This study investigates composites' mechanical properties, highlighting the effects of alkali treatment and wood flour content.
In this study, alkali-treated wood flour/dynamic polyurethane composites were successfully prepared through a solvent-free one-pot method and in situ polymerization. The effects of the alkaline treatment process, changes in the flexible long-chain content in the dynamic polyurethane system, and the wood flour filling amount on the interface's bonding, mechanical, and reprocessing properties were investigated. Partial removal of lignin and hemicellulose from the alkali-treated wood flour enhanced rigidity and improved interface bonding and mechanical strength when combined with dynamic polyurethane. The tensile strength was improved from 5.65-11.00 MPa to 13.08-23.53 MPa. As the composite matrix, dynamic polyurethane could not easily infiltrate all wood flour particles when its content was low or its fluidity was poor. Conversely, excessive content or overly high fluidity led to leakage and the formation of large pores, affecting the mechanical strength. As the polyol content increased, the matrix exhibited greater fluidity, which enabled it to accommodate more wood flour and penetrate the cell cavity or even the cell wall. This improved infiltration enhanced the interface bonding performance of the composites and made their mechanical properties sensitive to changes in wood flour content. The reprocessing ability of the prepared composites decreased with the increase in wood flour content, and the interface bonding was enhanced after reprocessing. The tensile strength retention rate of the composites prepared with alkali-treated wood flour was lower. This study provides a theoretical basis for optimizing the performance of wood fiber/dynamic polyurethane composites and an exploration path for developing self-healing and recyclable wood-plastic composites, which can be applied to building materials, automotive interiors, furniture manufacturing, and other fields.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Diao et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: