classification of bio-fibers

Bio-fibers Examples
Animal fiber (a) Wool/hair—sheep, camel, rabbit hair, goat hair, yak, horse hair
(b) Silk—mulberry silk, coarse silk
Mineral Asbestos, wollastonite
Plant fiber (a) Wood fiber—hardwood, softwood
(b) Non-wood
Stalk fiber—bamboo, wheat, rice, grass, barley, corn, maize, oat
Fruit fiber—coconut, betelnut
Seed fiber—cotton, oil palm, kapok, alfalfa
Leaf fiber—sisal, banana, palm, date palm, pineapple, henequen, agave
Bast fiber—hemp, jute, banana, flax, kenaf sugarecane, ramie, roselle
Adopted from Refs. Mohanty et al. (2002), Holbery and Houston (2006), Thakur et al. (2014)
32 A.A. Singh et al.

In recent years, natural plant based fibers, for example—jute, coconut, hemp,
sisal, coir, banana etc., have been used as reinforcing materials in place of conven-
tional fibers like glass, carbon, aramid, etc. The main advantages of using these
natural fibers over conventional synthetic fibers are their easy availability, low cost,
bio-degradability, renewability, recyclability, low density, acceptable specific
strength and stiffness, reduced tool wear, non-abrasiveness, easy to manufacture,
light weight and non-toxic nature. Dittenber and Gangarao (2012) and Ahmad et al.
(2015) discussed the comparison between natural fiber and synthetic fiber on the
basis of cost per weight, and cost per volume versus tensile modulus and tensile
strength for natural fibers, synthetic fibers, natural fiber composites, and synthetic
fiber composites and it was found that as compared to synthetic fibers, the natural
fibers are generally cheaper in cost (Oksman et al. 2003; Ramamoorthya et al. 2015).

2.1.1 Plant Fibers

Plants from which natural fibers obtained are classified as primary and secondary
depending on their utilization. Primary plants are those grown for their fiber content
for example; jute, hemp, kenaf, and sisal and/or secondary plants, for example;
pineapple, oil palm and coir (Corbiere et al. 2001). Plant fibers have also been clas-
sified according to their origin and the part of the plant from which the fiber is
extracted. The classification of natural fibers based on their origin is shown in Table 2.

Wood Fibers
Wood fibers have been categorized into hardwood and softwood fiber. Hardwood
fibers for example; fibers from aspen and birch and softwood fibers for example;

Table 2 Comparison between natural fibers and synthetic fibers cost

Properties Natural fibers Synthetic fibers
Resource Infinite Limited
Renewability Renewable Non-renewable
Recyclability Good Moderate
Bio-degradability Bio-degradable Non-biodegradable
CO2 neutral Yes No
Density Low High
Mechanical properties Moderate High
Moisture sensitivity High Low
Thermal sensitivity High Low
Abrasiveness Low High
Toxicity Non-toxic Toxic
Cost Low Higher than natural fiber
Energy consumption Low High
Adopted from Refs. Oksman et al. (2003), Dittenber et al. (2012)
Green Composites: Versatile Material for Future 33

Table 3 Estimated average global production of different natural fibers

Fiber type Origin Production per year (Million Largest producer country
Tonnes)
Cotton Seed 25 China, USA, India, Pakistan
Jute Bast 2.3–2.5 India, Bangladesh
Flaxa Bast 0.5–1.5 China, France, Belgium, Belarus,
Ukraine
Coir Seed 0.45 India, Sri Lanka
Kenaf Bast 0.45–0.97 China, India, Thailand
Sisal Leaf 0.39 Brazil, China, Tanzania, Kenya
Ramie Bast 0.15 China, Brazil, Philippines, India
Abaca Leaf 0.10–0.07 Philippines, Costa Rice
Hempb Bast 0.10–0.2 China, France
Pineapple Leaf 0.74 Philippines, Thailand, Indonesia
Henequen Leaf 0.03 Mexico
a
The real production of flax was underestimated because the production of flax in Canada is not
considered for calculation
b
China has announced plan to substantially increase the hemp production for textiles in the coming
years to 1.5 million tonnes of fiber per year
Adopted from Refs. Bledzki et al. (2002), Niska and Sain (2008)

fibers from pines, spruces, larches; are obtained from conifer. Hardwoods except
balsa wood are generally denser than softwoods but the growth rate of softwood is
faster than that of hardwood. The anatomy of softwood is simple in most cases, as
90% or more of softwood volume is composed of longitudinal tracheid which
transports water and gives mechanical strength to the wood. Softwood fiber rein-
forced polymeric composites have better stiffness than hardwood fiber reinforced
polymeric composites and this is due to higher lignin content in softwood fiber
compared to that in hardwood fiber. However, hardwood fiber reinforced polymeric
composites showed better tensile strength, impact strength, and elongation which
could be attributed to higher cellulose content (Joshi et al. 2004; Oma et al. 2012).
Softwood fibers are preferred for composite applications as it has higher aspect ratio
than hardwood fibers.

Non-wood Fibers
Non-wood fibers have been further categorized into bast fibers, leaf fibers, seed
fibers, fruit fibers and stalk fibers. Table 3 indicates the average global production
per year of some commonly used non-wood fibers.

Compositions of Plant Fibers

The structure, microfibrillar angle, cell dimensions, defects, and the chemical
composition of plant fibers are the most important properties that determine the
34 A.A. Singh et al.

overall properties of the fibers (Saravana and Kumar 2010). The size and length of
plant fibers obtained from various different plants of a particular type also varies
depending upon the climatic conditions, location and age of the plants and the fiber
extraction process. The overall structure of a plant fiber is very complex consisting
of several layers and walls. The cell wall of a natural fiber is not homogeneous as it
has a thin primary wall, which is the first layer formed during cell growth. Primary
wall encircles secondary wall, which is made up of three different layers, known as
outer layer, middle layer and inner layer. The transverse section of the unit cell in a
fiber has a central hollow cavity (lumen). Each layer in the cell wall has been found
to be composed of cellulose that embedded in a matrix of hemicellulose and lignin.
The physical and mechanical properties of plant fibers differ among cited works,
because different fibers were used, different moisture conditions were present, and
different testing methods were performed. Mechanical properties of plant fibers can
be affected by many factors for example; either single fiber or bundle of fibers is
being tested. Table 4 represents the important mechanical properties of commonly
used plant fibers. The physical properties of each natural fiber are critical, and
include the fiber dimensions, defects, strength and structure. There are several
physical properties for example; fiber dimensions, defects, strength, variability,
crystallinity, and structure; that are important to know about for each plant fiber
before that fiber can be used to reach its highest potential.
The chemical compositions of some of the commonly used plant fibers used as
reinforcement are summarized in Table 5, and it is observed that plant fibers mainly
consist of varying proportions of cellulose, hemicellulose, lignin and pectin (Nirma
et al. 2015; Ahmad et al. 2015). In addition to these there are a number of
non-structural components including waxes, inorganic salts and nitrogenous sub-
stances. Climatic conditions, age and the degradation process not only influence
the structure of fibers, but also the chemical composition. The chemical composi-
tions of the plant fibers are also influenced by the fiber growth time (days after
planting), the botanical classification of the fiber and the stalk height (Dittenber and
Gangarao 2012).

2.2 Biodegradable Polymer Matrix

The yearly disposal of synthetic polymers derived from petroleum products in both
the US and EC country has raised the demands for managing this
non-biodegradable waste. The commodity plastics for example; polyethylene,
polypropylene, polystyrene and polyvinyl chloride etc. displaced metals, glasses,
ceramics and wood products especially in the area of packaging and these polymers
are available in variety of forms as films, bags, containers etc. They persist in
environment, do not degraded after their disposal and thus giving rise to multitude
of ecological and environmental concerns. Biodegradable polymers offered scien-
tists and researchers a possible solution not only to the waste disposal problem
associated with traditional petroleum based polymers but also to the rising oil prices
Table 4 Different physical and mechanical properties of natural fibers
Name of plant Density (g/cm3) Elongation (%) Tensile Specific Young’s Specific Specific
fibers strength (MPa) strength (MPa) modulus (GPa) modulus (GPa) gravity
Alfa 0.89 5.8 35 – 22 25 –
Bagasse 1.1–1.6 6.3–7.9 170–350 – 5.1–6.2 3.6–4.1 1.4–1.5
Bamboo 1.1 1.9–3.2 500–575 454 27–40 50–67.9 0.4–0.8
Banana 1.35 2.4–3.5 711–789 444 4.0–32.7 3.6–27.3 1.1–1.2
Betel nut 0.2–0.4 22–24 120–166 – 1.3–2.6 1.0–1.9 1.3–1.4
Coir 1.2–1.6 14–30 170–230 146 3.0–7.0 2.5–5.0 1.2–1.4
Cotton 1.5–1.6 2.1–12 200–600 179–373 5.0–15.1 3.3–10.1 1.5
Green Composites: Versatile Material for Future

Curaua 1.4 1.3–4.9 87–1150 113–521 11.8–96 39 –

Flax 1.3–1.5 1.1–3.3 340–1600 535–1000 25–81 16.7–54 1.5
Hemp 1.1–1.6 0.8–3 550–900 372–608 70 47.3 1.5
Henequen 1.2 3.7–5.9 430–570 – 10.1–16.3 11 –
Jute 1.3–1.5 1.4–2.1 385–850 269–548 9–31 6.9–20.7 1.3–1.5
Kenaf 0.6–1.5 1.6–4.3 223–1191 641 11–60 10–42.9 1.1–1.4
Oil palm 0.7–1.6 4–18 50–400 – 0.6–9.0 0.5–7.5 1.1–1.2
Pineapple 1.56 2.4 150–1627 – 11–82 7.8–57 1.4–1.6
Ramie 1.4–1.5 1.5–4 200–1000 147–625 41–130 27–81 1.5–1.6
Sisal 1.3–1.6 1.9–15 400–700 366–441 8.5–40 6.5–30.8 1.3
Adopted from Refs. Manita and Morreale (2011), Ahmad et al. (2015)
35
36 A.A. Singh et al.

Table 5 Chemical compositions of different natural fibers

Name of plant Cellulose Hemicellulose Lignin Pectin Wax Ash Moisture
fiber (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%)
Bagasse 28.3–55 20–36.3 21.2– NA 0.9 1–4 NA
24
Bamboo 48.2–73.8 12.5–73.3 10.2– 0.37 NA 2.3 11.7
21.4
Banana 48–60 10.2–15.9 14.4– 2.1– 3–5 2.1 2–3
21.6 4.1
Betelnut 35–64.8 29–33.1 13–26 9.2– 0.5– 1.1– NA
15.4 0.7 2.1
Coir 19.9–36.7 11.9–15.4 32.7– 4.7– NA NA 0.2–0.5
53.3 7.0
Cotton 82.7 5.7 28.2 5.7 0.6 NA 10
Curaua 73.6 9.9 7.5 NA NA NA NA
Flax 64.1 16.7 2 1.8 1.5 13.1 10
Hemp 55–80.2 12–22.4 2.6–13 0.9– 0.2 0.5– 6.5
3.0 0.8
Henequen 77.6 4–8 13.1 NA NA NA NA
Jute 64.4 12 0.2 11.8 0.5 0.5– 10
2.1
Kenaf 37–49 18–24 15–21 8.9 0.5 2.4– NA
5.1
Oil Palm 42.7–65 17.1–33.5 13.2– NA 0.6 1.3– NA
25.3 6.0
Pineapple 57.5–74.3 80.7 4.4– 1.1 3.3 0.9– NA
10.1 4.7
Ramie 68.6 13.1 0.6 1.9 0.3 NA 10
Rice husk 38–45 12–20 – – – 20 –
Sea grass 57 38 5 10 – – –
Sisal 65.8 12.0 9.9 0.8 0.3 4.2 10.0
From kind Refs. Nirma et al. (2015), Ahmad et al. (2015)

(Satyanarayana et al. 1986; Ya et al. 2014; Mathew et al. 2014; Karim et al. 2014a,
2016b). The developments in emerging biodegradable polymers are impressive
from a technological point of view and mirror their rapid growth in the market place
(Mohanty et al. 2000; Azwa et al. 2013; Faruk et al. 2014; Karim et al. 2014b,
2016c, d).

2.2.1 Classification

Biodegradable polymers on the basis of their origin can be natural as well as

synthetic. Almost all natural biodegradable polymers which can be obtained from
the renewable resources degrade within a reasonable time scale. However, the
Green Composites: Versatile Material for Future 37

synthetic biodegradable polymers also degrade if they contain chemical bonds

which occur in natural compound (Mohanty et al. 2000; Karim et al. 2014b).
International organizations for example: American Society for Testing Materials
(ASTM) in connection with Institute for Standard Research (ISR), the European
Standardisation Committee (CEN), the International Standardization Organization
(ISO), the German Institute for Standardization (DIN) are all actively involved in
developing definitions and tests for biodegradability of polymers in different
environments. Some of the commonly used biodegradable polymers used as matrix
in green composites are polylactic acid, polyhydroxybutyrate, starch etc. Of all the
biodegradable polymers polylactic acid (PLA) is the most commonly used and
studied matrix material for green composites.

3 PLA Based Green Composites

Several works has been reported on the kenaf fiber with PLA. Various reports have
been discussed relating to chemical modifications, biodegradability, and the
mechanical and dynamic mechanical properties of fabricated composites (Ochi
2008; Huda et al. 2008; Lee et al. 2009; Karim 2014). Significant improvement in
mechanical properties has been reported by silane-treated kenaf fiber reinforced
PLA composite. The heat deflection temperature (HDT) was higher compare to neat
PLA. The biodegradability (weight loss with time) of kenaf/PLA decreased
approximately 38% after four weeks of decomposition. Young’s modulus
(6.3 GPa) and the tensile strength (62 MPa) of the kenaf (70%)-PLA composites
were in the line compare to conventional composites.
Flax fiber reinforced PLA composite was processed and the interfacial charac-
terization was performed using the microbond testing method (Le Duigou et al.
2010). The interfacial mechanisms was explained and discussed; depends on
thermal treatment (Le Duigou et al. 2010).
Abaca fiber and cellulose fiber reinforced PLA composites was processed using
two-step extrusion coating process followed by injection molding and compared
with each other. It was reported that with man-made cellulose of 30 wt%, the tensile
strength and modulus increased by factors of 1.45 and 1.75 times in comparison to
neat PLA. Reinforcing with abaca fibers (30 wt%) enhanced both the E-modulus and
the tensile strength by factors of 2.40 and 1.20, respectively (Bledzki et al. 2009).

3.1 Processing

PLA based green composites are manufactured using the same processing tech-
nique as used for the conventional synthetic fiber reinforced polymer matrix
composites. These processing techniques are broadly classified as open mold
process and closed mold process. Open mold process includes hand layup, spray
38 A.A. Singh et al.

Table 6 Processing and tensile properties of PLA based green composite

Composite Process Tensile Tensile Reference
strength (MPa) modulus (GPa)
PLLA/kenaf Wet impregnation 62 6.3 Nishino et al.
(70%) (2003)
PLA/kenaf Hot pressing 223 32 Nishino et al.
(70%) (2003)
PLA/ramie Hot pressing 52 – Tao et al. (2009)
PLA/cotton Compression 41.2 4.24 Graupner et al.
molding (2009)
PLA/jute Film stacking 100.5 9.4 Placketta et al.
(40%) (2003)
PLLA/flax Film stacking 99 9.52 Bodros et al.
(30%) (2007)
PLA/flax Extrusion, 53 8.3 Manita and
(30%) compression Morreale (2011)
molding
PLLA/flax Injection molding 53.1 7.32 Duigou et al.
(30%) (2008)
PLA/wood Injection molding 58.28 6.22 Petinakis et al.
flour (2009)
PLA/flax Solution casting, hot 21 0.137 Kumar et al.
(30%) pressing (2010)
PLA/bamboo Injection molding 50 – Kim et al. (2011)
flour
PLA/wood Hot pressing 41.33 3.00 Febrianto et al.
flour (2006)
PLA/sugar Extrusion, injection 29.55 2.59 Finkenstadt et al.
beet pulp molding (2007)
PLA/coconut Extrusion, 67.99 2.37 Tayommai et al.
(0.5%) compression (2010)
molding

up, tape layup, filament winding and autoclave method. The compression molding,
injection molding and transfer molding are closed mold processes. However the
most commonly used processing techniques are extrusion followed by injection
molding or compression molding. Some examples are given in Table 6.

3.1.1 Factors Influencing Processing of Green Composite

Some typical problems related to the processing of green composites are the
hydrophilic and hygroscopic nature of natural fibers which is used as reinforcement,
their poor thermal resistance and also the type as well as its content in the green
composite. Natural fibers must be processed at lower temperatures to avoid the
possibility of its burning and degradation (Nishino et al. 2003). This limits the use
Green Composites: Versatile Material for Future 39

of only those polymers as matrix resins for natural fiber composites that can be
processed at lower temperatures, consequently, high performance and high glass
transition temperature and high melting temperature polymers may not be used as
matrix resins for green composites. Hydrophilic and hygroscopic reinforcing nat-
ural fibers have poor compatibility with hydrophobic polymer matrix, as a result of
which, natural fiber reinforced polymer composites have weak fiber/matrix inter-
facial adhesion that limits load transfer from the fiber to the matrix and results in
poor mechanical properties of the composites (Tao et al. 2009). The fiber/matrix
interfacial adhesion needs improvement for use of natural fiber/polymer compos-
ites. Another drawback is the high moisture absorption by natural fibers in the green
composites (Tao et al. 2009). Moisture swells the natural fibers in composites and
adversely affects the dimensional stability and the mechanical properties of the
natural fiber/polymer composites. The presence of humidity or moisture during the
processing of green composite leads to the formation of water vapor which can, in
turn, give rise to several problems, especially in the in the case of injection molding,
if a venting or drying system is not present as it causes the formation of voids in the
material and thus poor mechanical properties. Furthermore, it is a widely accepted
step prior to the processing of green composite, to dry the natural fibers and this can
be done by different ways such as hot air jets, rotating driers, ventilated ovens, in
order to reduce the humidity level to approximately 2–3% (Graupner et al. 2009).
Fiber treatment either chemically or physically can also reduce both the moisture
content level and the rate of absorption very significantly. Bio-based polymers for
example polylactic acid can be more sensitive to moisture than natural fibers.
Moisture or water content in the sample also affects the mechanical properties (such
as, compression, flexural and tensile) of the composites. Nowadays new extruder
screw design (higher L/D ratio) allows better degassing and, consequently, lower
moisture content. In addition, the machine’s barrel must be redesigned. Type of
natural fiber and its content is another important parameter that influences the
processing of the green composite. The length of natural fibers (short or long),
aspect ratio (length/diameter), and chemical compositions have great influence on
the processing and therefore processing parameters are different for different fiber
types (Placketta et al. 2003). In general, increase in fiber content in the composites
increases the stiffness and strength of the composite.

3.1.2 Performance of Green Composite

The properties of a green composite cannot be achieved by any of the components

acting alone. Overall, the properties of composite are determined by properties of
the matrix, properties and aspect ratio of the reinforcing fiber, amount of fiber in the
composite (fiber volume fraction), geometry and orientation of the fibers in the
composite, and several others, including fiber/matrix interfacial adhesion, because
the adhesion between the reinforcing fiber and the matrix polymer plays an
important role in the transmission of stress from the matrix to the fiber and thus
contributes towards the performance of the composite (Placketta et al. 2003; Bodros
40 A.A. Singh et al.

et al. 2007). The principal purpose of a matrix is not to be load carrying constituent
but essentially to bind the fibers together, transfer load to the fibers, and to protect
the composite. Each fiber must be separated from the other and uniformly coated by
the matrix. Properties of the polymeric matrix govern the resultant properties of the
polymeric composites. Thermal stability and temperature dependent properties and
high temperature applications of a polymeric composite depend on its polymeric
matrix. The fundamental role of fibers is to perform as the reinforcing materials and
to carry or support the load, limit deformation, and enhance the mechanical
properties of the polymeric composite such that the polymeric matrix experiences
negligible stresses (Duigou et al. 2008). Reinforcing fibers provide stiffness,
strength, and other mechanical properties. The fiber aspect ratio (length/diameter
ratio) is a critical parameter in a composite material. Mechanical properties improve
with increasing fiber aspect ratio. The greatest stiffness and strength occurs, when
the fibers are very long compared to their diameter; however, although, short fiber
reinforced polymer composites are limited by the short length of the reinforcing
fiber; but they offer good properties. One of the significant factors determining the
mechanical properties of a composite is the content of reinforcing fiber (fiber
volume fraction) (Petinakis et al. 2009; Kumar et al. 2010). Stiffness and strength
increases with increasing fiber contents, however, beyond a particular volume
fraction of fibers, there is increase in stiffness, but no proportional increase in
strength. The geometry of the fibers in a composite is also important, since fibers
have their highest mechanical properties along their lengths, rather than across their
widths (Kumar et al. 2010). Orientation of the fibers in the composite plays an
important role in imparting isotropic or anisotropic properties to a composite.
Composite properties depend on the fiber/matrix interfacial adhesion also. The
ultimate mechanical properties of fiber reinforced polymeric composites depend not
only on the properties of the fibers and the matrix, but also on the extent of
interfacial adhesion between the fiber and the polymer matrix. Poor fiber-matrix
interfacial adhesion limits the load transfer from matrix to fibers. In polymer matrix
composites, the interface between the reinforcing fiber and the polymeric matrix is
important for the overall performance of the composite as a structural material.
It is important to know the certain mechanical properties of each green com-
posite in order to understand its highest potential. Mechanical properties of a
composite material are important because these properties decide the applications
and performance of a composite material. Among all the mechanical properties the
most commonly studied are the tensile, flexural and impact properties. However,
maximum work has been reported on tensile properties of green composite than any
other mechanical property. Table 6 summarizes the processing techniques and
tensile properties reported for PLA based green composites. Tensile test has been
performed to measure the ability of a material to withstand the force that tends to
pull it apart and the extent of its deformation before breaking. Tensile testing gives
result for tensile modulus, tensile strength and elongation at break of a material
(Tayommai et al. 2010). Tensile modulus indicates the stiffness of a material and
can be determined from the stress-strain curve. Stress is the force applied to produce
deformation in a unit area of a test specimen and is ratio of applied load to the
Green Composites: Versatile Material for Future 41

original cross-sectional area. Strain is the change in the length per unit of the
original length (Dl/l). Tensile strength is the maximum stress that a specimen can
withstand during a tension test, and is measured in MPa. Tensile Modulus, also
known as the Young’s modulus, is a measure of the stiffness of the material and is
the ratio of stress to corresponding strain below the proportional limit of a material;
and is measured in GPa. Elongation at break of a material is the percentage
increases in its length due to the applied tensile load up to its breaking point.

4 Green Composites in Future

The use of biodegradable polymers as matrix and natural fibers as reinforcement in

composite materials contributes to enhancing the development of green composites
in regards of performance as well as sustainability. Green composites have created
substantial commercial markets for value-added products especially in packaging
sector. Although PLA/kenaf fiber composites have been used for spare tire cover,
circuit boards (Nakamura et al. 2009) and so on Bax and Mussing (2008) proposed
the application in automotive and electronic industry. Graupner et al. (2009) sug-
gested their applications for furniture, suitcase, car parts, grinding discs, safety
helmets. However, to cover other fields, scientists and researchers still need to think
about the up scaling of products. To launch various lab scale ideas into market a
concise effort is required from scientific community.
In the future, these green composites will see increased use in structural appli-
cations. Various other applications depend on their further improvements and
research. But there are still a number of problems that have to be solved before
green composites become fully competitive with synthetic fiber composites.
In recent years, the major advancement lies within the establishment of
nanocomposites (i.e., the use of nano cellulose in the form of crystal or fibers
produced from natural fibers). Natural fibers consist of approximately 30–40%
cellulose and about half of that is crystalline cellulose. It was reported that this nano
cellulose could compete with components made from conventional materials.
Nanotechnology shows numerous opportunities for improving the properties of
green composite products. The use of cellulose nanocrystal and cellulose nanofibers
is being explored for a variety of uses since it is stronger than steel and stiffer than
aluminum. Cellulose nanocrystal reinforced composites could soon provide
advanced performance, durability, value, service-life, and utility while at the same
time being a fully sustainable technology.
42 A.A. Singh et al.

References

Ahmad F, Choi SH, Park MK et al (2015) A review: natural fiber composites selection in view of
mechanical, light weight, and economic properties. Macro Mater Eng 300:10–24
Azwa ZN, Yousif BF, Manalo AC et al (2013) A review on the degradability of polymeric
composites based on natural fibres. Mater Des 47:424–442
Bax B, Mussing J (2008) Impact and tensile properties of PLA/cordenka and PLA/flax composites.
Comput Sci Technol 68:1601–1607
Bledzki AK, Faruk O, Huque M et al (2002) Physico-mechanical studies of wood fiber reinforced
composites. Polym Plast Technol Eng 41:435–451
Bledzki AK, Jaszkiewicz A, Scherzer D et al (2009) Mechanical properties of PLA composites
with man-made cellulose and abaca fibres. Comput Part A Appl Sci Manuf 40:404–412
Bodros E, Pillin I, Montrelay N, Baley C et al (2007) Could biopolymers reinforced by randomly
scattered flax fiber be used in structural applications. Comput Sci Technol 67:462–470
Buschow KHJ, Cahn R, Fleming MC et al (2001) Encyclopedia of materials: science and
technology. Elsevier Science, Pergamon Press, Oxford
Corbiere NT, Gfeller LB, Lundquist B et al (2001) Life cycle assessment of biofibres replacing
glass fibres as reinforcement in plastics. Resourc Conserv Recy 33:267–287
Dittenber DB, Gangarao HVS (2012) Critical review of recent publications on use of natural
composites in infrastructure. Comput Part A Appl Sci Manuf 43:1419–1429
Duigou AL, Pillin I, Bourmaud A et al (2008) Effect of recycling on mechanical behaviour of
biocompostable flax/poly (L-lactide) composites. Comput Part A 39:1471–1478
Faruk O, Bledzki AK, Fink HP et al (2014) Progress report on natural fiber reinforced composites.
Macromol Mater Eng 299:9–26
Febrianto F, Yoshioka M, Nagai Y et al (2006) The morphological, mechanical and physical
properties of wood flour-poly lactic acid composites under various filler types. J Biol Sci
6:555–563
Finkenstadt VL, Liu LS, Willett JL et al (2007) Evaluation of poly (lactic acid) and sugar beet pulp
green composite. J Polym Environ 15:1–6
Graupner N, Herrmann AS, Mussig J et al (2009) Natural and man-made cellulose fiber-reinforced
poly(lactic acid) (PLA) composite: an overview about mechanical characteristics and
application areas. Comput Part A 40:810–821
Herrera-Franco PJ, Valadez-Gonzalez A (2004) Mechanical properties of continuous natural
fibre-reinforced polymer composites. Comput Part A Appl Sci Manuf 35:339–345
Holbery J, Houston D (2006) Natural-fiber-reinforced polymer composites in automotive
applications. J Min Met Mater Soc 58:80–86
Huda MS, Drzal LT, Mohanty AK et al (2008) Effect of fiber surface treatments on the properties
of laminated biocomposites from poly(lactic acid) (PLA) and kenaf fibers. Comput Sci Technol
68:424–432
Joshi SV, Drzal LT, Mohanty AK et al (2004) Are natural fiber composites environmentally
superior to glass fiber reinforced composites? Comput Part A Appl Sci Manuf 35:371–376
Karim Z (2014) Processing and characterization of membranes based on cellulose nanocrystals for
water purification. Licentiate thesis, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden
Karim Z, Afrin S (2015) Nanocellulose as novel supportive functional material for growth and
development of cells. Cell Dev Biol 4:2–7
Karim Z, Afrin S, Husain Q, Danish R et al (2016a) Necessity of enzymatic hydrolysis for
production and functionalization of nanocelluloses. Crit Rev Biotechnol 6:1–16
Karim Z, Claudpierre S, Grahn M et al (2016b) Nanocellulose based functional membranes for
water cleaning: tailoring of mechanical properties, porosity and metal ion capture. J Memb Sci
514:418–428
Karim Z, Grahn M, Oksman K et al (2016c) High flux affinity membranes based on
cellulose nanocompoite for removal of heavy metal ions from industrial effluent. RCS
Adv 6:20644–20653
Green Composites: Versatile Material for Future 43

Karim Z, Hakalahti M, Tammelin T et al (2016d) Effect of in situ surface TEMPO function

mineralization of nanocellulose membranes on the adsorption of metal ions from aqueous
solution. RSC Adva (submitted)
Karim Z, Mathew AP, Mouzon J et al (2014a) Nanoporous membranes with cellulose nanocrystals
as functional entity in chitosan: removal of dyes from water. Carbohydr Polym 112:668–676
Karim Z, Mathew AP, Oksman K et al (2014b) Fully biobased nanocomposite membranes:
removal of heavy metals from polluted water. Dissemination workshop for the Nano4water
Cluster
Kim HS, Lee BH, Lee S et al (2011) Enhanced interfacial adhesion, mechanical and thermal
properties of natural flour-filed biodegradable polymer bio-composites. J Therm Anal Calorim
104:331–338
Kumar R, Yakabu MK, Anandjiwala RD et al (2010) Effect of montmorillonite clay on
flax fabric reinforced poly lactic acid composites with amphiphilic additives. Comput
Part A 41:1620–1627
Le Duigou A, Davies P, Baley C et al (2010) Interfacial bonding of flax fibre/poly(l-lactide)
bio-composites. Comput Sci Technol 70:231–239
Lee BH, Kim HS, Lee S et al (2009) Bio-composites of kenaf fibers in polylactide: role of
improved interfacial adhesion in the carding process. Comput Sci Technol 69:2573–2579
Manita PL, Morreale M (2011) Green composites: a brief review. Comput Part A Allie Sci Manuf
42:579–588
Mathew AP, Oksman K, Karim Z et al (2014) Process scale up and characterization of wood
cellulose nanocrystals hydrolysed using bioethanol pilot plant. Ind Crop Prod 58:212–219
Mohanty AK, Misra M, Drzal LT et al (2002) Sustainable bio-composites from renewable
resources: opportunities and challenges in the green material world. J Polym Environ 10:19–26
Mohanty AK, Misra M, Hinrichsen G et al (2000) Biofibres, biodegradable polymers and
biocomposites: an overview. Macomol Mater Eng 276:1–24
Nakamura R, Goda K, Noda J et al (2009) High temperature tensile properties and deep drawing of
fully green composites. Exp Polym Lett 3:19–24
Nirma U, Jamil MMH, Ahmad M et al (2015) A review on tribological performance of natural
fibre polymeric composites. Tribol Inter 83:77–104
Nishino T, Hirao K, Kotera M et al (2003) Kenaf reinforced biodegradable composite. Comput Sci
Technol 63:1281–1286
Niska KO, Sain M (eds) (2008) Wood–polymer composites. Elsevier, Amsterdam
Ochi S (2008) Mechanical properties of kenaf fibers and kenaf/PLA composites. Mech Mater
40:446–452
Oksman K, Skrifvars M, Selin JF et al (2003) Natural fibres as reinforcement in polylactic acid
(PLA) composites. Comput Sci Technol 63:1317–1324
Oma F, Bledzki AK, Finkb HP et al (2012) Biocomposites reinforced with natural fibers:
2000-2010. Prog Polym Sci 37:1552–1596
Paul W, Jan I, Ignaas V et al (2003) Natural fibers: can they replace glass in fiber reinforced
plastics? Comput Sci Technol 63:1259–1264
Petinakis E, Yu L, Edward G et al (2009) Effect of matrix-particle interfacial adhesion on the
mechanical properties of poly(lactic acid)/wood-flour micro-composites. J Polym Environ
17:83–94
Placketta D, Andersen TL, Pedersenc WB et al (2003) Biodegradable composite based on
L-polylactide and jute fibers. Comput Sci Technol 63:1287–1296
Ramamoorthya SK, Skrifvarsa M, Persson A et al (2015) A review of natural fibers used in
biocomposites: plant, animal and regenerated cellulose fibers. Polym Rev 55:107–162
Saravana DB, Kumar M (2010) Potential use of natural fiber composite materials in Indian. J Reinf
Plast Comput 29:3600–3613
Satyanarayana KG, Ravikumar KK, Sukumaran K et al (1986) Structure and properties of some
vegetable fibres. Part 3. Talipot and palmyrah fibres. J Mater Sci 21:57–63
Tao Y, Yan L, Jie R et al (2009) Preparation and properties of short natural fiber reinforced poly
(lactic acid) composites. Trans Nonferrous Met Soc China 19:s651–s655
44 A.A. Singh et al.

Tayommai T, Ong DA et al (2010) Natural fiber/PLA composites: mechanical properties and

biodegradability by gravimetric measurement respirometric (GMR) system. Adv Mater Res 93
(94):223–226
Thakur VK, Thakur MK, Gupta RK et al (2014) Review: raw natural fiber–based polymer
composites. Inter J Polym Anal Charact 19:256–271
Ya L, Chouw N, Jayaraman K et al (2014) Flax fibre and its composites-a review. Comput Part B
56:296–317
http://www.springer.com/978-3-319-49381-7